The Unz Review - Mobile
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 James Thompson ArchiveBlogview
Micro-Aggression and Hyper-Sensitivity
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments

micro-aggression

I can claim to have been assaulted by micro-aggressions. I find myself profoundly hurt when people in my presence say “Intelligence – whatever that is”. They do it to vex me, which is beastly of them. Other aggressive behaviours include people in conversation denouncing anyone who holds a particular political opinion, without considering that I might be one of them, and without using the polite English circumlocution “present company excepted”. They assume that I cannot possibly be in agreement with the policy in question, by which they intend, I surmise, to cow me into submission. As for radio broadcasts, they assume I must be lectured to about the perils of lack of compassion, or that I will share their interpretation of world events. As the late Kenneth Williams exclaimed: “Infamy, infamy, they’ve all got it in for me.”

Now the British Psychological Society Research Digest reports that Scott Lilienfeld has had a look at the concept of micro-aggression, and finds it lacking. I agree. I had always thought the concept could be dismissed in one line: small slights are small, and in the eye of the beholder. (None of us are perfect. I myself am peculiarly susceptible to draughts.)

Microaggressions. Strong Claims, Inadequate Evidence Scott O. Lilienfeld January 11, 2017 Perspectives on Social Science.
Perspectives on Psychological Science http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/1745691616659391

Lilienfeld has gone deeper, questioning whether microaggressions:

(1) are operationalized with sufficient clarity and consensus to afford rigorous scientific investigation; (2) are interpreted negatively by most or all minority group members; (3) reflect implicitly prejudicial and implicitly aggressive motives; (4) can be validly assessed using only respondents’ subjective reports; and (5) exert an adverse impact on recipients’ mental health. A review of the literature reveals negligible support for all five suppositions.

Dropping the whole notion seems a good policy: micro-aggressions turn out to be too micro, and not distinguishable from nothing. Phlogiston. Lilienfeld asks that micro-aggression sensitivity training be dropped till some supportive evidence can be found, and helpfully suggests that 18 points could be addressed to test the hypothesis more fully. Good. One should be kind to hypotheses, harsh to supposed proofs. Lilienfeld does not deny that people can be slighted, or that such things do not happen.

Of even more importance, in my view, is his call that this silo of weak research needs to be connected with well-established methods in wider psychology. It is a permissive feature of the cottage industry of psychology that such researchers feel no compulsion to meet methodological standards, and no need to link their findings to relevant research areas. Richard Feynman bemoaned such laissez faire in psychological research decades ago. When a measurement error is detected in Physics, everything has to stop till the problem is sorted: in psychology all flowers bloom, particularly the imaginary ones.

For the benefit of those who regard methodology as boring, as I did in my youth, when it was mostly about Latin square designs, here are the main points Lilienfeld makes.

I focus on the (a) logical clarity and coherence of the microaggression construct, (b) reliability of microaggression measures, (c) criterion-related validity of microaggression measures, (d) incremental validity of microaggression measures above and beyond measures of overt prejudice, and (e) extent to which microaggression findings have been replicated across diverse information sources, especially independent observers.

The micro-aggression concept was firmly based on black/white relations in the USA.

The term microaggression was coined by Harvard University psychiatrist Chester Pierce in 1970 to describe seemingly minor but damaging put-downs and indignities experienced by African Americans. Pierce wrote that “every Black must recognize the offensive mechanisms used by the collective White society, usually by means of cumulative pro-racist micro-aggressions, which keep him psychologically accepting of the disenfranchised state” (Pierce, 1970, p. 472).

Derald Sue et al. took this up in 2007 (Sue et al., 2007). They defined micro-aggressions as “brief and commonplace daily verbal, behavioral, or environmental indignities, whether intentional or unintentional, that communicate hostile, derogatory, or negative racial slights and insults toward people of color” (p. 271). According to Sue et al., micro-aggressions necessarily lie in the eye of the beholder.

As a matter of evidence, I find it hard to accept that the person who feels himself to be offended becomes the judge of the presumed offence. This goes against the presumption of innocence, the golden thread of jurisprudence. It also enshrines a particular definition of prejudice, in that even well-founded criticism is no defence. For example, I feel myself offended when people talk of the collect guilt of white people for African slavery. I have not kept slaves, and neither did my ancestors, as far as I can trace them, which is not far. I am not aware of having got any ancestral benefits from slavery. I can claim to be closer in my attitudes to the Clapham Sect than to a Bristol plantation owner. However, irritated as I may be at the imputation of collective racial guilt, if someone could show that I was in fact a beneficiary of slavery, I could not accuse them of aggression, but would grant that they were making a valid point. Facts matter.

For an example of a purported micro-aggression advanced by Sue et al., consider a university teacher who is surprised that an African American gets full marks on a University test. In the US it is more surprising to find a bright Black man than a bright White man, because given a 1 standard deviation mean difference in intelligence, equal 15-point standard deviations and assuming equal population size, it is 17 times more probable that a white man is IQ 130+ than a black man is. If you do the calculation assuming the Black standard deviation is 14 rather than 15, the ratio is 35 to 1. Assume the Black standard deviation is in fact 13, as seems to be the case on historical data, and the ratio is 85 to 1. Adjust for population size with African Americans being 12.3% of the US population and the likelihood of a professor finding that a IQ130+ student is black is a further 8 times as low. It is still rude to say to any student that you are surprised that they have done well on a test, and to say that to a Black student is grossly insensitive, but the surprise could be based on a validated judgment, not a malevolent pre-judgment.

The “eye of the beholder” assumption implicit in the micro-aggression research generates other logical quandaries. In particular, it is unclear whether any verbal or nonverbal action that a certain proportion of minority individuals perceive as upsetting or offensive would constitute a microaggression. Nor is it apparent what level of agreement among minority group members would be needed to regard a given act as a microaggression. As a consequence, one is left to wonder which actions might fall under the capacious microaggression umbrella. Would a discussion of race differences in personality, intelligence, or mental illness in an undergraduate psychology course count? Or a dinner-table conversation regarding the societal pros and cons of affirmative action? What about news coverage of higher crime rates among certain minority populations than among majority populations? It is likely that some or all of these admittedly uncomfortable topics would elicit pronounced negative emotional reactions among at least some minority group members.

A valid counter-argument to a supposedly aggressive slight is to reply that a slight was not intended, and that the hearer has misinterpreted what was said, or has been hyper-sensitive about it. If those counter-arguments are deemed inadmissible in evidence, then the concept is untestable. It gives the complainant carte blanche to yell “Fire” even if no fire proves to be present. Ultimately, accepting this nonsense on stilts gives the complainant power to determine what is real on the basis of their hurt feelings. The evil eye. As Lilienfeld says, it implies that the complainant is a mind reader, better able to understand their interlocutor than the speaker himself.

Lilienfeld’s essay is a long one, raising many methodological points, and to my mind he has been kinder to the concept than the evidence warrants. Indeed, he has no doubts that such aggressive slights happen. Is it ever possible to collect reliable data on this point? There must be recordings of conversations somewhere which could be studied applying some agreed measures of aggression. How do they compare with macro-aggressions, in which the insult is obvious? Nonetheless, as he himself muses, some might see his essay as a micro-aggression itself. Unfair. However, on the basis that a judgment of aggression is valid even though it is in the eye of the beholder, none of us can gainsay a person who claims to be offended.

Just as important, advocates of the micro-aggression research have not conducted correlational or factor-analytic work to demonstrate that microaggressions cohere with other indicators of deliverer prejudice, whether they be implicit, explicit, or both. Most research has revealed only small or at best moderate correlations between indices of implicit prejudice, such as the IAT, and those of explicit prejudice (Hofmann, Gawronski, Gschwendner, Le, & Schmitt, 2005), so it may be unrealistic to anticipate correlations of high magnitude, at least with measures of explicit prejudice. Still, at a minimum it is incumbent on micro-aggression research proponents to demonstrate that ostensible microaggressions are statistically associated with at least some other well-validated indicators of deliverer prejudice. If they cannot do so, it would raise questions regarding the interpretation of many, let alone all, purported microaggressions as prejudicial in nature and challenge a bedrock presupposition undergirding the micro-aggression research.

In sum, Lilienfeld’s essay does not support the concept, but shows how it might be better tested. Offence can be taken where none was intended, but offence can be intended in sly remarks. Elevating snide comments to the status of an assault is disproportionate. If you fell offended, reply in kind. Finding validated methods for investigating the subtleties of attitude and opinion is a worthwhile endeavour (if you like that sort of thing). Brings to mind that polite British rejoinder to an assertion with which the listener disagrees: “If you say so”.

Should there be training sessions for the hyper-sensitive, teaching them to be more relaxed and evidence based? I would not bother with any of these sermons. People should just get back to work.

 
• Category: Science • Tags: microaggressions, Political Correctness 
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
    []
  1. res says:

    Thanks for calling out microaggressions. As much as I agree with most of what you say above, I think it is necessary to be careful about the following chain of reasoning:

    In the US it is more surprising to find a bright Black man than a bright White man, because given a 1 standard deviation mean difference in intelligence, equal 15-point standard deviations and assuming equal population size, it is 17 times more probable that a white man is IQ 130+ than a black man is. If you do the calculation assuming the Black standard deviation is 14 rather than 15, the ratio is 35 to 1. Assume the Black standard deviation is in fact 13, as seems to be the case on historical data, and the ratio is 85 to 1. Adjust for population size with African Americans being 12.3% of the US population and the likelihood of a professor finding that a IQ130+ student is black is a further 8 times as low.

    As I understand it (have you addressed this in the past?) the normal distribution assumption for IQ is a problem at the tails. Whether this is intrinsic, a characteristic of multiple groups with different means and SDs, or something else is unclear to me. But what I think is clear is that the Black American population is heterogeneous. I think racial admixture (along with the one drop rule in the US) introduces an important effect. In addition, I think selective African immigration at the high end is also relevant (the latter is my preferred explanation for most of Chanda Chisala’s results BTW, I wish there was better data to test that hypothesis).

    Empirical data for this can be hard to find and is often obfuscated. Here is one example I think is pretty representative (National Merit Scholarship results on the PSAT, NMSF, i.e. semifinalist, is about 140 IQ):

    https://www.jbhe.com/2015/09/national-merit-scholarship-corporation-ends-its-program-for-black-students-entering-college/

    data from the College Board shows that Blacks typically make up between 1 and 2 percent of the very top scorers on these types of standardized tests.

    That gives a range of 6-13x underrepresented (given the obfuscatory habits, I’m guessing closer to 13x). Given that Asians are extremely overrepresented in these results: http://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/the-myth-of-american-meritocracy/
    I think the Black/White difference in US high end test results is less than your analysis indicates. I would be interested in your further thoughts on this! Also your thoughts on US/Britain differences.

    One subtlety of the NMS results is they use location based thresholds which correlate positively with Black population: http://acadiumscholar.org/the-national-merit-scholarship/
    This may be a problem for drawing conclusions from the data, but I believe if anything this should bias the results towards fewer Blacks qualifying.

    One additional effect in US academics is mismatch. Given the typical 1 SD gap and the use of affirmative action to equalize representation, I think it is common for the smartest Blacks to be studying with Whites (and Asians) who are even smarter (~1 SD on average). This has multiple effects:
    - It starves the other venues of those smartest Blacks to some degree (e.g. the 1SD gap appears fairly uniformly across the academic hierarchy).
    - It means that their even smarter peers might not appreciate the intellects of some of those 130+ IQ Blacks as much as is deserved.
    That was a long-winded way of trying to make the point that observational experiences of the prevalence of smart Blacks might be misleading.

    Read More
    • Replies: @James Thompson
    Thanks for your comments. There is no problem with normal distributions, tail effects and group comparisons as such, other than that you have to use real population data, which approximates to the normal standard distribution, but which can often be slightly different from it.
    The enormous differences at the tails derive from a) a big mean difference b) a much narrower standard deviation for Black intelligence (on historical data, but it might be different now). The calculations I made are, of course, idealized. Institutions will differ in admissions criteria. Elite Africans from Africawill complicate the picture, as will the rate of Chinese admissions, etc. I think that the main point stands, that very bright students will be rarer among Africans, so long as all our data are correct. If a large number of African Americans do very well at hard subjects, then the original group assessments are called into question. Tail end achievements can be very informative.
    , @Anonymous
    You scroll down and copy paste and we are supposed to read your comments. Fuck off.
    , @Citizen of a Silly Country
    Res,

    While I agree that admixture and select immigration could create tail effects for blacks, I'm not sure that I trust the source. First, you curiously left out an important part of the quote about PSAT scores. Here's the entire passage:

    While the NMSC claims to have no data on the race of who receives their scholarships, data from the College Board shows that Blacks typically make up between 1 and 2 percent of the very top scorers on these types of standardized tests.
     
    A quick search for PSAT scores by race turned up nothing, so I'll hold judgement until someone can show me the actual scores by race.

    We do have the numbers for the SAT, and they may help. A study on effects of recentering the SAT breaks down scores at the very top. Under the pre-centered SAT, 0.1% of blacks scored a 750-800 in math and 0.3% scored 700-740. Now, the 0.1% isn't particularly helpful because we don't know if that's 0.051 or 0.099, and, in this case, that's a huge difference. However, the 0.3 may be instructive.

    At the top level, 1.1% of whites scored 750-800 and 3.1% scored 700-740. (Btw, I'm guessing that charts are mistaken and what they really mean 700-749.) Again, because the decimal only goes out to the tenth instead of the hundredth, we don't have quite the information that we need, but it's a decent start.

    Let's guess that if we went to the hundredth, the top black percentage would be 0.075, i.e. we split the difference. Whites would be 1.075. That's ~14 to 1, which isn't too far off from Thompson's 17 to 1 for a 15 SD. For 700-749, we'd have 0.275% for blacks and 3.075% for whites, so a ~11 to 1.

    Btw, Asian percentile for the math section were 4.1% for 750-800 and 7.5% for 700-749. And I, for one, would like to welcome our new Asian overlords. ;)

    Of course, the SAT, obviously, is not administered to all students so we can't draw any definite conclusions, but you have to think that most very bright kids are taking it.

    https://www.ets.org/Media/Research/pdf/RR-02-04-Dorans.pdf

    Check pages 16 and 17 for charts.
    , @John Henry
    If you say so.
    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.
    Sharing Comment via Twitter
    /jthompson/micro-aggression-and-hyper-sensitivity/#comment-1816462
    More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  2. Jason Liu says:

    At best, microaggressions deserve microsympathy.

    Read More
    • Replies: @dearieme
    As they say in rugby, get your retaliation in first.
  3. @res
    Thanks for calling out microaggressions. As much as I agree with most of what you say above, I think it is necessary to be careful about the following chain of reasoning:

    In the US it is more surprising to find a bright Black man than a bright White man, because given a 1 standard deviation mean difference in intelligence, equal 15-point standard deviations and assuming equal population size, it is 17 times more probable that a white man is IQ 130+ than a black man is. If you do the calculation assuming the Black standard deviation is 14 rather than 15, the ratio is 35 to 1. Assume the Black standard deviation is in fact 13, as seems to be the case on historical data, and the ratio is 85 to 1. Adjust for population size with African Americans being 12.3% of the US population and the likelihood of a professor finding that a IQ130+ student is black is a further 8 times as low.
     
    As I understand it (have you addressed this in the past?) the normal distribution assumption for IQ is a problem at the tails. Whether this is intrinsic, a characteristic of multiple groups with different means and SDs, or something else is unclear to me. But what I think is clear is that the Black American population is heterogeneous. I think racial admixture (along with the one drop rule in the US) introduces an important effect. In addition, I think selective African immigration at the high end is also relevant (the latter is my preferred explanation for most of Chanda Chisala's results BTW, I wish there was better data to test that hypothesis).

    Empirical data for this can be hard to find and is often obfuscated. Here is one example I think is pretty representative (National Merit Scholarship results on the PSAT, NMSF, i.e. semifinalist, is about 140 IQ):
    https://www.jbhe.com/2015/09/national-merit-scholarship-corporation-ends-its-program-for-black-students-entering-college/

    data from the College Board shows that Blacks typically make up between 1 and 2 percent of the very top scorers on these types of standardized tests.
     
    That gives a range of 6-13x underrepresented (given the obfuscatory habits, I'm guessing closer to 13x). Given that Asians are extremely overrepresented in these results: http://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/the-myth-of-american-meritocracy/
    I think the Black/White difference in US high end test results is less than your analysis indicates. I would be interested in your further thoughts on this! Also your thoughts on US/Britain differences.

    One subtlety of the NMS results is they use location based thresholds which correlate positively with Black population: http://acadiumscholar.org/the-national-merit-scholarship/
    This may be a problem for drawing conclusions from the data, but I believe if anything this should bias the results towards fewer Blacks qualifying.

    One additional effect in US academics is mismatch. Given the typical 1 SD gap and the use of affirmative action to equalize representation, I think it is common for the smartest Blacks to be studying with Whites (and Asians) who are even smarter (~1 SD on average). This has multiple effects:
    - It starves the other venues of those smartest Blacks to some degree (e.g. the 1SD gap appears fairly uniformly across the academic hierarchy).
    - It means that their even smarter peers might not appreciate the intellects of some of those 130+ IQ Blacks as much as is deserved.
    That was a long-winded way of trying to make the point that observational experiences of the prevalence of smart Blacks might be misleading.

