RSS
Returning to the consul system, the COTW present a unified front, advocating for honest conversations, made and received in good faith, about things that matter. Twinkie:
We need ways to be able to discuss – in public – demographic issues honestly, without being attacked as racists. It’s not random that blacks are over-represented in football (and crime), Jews in finance (and financial crimes), and Asians in engineering (and gambling). We can’t address these phenomena without acknowledging these demographic facts and crafting public policies accordingly.
I think much of the impetus for racial animus and radicalism stem from the enormous constraints that are put on by those in power (culturally and, increasingly, legally). Prevent people from talking honestly (and in fact punish them for it), and you are bound to get frustration and anger, which in turn lead to crazy, wild talk, including violence.
The prevaricators aren’t lying in the service of social harmony. They are fomenting discord by propping up superstitions about human nature, the inevitable consequence of which is growing mistrust, misunderstanding, and malcontent.
The demographic shifts the US has undergone over the last few decades are deeply unprecedented. Simply put, this isn’t the same country that I was born into a quarter century ago, and there isn’t much of a precedent for this being a smooth, successful thing in human history. Economic, media and political elites are getting less and less shy about openly crowing about it. Yet they simultaneously somehow think there will be no backlash, if they just enforce orthodoxy enough in public discussion. Human nature does not work that way, least of all at a time when trust in traditional institutions are at a low and social atomization is at a height.
What’s done is done: even if immigration is fully halted tomorrow, demographics are what they are, with tens of millions of new citizens. But that makes it all the more imperative that we find a way to rebuild whatever social coherence is possible. Not unpersoning people who try to break an increasingly Brehznevite orthodoxy on racial and demographic issues strikes me as a good first step toward that. But of course, that leaves open the question as to how much the Usual Suspects want social coherence. It makes sense from their perspective, at least on the surface. More social atomization means more power and more profit for them.
They openly crowed in 2016 and they got Trump. Having learned nothing, they continue to crow–and they may get Bernie Sanders as a result.
There are cracks in the foundation of the financial tower they sit atop. The cracks are growing and the sappers are gathering below. There is a lot of ruin in a nation, but it isn’t infinite.
English
Arabic
Chinese (Simplified)
Dutch
French
German
Hebrew
Hindi
Italian
Japanese
Korean
Persian
Polish
Portuguese
Russian
Spanish
Swedish
Turkish
Vietnamese
You can’t possibly think Bernie Sanders could win the general election. His chances are even weaker than Biden’s are, against Trump.
This would be true even if Bernie Sanders were not 79 years old at the date of the potential inauguration.
The demographic shifts the US has undergone over the last few decades are deeply unprecedented.
Not in the longer term, no. Over the last 10,000 years some parts of Eurasia have seen huge demographic shifts. Of course, many of those shifts were the result of something called “invasion”.
Just look at the different haplogroups of Europe.
https://eupedia.com/europe/origins_haplogroups_europe.shtml
Stability isn’t the norm, in human history. Not blackpilling, just realistic.
This would be true even if Bernie Sanders were not 79 years old at the date of the potential inauguration.Replies: @Some Guy, @SunBakedSuburb, @Daniel H
The polls say otherwise: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nationwide_opinion_polling_for_the_2020_United_States_presidential_election#Bernie_Sanders
79 (Sanders) can't win.
78 (Biden) can't win either.
And age isn't even the only reason. Trump was 70 at inauguration, and was still the oldest ever.Replies: @Jay Fink
Them polls be garbage.
79 (Sanders) can’t win.
78 (Biden) can’t win either.
And age isn’t even the only reason. Trump was 70 at inauguration, and was still the oldest ever.
79 (Sanders) can't win.
78 (Biden) can't win either.
And age isn't even the only reason. Trump was 70 at inauguration, and was still the oldest ever.Replies: @Jay Fink
Yet young people love Sanders more than anyone. They don’t care how old he is.
Talking frankly means one has to talk about the jew (specifically their control of Hollywood,Wall Street, foreign policy, internet censorship, etc). Obviously jews don’t want to discuss this, so calling for candor is a waste of time, violence is inevitable now.
Moreover, I don't know that talking frankly will help anything. The problem isn't that we can't talk about these people. The problem is that they are here to begin with. A smaller, retrenched ethnostate that takes account of demographic realities would be much better.Replies: @iffen
It’s okay to talk frankly about Jews calling anti-Semite to get themselves off the hook for bad behavior when they get caught. People have seen this happen in their own lives with other groups and maybe even Jews. That’s about as far as people are ready to go right now. Maybe ever. The topic of Jews wanting more immigration because they are paranoid about another holocaust is potentially okay after you feel out the target. The angle is that they are insane and we would absolutely never do that. Under no circumstances should you say shit that makes people think you want to do it.