    Thanks for your comments. There is no problem with normal distributions, tail effects and group comparisons as such, other than that you have to use real population data, which approximates to the normal standard distribution, but which can often be slightly different from it.
    The enormous differences at the tails derive from a) a big mean difference b) a much narrower standard deviation for Black intelligence (on historical data, but it might be different now). The calculations I made are, of course, idealized. Institutions will differ in admissions criteria. Elite Africans from Africawill complicate the picture, as will the rate of Chinese admissions, etc. I think that the main point stands, that very bright students will be rarer among Africans, so long as all our data are correct. If a large number of African Americans do very well at hard subjects, then the original group assessments are called into question. Tail end achievements can be very informative.

    Read More
    • Replies: @res

    I think that the main point stands, that very bright students will be rarer among Africans, so long as all our data are correct.
     
    Agreed about this. I was questioning the proportions.

    other than that you have to use real population data
     
    Also agreed about this. The NMSF data is the best I have seen for answering questions about representation given a high IQ (there ~140, with caveats as mentioned) threshold. Does anyone have suggestions for other data sets addressing this question. Or more concrete and precise NMSF data (e.g. more specific than a 1-2% range for Blacks and ideally with numbers for other races)?

    I do think the distributional effects of varying racial admixture (especially given the one drop rule!) call into question using the normal distribution for the IQ of African-Americans (much more so than the larger question, e.g. is log-normal a better fit at the high end in general given empirical data). The problem (as I see it) is this touches on multiple academic/popular third rails and I don't know of any data which addresses it.

    The closest I have seen to this is some of Emil's work you have discussed:
    http://www.unz.com/jthompson/admixture-in-americas-european/
    I can't find your blog post where people originally discovered an intelligence data set which (accidentally?) left in genetic racial admixture numbers. Was that data the basis of above?
    Some other links:
    http://www.unz.com/jthompson/gwas-hits-and-country-iq/

    But those don't really focus on the high end tail where I think the effect of admixture would be most dramatic (I think this matches anecdotal/observational data as well).

    Tail end achievements can be very informative.
     
    And agreed on this. For visual and/or numerical thinkers this is a good time to plug Emil's tail effects visualizer: http://emilkirkegaard.dk/understanding_statistics/?app=tail_effects
    Which by what I assume is a complete coincidence ; ) defaults to numbers relevant to this discussion. For a sense of how dramatic these effects are change the threshold from 130 to 140 and watch the ratio almost double. Also notice (supporting my point IMHO) how after changing the population proportions to 0.87 and 0.13 the 208x calculated ratio for a 140 threshold compares to the NMSF <13x estimate, even with Asian overrepresentation!
  4. Anonymous says:
    @res
    Thanks for calling out microaggressions. As much as I agree with most of what you say above, I think it is necessary to be careful about the following chain of reasoning:

    In the US it is more surprising to find a bright Black man than a bright White man, because given a 1 standard deviation mean difference in intelligence, equal 15-point standard deviations and assuming equal population size, it is 17 times more probable that a white man is IQ 130+ than a black man is. If you do the calculation assuming the Black standard deviation is 14 rather than 15, the ratio is 35 to 1. Assume the Black standard deviation is in fact 13, as seems to be the case on historical data, and the ratio is 85 to 1. Adjust for population size with African Americans being 12.3% of the US population and the likelihood of a professor finding that a IQ130+ student is black is a further 8 times as low.
     
    As I understand it (have you addressed this in the past?) the normal distribution assumption for IQ is a problem at the tails. Whether this is intrinsic, a characteristic of multiple groups with different means and SDs, or something else is unclear to me. But what I think is clear is that the Black American population is heterogeneous. I think racial admixture (along with the one drop rule in the US) introduces an important effect. In addition, I think selective African immigration at the high end is also relevant (the latter is my preferred explanation for most of Chanda Chisala's results BTW, I wish there was better data to test that hypothesis).

    Empirical data for this can be hard to find and is often obfuscated. Here is one example I think is pretty representative (National Merit Scholarship results on the PSAT, NMSF, i.e. semifinalist, is about 140 IQ):
    https://www.jbhe.com/2015/09/national-merit-scholarship-corporation-ends-its-program-for-black-students-entering-college/

    data from the College Board shows that Blacks typically make up between 1 and 2 percent of the very top scorers on these types of standardized tests.
     
    That gives a range of 6-13x underrepresented (given the obfuscatory habits, I'm guessing closer to 13x). Given that Asians are extremely overrepresented in these results: http://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/the-myth-of-american-meritocracy/
    I think the Black/White difference in US high end test results is less than your analysis indicates. I would be interested in your further thoughts on this! Also your thoughts on US/Britain differences.

    One subtlety of the NMS results is they use location based thresholds which correlate positively with Black population: http://acadiumscholar.org/the-national-merit-scholarship/
    This may be a problem for drawing conclusions from the data, but I believe if anything this should bias the results towards fewer Blacks qualifying.

    One additional effect in US academics is mismatch. Given the typical 1 SD gap and the use of affirmative action to equalize representation, I think it is common for the smartest Blacks to be studying with Whites (and Asians) who are even smarter (~1 SD on average). This has multiple effects:
    - It starves the other venues of those smartest Blacks to some degree (e.g. the 1SD gap appears fairly uniformly across the academic hierarchy).
    - It means that their even smarter peers might not appreciate the intellects of some of those 130+ IQ Blacks as much as is deserved.
    That was a long-winded way of trying to make the point that observational experiences of the prevalence of smart Blacks might be misleading.

    You scroll down and copy paste and we are supposed to read your comments. Fuck off.

    Read More
    • Replies: @res
    I understand that my comments can be long sometimes, and I do like to use copy and paste to establish context (less useful as first post in the thread), but if you want me to change my behavior more cogent criticisms and/or suggestions would be helpful. On the other hand, if you are just venting and/or lashing out, have a nice day.

    P.S. If my comments bother you that much please consider using the ignore commenter feature.
  5. Anonymous says:

    Micro Aggression? Just the head rubbing, knocking at heavens door?

    Read More
  6. res says:
    @James Thompson
    Thanks for your comments. There is no problem with normal distributions, tail effects and group comparisons as such, other than that you have to use real population data, which approximates to the normal standard distribution, but which can often be slightly different from it.
    The enormous differences at the tails derive from a) a big mean difference b) a much narrower standard deviation for Black intelligence (on historical data, but it might be different now). The calculations I made are, of course, idealized. Institutions will differ in admissions criteria. Elite Africans from Africawill complicate the picture, as will the rate of Chinese admissions, etc. I think that the main point stands, that very bright students will be rarer among Africans, so long as all our data are correct. If a large number of African Americans do very well at hard subjects, then the original group assessments are called into question. Tail end achievements can be very informative.

    I think that the main point stands, that very bright students will be rarer among Africans, so long as all our data are correct.

    Agreed about this. I was questioning the proportions.

    other than that you have to use real population data

    Also agreed about this. The NMSF data is the best I have seen for answering questions about representation given a high IQ (there ~140, with caveats as mentioned) threshold. Does anyone have suggestions for other data sets addressing this question. Or more concrete and precise NMSF data (e.g. more specific than a 1-2% range for Blacks and ideally with numbers for other races)?

    I do think the distributional effects of varying racial admixture (especially given the one drop rule!) call into question using the normal distribution for the IQ of African-Americans (much more so than the larger question, e.g. is log-normal a better fit at the high end in general given empirical data). The problem (as I see it) is this touches on multiple academic/popular third rails and I don’t know of any data which addresses it.

    The closest I have seen to this is some of Emil’s work you have discussed:

    http://www.unz.com/jthompson/admixture-in-americas-european/

    I can’t find your blog post where people originally discovered an intelligence data set which (accidentally?) left in genetic racial admixture numbers. Was that data the basis of above?
    Some other links:

    http://www.unz.com/jthompson/gwas-hits-and-country-iq/

    But those don’t really focus on the high end tail where I think the effect of admixture would be most dramatic (I think this matches anecdotal/observational data as well).

    Tail end achievements can be very informative.

    And agreed on this. For visual and/or numerical thinkers this is a good time to plug Emil’s tail effects visualizer: http://emilkirkegaard.dk/understanding_statistics/?app=tail_effects
    Which by what I assume is a complete coincidence ; ) defaults to numbers relevant to this discussion. For a sense of how dramatic these effects are change the threshold from 130 to 140 and watch the ratio almost double. Also notice (supporting my point IMHO) how after changing the population proportions to 0.87 and 0.13 the 208x calculated ratio for a 140 threshold compares to the NMSF <13x estimate, even with Asian overrepresentation!

    Read More
  7. res says:
    @Anonymous
    You scroll down and copy paste and we are supposed to read your comments. Fuck off.

    I understand that my comments can be long sometimes, and I do like to use copy and paste to establish context (less useful as first post in the thread), but if you want me to change my behavior more cogent criticisms and/or suggestions would be helpful. On the other hand, if you are just venting and/or lashing out, have a nice day.

    P.S. If my comments bother you that much please consider using the ignore commenter feature.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Wizard of Oz
    Your useful thoughts include a prompt to consider asking Ron for a button which allows one to ask another commenter to put one on his ignore list. I have in mind a regular shortwinded alcoholic commenter who seems to be obsessed by my very indifference.

    More seriously....

    There is too the irritation that one doesn't know for sure that there is only one Anonymous or Anon on the thread. I have suggested a labelling system which would answer that problem and also allow for disclosure of motive for being anonymous, so far with no response.

  8. dearieme says:
    @Jason Liu
    At best, microaggressions deserve microsympathy.

    As they say in rugby, get your retaliation in first.

    Read More
  9. Nauta says:

    Past is the past for white and black alike. Here is the present for white and black alike:

    http://slaveryfootprint.org/

    Read More
    • Replies: @Wally
    Black researcher, Dr. Tony Martin, let's us know who the prime owners of slaves really were, Jews.
    see:
    Dr. Tony Martin - The Jewish Role in the African Slave Trade

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ut7I75Q_-zA

    JEWS AND THE SLAVE TRADE
    http://wethoughttheywerewhite.weebly.com/jews--the-slave-trade.html

    http://wethoughttheywerewhite.weebly.com/uploads/5/3/4/9/53499197/6585841.jpg?296
    http://wethoughttheywerewhite.weebly.com/uploads/5/3/4/9/53499197/8785931.jpg?277
    http://wethoughttheywerewhite.weebly.com/uploads/5/3/4/9/53499197/3328022_orig.jpg
    http://wethoughttheywerewhite.weebly.com/uploads/5/3/4/9/53499197/892816_orig.jpg
    http://wethoughttheywerewhite.weebly.com/uploads/5/3/4/9/53499197/1507471.jpg?717
  10. “Richard Feynman bemoaned such laissez faire in psychological research decades ago.”

    I recall something of that nature, but I’ll be darned if I can find it. I’d like to add Feynman to the reading list for my upcoming research methods course. Anyone have the reference?

    I’ve upgraded “if you say so” to the slightly more passive-aggressive “it’s pretty to think so.”

    Read More
    • Replies: @James Thompson
    Somewhere in here, I think, if I say so.

    Surely You're Joking Mr Feynman: Adventures of a Curious Character as Told to Ralph Leighton
    , @res
    Are you talking about Feynman's "cargo cult science" idea?
    See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cargo_cult_science
    , @David
    Search on rats. He delves into all the adjustments a researcher had to make to his rat experiment before he could even confuse the rats about what door to go to or tunnel to take, like putting sand under the floor so the rats couldn't detect the little floor joists. Feynman laments that countless psychology experiments proceed without making such obviously necessary refinements to their model.

    http://calteches.library.caltech.edu/51/2/CargoCult.htm

    Search on "rats"

    , @Craig Morris

    I’ve upgraded “if you say so” to the slightly more passive-aggressive “it’s pretty to think so.”
     
    Go all the way. Use "cool story, bro".
  11. I was a shy and sensitive child. Entering my teens I was blessed to have good friends who told me, “Fuck you, buddy, if you can’t take a joke,” whether the jibe was a joke or not.

    I got over it.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Forbes
    I had two older brothers. They didn't bother with microaggressions--I very quickly learned to ignore macroaggressions.
  12. @TheRandomTexan
    "Richard Feynman bemoaned such laissez faire in psychological research decades ago."

    I recall something of that nature, but I'll be darned if I can find it. I'd like to add Feynman to the reading list for my upcoming research methods course. Anyone have the reference?

    I've upgraded "if you say so" to the slightly more passive-aggressive "it's pretty to think so."

    Somewhere in here, I think, if I say so.

    Surely You’re Joking Mr Feynman: Adventures of a Curious Character as Told to Ralph Leighton

    Read More
  13. If you fell offended, reply in kind. Finding validated methods for investigating the subtleties of attitude and opinion is a worthwhile endeavor.

    I have a friend who works as a customer service VP at a huge investment bank. His entire job is to read customer’s moods, attitudes, and feels. Listening to him talking about people and how to deal with them is almost like an art form.

    Read More
  14. res says:
    @TheRandomTexan
    "Richard Feynman bemoaned such laissez faire in psychological research decades ago."

    I recall something of that nature, but I'll be darned if I can find it. I'd like to add Feynman to the reading list for my upcoming research methods course. Anyone have the reference?

    I've upgraded "if you say so" to the slightly more passive-aggressive "it's pretty to think so."

    Are you talking about Feynman’s “cargo cult science” idea?
    See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cargo_cult_science

    Read More
  15. Cortes says:

    The golden thread of jurisprudence is Might = Right. Check out the (appropriately enough) German concept of Grundnorm beloved by lecturers in Jurisprudence. After that, the rest is flummery.

    Check out:

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ronald_Dworkin

    His work was macro aggressive.

    Read More
  16. Wally says:
    @Nauta
    Past is the past for white and black alike. Here is the present for white and black alike:

    http://slaveryfootprint.org/
    Read More
  17. Randal says:

    Lilienfeld asks that micro-aggression sensitivity training be dropped till some supportive evidence can be found

    Rather naïve of him, I think, to hope that such a useful concept might be dropped over a mere detail such as being “not distinguishable from nothing”.

    As a matter of evidence, I find it hard to accept that the person who feels himself to be offended becomes the judge of the presumed offence. This goes against the presumption of innocence, the golden thread of jurisprudence. It also enshrines a particular definition of prejudice, in that even well-founded criticism is no defence.

    That’s as may be, but the practice of making the victim the judge of offence is well established in English law and prosecutorial practice now:

    The Stephen Lawrence Inquiry Report was published in February 1999, and defined a racist incident as:

    ˜… any incident which is perceived to be racist by the victim or any other person.”

    We accept this definition.

    We define a religious incident as:

    “Any incident which is believed to be motivated because of a person’s religion or perceived religion, by the victim or any other person”.

    Both definitions help us to identify all racist or religious incidents on our case files to make sure we take the racist or religious element into account when we make decisions about prosecuting.”
    CPS prosecuting policy

    And, of course, it determines what goes on the UK government’s list of “hate incidents”, as the Home Secretary found out earlier this year after an Oxford University professor, no less, fatuously reported one of her speeches to police, to be used in future justifications of increased budgets, loftier positions and more intrusive powers for those dedicated to suppressing such unwarranted exercises of personal liberty:

    Police treat home secretary speech as ‘hate incident’

    Read More
  18. I long for that glorious day when micro-aggressions will be consigned to the dustbin of history, and we can move on to the nano-aggressions.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Inque Yutani
    Let us know when you locate that timeline, because it's not ours.
  19. mp says:

    Seriously? Are these people high? If you need an academic psychologist investigating a made up SJW term in order to determine whether it’s a real thing, or not, you know that it’s already too late, and that the safest thing for you to do is just become a hermit, living out in the woods somewhere.

    Read More
    • Replies: @James Thompson
    A made up term might be correctly identifying a phenomenon. It is worth checking.
  20. “Microaggression” is exposed here as the agitprop that it is. Unfortunately, we have a fully entrenched, politically leveraged class of “professionals” who compose the “diversity” industry. These guys are all about trying to make the rest of us take this nonsense seriously. And they do a pretty good job of it. (Having to resort repeatedly to quotation marks in these sorts of discussions indicates how far the left has progressed in its domination of metapolitics. Because we talk the talk, we then walk the walk.)

    At universities the diversity gal (usually a gal) whose main responsibility is tamping down microaggressions on campus carries the hefty title of Vice President for Diversity and Inclusion. Any title less than VP means an undervaluing of diversity and hence, racism. Particularly depressing is that everyone knows that microaggressions are part of the diversity scam but racial extortion now has too much institutional clout to be resisted. We just put up with it — a cost of business that comes off the bottom line.

    See: http://fosterspeak.blogspot.com/2017/03/diversity-speak-animal-farm-at-wright.html

    Read More
  21. HBm says:

    Jews are responsible for all this Marxist crap.

    Those they influence and capture become Jews-by-proxy: histrionic; hysterical; hyper-sensitive; seditious; persecution fantasists; propagandists; liars.

    Read More
  22. White man, because given a 1 standard deviation mean difference in intelligence, equal 15-point standard deviations and assuming equal population size, it is 17 times more probable that a white man is IQ 130+ than a black man is.

    Isn’t it about 7 times?

    Read More
    • Replies: @James Thompson
    I make it 16.85 times, hence rounded to 17

    Workings here:

    http://emilkirkegaard.dk/understanding_statistics/?app=tail_effects
  23. @res
    Thanks for calling out microaggressions. As much as I agree with most of what you say above, I think it is necessary to be careful about the following chain of reasoning:

    In the US it is more surprising to find a bright Black man than a bright White man, because given a 1 standard deviation mean difference in intelligence, equal 15-point standard deviations and assuming equal population size, it is 17 times more probable that a white man is IQ 130+ than a black man is. If you do the calculation assuming the Black standard deviation is 14 rather than 15, the ratio is 35 to 1. Assume the Black standard deviation is in fact 13, as seems to be the case on historical data, and the ratio is 85 to 1. Adjust for population size with African Americans being 12.3% of the US population and the likelihood of a professor finding that a IQ130+ student is black is a further 8 times as low.
     
    As I understand it (have you addressed this in the past?) the normal distribution assumption for IQ is a problem at the tails. Whether this is intrinsic, a characteristic of multiple groups with different means and SDs, or something else is unclear to me. But what I think is clear is that the Black American population is heterogeneous. I think racial admixture (along with the one drop rule in the US) introduces an important effect. In addition, I think selective African immigration at the high end is also relevant (the latter is my preferred explanation for most of Chanda Chisala's results BTW, I wish there was better data to test that hypothesis).

    Empirical data for this can be hard to find and is often obfuscated. Here is one example I think is pretty representative (National Merit Scholarship results on the PSAT, NMSF, i.e. semifinalist, is about 140 IQ):
    https://www.jbhe.com/2015/09/national-merit-scholarship-corporation-ends-its-program-for-black-students-entering-college/

    data from the College Board shows that Blacks typically make up between 1 and 2 percent of the very top scorers on these types of standardized tests.
     
    That gives a range of 6-13x underrepresented (given the obfuscatory habits, I'm guessing closer to 13x). Given that Asians are extremely overrepresented in these results: http://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/the-myth-of-american-meritocracy/
    I think the Black/White difference in US high end test results is less than your analysis indicates. I would be interested in your further thoughts on this! Also your thoughts on US/Britain differences.

    One subtlety of the NMS results is they use location based thresholds which correlate positively with Black population: http://acadiumscholar.org/the-national-merit-scholarship/
    This may be a problem for drawing conclusions from the data, but I believe if anything this should bias the results towards fewer Blacks qualifying.

    One additional effect in US academics is mismatch. Given the typical 1 SD gap and the use of affirmative action to equalize representation, I think it is common for the smartest Blacks to be studying with Whites (and Asians) who are even smarter (~1 SD on average). This has multiple effects:
    - It starves the other venues of those smartest Blacks to some degree (e.g. the 1SD gap appears fairly uniformly across the academic hierarchy).
    - It means that their even smarter peers might not appreciate the intellects of some of those 130+ IQ Blacks as much as is deserved.
    That was a long-winded way of trying to make the point that observational experiences of the prevalence of smart Blacks might be misleading.

    Res,

    While I agree that admixture and select immigration could create tail effects for blacks, I’m not sure that I trust the source. First, you curiously left out an important part of the quote about PSAT scores. Here’s the entire passage:

    While the NMSC claims to have no data on the race of who receives their scholarships, data from the College Board shows that Blacks typically make up between 1 and 2 percent of the very top scorers on these types of standardized tests.

    A quick search for PSAT scores by race turned up nothing, so I’ll hold judgement until someone can show me the actual scores by race.

    We do have the numbers for the SAT, and they may help. A study on effects of recentering the SAT breaks down scores at the very top. Under the pre-centered SAT, 0.1% of blacks scored a 750-800 in math and 0.3% scored 700-740. Now, the 0.1% isn’t particularly helpful because we don’t know if that’s 0.051 or 0.099, and, in this case, that’s a huge difference. However, the 0.3 may be instructive.

    At the top level, 1.1% of whites scored 750-800 and 3.1% scored 700-740. (Btw, I’m guessing that charts are mistaken and what they really mean 700-749.) Again, because the decimal only goes out to the tenth instead of the hundredth, we don’t have quite the information that we need, but it’s a decent start.

    Let’s guess that if we went to the hundredth, the top black percentage would be 0.075, i.e. we split the difference. Whites would be 1.075. That’s ~14 to 1, which isn’t too far off from Thompson’s 17 to 1 for a 15 SD. For 700-749, we’d have 0.275% for blacks and 3.075% for whites, so a ~11 to 1.

    Btw, Asian percentile for the math section were 4.1% for 750-800 and 7.5% for 700-749. And I, for one, would like to welcome our new Asian overlords. ;)

    Of course, the SAT, obviously, is not administered to all students so we can’t draw any definite conclusions, but you have to think that most very bright kids are taking it.

    https://www.ets.org/Media/Research/pdf/RR-02-04-Dorans.pdf

    Check pages 16 and 17 for charts.

    Read More
    • Replies: @res
    Thanks for your excellent reply.

    While I agree that admixture and select immigration could create tail effects for blacks, I’m not sure that I trust the source. First, you curiously left out an important part of the quote about PSAT scores. Here’s the entire passage:
     
    Agreed about trusting the source. There is so much obfuscation in this area...
    Apologies if it looked like I was intentionally selectively quoting. My understanding is
    College Board https://www.collegeboard.org/ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/College_Board
    NMSC http://www.nationalmerit.org/ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Merit_Scholarship_Program
    and ETS https://www.ets.org/ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Educational_Testing_Service
    are all separate entities which explained that initial sentence.

    This excerpt from the first wiki clarifies one of the relationships, but I don't claim to understand all the nuances (both official and actual) of those relationships:

    The SAT is administered by College Board in the United States and is developed, published, and scored by the Educational Testing Service (ETS).
     
    Since College Board administers the test and ETS scores the test it seems reasonable that they would have the most comprehensive data on the test takers (i.e. not NMSC, which actually has reason to want to be race blind). I actually took the part I left out as a form of "pay no attention, nothing to see here" squid ink, but I probably should not have omitted it.

    Frankly, I don't buy the statement about NMSC lacking knowledge of race given that they also used to have the race based National Achievement Scholarship Program: http://www.nationalmerit.org/s/1758/interior.aspx?sid=1758&gid=2&pgid=433

    The link you gave is a great reference. I've linked it elsewhere on unz.com, but forgot about it when writing my original comment. One particularly good aspect is the data is from pre-1995 recentering so gives a better look at the top end. The downside is I only see V/M data not combined (which IMHO maps better to IQ). I think your analysis is good (as much as the data permits, and you caveat appropriately), so won't quibble with that. On to the bottom line.

    That’s ~14 to 1, which isn’t too far off from Thompson’s 17 to 1 for a 15 SD.
     
    It's possible I did Dr. Thompson an injustice, so let me elaborate. My raw estimate was ~13 to 1 (assuming the bottom of the stated percentage range for Black scores, which in my experience tends to be a good rule of thumb for racial numbers like that). This aligns well with your ~14 to 1 (and your other estimates like 11, the clustering of your estimates is encouraging).

    My understanding (and please correct me I am wrong) was that this passage:

    given a 1 standard deviation mean difference in intelligence, equal 15-point standard deviations and assuming equal population size, it is 17 times more probable that a white man is IQ 130+ than a black man is. If you do the calculation assuming the Black standard deviation is 14 rather than 15, the ratio is 35 to 1. Assume the Black standard deviation is in fact 13, as seems to be the case on historical data, and the ratio is 85 to 1. Adjust for population size with African Americans being 12.3% of the US population and the likelihood of a professor finding that a IQ130+ student is black is a further 8 times as low.

     

    specifies 17 to 1 given equal population size which translates to 17 * 8 = 136 to 1 given actual population sizes. That is a big difference from our (admittedly flawed as we have both observed) estimates. That was my objection. This also ignores the 13/14 SD discussion which increases the estimate. Also notice that Dr. Thompson specifies a 130 threshold where NMSF is more like 140. The higher threshold means my estimate should be significantly higher than Dr. Thompson's. (any idea of what IQ threshold your buckets correspond to?)

    Dr Thompson's numbers are more in line with Emil's calculator results using the theoretical normal distribution as we would expect (e.g. the 208 to 1 for conditions specified in comment 7).

    So, if I understand correctly, your data and analysis actually support my point about assuming the normal distribution for black IQ for an analysis of the upper tail seeming questionable. If I have missed something please help me by pointing it out.

    P.S. Our new Asian overlords are joining our old Jewish overlords (so much for any accusations of White supremacy here). IMHO all of these trends were obvious observationally when I went to college. It does matter that Asians are ~6% (and growing) of the US population while Jews are only ~2% and stable.
  24. The only thing the prog-left offers as a future is Zardoz, but without nearly naked Sean Connery as a distraction.

    A ruined civilization with them hiding inside their enclaves, slowly eating one another in the slowest and most pathetic extinction event in the plamet’s history.

    Read More
  25. @Pat Kittle
    I long for that glorious day when micro-aggressions will be consigned to the dustbin of history, and we can move on to the nano-aggressions.

    Let us know when you locate that timeline, because it’s not ours.

    Read More
  26. @res
    Thanks for calling out microaggressions. As much as I agree with most of what you say above, I think it is necessary to be careful about the following chain of reasoning:

    In the US it is more surprising to find a bright Black man than a bright White man, because given a 1 standard deviation mean difference in intelligence, equal 15-point standard deviations and assuming equal population size, it is 17 times more probable that a white man is IQ 130+ than a black man is. If you do the calculation assuming the Black standard deviation is 14 rather than 15, the ratio is 35 to 1. Assume the Black standard deviation is in fact 13, as seems to be the case on historical data, and the ratio is 85 to 1. Adjust for population size with African Americans being 12.3% of the US population and the likelihood of a professor finding that a IQ130+ student is black is a further 8 times as low.
     
    As I understand it (have you addressed this in the past?) the normal distribution assumption for IQ is a problem at the tails. Whether this is intrinsic, a characteristic of multiple groups with different means and SDs, or something else is unclear to me. But what I think is clear is that the Black American population is heterogeneous. I think racial admixture (along with the one drop rule in the US) introduces an important effect. In addition, I think selective African immigration at the high end is also relevant (the latter is my preferred explanation for most of Chanda Chisala's results BTW, I wish there was better data to test that hypothesis).

    Empirical data for this can be hard to find and is often obfuscated. Here is one example I think is pretty representative (National Merit Scholarship results on the PSAT, NMSF, i.e. semifinalist, is about 140 IQ):
    https://www.jbhe.com/2015/09/national-merit-scholarship-corporation-ends-its-program-for-black-students-entering-college/

    data from the College Board shows that Blacks typically make up between 1 and 2 percent of the very top scorers on these types of standardized tests.
     
    That gives a range of 6-13x underrepresented (given the obfuscatory habits, I'm guessing closer to 13x). Given that Asians are extremely overrepresented in these results: http://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/the-myth-of-american-meritocracy/
    I think the Black/White difference in US high end test results is less than your analysis indicates. I would be interested in your further thoughts on this! Also your thoughts on US/Britain differences.

    One subtlety of the NMS results is they use location based thresholds which correlate positively with Black population: http://acadiumscholar.org/the-national-merit-scholarship/
    This may be a problem for drawing conclusions from the data, but I believe if anything this should bias the results towards fewer Blacks qualifying.

    One additional effect in US academics is mismatch. Given the typical 1 SD gap and the use of affirmative action to equalize representation, I think it is common for the smartest Blacks to be studying with Whites (and Asians) who are even smarter (~1 SD on average). This has multiple effects:
    - It starves the other venues of those smartest Blacks to some degree (e.g. the 1SD gap appears fairly uniformly across the academic hierarchy).
    - It means that their even smarter peers might not appreciate the intellects of some of those 130+ IQ Blacks as much as is deserved.
    That was a long-winded way of trying to make the point that observational experiences of the prevalence of smart Blacks might be misleading.

    If you say so.

    Read More
  27. @anonymsssous
    White man, because given a 1 standard deviation mean difference in intelligence, equal 15-point standard deviations and assuming equal population size, it is 17 times more probable that a white man is IQ 130+ than a black man is.

    --

    Isn't it about 7 times?

    I make it 16.85 times, hence rounded to 17

    Workings here:

    http://emilkirkegaard.dk/understanding_statistics/?app=tail_effects

    Read More
    • Replies: @Wizard of Oz
    About 17 was what i used 15 years ago or more when the figure of 115 for average Ashkenazi IQ was still being bandied about to explain why it was not surprising that American Jews held about 50 per cent of positions like major broadsheet editor or head of a Hollywood Studio for which I asdumed an IQ of 145 would be typical.
  28. @mp
    Seriously? Are these people high? If you need an academic psychologist investigating a made up SJW term in order to determine whether it's a real thing, or not, you know that it's already too late, and that the safest thing for you to do is just become a hermit, living out in the woods somewhere.

    A made up term might be correctly identifying a phenomenon. It is worth checking.

    Read More
  29. res says:
    @Citizen of a Silly Country
    Res,

    While I agree that admixture and select immigration could create tail effects for blacks, I'm not sure that I trust the source. First, you curiously left out an important part of the quote about PSAT scores. Here's the entire passage:

    While the NMSC claims to have no data on the race of who receives their scholarships, data from the College Board shows that Blacks typically make up between 1 and 2 percent of the very top scorers on these types of standardized tests.
     
    A quick search for PSAT scores by race turned up nothing, so I'll hold judgement until someone can show me the actual scores by race.

    We do have the numbers for the SAT, and they may help. A study on effects of recentering the SAT breaks down scores at the very top. Under the pre-centered SAT, 0.1% of blacks scored a 750-800 in math and 0.3% scored 700-740. Now, the 0.1% isn't particularly helpful because we don't know if that's 0.051 or 0.099, and, in this case, that's a huge difference. However, the 0.3 may be instructive.

    At the top level, 1.1% of whites scored 750-800 and 3.1% scored 700-740. (Btw, I'm guessing that charts are mistaken and what they really mean 700-749.) Again, because the decimal only goes out to the tenth instead of the hundredth, we don't have quite the information that we need, but it's a decent start.

    Let's guess that if we went to the hundredth, the top black percentage would be 0.075, i.e. we split the difference. Whites would be 1.075. That's ~14 to 1, which isn't too far off from Thompson's 17 to 1 for a 15 SD. For 700-749, we'd have 0.275% for blacks and 3.075% for whites, so a ~11 to 1.

    Btw, Asian percentile for the math section were 4.1% for 750-800 and 7.5% for 700-749. And I, for one, would like to welcome our new Asian overlords. ;)

    Of course, the SAT, obviously, is not administered to all students so we can't draw any definite conclusions, but you have to think that most very bright kids are taking it.

    https://www.ets.org/Media/Research/pdf/RR-02-04-Dorans.pdf

    Check pages 16 and 17 for charts.

    Thanks for your excellent reply.

    While I agree that admixture and select immigration could create tail effects for blacks, I’m not sure that I trust the source. First, you curiously left out an important part of the quote about PSAT scores. Here’s the entire passage:

    Agreed about trusting the source. There is so much obfuscation in this area…
    Apologies if it looked like I was intentionally selectively quoting. My understanding is
    College Board https://www.collegeboard.org/ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/College_Board
    NMSC http://www.nationalmerit.org/ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Merit_Scholarship_Program
    and ETS https://www.ets.org/ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Educational_Testing_Service
    are all separate entities which explained that initial sentence.

    This excerpt from the first wiki clarifies one of the relationships, but I don’t claim to understand all the nuances (both official and actual) of those relationships:

    The SAT is administered by College Board in the United States and is developed, published, and scored by the Educational Testing Service (ETS).

    Since College Board administers the test and ETS scores the test it seems reasonable that they would have the most comprehensive data on the test takers (i.e. not NMSC, which actually has reason to want to be race blind). I actually took the part I left out as a form of “pay no attention, nothing to see here” squid ink, but I probably should not have omitted it.

    Frankly, I don’t buy the statement about NMSC lacking knowledge of race given that they also used to have the race based National Achievement Scholarship Program: http://www.nationalmerit.org/s/1758/interior.aspx?sid=1758&gid=2&pgid=433

    The link you gave is a great reference. I’ve linked it elsewhere on unz.com, but forgot about it when writing my original comment. One particularly good aspect is the data is from pre-1995 recentering so gives a better look at the top end. The downside is I only see V/M data not combined (which IMHO maps better to IQ). I think your analysis is good (as much as the data permits, and you caveat appropriately), so won’t quibble with that. On to the bottom line.

    That’s ~14 to 1, which isn’t too far off from Thompson’s 17 to 1 for a 15 SD.

    It’s possible I did Dr. Thompson an injustice, so let me elaborate. My raw estimate was ~13 to 1 (assuming the bottom of the stated percentage range for Black scores, which in my experience tends to be a good rule of thumb for racial numbers like that). This aligns well with your ~14 to 1 (and your other estimates like 11, the clustering of your estimates is encouraging).