People, normies, are on the edge of agreeing with us about capitalism, modernity, technology, media, just about everything else. There’s no reason to make a big deal about the one little
thing they’ve been conditioned the hardest to reject immediately.Replies: @Rosie, @dfordoom, @Mike Tre
Over-representation isn’t always control or the outcome of some sort of a nefarious scheme. Often it is a result of HBD plus historical contingencies. That doesn’t mean the said over-representation is always positive or benign necessarily, but attribution of ill-intent is not always accurate or productive.
I have been critical of Jews in America and their political and cultural proclivities, but that’s not because I think they sit around together and plot the doom for the rest of us. They are people like the rest of us, navigating this world as best as they can given their particular strengths and weaknesses, and history. I’d rather that we designed our society where they are channeled to productive and beneficial ends for all, rather than paint them as some nefarious cabal of boogeymen to be burned.
Yes it's anecdotal and a relatively small sample size but my experiences say you are absolutely right. I have never heard my Jewish family (including my cousin who I would put in the category of elite Jew) or friends even come close to that kind of talk. There is no us against them talk. Judaism rarely comes up at all. Nobody talks about anything that serious. They talk about SWPL type subjects, sports, the weather, their vacations, just normal boring subjects.
I agree.
But it's the 0.01% who have been "designing" the whole world for their purposes for the last 40-50 years.
When “overrepresentation” ends up having screen writers, movie CEOs, supreme court judges, political pundits, etc, being anywhere from 50% to 90% of the representation then there is more going on here. Unless you seriously believe that only jews have the high enough IQ to do this job (and that screenwriters even have high IQ in the first place), this is a cabal that is very clearly just picking their own.
Their ill intent is baked into their DNA, just check out their ancient mythologies on how they view themselves and others, they are utterly incapable of behaving and thinking any other way because this is who they have always been.
Survival is baked into Jewish DNA.
I agree with you that IQ is in no way the only driver for this phenomena but whilst I accept that genes give us certain propensities I do not think there is a gene for premeditated lying, fraud and corruption. Their ancestral spirit, when allowed into an accepting heart, provides the main driver. The best description I have ever come across is the words of Jesus “You belong to your father, the devil, and you want to carry out your father’s desires. He was a murderer from the beginning, not holding to the truth, for there is no truth in him. When he lies, he speaks his native language, for he is a liar and the father of lies.” A Jew who can reject that ancestral spirit can turn their genetic propensities to the good but I think it takes a special grace to break free from the prison of that strong man.
First of all, IQ has a bell curve distribution, so even when the average differences are small, the differences at the edges are going to be much more significant. Second, Jewish IQ is heavily verbally-loaded (unlike East Asians who are quantitatively and especially visuospatially-loaded). Third, there is going to be network effect on top of HBD factors (e.g. sons and nephews going into fathers’ and uncles’ profession) that compound the effect of the latter after several generations. None of this requires ill intent, especially collective kind.
A lot of peoples have had mythologies of special-ness and superiority since time immemorial. The Japanese think they are hotter stuff than other peoples. So do we Americans (or American whites, if you like) when you see how we/they behave overseas. You need more evidence than that to damn a whole group of people.
Again, this is not to say that I agree with the political and cultural proclivities of most or average Jews, but criticizing them for those is not the same as condemning them as some sort of incorrigible vermin.
And viewing their nepotism (and much of it very obviously is nepotism) and control of various institutions as negative and intentional (like in the case of hollywood; anti-white messaging isn't an accident of the most efficient money-maker, it's the expression of ethnic animus), isn't the same as viewing them as incorrigable vermin. You let foreigners exert great influence over you with minimal mechanisms to punish them for screwing you, and amazingly they get used to screwing you and take it as a given. This is entirely predictable, and is practically a restatement of the premise of the original post. The intractable tendency to treat other peoples with less care than their own is part of why there are seperate countries in the first place.
Also speaking of the original post, redpill me on asian control of gambling and why they rigged Saturday night's title fight to steal my 40 dollars.Replies: @Rosie
There are about 7 million Jews in America and 215 million whites.
11 million Whites have IQs above 125 and if we calculate that Jews have an average IQ of 110 then 950,000 Jews would have an IQ over 125. There would still be 12 times as many whites with IQs above 125 than Jews.Replies: @Twinkie
The English. The French. The Germans.
All imperial powers tend to have that attitude. And the United States is imperialism on steroids.
I don’t know about that, but I agree with the rest of what you say.
Moreover, I don’t know that talking frankly will help anything. The problem isn’t that we can’t talk about these people. The problem is that they are here to begin with. A smaller, retrenched ethnostate that takes account of demographic realities would be much better.
No, every individual has that attitude to a stronger or weaker degree. Different cultures and polities channel it in different ways.Replies: @Rosie
Moreover, I don't know that talking frankly will help anything. The problem isn't that we can't talk about these people. The problem is that they are here to begin with. A smaller, retrenched ethnostate that takes account of demographic realities would be much better.Replies: @iffen
All imperial powers tend to have that attitude.