    My understanding (and please correct me I am wrong) was that this passage:

    given a 1 standard deviation mean difference in intelligence, equal 15-point standard deviations and assuming equal population size, it is 17 times more probable that a white man is IQ 130+ than a black man is. If you do the calculation assuming the Black standard deviation is 14 rather than 15, the ratio is 35 to 1. Assume the Black standard deviation is in fact 13, as seems to be the case on historical data, and the ratio is 85 to 1. Adjust for population size with African Americans being 12.3% of the US population and the likelihood of a professor finding that a IQ130+ student is black is a further 8 times as low.

    specifies 17 to 1 given equal population size which translates to 17 * 8 = 136 to 1 given actual population sizes. That is a big difference from our (admittedly flawed as we have both observed) estimates. That was my objection. This also ignores the 13/14 SD discussion which increases the estimate. Also notice that Dr. Thompson specifies a 130 threshold where NMSF is more like 140. The higher threshold means my estimate should be significantly higher than Dr. Thompson’s. (any idea of what IQ threshold your buckets correspond to?)

    Dr Thompson’s numbers are more in line with Emil’s calculator results using the theoretical normal distribution as we would expect (e.g. the 208 to 1 for conditions specified in comment 7).

    So, if I understand correctly, your data and analysis actually support my point about assuming the normal distribution for black IQ for an analysis of the upper tail seeming questionable. If I have missed something please help me by pointing it out.

    P.S. Our new Asian overlords are joining our old Jewish overlords (so much for any accusations of White supremacy here). IMHO all of these trends were obvious observationally when I went to college. It does matter that Asians are ~6% (and growing) of the US population while Jews are only ~2% and stable.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Citizen of a Silly Country
    Yeah, using Emil's handy site, I see that theoretically there should be an equal population 17 to 1 ratio of whites to blacks at a 130 IQ if whites average 100 and blacks average 85 and each has a SD of 15. I'm pretty sure that a 700-749 pre-centered math score is at least a 130 IQ, so the fact that the ratio is 11 to 1 at that score seems to indicate a fat tail for blacks.

    I'd also say that if this fat tail really exists, it's likely the result of admixture and some select immigration - Obama being the perfect example of both.

    Ironically, this possible higher that expected number of "blacks" at the high end of the IQ bell curve only serves to strengthen the HBD argument rather than disprove it.

    Regarding our new overlords and our old overlords, from what I've seen on the ground, they seem to be breeding a new generation of hybrid overload. God help the next generation of ignorant white gentiles when they come up against a combination of Jewish minds and Asian grinds.
  30. David says:
    @TheRandomTexan
    "Richard Feynman bemoaned such laissez faire in psychological research decades ago."

    I recall something of that nature, but I'll be darned if I can find it. I'd like to add Feynman to the reading list for my upcoming research methods course. Anyone have the reference?

    I've upgraded "if you say so" to the slightly more passive-aggressive "it's pretty to think so."

    Search on rats. He delves into all the adjustments a researcher had to make to his rat experiment before he could even confuse the rats about what door to go to or tunnel to take, like putting sand under the floor so the rats couldn’t detect the little floor joists. Feynman laments that countless psychology experiments proceed without making such obviously necessary refinements to their model.

    http://calteches.library.caltech.edu/51/2/CargoCult.htm

    Search on “rats”

    Read More
  31. Imagine if everyone start to name calling you ”Babidi”.

    So you, in the begining, think it’s funny and ”take a joke”.

    But what you believe would be temporary become permanent and when you interact with people in your community they always call you ”doctor Babidi”.

    How do you would act*

    How do you would interpret it*

    Even i’m quite aware what microaggression mean and how it can be malignantly used [even if it's your original purpose], i believe anyone who are reasonable can understand what it’s mean.

    I would not call ”microaggresion” but other name what people, and specially some people, tend to suffer everyday in their lives. Microaggresion would be a constant, underlying and often irrational bullying, not only among children but also among ”adults”.

    A little irrational provocation/disrespect everyday, just like micro-earthquackes.

    None is free to suffer some verbal aggresion [specially] throughout their lives, but some people are more sensitive than others and worse, some people really don’t deserve be mis-treated.

    Combat icroaggresions has been used as ”superior moral flag” but (((those))) who created it, use it for other goals.

    BUT because we are in your specific narrative, ”left” against ”right”, so you try to discredit something that is real and varies among people. You attack the means and the useful idiots, not totally the ends, that is directly related to the masters who are behind

    Your improvised example of microaggresion or only a supposed funny example ”intelligence, whatever it’s mean” is not a true disrespect against you.

    You could summarize your post like that

    ”folks, judge case by case and via impartial ways”

    Use analytical skills or pattern recognition to analyse [well] and based on proportionality golden rule.

    le fin!.

    Read More
  32. Anonymouse says: • Website

    Beautifully written. Nonsense on stilts. Nonsense on steroids. My wife suggests nonsense on crutches or in a wheelchair.

    I write to report phenomena. I walk about the streets of downtown Austin TX. I am an older white type guy. In passing one another, younger than I am women glance at me half-smiling, not an invitation to stop and meet, but to indicate that they are peacefully passing me on the street. Older black men are pleased to be nodded to on passing which I read as reflecting a life time of being a Negro in a white society. They were used to, now less so, being considered automatically as an inferior by white folks. I am totally ignored on the street as an old white guy by everyone else. I am reporting only on white women over 55 and black men over 60.

    Read More
  33. wayfarer says:

    SJW melt-down, as a snowflake faces critical thinker’s blunt blowback on New York City subway.

    Listen carefully to the canned ANTIFA script being recited, and realize its content is interwoven with Zionist ideology.

    Self-serving community organizers are mass-marketing ill will and promoting fabricated hatred in an engineered effort to divide America.

    Read More
  34. Forbes says:
    @another fred
    I was a shy and sensitive child. Entering my teens I was blessed to have good friends who told me, "Fuck you, buddy, if you can't take a joke," whether the jibe was a joke or not.

    I got over it.

    I had two older brothers. They didn’t bother with microaggressions–I very quickly learned to ignore macroaggressions.

    Read More
  35. Thanks for discussing this!

    Having sat through my share of mandatory “micro-aggression” sensitivity training sessions in recent years — with more to come, I’ve been told* — I’m coming to the conclusion that the “micro-aggression” fad is simply an attempt to intellectualize (and hence raise the price of training in) what used to be called courtesy or etiquette. Plus, I guess it’s easier to get a room full of managers to accept the message if they’re told that behavior X is “micro-aggressive,” as opposed to “rude” or “tactless.”

    *Just to be clear, these are company-wide sessions. They’re not my own, individual penance.

    Read More
  36. CanSpeccy says: • Website

    I find myself profoundly hurt when people in my presence say “Intelligence – whatever that is”.

    Ridiculing those who reject your authority to rate their intellectual horsepower in all domains with a number on a unidimensional scale, doesn’t add anything to your IQist credibility.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Santoculto
    I don't know what it's more ridicule

    That people who always use this proto argument "intelligence whatever it's mean"

    Or those who think IQ itself can be easily treated as intelligence.

    Doctor Thom must visit Quora to see endless nonsense posts of IQsm, IQdiots usually post. He must be proud of this stupid and emotionally challenging people.

    Psychometrics have found great or important things about intelligence but in in the semantic departments, they are always misinterpret what they find.

  37. Logan says:

    “Other aggressive behaviours include people in conversation denouncing anyone who holds a particular political opinion, without considering that I might be one of them, and without using the polite English circumlocution “present company excepted”. They assume that I cannot possibly be in agreement with the policy in question, by which they intend, I surmise, to cow me into submission.”

    The people you’ve been in contact with who do this might be quite different from those I’ve found doing it.

    I’m in a line of work where I’m often in people’s homes doing highly technical inspections. I am obviously competent and intelligent. Quite often those (the considerable majority) who are liberals will go off on political rants assuming I will agree with them. Conservatives do this MUCH less often, at least without carefully feeling out my opinions first.

    The liberals I deal with are not, I think, trying to cow me into submission. They see a competent, intelligent person and simply assume he shares their beliefs. After all, conservatives are known to believe as they do because they are either evil or stupid. I don’t seem to them to be either, therefore by their definition I simply must be liberal. Doesn’t cross their mind any other possibility exists.

    Read More
    • Replies: @James Thompson
    Interesting observation!
    , @OutWest
    Know the symptom. Do you live in a university town too?
    , @Macumazahn
    I, too, find it hilarious how Lefties, upon noticing that I'm "smarter than the average bear," instantly assume that I'm a Lefty too.
    All through the recent political cycle, we were told incessantly how "college-educated" voters are overwhelmingly Liberal - as if "college-educated" meant "superior" rather than "indoctrinated."
    BTW, when I took the PSAT back in 1975 it was called the PSAT/NMSQT (with the latter part signifying "National Merit Scholarship Qualifying Test") and the total score was computed as 2V+M. I rode my combined 208 and my subsequent 700V/750M SAT to a NM scholarship that allowed me to be the first in my family to attend college. No brag, just fact.
    I will brag, though, by saying that as a college senior in 1980 I scored 990 on the GRE Math exam.
  38. @CanSpeccy

    I find myself profoundly hurt when people in my presence say “Intelligence – whatever that is”.
     
    Ridiculing those who reject your authority to rate their intellectual horsepower in all domains with a number on a unidimensional scale, doesn't add anything to your IQist credibility.

    I don’t know what it’s more ridicule

    That people who always use this proto argument “intelligence whatever it’s mean”

    Or those who think IQ itself can be easily treated as intelligence.

    Doctor Thom must visit Quora to see endless nonsense posts of IQsm, IQdiots usually post. He must be proud of this stupid and emotionally challenging people.

    Psychometrics have found great or important things about intelligence but in in the semantic departments, they are always misinterpret what they find.

    Read More
  39. @TheRandomTexan
    "Richard Feynman bemoaned such laissez faire in psychological research decades ago."

    I recall something of that nature, but I'll be darned if I can find it. I'd like to add Feynman to the reading list for my upcoming research methods course. Anyone have the reference?

    I've upgraded "if you say so" to the slightly more passive-aggressive "it's pretty to think so."

    I’ve upgraded “if you say so” to the slightly more passive-aggressive “it’s pretty to think so.”

    Go all the way. Use “cool story, bro”.

    Read More
  40. https://areomagazine.com/2017/03/27/how-french-intellectuals-ruined-the-west-postmodernism-and-its-impact-explained/

    (((French intellectuals ruined the west))) is equivalent to (((Russian mafia)))??

    I mean. Super magical power make post modern books extremely relevant not only in academia but also in politics!!!!!1

    Someone explain me how this magic happened?? Maybe ((($oro$))) and (((Frankfurt teachers))) can explain us.. ^.^

    Read More
  41. @Logan
    "Other aggressive behaviours include people in conversation denouncing anyone who holds a particular political opinion, without considering that I might be one of them, and without using the polite English circumlocution “present company excepted”. They assume that I cannot possibly be in agreement with the policy in question, by which they intend, I surmise, to cow me into submission."

    The people you've been in contact with who do this might be quite different from those I've found doing it.

    I'm in a line of work where I'm often in people's homes doing highly technical inspections. I am obviously competent and intelligent. Quite often those (the considerable majority) who are liberals will go off on political rants assuming I will agree with them. Conservatives do this MUCH less often, at least without carefully feeling out my opinions first.

    The liberals I deal with are not, I think, trying to cow me into submission. They see a competent, intelligent person and simply assume he shares their beliefs. After all, conservatives are known to believe as they do because they are either evil or stupid. I don't seem to them to be either, therefore by their definition I simply must be liberal. Doesn't cross their mind any other possibility exists.

    Interesting observation!

    Read More
  42. @res
    Thanks for your excellent reply.

    While I agree that admixture and select immigration could create tail effects for blacks, I’m not sure that I trust the source. First, you curiously left out an important part of the quote about PSAT scores. Here’s the entire passage:
     
    Agreed about trusting the source. There is so much obfuscation in this area...
    Apologies if it looked like I was intentionally selectively quoting. My understanding is
    College Board https://www.collegeboard.org/ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/College_Board
    NMSC http://www.nationalmerit.org/ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Merit_Scholarship_Program
    and ETS https://www.ets.org/ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Educational_Testing_Service
    are all separate entities which explained that initial sentence.

    This excerpt from the first wiki clarifies one of the relationships, but I don't claim to understand all the nuances (both official and actual) of those relationships:

    The SAT is administered by College Board in the United States and is developed, published, and scored by the Educational Testing Service (ETS).
     
    Since College Board administers the test and ETS scores the test it seems reasonable that they would have the most comprehensive data on the test takers (i.e. not NMSC, which actually has reason to want to be race blind). I actually took the part I left out as a form of "pay no attention, nothing to see here" squid ink, but I probably should not have omitted it.

    Frankly, I don't buy the statement about NMSC lacking knowledge of race given that they also used to have the race based National Achievement Scholarship Program: http://www.nationalmerit.org/s/1758/interior.aspx?sid=1758&gid=2&pgid=433

    The link you gave is a great reference. I've linked it elsewhere on unz.com, but forgot about it when writing my original comment. One particularly good aspect is the data is from pre-1995 recentering so gives a better look at the top end. The downside is I only see V/M data not combined (which IMHO maps better to IQ). I think your analysis is good (as much as the data permits, and you caveat appropriately), so won't quibble with that. On to the bottom line.

    That’s ~14 to 1, which isn’t too far off from Thompson’s 17 to 1 for a 15 SD.
     
    It's possible I did Dr. Thompson an injustice, so let me elaborate. My raw estimate was ~13 to 1 (assuming the bottom of the stated percentage range for Black scores, which in my experience tends to be a good rule of thumb for racial numbers like that). This aligns well with your ~14 to 1 (and your other estimates like 11, the clustering of your estimates is encouraging).

    My understanding (and please correct me I am wrong) was that this passage:

    given a 1 standard deviation mean difference in intelligence, equal 15-point standard deviations and assuming equal population size, it is 17 times more probable that a white man is IQ 130+ than a black man is. If you do the calculation assuming the Black standard deviation is 14 rather than 15, the ratio is 35 to 1. Assume the Black standard deviation is in fact 13, as seems to be the case on historical data, and the ratio is 85 to 1. Adjust for population size with African Americans being 12.3% of the US population and the likelihood of a professor finding that a IQ130+ student is black is a further 8 times as low.

     

    specifies 17 to 1 given equal population size which translates to 17 * 8 = 136 to 1 given actual population sizes. That is a big difference from our (admittedly flawed as we have both observed) estimates. That was my objection. This also ignores the 13/14 SD discussion which increases the estimate. Also notice that Dr. Thompson specifies a 130 threshold where NMSF is more like 140. The higher threshold means my estimate should be significantly higher than Dr. Thompson's. (any idea of what IQ threshold your buckets correspond to?)

    Dr Thompson's numbers are more in line with Emil's calculator results using the theoretical normal distribution as we would expect (e.g. the 208 to 1 for conditions specified in comment 7).

    So, if I understand correctly, your data and analysis actually support my point about assuming the normal distribution for black IQ for an analysis of the upper tail seeming questionable. If I have missed something please help me by pointing it out.

    P.S. Our new Asian overlords are joining our old Jewish overlords (so much for any accusations of White supremacy here). IMHO all of these trends were obvious observationally when I went to college. It does matter that Asians are ~6% (and growing) of the US population while Jews are only ~2% and stable.

    Yeah, using Emil’s handy site, I see that theoretically there should be an equal population 17 to 1 ratio of whites to blacks at a 130 IQ if whites average 100 and blacks average 85 and each has a SD of 15. I’m pretty sure that a 700-749 pre-centered math score is at least a 130 IQ, so the fact that the ratio is 11 to 1 at that score seems to indicate a fat tail for blacks.

    I’d also say that if this fat tail really exists, it’s likely the result of admixture and some select immigration – Obama being the perfect example of both.

    Ironically, this possible higher that expected number of “blacks” at the high end of the IQ bell curve only serves to strengthen the HBD argument rather than disprove it.

    Regarding our new overlords and our old overlords, from what I’ve seen on the ground, they seem to be breeding a new generation of hybrid overload. God help the next generation of ignorant white gentiles when they come up against a combination of Jewish minds and Asian grinds.

    Read More
    • Replies: @res
    I revisited this in an iSteve comment: http://www.unz.com/isteve/nyt-nice-white-lady-teachers-are-practically-george-zimmerman-level-racists/#comment-1840356
    and am less confident of my conclusions now. Some weaknesses in what I wrote above:
    - I am not confident the reference I gave as NMSF percentage was really that. It was not stated as such explicitly and I have learned to distrust ambiguity in this area.
    - In comment 33 I erred in the way I calculated 136 for actual population size. Should have multiplied by 87/13 = 6.7 giving ~114 rather than 100/13 = 7.7 (which I foolishly rounded to 8 since I was doing the math in my head).
    - (this is the big one) Your comment 27 actually did account for population size implicitly (by using % of whites and blacks). I missed this originally, but looked again after Jack D made that point in the other thread.

    So it looks like you were basically right in comment 27. Sorry for the confusion.
  43. CCZ says:

    My printed card of introduction for political conversation in our current diversified, transgenderized, conversationally sanitized, hypersensitized, multiculturalized society:

    MY MISSION:
    SPEAK POLITICALLY INCORRECTLY
    FOR AS LONG AS I CAN.