No, every individual has that attitude to a stronger or weaker degree. Different cultures and polities channel it in different ways.
I am not aware of any of these having their religion declaring their race must rule over the rest.
Concerning Jews and their cabal or lack thereof.
During the 19th century it became obvious to most observers that people divide into groups (classes, professions, guilds, clans, institutions, bureaucracies) and that these let’s call them “social groups” do indeed make choices and do indeed exhibit behaviors in such a way, as to benefit their groups.
All such groups have an “internal tension” that drives them to try to expand and take over as much territory as possible, and all such groups defend themselves. On an individual level there may even be cutthroat competition between the various members and sub-groups, but when you zoom out into the wider sociological levels, the members of these groups behave in ways which try to strengthen their groups, most often at the expense of other groups.
Mussolini’s doctrine was an attempt to juggle this as well.
Add to this the Western post-colonial societies (post-colonial in both sense, either as former center or as former colony), where imported ethnicities gradually, over generations, settle into specific “classes” or “castes”. This generally happened over the last century or more in most such places, but is also happening right now in Germany and Scandinavia, in front of our eyes, in real time.
**
Let’s say that in hypothetical Western “Country W”:
1) the Chinese become dry cleaners and engineers
2) the Turks become taxi drivers
3) the Latinos become farmhands
4) the Africans become musicians and sports performers
5) the eastern Europeans become blue collar workers
6) the Arabs and pakis become shopkeepers
7) the Jews take over media, the judiciary, and academia
After a certain point of such ethnicity-class realignments, they start to overlap to the extent that “Turk” and “taxi driver” become synonymous. Or “paki” and “shopkeeper”. Thus, when Turk taxidrivers as a class make decisions to benefit themselves as taxidrivers it is equal to it benefiting them as turks as well, and they don’t do it because of a “Turkish cabal”, they do it without conscious coordination, on the macroscopic sociological level at which such events take place.
Likewise when Paki shopkeepers behave like members of a specific class.
Likewise when Jew academics or pundits behave like members of a specific class.
**
In today’s America, certain classes have been over-saturate by Jews, this is a fact. But beyond this, Jews behave as a “meta-class” which is, cough, “intersectional” across all of the host society.
It is in their interest that:
1) They are invisible, thus they need as many outrageously visible groups as possible, in order to get lost in the noise and blend in
2) That as many “identity groups” exist as possible, and that instead of expecting individuals to assimilate, the host society accepts that there is a zillion different groups with different interests, and that’s supposed to be OK
3) That everybody behaves like Jews (grievance politics, shaming, whining, cheating, lawfare, pearl clutching, separate cultural enclaves), thus yet again helping them remain invisible
4) That preexisting social institutions are torn down, and the resulting void is filled with social conditioning and pharmaceutics
5) That the social contract of society as “a continuum between the dead, the living, and the unborn” is broken, with the ancestors seen as evil monsters, and the unborn as useless lumps of cells.
And so on. This is why a homogenous society with functioning traditional social institutions is “literally Hitler”, whereas a dysfunctional mess of arab trannies is “progressive”.
There is no need for a specific “cabal” of any sort for Jewish behavior to be explained—it is sociological class-based (intersectional meta-class) behavior, which strives to achieve certain results in order to pander to the Jewish idea of “how to make the host society safe and profitable for me”, while combined with a higher road of rationalization that all this is also “healing the world” and sheit.
**
Being race realist is not the same as being a racist, and being semitic-realist is not the same as being an anti-Semite. Being tranny-realist is not being a transphobe, and so on. There are many admirable Jews, Negros, trannies, and even jewish black trannies. However, on a larger, class level, they should not be allowed to go beyond a certain point, after which their actions start ruining whole cities (on the Negro level), and civilizations (on the Jewish level).
There is still a way to resolve this all peacefully and push the pendulum back into sanity, especially if modern Western democracies all shift right now into something like turbo-Swiss mode, where whatever degenerate elites come up with, has to be accepted or rejected by redneck Joe. That’s a very powerful brake for many bullshit proposals and underhanded deals. Including Zionist takeover of one’s foreign policy.
Peace.Replies: @Audacious Epigone
I suppose the good news here is that the United States has a *lot* more of a margin of error than most countries have historically gotten. Things are salvageable. But it isn’t an infinite margin of error. Nothing humans build is infinite. That’s up to God.
Our structures-economic, social, or otherwise-have taken a pounding over the past quarter century, partly by forces beyond any one man’s control, but also partly because of the utter incompetence and venality of our ruling classes. And they are still standing. But few will deny they don’t look as strong as they once did, and by definition, they can only take so much pounding before cracks show.
All well and good until the flood comes and those cracks make all the difference.
The concept of focal (Schelling) points in game theory is apropos: there doesn’t need to be an organized conspiracy if enough people are individually doing enough things in the same direction in a conducive environment.