    I have male biology, working-class roots, and micro-aggressive vocabulary and behavior. I DO NOT acknowledge “My pronouns are.” I DO NOT accommodate delusions, personal or political. I DO NOT “Celebrate Diversity” or encourage any “Multi-Culturalism” that denigrates, despises, denies or seeks to destroy and erase the achievements of Western Civilization.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Santoculto
    One example of western achievement:


    Some billion Africans in 2050.. Well
  44. CanSpeccy says: • Website

    That scholars consider the phenomenon of microaggression worthy of study is proof of the ongoing collapse of Western civilization and rationality.

    Coinciding with this development and not unrelated to it, America had become the world’s bully nation: Americans ruthlessly kill and displace millions abroad for the sake of American global hegemony, engage in virulent hate speech directed at anyone with whom they disagree, while whining pathetically in the face of counter criticism, ridicule or hate.

    When JT says “dropping the whole notion seems a good policy,” he does not go far enough. Whether or not micro-aggressions are “distinguishable from nothing,” they have to be borne in a free society. America, of course, is no longer a free society. It is a basket of pathetic, whinging, whining, self-pitying ignoramuses (with exceptions, of course), intent on turning a once great nation into a loony bin, run on Leninist-Stalinist lines where the exercise of free speech leads directly to the gulag.

    One difference, though, between the US of Assininity and the Soviet Union is that whereas the Soviets thought schools were primarily to insure that the nation was well supplied with people expert in hard subjects like math and physics, the US imports a replacement population to do its brain work while devoting its schools and colleges to the task of turning out adults brainwashed into a state of agitated stupidity.

    Read More
    • Replies: @dfordoom

    That scholars consider the phenomenon of microaggression worthy of study is proof of the ongoing collapse of Western civilization and rationality.

    Coinciding with this development and not unrelated to it, America had become the world’s bully nation: Americans ruthlessly kill and displace millions abroad for the sake of American global hegemony, engage in virulent hate speech directed at anyone with whom they disagree,
     
    That's the bizarre nature of the modern US. Domestically tortured by the fear of being racist, sexist, homophobic, etc but when it comes to foreign policy it's full-on xenophobia and out-and-out racism. How dare the Chinese think they can challenge US economic power? We should bomb them back to the Stone Age. How dare Iran refuse to grovel to the US! We should bomb them back to the Stone Age. US foreign policy seems to consist entirely of slaughtering non-white people who commit the unpardonable sin of peacefully living in their own countries.
  45. @CCZ
    My printed card of introduction for political conversation in our current diversified, transgenderized, conversationally sanitized, hypersensitized, multiculturalized society:

    MY MISSION:
    SPEAK POLITICALLY INCORRECTLY
    FOR AS LONG AS I CAN.

    I have male biology, working-class roots, and micro-aggressive vocabulary and behavior. I DO NOT acknowledge “My pronouns are.” I DO NOT accommodate delusions, personal or political. I DO NOT “Celebrate Diversity” or encourage any “Multi-Culturalism” that denigrates, despises, denies or seeks to destroy and erase the achievements of Western Civilization.

     

    One example of western achievement:

    Some billion Africans in 2050.. Well

    Read More
    • Replies: @CanSpeccy

    Some billion Africans in 2050.. Well
     
    Well?

    Invite 'em in! That's the plan. And there's plenty of girls here in the West pining for a lusty African, whether from sub or supra-Saharan Africa. We're seeing the inevitable consequence of feminism. White girls gonna shack up either with an immigrant or another girl. Meantime, dem Whitey males, gonna be cucked good, an' gonna be able to say nuthin' for fear of micro-aggressin'. Meantime, in Sweden, the home of cuckdom, degenerate white males attend psychological castration classes at uni.

  46. Tomster says:

    ‘get back to work” is exactly the problem. These kids (unless they’re very well-off – no matter their color) know the system is rigged, and that there are no jobs, let alone careers waiting for them in their futures, no matter how clever they be.

    They are young and angry, and lashing out – and they are being encouraged in this by advocacy orgs that feed their rage in order to receive funding from Soros, etc. Sad, sad, sad.

    Read More
  47. CanSpeccy says: • Website
    @Santoculto
    One example of western achievement:


    Some billion Africans in 2050.. Well

    Some billion Africans in 2050.. Well

    Well?

    Invite ‘em in! That’s the plan. And there’s plenty of girls here in the West pining for a lusty African, whether from sub or supra-Saharan Africa. We’re seeing the inevitable consequence of feminism. White girls gonna shack up either with an immigrant or another girl. Meantime, dem Whitey males, gonna be cucked good, an’ gonna be able to say nuthin’ for fear of micro-aggressin’. Meantime, in Sweden, the home of cuckdom, degenerate white males attend psychological castration classes at uni.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Santoculto
    I really don't know what is the plan, if there is a plan, i already believed there is a plan... to hegemony, now i believe in the plan to.... destruction.

    People who

    - have subjectively ''sensitive'' about blacks, on avg

    or

    - have little time living and observing then via ''neutral'' ways

    don't know how problematic many if not most of them can be...

    and how insane can be the earth planet with, maybe, four billion of this people.

    Only if (((they))) have a hidden card (technology*)
    , @Santoculto
    Sweden is a ''special'' case, =(
  48. dfordoom says: • Website
    @CanSpeccy
    That scholars consider the phenomenon of microaggression worthy of study is proof of the ongoing collapse of Western civilization and rationality.

    Coinciding with this development and not unrelated to it, America had become the world's bully nation: Americans ruthlessly kill and displace millions abroad for the sake of American global hegemony, engage in virulent hate speech directed at anyone with whom they disagree, while whining pathetically in the face of counter criticism, ridicule or hate.

    When JT says "dropping the whole notion seems a good policy," he does not go far enough. Whether or not micro-aggressions are "distinguishable from nothing," they have to be borne in a free society. America, of course, is no longer a free society. It is a basket of pathetic, whinging, whining, self-pitying ignoramuses (with exceptions, of course), intent on turning a once great nation into a loony bin, run on Leninist-Stalinist lines where the exercise of free speech leads directly to the gulag.

    One difference, though, between the US of Assininity and the Soviet Union is that whereas the Soviets thought schools were primarily to insure that the nation was well supplied with people expert in hard subjects like math and physics, the US imports a replacement population to do its brain work while devoting its schools and colleges to the task of turning out adults brainwashed into a state of agitated stupidity.

    That scholars consider the phenomenon of microaggression worthy of study is proof of the ongoing collapse of Western civilization and rationality.

    Coinciding with this development and not unrelated to it, America had become the world’s bully nation: Americans ruthlessly kill and displace millions abroad for the sake of American global hegemony, engage in virulent hate speech directed at anyone with whom they disagree,

    That’s the bizarre nature of the modern US. Domestically tortured by the fear of being racist, sexist, homophobic, etc but when it comes to foreign policy it’s full-on xenophobia and out-and-out racism. How dare the Chinese think they can challenge US economic power? We should bomb them back to the Stone Age. How dare Iran refuse to grovel to the US! We should bomb them back to the Stone Age. US foreign policy seems to consist entirely of slaughtering non-white people who commit the unpardonable sin of peacefully living in their own countries.

    Read More
  49. @CanSpeccy

    Some billion Africans in 2050.. Well
     
    Well?

    Invite 'em in! That's the plan. And there's plenty of girls here in the West pining for a lusty African, whether from sub or supra-Saharan Africa. We're seeing the inevitable consequence of feminism. White girls gonna shack up either with an immigrant or another girl. Meantime, dem Whitey males, gonna be cucked good, an' gonna be able to say nuthin' for fear of micro-aggressin'. Meantime, in Sweden, the home of cuckdom, degenerate white males attend psychological castration classes at uni.

    I really don’t know what is the plan, if there is a plan, i already believed there is a plan… to hegemony, now i believe in the plan to…. destruction.

    People who

    - have subjectively ”sensitive” about blacks, on avg

    or

    – have little time living and observing then via ”neutral” ways

    don’t know how problematic many if not most of them can be…

    and how insane can be the earth planet with, maybe, four billion of this people.

    Only if (((they))) have a hidden card (technology*)

    Read More
  50. @CanSpeccy

    Some billion Africans in 2050.. Well
     
    Well?

    Invite 'em in! That's the plan. And there's plenty of girls here in the West pining for a lusty African, whether from sub or supra-Saharan Africa. We're seeing the inevitable consequence of feminism. White girls gonna shack up either with an immigrant or another girl. Meantime, dem Whitey males, gonna be cucked good, an' gonna be able to say nuthin' for fear of micro-aggressin'. Meantime, in Sweden, the home of cuckdom, degenerate white males attend psychological castration classes at uni.

    Sweden is a ”special” case, =(

    Read More
  51. “The term microaggression was coined by Harvard University psychiatrist Chester Pierce in 1970 to describe seemingly minor but damaging put-downs and indignities experienced by African Americans. Pierce wrote that “every Black must recognize the offensive mechanisms used by the collective White society, usually by means of cumulative pro-racist micro-aggressions, which keep him psychologically accepting of the disenfranchised state”

    And, of course, Pierce was a negro. Whether it is the myths of black inventions, the lies of afrocentric history, or calling murder, rape, and violence justified because of “poverty”, there is an entire cottage industry for creating excuses for black behavior. Unfortunately, blacks don’t do their homework and will often lie with “facts” that are easily disproven. Microagression is just a word that can’t be proven, so it has legs. Hopefully, others will point out the absurdity of this psychobabble or the historical obfuscations about black accomplishment, like the Tuskegee Airmen or Hidden Figures.

    Read More
  52. Microaggresion is a neo-term for disrespect. And disrespect, specially of irrational nature, seems more effective to communicate what it’s mean than ”microaggresion”, that appears ”scientific” and too ”cold” term to have similar impact.

    Disrespect word involve more objectivity and emotion, it’s easy to be understood.

    Vague concepts are at the same time less efficient to communicate its meanings as well useful to erase its conceptual borders, more useful to manipulate people.

    Read More
    • Replies: @res
    This strikes me as extremely perceptive. Perhaps not a coincidence that "dissing" (i.e. disrespecting) someone seems both common and contentious in the ghetto. (not sure if the word dis is current there, but it seems to have been once)

    I think it's worth adding that not respecting sounds more passive and less "bad" than aggressing. Failure to be nice to someone sounds less severe than actively being aggressive to them.

    I'm a little surprised the microaggression idea got so much traction given how easy "micro" makes it to ridicule.
    , @another fred
    Much of what has been termed "disrespect" would, in a less diverse and crowded culture, have formerly been seen as enforcing cultural norms, which is not always a gentle, pleasant process. Large segments of the population have rejected traditional western cultural norms.

    The left proposes to have some better norms, but there are so many internal contradictions in their norms, mostly grounded in a rejection of human nature, that they cannot sell them to the mass of people, especially to people who have a sense that human nature is real.

    This will not end well.
  53. res says:
    @Santoculto
    Microaggresion is a neo-term for disrespect. And disrespect, specially of irrational nature, seems more effective to communicate what it's mean than ''microaggresion'', that appears ''scientific'' and too ''cold'' term to have similar impact.

    Disrespect word involve more objectivity and emotion, it's easy to be understood.

    Vague concepts are at the same time less efficient to communicate its meanings as well useful to erase its conceptual borders, more useful to manipulate people.

    This strikes me as extremely perceptive. Perhaps not a coincidence that “dissing” (i.e. disrespecting) someone seems both common and contentious in the ghetto. (not sure if the word dis is current there, but it seems to have been once)

    I think it’s worth adding that not respecting sounds more passive and less “bad” than aggressing. Failure to be nice to someone sounds less severe than actively being aggressive to them.

    I’m a little surprised the microaggression idea got so much traction given how easy “micro” makes it to ridicule.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Santoculto
    Because people who are invariably more instinctive/cognitively impulsive tend to associate quickly the words they are using to the certain meaning OR value, specially based on social consciousness.

    Meaning and value is not exactly the same thing and people tend to be lazy to connect both in supra-correct ways.

    What is the meaning of racism**

    If we apply correctly the term, anti-white narrative would be finished.

    But people usually adhere more quickly to the value, that is not always exactly what meaning is.

    Meaning is extracted from objective and ''neutral'' pattern recognition.

    Value is the emotional imput we give to the meaning.

    Meaning = what it is

    Value= what it express

    but also

    how i feel about it

    It's not problematic you have a subjective feeling about certain aspect of reality. It's problematic if this feeling is used to obscure that truth.

    When the meaning of words are neglected the value become whatever you want to be.
    , @Anonymous White Male
    When I was growing up, I do not recall the word disrespect used as a verb. It was always used as "to show disrespect". Does anyone have a dictionary from before the 1960's that uses disrespect as a verb? I began to see it, I think, in the 1980's always spoken by a negro. If respect can be used as a verb, I suppose disrespect can too. Just don't every recall seeing it used that way.
  54. CanSpeccy says: • Website

    Incidentally, Santoculto, it’s not a billion Africans by 2050 but, according to Wikipedia, two billion:

    By 2050, the bulk of the world’s population growth will take place in Africa: of the additional 2.4 billion people projected [to be added to the world population] between 2015 and 2050, 1.3 billion will be added in Africa

    That ‘s quite an achievement for Western technology, Western aid programs, and the legacy of Western colonialism.

    Still Africa’s a big place, and by 2050, the Africans will be well established in Europe and America too, where people like AnneGailer Murckle, Tessy May, and Hillary can’t, apparently, have enough of those lusty young male immigrants. Good thing, I suppose, since white Western feminists aren’t much use when it comes to raising children of their own. We’ll just have to accept that Africans and mongrels are to be our posterity.

    In fact, the West will surely live or die according as whether it destroys the feminist traitors in its midst. What was it William Buckley said, “a woman should seek, not to distinguish herself, but to raise distinguished sons.” LOL. As if. Mostly, women who seek positions of power are Commies for the New World Ordure.

    Read More
  55. @res
    This strikes me as extremely perceptive. Perhaps not a coincidence that "dissing" (i.e. disrespecting) someone seems both common and contentious in the ghetto. (not sure if the word dis is current there, but it seems to have been once)

    I think it's worth adding that not respecting sounds more passive and less "bad" than aggressing. Failure to be nice to someone sounds less severe than actively being aggressive to them.

    I'm a little surprised the microaggression idea got so much traction given how easy "micro" makes it to ridicule.

    Because people who are invariably more instinctive/cognitively impulsive tend to associate quickly the words they are using to the certain meaning OR value, specially based on social consciousness.

    Meaning and value is not exactly the same thing and people tend to be lazy to connect both in supra-correct ways.

    What is the meaning of racism**

    If we apply correctly the term, anti-white narrative would be finished.

    But people usually adhere more quickly to the value, that is not always exactly what meaning is.

    Meaning is extracted from objective and ”neutral” pattern recognition.

    Value is the emotional imput we give to the meaning.

    Meaning = what it is

    Value= what it express

    but also

    how i feel about it

    It’s not problematic you have a subjective feeling about certain aspect of reality. It’s problematic if this feeling is used to obscure that truth.

    When the meaning of words are neglected the value become whatever you want to be.

    Read More
  56. @CanSpeccy
    Incidentally, Santoculto, it's not a billion Africans by 2050 but, according to Wikipedia, two billion:

    By 2050, the bulk of the world's population growth will take place in Africa: of the additional 2.4 billion people projected [to be added to the world population] between 2015 and 2050, 1.3 billion will be added in Africa
     
    That 's quite an achievement for Western technology, Western aid programs, and the legacy of Western colonialism.

    Still Africa's a big place, and by 2050, the Africans will be well established in Europe and America too, where people like AnneGailer Murckle, Tessy May, and Hillary can't, apparently, have enough of those lusty young male immigrants. Good thing, I suppose, since white Western feminists aren't much use when it comes to raising children of their own. We'll just have to accept that Africans and mongrels are to be our posterity.

    In fact, the West will surely live or die according as whether it destroys the feminist traitors in its midst. What was it William Buckley said, "a woman should seek, not to distinguish herself, but to raise distinguished sons." LOL. As if. Mostly, women who seek positions of power are Commies for the New World Ordure.

    Ecologically correct*

    Read More
  57. @Santoculto
    Microaggresion is a neo-term for disrespect. And disrespect, specially of irrational nature, seems more effective to communicate what it's mean than ''microaggresion'', that appears ''scientific'' and too ''cold'' term to have similar impact.

    Disrespect word involve more objectivity and emotion, it's easy to be understood.

    Vague concepts are at the same time less efficient to communicate its meanings as well useful to erase its conceptual borders, more useful to manipulate people.

    Much of what has been termed “disrespect” would, in a less diverse and crowded culture, have formerly been seen as enforcing cultural norms, which is not always a gentle, pleasant process. Large segments of the population have rejected traditional western cultural norms.

    The left proposes to have some better norms, but there are so many internal contradictions in their norms, mostly grounded in a rejection of human nature, that they cannot sell them to the mass of people, especially to people who have a sense that human nature is real.

    This will not end well.

    Read More
    • Replies: @CanSpeccy

    Large segments of the population have rejected traditional western cultural norms.
     
    Like these guys, engaging in a mass demonstration of macroaggression, aka, promoting European genocide as a form of protected free speech. And here come the reinforcements.

    Does anyone seriously doubt that we are ruled by traitors, aided by morons and opportunists in academia with their stupid research projects, their safe spaces and their preposterously overpaid Presidents, deans and all the rest of the bureaucratic scum that have taken over and made a mockery of the world of higher education?

    , @Santoculto
    There are many internal contradictions because to white people (((they))) want to pass one idea.

    To other people who are not white/targeted and among themselves (((they))) want to pass other/true idea.

    Seems contradictions for us but it's not. Increasing of en masse immigration is more than just symptomatic.

    For example islamophobia, homophobia and hate against Christianism.

    In reasonable reality the harsh criticism totally directed to the Christianity also must be directed to the Islam not only because "macroaggresion" against homosexuals but also against women, apostates and even against dogs!!

    Why that retarded"atheists" only hate Christianism and not Islam?? First, because they are stupid. Second, because they are coward. Third, because they are conformist to the (((leftist))) narrative. Fourth, because they believe Christianism is a personal subject while Islam is a foreign subject.

    Islamophobia is used to shut up people against slow Islamic invasion in Europe. Fundamental question: Why Europe must need Islamic immigrants firstly?? For exactly what?

    Homophobia is used to relativize (Christian) morality but also because it's part of plan to confuse westerners and when homosexuality surpass their ghettos it can become destructive and weak social orderness.

    So because majority people are tamed, can't think outside their social group and no have higher intellect to engage independently on this intellectual or political investigation they are easily blackmailed even or fundamentally at subconscious levels.

    Higher delayed gratification levels and hope can work very well. The patience to expect that tomorrow"immigrants' will be integrated and lack of anxiety can work against survive, a lot of traits of higher "intelligence" can work against survive, surprisingly lack of anxiety or emotional stability and higher delayed gratification of many Europeans namely the "smartest" has been used against them.

    Entire (((leftist))) culture is directed to the white minds and in different way to the other groups. For whites is shame, for non whites is proud and because most of non-Caucasian humans are not so different than Europeans so they usually succumb to similar defective mode even because they already tend to be nurture in deceptive belief systems, it's not problematic to the weak mind internalize other magical thinking.

    Whites are only people by now who has been nurtured within a non-tribal culture. But non white and reasonably smarter people who are nurtured within globalist culture tend to become less tribal specially when they married out of the tribe.

    Plain and simple: Whites has been emotionally blackmailed and their trends to lack of intelectual curiosity, social conformism and even lack of malice also has worked enormously to adhere to this suicidal cult.

    It's not a exotic white feature. Mentally independent individuals are rare throughout human populations, even worse in other groups for example east Asians.

    I believe you can direct ( the collective behavior) almost human populations to adhere to this suicidal cult. You only need to know what is their weaknesses and after 500 years of invasion, colonization and many other truculent macro-actions via western civilization (and also against their own peoples, uncountable wars among white peoples, for example) it's easy to attack westerners via morality. And western civilization no only have committed quite stupid actions for example African slavery but never solved their problems in rational ways.
  58. OutWest says:
    @Logan
    "Other aggressive behaviours include people in conversation denouncing anyone who holds a particular political opinion, without considering that I might be one of them, and without using the polite English circumlocution “present company excepted”. They assume that I cannot possibly be in agreement with the policy in question, by which they intend, I surmise, to cow me into submission."

    The people you've been in contact with who do this might be quite different from those I've found doing it.

    I'm in a line of work where I'm often in people's homes doing highly technical inspections. I am obviously competent and intelligent. Quite often those (the considerable majority) who are liberals will go off on political rants assuming I will agree with them. Conservatives do this MUCH less often, at least without carefully feeling out my opinions first.

    The liberals I deal with are not, I think, trying to cow me into submission. They see a competent, intelligent person and simply assume he shares their beliefs. After all, conservatives are known to believe as they do because they are either evil or stupid. I don't seem to them to be either, therefore by their definition I simply must be liberal. Doesn't cross their mind any other possibility exists.

    Know the symptom. Do you live in a university town too?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Logan
    Nahh. Used to, though, and it was worse there.

    My point is that they aren't trying to browbeat me into submission, they simply assume I will agree. They would probably be very embarrassed if they realized what they had done.

    You may recall the story, got a lot of ink, after the election in which the writer realized his plumber, there to repair a leak, might very well have voted for Trump. Well, these folks simply assume I didn't.
  59. Sam J. says:

    Minorities should work on their macro-aggressions like assault, theft, rape and murder. When they get a good handle on those then we will work on White’s micro-aggressions.

    Read More
  60. CanSpeccy says: • Website
    @another fred
    Much of what has been termed "disrespect" would, in a less diverse and crowded culture, have formerly been seen as enforcing cultural norms, which is not always a gentle, pleasant process. Large segments of the population have rejected traditional western cultural norms.

    The left proposes to have some better norms, but there are so many internal contradictions in their norms, mostly grounded in a rejection of human nature, that they cannot sell them to the mass of people, especially to people who have a sense that human nature is real.

    This will not end well.

    Large segments of the population have rejected traditional western cultural norms.

    Like these guys, engaging in a mass demonstration of macroaggression, aka, promoting European genocide as a form of protected free speech. And Read More

    • Replies: @CanSpeccy

    And Read More
     
    LOL.

    That wasn't my "Read More" link that excises the pithy part of my comment.

    Looks like James is resorting to censorship.

    So what was it I said that could have so disturbed the young fella?

    Guess I was pointing out that all this crap about microaggressions and safe spaces was imposed on academia by overpaid scoundrel university presidents (for example, people like the Provost of University College London), deans and other bureaucratic scum who are quite deliberately overpaid to overcome any scruple they may have against destroying the integrity of the university.

    I suppose there could be some other, technical, explanation for the expurgation of most of my comment, but more likely, James just confirmed that the academy is a no-free-speech zone which extends to wherever an academic speaks.

  61. @res
    This strikes me as extremely perceptive. Perhaps not a coincidence that "dissing" (i.e. disrespecting) someone seems both common and contentious in the ghetto. (not sure if the word dis is current there, but it seems to have been once)

    I think it's worth adding that not respecting sounds more passive and less "bad" than aggressing. Failure to be nice to someone sounds less severe than actively being aggressive to them.

    I'm a little surprised the microaggression idea got so much traction given how easy "micro" makes it to ridicule.

    When I was growing up, I do not recall the word disrespect used as a verb. It was always used as “to show disrespect”. Does anyone have a dictionary from before the 1960′s that uses disrespect as a verb? I began to see it, I think, in the 1980′s always spoken by a negro. If respect can be used as a verb, I suppose disrespect can too. Just don’t every recall seeing it used that way.

    Read More
    • Replies: @res
    I have the same sense, but I looked into it and it appears the usage actually goes back to the seventeenth century: http://www.dailywritingtips.com/that-annoying-new-verb-%E2%80%9Cdisrespect%E2%80%9D/
  62. res says:
    @Anonymous White Male
    When I was growing up, I do not recall the word disrespect used as a verb. It was always used as "to show disrespect". Does anyone have a dictionary from before the 1960's that uses disrespect as a verb? I began to see it, I think, in the 1980's always spoken by a negro. If respect can be used as a verb, I suppose disrespect can too. Just don't every recall seeing it used that way.

    I have the same sense, but I looked into it and it appears the usage actually goes back to the seventeenth century: http://www.dailywritingtips.com/that-annoying-new-verb-%E2%80%9Cdisrespect%E2%80%9D/

    Read More
  63. Darmak says:

    You may be interested in the paper “Microaggression and Moral Cultures” by Campbell and Manning. Ungated version here on Academia.edu. They also have a piece on Quilette called “Purity and Tolerance: The Contradictory Morality of College Campuses.”

    Read More
  64. @another fred
    Much of what has been termed "disrespect" would, in a less diverse and crowded culture, have formerly been seen as enforcing cultural norms, which is not always a gentle, pleasant process. Large segments of the population have rejected traditional western cultural norms.

    The left proposes to have some better norms, but there are so many internal contradictions in their norms, mostly grounded in a rejection of human nature, that they cannot sell them to the mass of people, especially to people who have a sense that human nature is real.

    This will not end well.

    There are many internal contradictions because to white people (((they))) want to pass one idea.

    To other people who are not white/targeted and among themselves (((they))) want to pass other/true idea.

    Seems contradictions for us but it’s not. Increasing of en masse immigration is more than just symptomatic.

    For example islamophobia, homophobia and hate against Christianism.

    In reasonable reality the harsh criticism totally directed to the Christianity also must be directed to the Islam not only because “macroaggresion” against homosexuals but also against women, apostates and even against dogs!!

    Why that retarded”atheists” only hate Christianism and not Islam?? First, because they are stupid. Second, because they are coward. Third, because they are conformist to the (((leftist))) narrative. Fourth, because they believe Christianism is a personal subject while Islam is a foreign subject.

    Islamophobia is used to shut up people against slow Islamic invasion in Europe. Fundamental question: Why Europe must need Islamic immigrants firstly?? For exactly what?

    Homophobia is used to relativize (Christian) morality but also because it’s part of plan to confuse westerners and when homosexuality surpass their ghettos it can become destructive and weak social orderness.

    So because majority people are tamed, can’t think outside their social group and no have higher intellect to engage independently on this intellectual or political investigation they are easily blackmailed even or fundamentally at subconscious levels.

    Higher delayed gratification levels and hope can work very well. The patience to expect that tomorrow”immigrants’ will be integrated and lack of anxiety can work against survive, a lot of traits of higher “intelligence” can work against survive, surprisingly lack of anxiety or emotional stability and higher delayed gratification of many Europeans namely the “smartest” has been used against them.

    Entire (((leftist))) culture is directed to the white minds and in different way to the other groups. For whites is shame, for non whites is proud and because most of non-Caucasian humans are not so different than Europeans so they usually succumb to similar defective mode even because they already tend to be nurture in deceptive belief systems, it’s not problematic to the weak mind internalize other magical thinking.

    Whites are only people by now who has been nurtured within a non-tribal culture. But non white and reasonably smarter people who are nurtured within globalist culture tend to become less tribal specially when they married out of the tribe.

    Plain and simple: Whites has been emotionally blackmailed and their trends to lack of intelectual curiosity, social conformism and even lack of malice also has worked enormously to adhere to this suicidal cult.

    It’s not a exotic white feature. Mentally independent individuals are rare throughout human populations, even worse in other groups for example east Asians.

    I believe you can direct ( the collective behavior) almost human populations to adhere to this suicidal cult. You only need to know what is their weaknesses and after 500 years of invasion, colonization and many other truculent macro-actions via western civilization (and also against their own peoples, uncountable wars among white peoples, for example) it’s easy to attack westerners via morality. And western civilization no only have committed quite stupid actions for example African slavery but never solved their problems in rational ways.

    Read More
    • Replies: @CanSpeccy

    Why that retarded”atheists” only hate Christianism and not Islam??
     
    Good question, though I don't think you have the right answer — not the whole of it, anyway.

    Mostly, those you call "retarded atheists," who include virtually all of those in academia, including K to 12 education, plus the media, the bureaucracy and the global corporations, don't have any real beliefs except in the accumulation of wealth and power.

    They are subservient to the globalist elite, the international bankers, the bosses of the global corporations, and the dynamic elements of the plutocracy, people like George Soros and the late but unlamented David Rockefeller.

    And the aim of those elites is to destroy the democratic, sovereign, nation state.

    So what's the biggest challenge these revolutionaries face? It's overcoming the resistance of the European nations, the most powerful nations on earth, and the ones where democracy, free speech and human rights are most firmly embedded.

    Their goal, therefore is genocide, both racial and cultural, and the cretins, dupes and agents of subversion in academia promoting bollocks about micro-aggressions, safe spaces, gay marriage and men in dresses winning all the female athletics prizes are doing the work of these enemies of Western civilization, democracy and freedom.

    Here's an example of a white academic who promotes white genocide! Is he a self-hating cretin. No he's an academic on the rise.

  65. CanSpeccy says: • Website
    @CanSpeccy

    Large segments of the population have rejected traditional western cultural norms.
     
    Like these guys, engaging in a mass demonstration of macroaggression, aka, promoting European genocide as a form of protected free speech. And here come the reinforcements.

    Does anyone seriously doubt that we are ruled by traitors, aided by morons and opportunists in academia with their stupid research projects, their safe spaces and their preposterously overpaid Presidents, deans and all the rest of the bureaucratic scum that have taken over and made a mockery of the world of higher education?

    And Read More

    LOL.

    That wasn’t my “Read More” link that excises the pithy part of my comment.

    Looks like James is resorting to censorship.

    So what was it I said that could have so disturbed the young fella?

    Guess I was pointing out that all this crap about microaggressions and safe spaces was imposed on academia by overpaid scoundrel university presidents (for example, people like the Provost of University College London), deans and other bureaucratic scum who are quite deliberately overpaid to overcome any scruple they may have against destroying the integrity of the university.

    I suppose there could be some other, technical, explanation for the expurgation of most of my comment, but more likely, James just confirmed that the academy is a no-free-speech zone which extends to wherever an academic speaks.

    Read More
  66. CanSpeccy says: • Website
    @Santoculto
    There are many internal contradictions because to white people (((they))) want to pass one idea.

    To other people who are not white/targeted and among themselves (((they))) want to pass other/true idea.

    Seems contradictions for us but it's not. Increasing of en masse immigration is more than just symptomatic.

    For example islamophobia, homophobia and hate against Christianism.

    In reasonable reality the harsh criticism totally directed to the Christianity also must be directed to the Islam not only because "macroaggresion" against homosexuals but also against women, apostates and even against dogs!!

    Why that retarded"atheists" only hate Christianism and not Islam?? First, because they are stupid. Second, because they are coward. Third, because they are conformist to the (((leftist))) narrative. Fourth, because they believe Christianism is a personal subject while Islam is a foreign subject.

    Islamophobia is used to shut up people against slow Islamic invasion in Europe. Fundamental question: Why Europe must need Islamic immigrants firstly?? For exactly what?

    Homophobia is used to relativize (Christian) morality but also because it's part of plan to confuse westerners and when homosexuality surpass their ghettos it can become destructive and weak social orderness.

    So because majority people are tamed, can't think outside their social group and no have higher intellect to engage independently on this intellectual or political investigation they are easily blackmailed even or fundamentally at subconscious levels.

    Higher delayed gratification levels and hope can work very well. The patience to expect that tomorrow"immigrants' will be integrated and lack of anxiety can work against survive, a lot of traits of higher "intelligence" can work against survive, surprisingly lack of anxiety or emotional stability and higher delayed gratification of many Europeans namely the "smartest" has been used against them.

    Entire (((leftist))) culture is directed to the white minds and in different way to the other groups. For whites is shame, for non whites is proud and because most of non-Caucasian humans are not so different than Europeans so they usually succumb to similar defective mode even because they already tend to be nurture in deceptive belief systems, it's not problematic to the weak mind internalize other magical thinking.

    Whites are only people by now who has been nurtured within a non-tribal culture. But non white and reasonably smarter people who are nurtured within globalist culture tend to become less tribal specially when they married out of the tribe.

    Plain and simple: Whites has been emotionally blackmailed and their trends to lack of intelectual curiosity, social conformism and even lack of malice also has worked enormously to adhere to this suicidal cult.

    It's not a exotic white feature. Mentally independent individuals are rare throughout human populations, even worse in other groups for example east Asians.

    I believe you can direct ( the collective behavior) almost human populations to adhere to this suicidal cult. You only need to know what is their weaknesses and after 500 years of invasion, colonization and many other truculent macro-actions via western civilization (and also against their own peoples, uncountable wars among white peoples, for example) it's easy to attack westerners via morality. And western civilization no only have committed quite stupid actions for example African slavery but never solved their problems in rational ways.

    Why that retarded”atheists” only hate Christianism and not Islam??

    Good question, though I don’t think you have the right answer — not the whole of it, anyway.

    Mostly, those you call “retarded atheists,” who include virtually all of those in academia, including K to 12 education, plus the media, the bureaucracy and the global corporations, don’t have any real beliefs except in the accumulation of wealth and power.

    They are subservient to the globalist elite, the international bankers, the bosses of the global corporations, and the dynamic elements of the plutocracy, people like George Soros and the late but unlamented David Rockefeller.

    And the aim of those elites is to destroy the democratic, sovereign, nation state.

    So what’s the biggest challenge these revolutionaries face? It’s overcoming the resistance of the European nations, the most powerful nations on earth, and the ones where democracy, free speech and human rights are most firmly embedded.

    Their goal, therefore is genocide, both racial and cultural, and the cretins, dupes and agents of subversion in academia promoting bollocks about micro-aggressions, safe spaces, gay marriage and men in dresses winning all the female athletics prizes are doing the work of these enemies of Western civilization, democracy and freedom.

    Here’s an example of a white academic who promotes white genocide! Is he a self-hating cretin. No he’s an academic on the rise.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Santoculto

    Good question, though I don’t think you have the right answer
     
    ..

    Refute point by point firstly before to say it.

    these enemies of Western civilization, democracy and freedom.
     
    Western civilization dig your own grave.
    , @Santoculto

    Is he a self-hating cretin
     
    I don't believe he's self-hating.

    In the same way you are concerned about the issues of your race there are people who simply don't care about it and it's easy for them think that race don't exist OR it's not relevant.
  67. @CanSpeccy

    Why that retarded”atheists” only hate Christianism and not Islam??
     