We need ways to be able to discuss – in public – demographic issues honestly, without being attacked as racists.
To note the obvious: whether one is ‘attacked as a racist’ depends entirely upon the reaction of others — and anyone with even slight experience discussing sensitive demographic topics (e.g. race and crime, or race and intelligence) knows there is almost nothing you can do, no way to broach the subject, that’s guaranteed to avoid that.
Better advice is to just accept that it’s going to happen.
That said, you have to be conscious of risk/reward — I have later regretted a couple of experiences, not because I’m ashamed of my views, or anything I said, or how I said it, but due to the social consequences, not only for myself (the least concern), but also for friends and family, including my significant other — sometimes it may be better to keep your mouth shut, and you need to be aware of/realize that.
Above I speak about face-to-face/verbal social interactions — online I write what I want, since I most often do it pseudo-anonymously.
The white racial politics that our betters on the left (and some on the right) think animates American politics and culture doesn’t really exist but would be birthed into existence by the politics and policies an increasing share of the Democratic party is advocating for. I don’t think they get this at all – too many on the left are white cucks that hang out with other white cucks and think there is a significant number of people out there that will take being ruled by coalition that promises their political, economic, and cultural disenfranchisement laying down.
After Trump, I think the Democratic party is dead serious about implementing race conscious (as Warren would say) laws, and although I think it will take some time to percolate, the backlash will be serious. Hard to predict exactly what happens, but it would seem to me that domestic tranquility would be difficult to maintain if a nation’s largest group – which provides the lion’s share of taxes and consumers a proportionally small share of public services – decides they aren’t going to go along with this anymore.
This is the way we should run the resistance. I like to think that we could do an open conspiracy.
All means of resistance against oblivion should be conducted through culture.
Operation Overload is ready to storm the beaches after the monetary extremism naval artillery barrage and air assault has weakened the coastal defenses of the JEW/WASP ruling class of the American Empire.
A currency crisis caused by monetary extremism is baked into the cake for the globally coordinated central banker shysters. The globalized asset bubbles are going to implode with the force of a dying star.
Some fat Jew named Gertrude Stein famously said “there is no there there” when referring to downtown Oakland, California. Gerty Stein may have been referring to something else, but print the legend as the saying goes. There is no there there to the debt-based fiat currency called the US Dollar. The US Dollar still functions as the world’s reserve currency, but all globalized currencies, including the US Dollar, will soon implode in terms of purchasing power because of all the damn monetary extremism — dollar swaps, quantitative easing, balance sheet expansions, zero or low interest rates and all the rest — that are propping up all the globalized asset bubbles.
This complete and total implosion of the global financial system should be welcomed by all American patriots — especially the young. It is true that most Whites born before 1965 will be financially liquidated, but that is a small price to pay to ensure that young White Core Americans have the ability to enjoy AFFORDABLE FAMILY FORMATION.
All student loan debt must be extinguished immediately. Every penny of every student loan ever paid must be paid back to the borrower with 6 percent interest accrued annually for opportunity costs lost to the evil and immoral student loan debt millstone scam.
Stop Crushing The Young People With That Damn Student Loan Debt Millstone!
DAMMIT!
You Damn Bankers, You!
Tweets from 2015:
The baby boomers have violently attacked future generations by sinking a claw hammer of stolen demand from the future into the skulls of all Americans born after 1965.
The baby boomer psycho killer debt swindlers chased down innocent future generations of Americans and they have violently claw hammered in the head future generations by loading up everything and everybody and every entity in the USA with unpayable debt.
Debt Is Demand Stolen From The Future!
The baby boomers said “after me, the debt deluge” and they piled debt on top of debt on top of debt.
These innocent little lamb students were walking around like little cute puppies and these evil and immoral baby boomers sunk the claw hammer of student loan debt right into the skull of these wonderful student loan people.
How Could You!
Tweets from 2014 and 2015:
Race is not the only topic to be suppressed.
The Democrat Party, Political Correctness, and SJW activism have killed the concept of Civil Discourse. Anything that does not confirm to their self-righteous dogma is subject to fascist violence.
The most recent incident is a Democrat destroying a voter registration booth with his truck. (1)
.
.
The #1 defining characteristic of Democrat Party members is a depraved indifference to human life. And, I don’t know how this can be fixed.
PEACE 😇
(1) https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2020/02/08/political-violence-man-drives-van-into-trump-voter-registration-event-in-jacksonville-florida/
No, every individual has that attitude to a stronger or weaker degree. Different cultures and polities channel it in different ways.Replies: @Rosie
Just FTR, often, that wasn’t my comment.
My inattention was at fault. I frequently try to catch up on all of the comments and go back later to comment on a comment and click the wrong one.
often
I think I know what you mean. 🙂
During the 19th century it became obvious to most observers that people divide into groups (classes, professions, guilds, clans, institutions, bureaucracies) and that these let’s call them “social groups” do indeed make choices and do indeed exhibit behaviors in such a way, as to benefit their groups.
All such groups have an “internal tension” that drives them to try to expand and take over as much territory as possible, and all such groups defend themselves. On an individual level there may even be cutthroat competition between the various members and sub-groups, but when you zoom out into the wider sociological levels, the members of these groups behave in ways which try to strengthen their groups, most often at the expense of other groups.
Mussolini’s doctrine was an attempt to juggle this as well.
Add to this the Western post-colonial societies (post-colonial in both sense, either as former center or as former colony), where imported ethnicities gradually, over generations, settle into specific “classes” or “castes”. This generally happened over the last century or more in most such places, but is also happening right now in Germany and Scandinavia, in front of our eyes, in real time.
**
Let’s say that in hypothetical Western “Country W”:
1) the Chinese become dry cleaners and engineers
2) the Turks become taxi drivers
3) the Latinos become farmhands
4) the Africans become musicians and sports performers
5) the eastern Europeans become blue collar workers
6) the Arabs and pakis become shopkeepers
7) the Jews take over media, the judiciary, and academia
After a certain point of such ethnicity-class realignments, they start to overlap to the extent that “Turk” and “taxi driver” become synonymous. Or “paki” and “shopkeeper”. Thus, when Turk taxidrivers as a class make decisions to benefit themselves as taxidrivers it is equal to it benefiting them as turks as well, and they don’t do it because of a “Turkish cabal”, they do it without conscious coordination, on the macroscopic sociological level at which such events take place.
Likewise when Paki shopkeepers behave like members of a specific class.
Likewise when Jew academics or pundits behave like members of a specific class.
**
In today’s America, certain classes have been over-saturate by Jews, this is a fact. But beyond this, Jews behave as a “meta-class” which is, cough, “intersectional” across all of the host society.
It is in their interest that:
1) They are invisible, thus they need as many outrageously visible groups as possible, in order to get lost in the noise and blend in
2) That as many “identity groups” exist as possible, and that instead of expecting individuals to assimilate, the host society accepts that there is a zillion different groups with different interests, and that’s supposed to be OK
3) That everybody behaves like Jews (grievance politics, shaming, whining, cheating, lawfare, pearl clutching, separate cultural enclaves), thus yet again helping them remain invisible
4) That preexisting social institutions are torn down, and the resulting void is filled with social conditioning and pharmaceutics
5) That the social contract of society as “a continuum between the dead, the living, and the unborn” is broken, with the ancestors seen as evil monsters, and the unborn as useless lumps of cells.
And so on. This is why a homogenous society with functioning traditional social institutions is “literally Hitler”, whereas a dysfunctional mess of arab trannies is “progressive”.
There is no need for a specific “cabal” of any sort for Jewish behavior to be explained—it is sociological class-based (intersectional meta-class) behavior, which strives to achieve certain results in order to pander to the Jewish idea of “how to make the host society safe and profitable for me”, while combined with a higher road of rationalization that all this is also “healing the world” and sheit.
**
Being race realist is not the same as being a racist, and being semitic-realist is not the same as being an anti-Semite. Being tranny-realist is not being a transphobe, and so on. There are many admirable Jews, Negros, trannies, and even jewish black trannies. However, on a larger, class level, they should not be allowed to go beyond a certain point, after which their actions start ruining whole cities (on the Negro level), and civilizations (on the Jewish level).
There is still a way to resolve this all peacefully and push the pendulum back into sanity, especially if modern Western democracies all shift right now into something like turbo-Swiss mode, where whatever degenerate elites come up with, has to be accepted or rejected by redneck Joe. That’s a very powerful brake for many bullshit proposals and underhanded deals. Including Zionist takeover of one's foreign policy.Replies: @Adam Smith, @Talha, @Audacious Epigone
And the award for most admirable jewish black tranny goes to….?
This would be true even if Bernie Sanders were not 79 years old at the date of the potential inauguration.Replies: @Some Guy, @SunBakedSuburb, @Daniel H
Democratic Party elites rigged Iowa so the CIA puppet that calls itself Buttigieg would be seen as a contender to Bernie while Joe continues his wandering and muttering. Dem elites see Bloomberg’s billions as another weapon to be used against Bernie. The grouchy old socialist has captured the youth and energy of the Democratic Party. The strife and division between the elites and little people means civil war for the Dems. Hopefully the party will implode and rebuild into a political entity that has meaning in the real world.
“Their ill intent is baked into their DNA”
Survival is baked into Jewish DNA.
“This is the way we should run the resistance.”
All means of resistance against oblivion should be conducted through culture.
Cant be said enough how bad of an idea this is. You just sound like a lunatic.