    Good question, though I don't think you have the right answer — not the whole of it, anyway.

    Mostly, those you call "retarded atheists," who include virtually all of those in academia, including K to 12 education, plus the media, the bureaucracy and the global corporations, don't have any real beliefs except in the accumulation of wealth and power.

    They are subservient to the globalist elite, the international bankers, the bosses of the global corporations, and the dynamic elements of the plutocracy, people like George Soros and the late but unlamented David Rockefeller.

    And the aim of those elites is to destroy the democratic, sovereign, nation state.

    So what's the biggest challenge these revolutionaries face? It's overcoming the resistance of the European nations, the most powerful nations on earth, and the ones where democracy, free speech and human rights are most firmly embedded.

    Their goal, therefore is genocide, both racial and cultural, and the cretins, dupes and agents of subversion in academia promoting bollocks about micro-aggressions, safe spaces, gay marriage and men in dresses winning all the female athletics prizes are doing the work of these enemies of Western civilization, democracy and freedom.

    Here's an example of a white academic who promotes white genocide! Is he a self-hating cretin. No he's an academic on the rise.

    Good question, though I don’t think you have the right answer

    ..

    Refute point by point firstly before to say it.

    these enemies of Western civilization, democracy and freedom.

    Western civilization dig your own grave.

    Read More
  68. @CanSpeccy

    Why that retarded”atheists” only hate Christianism and not Islam??
     
    Good question, though I don't think you have the right answer — not the whole of it, anyway.

    Mostly, those you call "retarded atheists," who include virtually all of those in academia, including K to 12 education, plus the media, the bureaucracy and the global corporations, don't have any real beliefs except in the accumulation of wealth and power.

    They are subservient to the globalist elite, the international bankers, the bosses of the global corporations, and the dynamic elements of the plutocracy, people like George Soros and the late but unlamented David Rockefeller.

    And the aim of those elites is to destroy the democratic, sovereign, nation state.

    So what's the biggest challenge these revolutionaries face? It's overcoming the resistance of the European nations, the most powerful nations on earth, and the ones where democracy, free speech and human rights are most firmly embedded.

    Their goal, therefore is genocide, both racial and cultural, and the cretins, dupes and agents of subversion in academia promoting bollocks about micro-aggressions, safe spaces, gay marriage and men in dresses winning all the female athletics prizes are doing the work of these enemies of Western civilization, democracy and freedom.

    Here's an example of a white academic who promotes white genocide! Is he a self-hating cretin. No he's an academic on the rise.

    Is he a self-hating cretin

    I don’t believe he’s self-hating.

    In the same way you are concerned about the issues of your race there are people who simply don’t care about it and it’s easy for them think that race don’t exist OR it’s not relevant.

    Read More
    • Replies: @CanSpeccy

    you are concerned about the issues of your race there are people who simply don’t care about it
     
    Obviously. And some of them are the people working, very successfully it seems, to destroy the European people. If you are one of those people, you are, from the European perspective, an enemy.
  69. @Logan
    "Other aggressive behaviours include people in conversation denouncing anyone who holds a particular political opinion, without considering that I might be one of them, and without using the polite English circumlocution “present company excepted”. They assume that I cannot possibly be in agreement with the policy in question, by which they intend, I surmise, to cow me into submission."

    The people you've been in contact with who do this might be quite different from those I've found doing it.

    I'm in a line of work where I'm often in people's homes doing highly technical inspections. I am obviously competent and intelligent. Quite often those (the considerable majority) who are liberals will go off on political rants assuming I will agree with them. Conservatives do this MUCH less often, at least without carefully feeling out my opinions first.

    The liberals I deal with are not, I think, trying to cow me into submission. They see a competent, intelligent person and simply assume he shares their beliefs. After all, conservatives are known to believe as they do because they are either evil or stupid. I don't seem to them to be either, therefore by their definition I simply must be liberal. Doesn't cross their mind any other possibility exists.

    I, too, find it hilarious how Lefties, upon noticing that I’m “smarter than the average bear,” instantly assume that I’m a Lefty too.
    All through the recent political cycle, we were told incessantly how “college-educated” voters are overwhelmingly Liberal – as if “college-educated” meant “superior” rather than “indoctrinated.”
    BTW, when I took the PSAT back in 1975 it was called the PSAT/NMSQT (with the latter part signifying “National Merit Scholarship Qualifying Test”) and the total score was computed as 2V+M. I rode my combined 208 and my subsequent 700V/750M SAT to a NM scholarship that allowed me to be the first in my family to attend college. No brag, just fact.
    I will brag, though, by saying that as a college senior in 1980 I scored 990 on the GRE Math exam.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Logan
    Well, you have me seriously beat on the math level.:)

    I was however, about 20 years ago, a one-day Jeopardy champion.
  70. CanSpeccy says: • Website
    @Santoculto

    Is he a self-hating cretin
     
    I don't believe he's self-hating.

    In the same way you are concerned about the issues of your race there are people who simply don't care about it and it's easy for them think that race don't exist OR it's not relevant.

    you are concerned about the issues of your race there are people who simply don’t care about it

    Obviously. And some of them are the people working, very successfully it seems, to destroy the European people. If you are one of those people, you are, from the European perspective, an enemy.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Santoculto
    I'm mixed race. I'm not anti white. But I'm not blind about the weaknesses of your people. I could pass as white, so called "white 'hispanic'". I believe there is a degree of anti whiteism, explicit and implicit. In this aspect I'm the least anti white, anti black, anti yellow, anti purple, etc, person.

    Again and better summarized and synthesized: (((leftists))) are right about many things.

    Only two big purposeful mistakes:

    They are only critical of anti white

    And as response they are anti HRD, human racial diversity.

    Western civilization invade, enslave, colonize Americas, for example. It's wrong?? It's not factual??

    No there is other way to do that?
  71. @CanSpeccy

    you are concerned about the issues of your race there are people who simply don’t care about it
     
    Obviously. And some of them are the people working, very successfully it seems, to destroy the European people. If you are one of those people, you are, from the European perspective, an enemy.

    I’m mixed race. I’m not anti white. But I’m not blind about the weaknesses of your people. I could pass as white, so called “white ‘hispanic’”. I believe there is a degree of anti whiteism, explicit and implicit. In this aspect I’m the least anti white, anti black, anti yellow, anti purple, etc, person.

    Again and better summarized and synthesized: (((leftists))) are right about many things.

    Only two big purposeful mistakes:

    They are only critical of anti white

    And as response they are anti HRD, human racial diversity.

    Western civilization invade, enslave, colonize Americas, for example. It’s wrong?? It’s not factual??

    No there is other way to do that?

    Read More
    • Replies: @CanSpeccy

    Western civilization invade, enslave, colonize Americas, for example. It’s wrong?? It’s not factual??
     
    You state the obvious.

    What it seems you wish to deny and what liberal Americans seem unable to grasp is that "invade and colonize" America is what others will do unless Americans are more successful than the Amerindians in holding the territory. In fact, American liberals are screaming for others to come and take the country. So what is an American liberal? An idiot or a traitor?

    There is the same problem in Europe where the Treason Class has opened the borders wide and put up welcome signs — the only exception being in Hungary.
  72. They are only critical of white and not ”critical against anti white”

    Read More
  73. CanSpeccy says: • Website
    @Santoculto
    I'm mixed race. I'm not anti white. But I'm not blind about the weaknesses of your people. I could pass as white, so called "white 'hispanic'". I believe there is a degree of anti whiteism, explicit and implicit. In this aspect I'm the least anti white, anti black, anti yellow, anti purple, etc, person.

    Again and better summarized and synthesized: (((leftists))) are right about many things.

    Only two big purposeful mistakes:

    They are only critical of anti white

    And as response they are anti HRD, human racial diversity.

    Western civilization invade, enslave, colonize Americas, for example. It's wrong?? It's not factual??

    No there is other way to do that?

    Western civilization invade, enslave, colonize Americas, for example. It’s wrong?? It’s not factual??

    You state the obvious.

    What it seems you wish to deny and what liberal Americans seem unable to grasp is that “invade and colonize” America is what others will do unless Americans are more successful than the Amerindians in holding the territory. In fact, American liberals are screaming for others to come and take the country. So what is an American liberal? An idiot or a traitor?

    There is the same problem in Europe where the Treason Class has opened the borders wide and put up welcome signs — the only exception being in Hungary.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Santoculto

    What it seems you wish to deny and what liberal Americans seem unable to grasp is that “invade and colonize” America is what others will do unless Americans are more successful than the Amerindians in holding the territory
     
    I know very well.

    The inhuman story has been a successive chain of nano,micro or macro inter-group revenges..

    So what is an American liberal? An idiot or a traitor?
     
    Seems most of them are idiot and become a traitor, as well a idiot can become a killer, even it's not your first intention.

    What you don't understand. They, not exactly useful idiots, want that national borders be completely broken because they want that the WORLD become a single nation.

    Invite the world and invade the world, become the world.

    Without their elites, whites and seems most other people will become extremely vulnerable, because they are the product of centuries of selection of domesticated variants or the product of selection to the workers/servs [hyper-specialization] and not complete human beings, capable to understand the basal reality without any BELIEF system.
  74. @CanSpeccy

    Western civilization invade, enslave, colonize Americas, for example. It’s wrong?? It’s not factual??
     
    You state the obvious.

    What it seems you wish to deny and what liberal Americans seem unable to grasp is that "invade and colonize" America is what others will do unless Americans are more successful than the Amerindians in holding the territory. In fact, American liberals are screaming for others to come and take the country. So what is an American liberal? An idiot or a traitor?

    There is the same problem in Europe where the Treason Class has opened the borders wide and put up welcome signs — the only exception being in Hungary.

    What it seems you wish to deny and what liberal Americans seem unable to grasp is that “invade and colonize” America is what others will do unless Americans are more successful than the Amerindians in holding the territory

    I know very well.

    The inhuman story has been a successive chain of nano,micro or macro inter-group revenges..

    So what is an American liberal? An idiot or a traitor?

    Seems most of them are idiot and become a traitor, as well a idiot can become a killer, even it’s not your first intention.

    What you don’t understand. They, not exactly useful idiots, want that national borders be completely broken because they want that the WORLD become a single nation.

    Invite the world and invade the world, become the world.

    Without their elites, whites and seems most other people will become extremely vulnerable, because they are the product of centuries of selection of domesticated variants or the product of selection to the workers/servs [hyper-specialization] and not complete human beings, capable to understand the basal reality without any BELIEF system.

    Read More
    • Replies: @CanSpeccy

    What you don’t understand.
     
    Always a good line, that, when you own argument is incoherent.

    The globalist elite obviously want a system of global govenarnce, the antithesis of national sovereignty and local democracy.

    The Hollywood-porn-distracted, toxic-fast-food ingesting, K-to-12 indoctrinated, masses in America and Europe have been programmed to despise their own heritage and national culture. As a result, many have become self-hating, self-destructive, idiot traitors, who have been taught to think that fucking is just about all that life has to offer while pathetically failing to achieve even a replacement rate of reproduction.

    The reproductive failure of Western populations is a desired object of the Treason Party. The white working class are deemed to be an obnoxious and redundant burden on rich people, who should shut the fuck up and die. Many Americans, all those who voted for Hillary, seem to agree.
  75. CanSpeccy says: • Website
    @Santoculto

    What it seems you wish to deny and what liberal Americans seem unable to grasp is that “invade and colonize” America is what others will do unless Americans are more successful than the Amerindians in holding the territory
     
    I know very well.

    The inhuman story has been a successive chain of nano,micro or macro inter-group revenges..

    So what is an American liberal? An idiot or a traitor?
     
    Seems most of them are idiot and become a traitor, as well a idiot can become a killer, even it's not your first intention.

    What you don't understand. They, not exactly useful idiots, want that national borders be completely broken because they want that the WORLD become a single nation.

    Invite the world and invade the world, become the world.

    Without their elites, whites and seems most other people will become extremely vulnerable, because they are the product of centuries of selection of domesticated variants or the product of selection to the workers/servs [hyper-specialization] and not complete human beings, capable to understand the basal reality without any BELIEF system.

    What you don’t understand.

    Always a good line, that, when you own argument is incoherent.

    The globalist elite obviously want a system of global govenarnce, the antithesis of national sovereignty and local democracy.

    The Hollywood-porn-distracted, toxic-fast-food ingesting, K-to-12 indoctrinated, masses in America and Europe have been programmed to despise their own heritage and national culture. As a result, many have become self-hating, self-destructive, idiot traitors, who have been taught to think that fucking is just about all that life has to offer while pathetically failing to achieve even a replacement rate of reproduction.

    The reproductive failure of Western populations is a desired object of the Treason Party. The white working class are deemed to be an obnoxious and redundant burden on rich people, who should shut the fuck up and die. Many Americans, all those who voted for Hillary, seem to agree.

    Read More
    • Replies: @CanSpeccy
    In that last sentence, the "who" mentioned should refer to the white working class, not as I seem to have written it, the rich people for whom the working class now represent a useless waste of resources.
    , @Santoculto
    You don't understand again.

    A stupid people can do stupid things believing they are doing smart things.

    To be a traitor, a full traitor, they must be quite aware what they are supporting. They don't. I'm talking about useful idiots.
    Ok, many them know they are supporting white dispossession but they believe it's right to do namely in extreme left sector and that it's not so hurt to the whitey.

    A dull traitor is a stupid people that believe they are making the world a better place but they aren't. They become traitor but they no have original intention extinct whites or they believe if race don't exist...
    , @Wizard of Oz
    "want a system of global governance" is a bit vague, lying as governance seems to somewhere between "government" and "a common set of rules on matters affecting big business".

    The EU may have a social chapter which is highly prescriptive and intrusive but the last thing Davos Man and his confederate who leaves Davos to those who like talk fests want is to institute a global welfare state, same sex marriage. or worldwide shelters for àbused women.

  76. CanSpeccy says: • Website
    @CanSpeccy

    What you don’t understand.
     
    Always a good line, that, when you own argument is incoherent.

    The globalist elite obviously want a system of global govenarnce, the antithesis of national sovereignty and local democracy.

    The Hollywood-porn-distracted, toxic-fast-food ingesting, K-to-12 indoctrinated, masses in America and Europe have been programmed to despise their own heritage and national culture. As a result, many have become self-hating, self-destructive, idiot traitors, who have been taught to think that fucking is just about all that life has to offer while pathetically failing to achieve even a replacement rate of reproduction.

    The reproductive failure of Western populations is a desired object of the Treason Party. The white working class are deemed to be an obnoxious and redundant burden on rich people, who should shut the fuck up and die. Many Americans, all those who voted for Hillary, seem to agree.

    In that last sentence, the “who” mentioned should refer to the white working class, not as I seem to have written it, the rich people for whom the working class now represent a useless waste of resources.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Wizard of Oz
    ????? Really. Is that how it reads to you, and/or should read?
  77. @CanSpeccy

    What you don’t understand.
     
    Always a good line, that, when you own argument is incoherent.

    The globalist elite obviously want a system of global govenarnce, the antithesis of national sovereignty and local democracy.

    The Hollywood-porn-distracted, toxic-fast-food ingesting, K-to-12 indoctrinated, masses in America and Europe have been programmed to despise their own heritage and national culture. As a result, many have become self-hating, self-destructive, idiot traitors, who have been taught to think that fucking is just about all that life has to offer while pathetically failing to achieve even a replacement rate of reproduction.

    The reproductive failure of Western populations is a desired object of the Treason Party. The white working class are deemed to be an obnoxious and redundant burden on rich people, who should shut the fuck up and die. Many Americans, all those who voted for Hillary, seem to agree.

    You don’t understand again.

    A stupid people can do stupid things believing they are doing smart things.

    To be a traitor, a full traitor, they must be quite aware what they are supporting. They don’t. I’m talking about useful idiots.
    Ok, many them know they are supporting white dispossession but they believe it’s right to do namely in extreme left sector and that it’s not so hurt to the whitey.

    A dull traitor is a stupid people that believe they are making the world a better place but they aren’t. They become traitor but they no have original intention extinct whites or they believe if race don’t exist…

    Read More
    • Replies: @Santoculto
    If they believe race don't exist... Correcting grrrr
    , @CanSpeccy
    I think I agree, with some reservation concerning your exact meaning!
  78. @Santoculto
    You don't understand again.

    A stupid people can do stupid things believing they are doing smart things.

    To be a traitor, a full traitor, they must be quite aware what they are supporting. They don't. I'm talking about useful idiots.
    Ok, many them know they are supporting white dispossession but they believe it's right to do namely in extreme left sector and that it's not so hurt to the whitey.

    A dull traitor is a stupid people that believe they are making the world a better place but they aren't. They become traitor but they no have original intention extinct whites or they believe if race don't exist...

    If they believe race don’t exist… Correcting grrrr

    Read More
  79. CanSpeccy says: • Website
    @Santoculto
    You don't understand again.

    A stupid people can do stupid things believing they are doing smart things.

    To be a traitor, a full traitor, they must be quite aware what they are supporting. They don't. I'm talking about useful idiots.
    Ok, many them know they are supporting white dispossession but they believe it's right to do namely in extreme left sector and that it's not so hurt to the whitey.

    A dull traitor is a stupid people that believe they are making the world a better place but they aren't. They become traitor but they no have original intention extinct whites or they believe if race don't exist...