It’s okay to talk frankly about Jews calling anti-Semite to get themselves off the hook for bad behavior when they get caught. People have seen this happen in their own lives with other groups and maybe even Jews. That’s about as far as people are ready to go right now. Maybe ever. The topic of Jews wanting more immigration because they are paranoid about another holocaust is potentially okay after you feel out the target. The angle is that they are insane and we would absolutely never do that. Under no circumstances should you say shit that makes people think you want to do it.
People, normies, are on the edge of agreeing with us about capitalism, modernity, technology, media, just about everything else. There’s no reason to make a big deal about the one little
thing they’ve been conditioned the hardest to reject immediately.
I agree with you that one shouldn't lead with the JQ, but at some point, it's going to come up.Replies: @Malenfant
But there are certain things that cause normies to switch off immediately and to conclude that the speaker is a dangerous lunatic. If you start talking nonsense about white genocide, if you start suggesting breaking the country into ethnostates, if you start talking about forced segregation, if you start ranting about Jewish conspiracies (or other wacky conspiracy theories) or you start talking about HBD (which to normal people sounds like an updated version of scientific racism) then you lose the normies. They put you straight into the dangerous lunatic category.
It's almost as if there's a whole bunch of people on the far right who are determined to do everything they can to discredit and marginalise their own movements. Maybe they're just so crazy or so blinded by hate that they can't see it.Replies: @Twinkie
Comments are predictably short on honesty though, or solutions for that matter, about saving this once great former nation.
A state (this is no longer a nation) comprised of countless minority groups all working to promote their own interests is a failed state. Chaotic, unfamiliar, and lacking trust. It's not going to end well and that is not some LARP fantasy. I am not looking forward to it. Prattle on.
During the 19th century it became obvious to most observers that people divide into groups (classes, professions, guilds, clans, institutions, bureaucracies) and that these let’s call them “social groups” do indeed make choices and do indeed exhibit behaviors in such a way, as to benefit their groups.
All such groups have an “internal tension” that drives them to try to expand and take over as much territory as possible, and all such groups defend themselves. On an individual level there may even be cutthroat competition between the various members and sub-groups, but when you zoom out into the wider sociological levels, the members of these groups behave in ways which try to strengthen their groups, most often at the expense of other groups.
Mussolini’s doctrine was an attempt to juggle this as well.
Add to this the Western post-colonial societies (post-colonial in both sense, either as former center or as former colony), where imported ethnicities gradually, over generations, settle into specific “classes” or “castes”. This generally happened over the last century or more in most such places, but is also happening right now in Germany and Scandinavia, in front of our eyes, in real time.
**
Let’s say that in hypothetical Western “Country W”:
1) the Chinese become dry cleaners and engineers
2) the Turks become taxi drivers
3) the Latinos become farmhands
4) the Africans become musicians and sports performers
5) the eastern Europeans become blue collar workers
6) the Arabs and pakis become shopkeepers
7) the Jews take over media, the judiciary, and academia
After a certain point of such ethnicity-class realignments, they start to overlap to the extent that “Turk” and “taxi driver” become synonymous. Or “paki” and “shopkeeper”. Thus, when Turk taxidrivers as a class make decisions to benefit themselves as taxidrivers it is equal to it benefiting them as turks as well, and they don’t do it because of a “Turkish cabal”, they do it without conscious coordination, on the macroscopic sociological level at which such events take place.
Likewise when Paki shopkeepers behave like members of a specific class.
Likewise when Jew academics or pundits behave like members of a specific class.
**
In today’s America, certain classes have been over-saturate by Jews, this is a fact. But beyond this, Jews behave as a “meta-class” which is, cough, “intersectional” across all of the host society.
It is in their interest that:
1) They are invisible, thus they need as many outrageously visible groups as possible, in order to get lost in the noise and blend in
2) That as many “identity groups” exist as possible, and that instead of expecting individuals to assimilate, the host society accepts that there is a zillion different groups with different interests, and that’s supposed to be OK
3) That everybody behaves like Jews (grievance politics, shaming, whining, cheating, lawfare, pearl clutching, separate cultural enclaves), thus yet again helping them remain invisible
4) That preexisting social institutions are torn down, and the resulting void is filled with social conditioning and pharmaceutics
5) That the social contract of society as “a continuum between the dead, the living, and the unborn” is broken, with the ancestors seen as evil monsters, and the unborn as useless lumps of cells.
And so on. This is why a homogenous society with functioning traditional social institutions is “literally Hitler”, whereas a dysfunctional mess of arab trannies is “progressive”.
There is no need for a specific “cabal” of any sort for Jewish behavior to be explained—it is sociological class-based (intersectional meta-class) behavior, which strives to achieve certain results in order to pander to the Jewish idea of “how to make the host society safe and profitable for me”, while combined with a higher road of rationalization that all this is also “healing the world” and sheit.
**
Being race realist is not the same as being a racist, and being semitic-realist is not the same as being an anti-Semite. Being tranny-realist is not being a transphobe, and so on. There are many admirable Jews, Negros, trannies, and even jewish black trannies. However, on a larger, class level, they should not be allowed to go beyond a certain point, after which their actions start ruining whole cities (on the Negro level), and civilizations (on the Jewish level).
There is still a way to resolve this all peacefully and push the pendulum back into sanity, especially if modern Western democracies all shift right now into something like turbo-Swiss mode, where whatever degenerate elites come up with, has to be accepted or rejected by redneck Joe. That’s a very powerful brake for many bullshit proposals and underhanded deals. Including Zionist takeover of one's foreign policy.Replies: @Adam Smith, @Talha, @Audacious Epigone
Do you have any links to a summary of the framework and political mechanisms you are talking about? Thanks in advance.
Peace.
In reply to the clarion call for candor I will admit to being a lower IQ dumb ass who is too lazy to check the internet to see how many votes the Green Party and the Libertarian Party got in the 2016 presidential election and other elections.
How dare you be so lazy! That might be the cry of some spiteful mutant young person named Greta from some Scandinavian nation that is being overrun by foreigners just like the USA is and this young lady doesn’t say much about China or India or any other non-White nation and their pollution and such. She also don’t say much about how all the major rivers that are pouring pollution and plastic and sewage into other watery bodies are in non-White nations.
Well, I gathered up the energy to check the internet and it seems the Libertarian Party presidential candidate got FOUR and a HALF million votes or over THREE percent of the vote in 2016. I disagree strongly with that guy from the Libertarian Party and I told him in person that his support for mass legal immigration and mass illegal immigration was bad for the USA.
I got even more energy and I done seen on the internet that the Green Party candidate for president in 2016 got ONE MILLION votes for a percentage that would be about ONE percent.
This Buttigieg bullshit is gonna be dust in the wind shortly. Biden and Sanders will battle it out in Nevada and on March 3. Biden wins South Carolina easy but it’s fun to see billionaire SOB Steyer making a ruckus in South Carolina.
Biden will be the presumptive Democrat Party nominee after March 3 and the Bernie Bros and the Bernie Broads will flood into the Green Party.
The Libertarian louts will get more votes in 2020 than they got in 2016. The Green Party might get more votes than the Libertarian Party.
The new political party called White Core America — with love in their hearts — will abandon the rancid and evil Republican Party and they will get more votes than the Green Party.
Bernie Sanders wins New Hampshire easily. If he doesn’t, my political premonitions will get even more radical.
Three auguries of Bernie Sanders New Hampshire presidential primary victory:
1) A good looking young lady ran an indoor mile as fast as can be and she is from New Hampshire. French surname!
2) An allegedly drunk snowmobile driver plowed through an ice fishing bobhouse on Lake Winnipesaukee.
3) Joe Biden jabbed his bony geezer finger into the sternum of reporter Ed O’Keefe in a belligerent reaction to possible reporter badgering.
Political experts all say that if all three of these auguries occur, then a guy named Bernie Sanders will win the New Hampshire presidential primary.
I usually don’t like sarcasm, even my own, but this is good and right on the money:
https://twitter.com/NationalistTV/status/1226920017901604864?s=20
In the pursuit of candor, I need someone to explain what a “Lying, dog faced pony soldier” is.
Joe Biden said it, therefore it must be important.
Jewish nepotism (a less complementary way of phrasing the “network effect”) isn’t quite ill-intent, but it is a violation of the implicit social contract (well, technically it is the actual letter of the law now, but wasn’t always) that they always want to compel others to follow. Jews can never stand for ethnic nepotism among whites, but we’re expected to overlook theirs. I don’t care for this standard obviously, but it’s doubly odious that we have to follow it (even when it actually isn’t nepotism but genuinely just hbd factors or historical accident) while they don’t.
And viewing their nepotism (and much of it very obviously is nepotism) and control of various institutions as negative and intentional (like in the case of hollywood; anti-white messaging isn’t an accident of the most efficient money-maker, it’s the expression of ethnic animus), isn’t the same as viewing them as incorrigable vermin. You let foreigners exert great influence over you with minimal mechanisms to punish them for screwing you, and amazingly they get used to screwing you and take it as a given. This is entirely predictable, and is practically a restatement of the premise of the original post. The intractable tendency to treat other peoples with less care than their own is part of why there are seperate countries in the first place.
Also speaking of the original post, redpill me on asian control of gambling and why they rigged Saturday night’s title fight to steal my 40 dollars.
It’s okay to talk frankly about Jews calling anti-Semite to get themselves off the hook for bad behavior when they get caught. People have seen this happen in their own lives with other groups and maybe even Jews. That’s about as far as people are ready to go right now. Maybe ever. The topic of Jews wanting more immigration because they are paranoid about another holocaust is potentially okay after you feel out the target. The angle is that they are insane and we would absolutely never do that. Under no circumstances should you say shit that makes people think you want to do it.