    I think I agree, with some reservation concerning your exact meaning!

    Read More
    • Replies: @Santoculto
    I know there is real big traitors scumbag among liberals but many if not most of them are just hopelessly dull to understand what they are really doing and they will be the first victims when racial wars begin.

    There are truly monsters among them, and the core of this sociopathic elites are jewish.
  80. @CanSpeccy
    I think I agree, with some reservation concerning your exact meaning!

    I know there is real big traitors scumbag among liberals but many if not most of them are just hopelessly dull to understand what they are really doing and they will be the first victims when racial wars begin.

    There are truly monsters among them, and the core of this sociopathic elites are jewish.

    Read More
  81. @James Thompson
    I make it 16.85 times, hence rounded to 17

    Workings here:

    http://emilkirkegaard.dk/understanding_statistics/?app=tail_effects

    About 17 was what i used 15 years ago or more when the figure of 115 for average Ashkenazi IQ was still being bandied about to explain why it was not surprising that American Jews held about 50 per cent of positions like major broadsheet editor or head of a Hollywood Studio for which I asdumed an IQ of 145 would be typical.

    Read More
  82. @res
    I understand that my comments can be long sometimes, and I do like to use copy and paste to establish context (less useful as first post in the thread), but if you want me to change my behavior more cogent criticisms and/or suggestions would be helpful. On the other hand, if you are just venting and/or lashing out, have a nice day.

    P.S. If my comments bother you that much please consider using the ignore commenter feature.

    Your useful thoughts include a prompt to consider asking Ron for a button which allows one to ask another commenter to put one on his ignore list. I have in mind a regular shortwinded alcoholic commenter who seems to be obsessed by my very indifference.

    More seriously….

    There is too the irritation that one doesn’t know for sure that there is only one Anonymous or Anon on the thread. I have suggested a labelling system which would answer that problem and also allow for disclosure of motive for being anonymous, so far with no response.

    Read More
    • Replies: @James Thompson
    I ask Anons to tell me which Anons they are, and some heeded the call on my former blogspot, signing their comments with another unique anonymous identifier, which was helpful.
  83. @CanSpeccy
    In that last sentence, the "who" mentioned should refer to the white working class, not as I seem to have written it, the rich people for whom the working class now represent a useless waste of resources.

    ????? Really. Is that how it reads to you, and/or should read?

    Read More
  84. @CanSpeccy

    What you don’t understand.
     
    Always a good line, that, when you own argument is incoherent.

    The globalist elite obviously want a system of global govenarnce, the antithesis of national sovereignty and local democracy.

    The Hollywood-porn-distracted, toxic-fast-food ingesting, K-to-12 indoctrinated, masses in America and Europe have been programmed to despise their own heritage and national culture. As a result, many have become self-hating, self-destructive, idiot traitors, who have been taught to think that fucking is just about all that life has to offer while pathetically failing to achieve even a replacement rate of reproduction.

    The reproductive failure of Western populations is a desired object of the Treason Party. The white working class are deemed to be an obnoxious and redundant burden on rich people, who should shut the fuck up and die. Many Americans, all those who voted for Hillary, seem to agree.

    “want a system of global governance” is a bit vague, lying as governance seems to somewhere between “government” and “a common set of rules on matters affecting big business”.

    The EU may have a social chapter which is highly prescriptive and intrusive but the last thing Davos Man and his confederate who leaves Davos to those who like talk fests want is to institute a global welfare state, same sex marriage. or worldwide shelters for àbused women.

    Read More
    • Replies: @CanSpeccy

    the last thing Davos Man and ...want...
     
    Certainly not.

    What they want is the freedom to maximize profits by the elimination of wasteful competition, and restrictions on the international movement of capital, technology, people, goods and profits with a view to minimizing wages, the regulation of workplace health and safety, the enforcement of environmental protection, and the payment of taxes.

    National governments will be controlled by people like Tony Blair, charismatic charlatans, stuffing their pockets with retainers, consulting fees, directorships, book royalties, etc., preaching spirituality, promising all good things to everyone equally, while reducing the populace to the status of domesticated animals whose breeding will be scientifically managed, and whose behavior will be strictly regulated by a combination of surveillance, brainwashing, the gulag, and an aerial version of those mechanical hounds that featured in Farenheit 451.
  85. CanSpeccy says: • Website
    @Wizard of Oz
    "want a system of global governance" is a bit vague, lying as governance seems to somewhere between "government" and "a common set of rules on matters affecting big business".

    The EU may have a social chapter which is highly prescriptive and intrusive but the last thing Davos Man and his confederate who leaves Davos to those who like talk fests want is to institute a global welfare state, same sex marriage. or worldwide shelters for àbused women.

    the last thing Davos Man and …want…

    Certainly not.

    What they want is the freedom to maximize profits by the elimination of wasteful competition, and restrictions on the international movement of capital, technology, people, goods and profits with a view to minimizing wages, the regulation of workplace health and safety, the enforcement of environmental protection, and the payment of taxes.

    National governments will be controlled by people like Tony Blair, charismatic charlatans, stuffing their pockets with retainers, consulting fees, directorships, book royalties, etc., preaching spirituality, promising all good things to everyone equally, while reducing the populace to the status of domesticated animals whose breeding will be scientifically managed, and whose behavior will be strictly regulated by a combination of surveillance, brainwashing, the gulag, and an aerial version of those mechanical hounds that featured in Farenheit 451.

    Read More
  86. I’m afraid we can’t count on the “charismatic charlatan” for scientifically managed breeding. Didn’t you know? Tony Blair is now a Catholic. I think the next step when his campaign fund is large enough must be the Papacy. And what a Papacy! Think of Swiss Guards in tens of thousands and trained by the SAS.

    Read More
    • Replies: @CanSpeccy

    Tony Blair is now a Catholic. I think the next step when his campaign fund is large enough must be the Papacy.
     
    His Holiness, Pope Antonio I.

    LOL

    Or should that be Antonio Pope, the primary antagonist of the 2016 action comedy film Ride Along 2... a powerful and rich drug lord in Miami ... very manipulative ...revealed to be a sociopathic criminal ...

    Either way, he seems to have what the job demands.

  87. @Wizard of Oz
    Your useful thoughts include a prompt to consider asking Ron for a button which allows one to ask another commenter to put one on his ignore list. I have in mind a regular shortwinded alcoholic commenter who seems to be obsessed by my very indifference.

    More seriously....

    There is too the irritation that one doesn't know for sure that there is only one Anonymous or Anon on the thread. I have suggested a labelling system which would answer that problem and also allow for disclosure of motive for being anonymous, so far with no response.

    I ask Anons to tell me which Anons they are, and some heeded the call on my former blogspot, signing their comments with another unique anonymous identifier, which was helpful.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Wizard of Oz
    Let's hope. I would quite like to see also a system, or rule, for allowing one to adopt another persona openly if it seemed like a good way to ensure that no one was confused about the seriousness of one's main points or message when one wanted to add an ironic or self-deprecating aside. But I have had even "Anonymoz" knocked back recently.
  88. CanSpeccy says: • Website
    @Wizard of Oz
    I'm afraid we can't count on the "charismatic charlatan" for scientifically managed breeding. Didn't you know? Tony Blair is now a Catholic. I think the next step when his campaign fund is large enough must be the Papacy. And what a Papacy! Think of Swiss Guards in tens of thousands and trained by the SAS.

    Tony Blair is now a Catholic. I think the next step when his campaign fund is large enough must be the Papacy.

    His Holiness, Pope Antonio I.

    LOL

    Or should that be Antonio Pope, the primary antagonist of the 2016 action comedy film Ride Along 2… a powerful and rich drug lord in Miami … very manipulative …revealed to be a sociopathic criminal …

    Either way, he seems to have what the job demands.

    Read More
  89. But look at the good side. He’s flexible enough to reconcile the needs of Italian and Spanish women who use birth control and have abortions with all those fertile African New Catholics who need them. First New Labour, next New Papacy. ( Blair dòesn’t sound Catholic on abortion or contraception but I think he’d baulf at eugenics.)

    I have to admit that Tony Blair seems to support your case for the importance of abilities not measured by IQ…

    Read More
    • Replies: @CanSpeccy
    Exactly. TB provides conclusive evidence for the proposition. His genius is in acting, he is the human chameleon.

    Rather than New Papacy, I think, as Pope, TB should adopt the label "New Christianity ." The tenets of the new religion we can surely anticipate.

    Blessed are the Rich for they shall inherit the Earth.

    Blessed are the Meek for they shall work for sweatshop wages

    Let he who is without sin show how far that got him.

    Love the Immigrant Worker as yourself, he's going to save you the trouble of earning a living.

    etc.

  90. @James Thompson
    I ask Anons to tell me which Anons they are, and some heeded the call on my former blogspot, signing their comments with another unique anonymous identifier, which was helpful.

    Let’s hope. I would quite like to see also a system, or rule, for allowing one to adopt another persona openly if it seemed like a good way to ensure that no one was confused about the seriousness of one’s main points or message when one wanted to add an ironic or self-deprecating aside. But I have had even “Anonymoz” knocked back recently.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anon
    I used to sign myself pretty regularly, then gradually dropped the habit as when writing shorter comments it seemed somewhat pompous (not exactly the word I was intending, which I've forgotten --drat-- but close enough); now I only sign myself when I actively think about doing so, or where my identity among other anons or what-have-you is important. By the rules Mr. Unz asks us to follow that seemed a decent compromise.

    For irony, there's always the /sarc tag, though unfortunately this doesn't do self-deprecating humor too well.

    I don't know if the "alcoholic commenter" with whom you had a spat earlier was "Che Guava", but if so he often does have interesting things to say and it seems that the active hostility between you petered out a while ago.

    RSDB
  91. Anon says:
    @Wizard of Oz
    Let's hope. I would quite like to see also a system, or rule, for allowing one to adopt another persona openly if it seemed like a good way to ensure that no one was confused about the seriousness of one's main points or message when one wanted to add an ironic or self-deprecating aside. But I have had even "Anonymoz" knocked back recently.

    I used to sign myself pretty regularly, then gradually dropped the habit as when writing shorter comments it seemed somewhat pompous (not exactly the word I was intending, which I’ve forgotten –drat– but close enough); now I only sign myself when I actively think about doing so, or where my identity among other anons or what-have-you is important. By the rules Mr. Unz asks us to follow that seemed a decent compromise.

    For irony, there’s always the /sarc tag, though unfortunately this doesn’t do self-deprecating humor too well.

    I don’t know if the “alcoholic commenter” with whom you had a spat earlier was “Che Guava”, but if so he often does have interesting things to say and it seems that the active hostility between you petered out a while ago.

    RSDB

    Read More
  92. CanSpeccy says: • Website
    @Wizard of Oz
    But look at the good side. He's flexible enough to reconcile the needs of Italian and Spanish women who use birth control and have abortions with all those fertile African New Catholics who need them. First New Labour, next New Papacy. ( Blair dòesn't sound Catholic on abortion or contraception but I think he'd baulf at eugenics.)

    I have to admit that Tony Blair seems to support your case for the importance of abilities not measured by IQ...

    Exactly. TB provides conclusive evidence for the proposition. His genius is in acting, he is the human chameleon.

    Rather than New Papacy, I think, as Pope, TB should adopt the label “New Christianity .” The tenets of the new religion we can surely anticipate.

    Blessed are the Rich for they shall inherit the Earth.

    Blessed are the Meek for they shall work for sweatshop wages

    Let he who is without sin show how far that got him.

    Love the Immigrant Worker as yourself, he’s going to save you the trouble of earning a living.

    etc.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Wizard of Oz
    I hate to say it but you give Anon a good name. No, not Che Guava, whose sins or defects I have forgotten.
    , @Wizard of Oz
    I think you have earned your gold or at least bronze starred dog collar. You inspire thoughts of Rowan Atkinson in clerical attire intoning "Blessed are the meek for they allow us to inherit the earth".
  93. @CanSpeccy
    Exactly. TB provides conclusive evidence for the proposition. His genius is in acting, he is the human chameleon.

    Rather than New Papacy, I think, as Pope, TB should adopt the label "New Christianity ." The tenets of the new religion we can surely anticipate.

    Blessed are the Rich for they shall inherit the Earth.

    Blessed are the Meek for they shall work for sweatshop wages

    Let he who is without sin show how far that got him.

    Love the Immigrant Worker as yourself, he's going to save you the trouble of earning a living.

    etc.

    I hate to say it but you give Anon a good name. No, not Che Guava, whose sins or defects I have forgotten.

    Read More
  94. @CanSpeccy
    Exactly. TB provides conclusive evidence for the proposition. His genius is in acting, he is the human chameleon.

    Rather than New Papacy, I think, as Pope, TB should adopt the label "New Christianity ." The tenets of the new religion we can surely anticipate.

    Blessed are the Rich for they shall inherit the Earth.

    Blessed are the Meek for they shall work for sweatshop wages

    Let he who is without sin show how far that got him.

    Love the Immigrant Worker as yourself, he's going to save you the trouble of earning a living.

    etc.

    I think you have earned your gold or at least bronze starred dog collar. You inspire thoughts of Rowan Atkinson in clerical attire intoning “Blessed are the meek for they allow us to inherit the earth”.

    Read More
  95. Where would you rather live?

    In a multi-ethnic, mean IQ 130 country, or a single-ethnic mean IQ 100 country (same ethnic as you)?

    Simple question to simpleton minds, ;)

    Read More
  96. @Anon
    I used to sign myself pretty regularly, then gradually dropped the habit as when writing shorter comments it seemed somewhat pompous (not exactly the word I was intending, which I've forgotten --drat-- but close enough); now I only sign myself when I actively think about doing so, or where my identity among other anons or what-have-you is important. By the rules Mr. Unz asks us to follow that seemed a decent compromise.

    For irony, there's always the /sarc tag, though unfortunately this doesn't do self-deprecating humor too well.

    I don't know if the "alcoholic commenter" with whom you had a spat earlier was "Che Guava", but if so he often does have interesting things to say and it seems that the active hostility between you petered out a while ago.

    RSDB

    #99 was meant to ne a reply to you.

    Read More
  97. res says:
    @Citizen of a Silly Country
    Yeah, using Emil's handy site, I see that theoretically there should be an equal population 17 to 1 ratio of whites to blacks at a 130 IQ if whites average 100 and blacks average 85 and each has a SD of 15. I'm pretty sure that a 700-749 pre-centered math score is at least a 130 IQ, so the fact that the ratio is 11 to 1 at that score seems to indicate a fat tail for blacks.

    I'd also say that if this fat tail really exists, it's likely the result of admixture and some select immigration - Obama being the perfect example of both.

    Ironically, this possible higher that expected number of "blacks" at the high end of the IQ bell curve only serves to strengthen the HBD argument rather than disprove it.

    Regarding our new overlords and our old overlords, from what I've seen on the ground, they seem to be breeding a new generation of hybrid overload. God help the next generation of ignorant white gentiles when they come up against a combination of Jewish minds and Asian grinds.

    I revisited this in an iSteve comment: http://www.unz.com/isteve/nyt-nice-white-lady-teachers-are-practically-george-zimmerman-level-racists/#comment-1840356
    and am less confident of my conclusions now. Some weaknesses in what I wrote above:
    - I am not confident the reference I gave as NMSF percentage was really that. It was not stated as such explicitly and I have learned to distrust ambiguity in this area.
    - In comment 33 I erred in the way I calculated 136 for actual population size. Should have multiplied by 87/13 = 6.7 giving ~114 rather than 100/13 = 7.7 (which I foolishly rounded to 8 since I was doing the math in my head).
    - (this is the big one) Your comment 27 actually did account for population size implicitly (by using % of whites and blacks). I missed this originally, but looked again after Jack D made that point in the other thread.

    So it looks like you were basically right in comment 27. Sorry for the confusion.

    Read More
  98. Logan says:
    @OutWest
    Know the symptom. Do you live in a university town too?

    Nahh. Used to, though, and it was worse there.

    My point is that they aren’t trying to browbeat me into submission, they simply assume I will agree. They would probably be very embarrassed if they realized what they had done.

    You may recall the story, got a lot of ink, after the election in which the writer realized his plumber, there to repair a leak, might very well have voted for Trump. Well, these folks simply assume I didn’t.

    Read More
  99. Logan says:
    @Macumazahn
    I, too, find it hilarious how Lefties, upon noticing that I'm "smarter than the average bear," instantly assume that I'm a Lefty too.
    All through the recent political cycle, we were told incessantly how "college-educated" voters are overwhelmingly Liberal - as if "college-educated" meant "superior" rather than "indoctrinated."
    BTW, when I took the PSAT back in 1975 it was called the PSAT/NMSQT (with the latter part signifying "National Merit Scholarship Qualifying Test") and the total score was computed as 2V+M. I rode my combined 208 and my subsequent 700V/750M SAT to a NM scholarship that allowed me to be the first in my family to attend college. No brag, just fact.
    I will brag, though, by saying that as a college senior in 1980 I scored 990 on the GRE Math exam.

    Well, you have me seriously beat on the math level.:)

    I was however, about 20 years ago, a one-day Jeopardy champion.

    Read More
Current Commenter says:

Leave a Reply - Comments on articles more than two weeks old will be judged much more strictly on quality and tone


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