People, normies, are on the edge of agreeing with us about capitalism, modernity, technology, media, just about everything else. There’s no reason to make a big deal about the one little
thing they’ve been conditioned the hardest to reject immediately.Replies: @Rosie, @dfordoom, @Mike Tre
The problem that you’re going to run into is that, without any discussion of the JQ, people are left with the impression that Whites are fine with White genocide. All they see are White-looking people running everything and they assume there’s nothing amiss.
I agree with you that one shouldn’t lead with the JQ, but at some point, it’s going to come up.
On the whole, whites are fine with white genocide. Look no further than Ireland: They've got a homosexual Indian PM, and they're rushing towards extinction and replacement at breakneck speed. It's quite a stretch to blame this entirely, or even mostly, on Jews.
...If anything, the WQ seems more pertinent!Replies: @anon, @dfordoom
“We need ways to be able to discuss – in public – demographic issues honestly, without being attacked as racists. It’s not random that blacks are over-represented in football (and crime), Jews in finance (and financial crimes), and Asians in engineering (and gambling). We can’t address these phenomena without acknowledging these demographic facts and crafting public policies accordingly.”
This morning my housemate woke me up from one of the best sleeps I have had in a while. She busted into the living room to tell me the cat or one of them we have been attempting to rescue had returned. I got up early to get rid of the squeeking noise in the dryer and was plumb ‘teeeeee’rd’. Candor — i cared, but i didn’t care because the last time I could have actually gotten the cat she hemmmm’d haw’d — nonetheless, I got up and put some food out — candor here’s some candor.
blacks in football —- every demographic that holds the lowest rungs of the ladder have accessed the avenues of physical labor: sports, military, etc. and as consequence are over represented, if one wants to to call it that, but in reality, they represent what avenues are there — and let’s face it the country has never been keen on pushing black intelligentsia/ Furthermore, most blacks are not playing sports professionally, nor do they seek that as profession – doesn’t mean some don’t, but they are not most. And they don;t for the same reasons whites didn’t — when whites wholesale barred blacks from even playing sports academically or professionally. Imagine that. That for most of the time slavery ended, blacks were by and large barred from professional sports, save boxing and horse racing. And in very short order black jockies were replaced for making too much money, it turns out whites prefer that brown skinned latins make the dough, even if they are foreigners.
blacks are not over represented in crime. It is accurate that the black population has percentage more to their population, but they simply replaced the lower rung whites that once held those rings of the social ladder. Irish, Italians, Poles . . . etc. all held their over represented status. More accurately, a particular segment of said populations are “over represented . . . unfortunately, it has been tougher blacks to blend in by changing their style of dress, language, names, or inter-marriage other relational avenues. All the venues traditionally used were a steeper hurdle based on skin color, right or wrong, good debilitative or facilitative — candor — that’s the way it is.
As for the rest, most jews in the US were white and while there were hurdles, a jew could change their name, change their clothes, manner of speaking and intermarry . . . yada yada yada . . . they had legs in the tubes of access and used them.
Asians have a long and tangled relationship with whites before Marco Polo supposedly made his silk road trip to China. Those trade and social histories of course would include trade, business . . . asians had powerful empires that even encompassed Europe — so the internal relations — well set.
The demographics is not devoid of social construction based on both truth and half truth and right out falsehood paraded as truth.
Base:
Jews: money making, legalese, wiley coyotes – useful
Asians: smart, ingenius, ingratiating useful
African Americans: lazy, sex crazed, uneducated, and an all round burden
The country has worked overtime to ensure those base tropes — stay in place
demographics: if you are 2% of the population and thirty percent of the population says you are thus — chances, right or wrong . . . a good portion of the society will repeat as truth and act according.
Candidly — that is the way it is . . .
Candor—- I really really really really resent be waken up
I agree with you that one shouldn't lead with the JQ, but at some point, it's going to come up.Replies: @Malenfant
> Whites are fine with White genocide. All they see are White-looking people running everything and they assume there’s nothing amiss.
On the whole, whites are fine with white genocide. Look no further than Ireland: They’ve got a homosexual Indian PM, and they’re rushing towards extinction and replacement at breakneck speed. It’s quite a stretch to blame this entirely, or even mostly, on Jews.
…If anything, the WQ seems more pertinent!
Homosexual Indian PM for now. That may change. Sinn Fein is having unexpected success.
https://www.rt.com/op-ed/480530-ireland-germany-elections-establishment/Yeah, it's an editorial from Russia Times. Because the western media is pure propaganda on stilts, lying about national elections so any real analysis is impossible in those organs. Boomers may find this confusing or even disorienting. They should just relax and enjoy the irony.Replies: @Malenfant, @Audacious Epigone
Mass immigration does have disastrous cultural, social and economic consequences but calling it genocide is stupid and counter-productive.
And whites on the whole couldn't care less about those disastrous cultural, social and economic consequences. Not unless it actually happens in their street. Even though they don't care very much unless they are personally affected, and most whites are not personally affected.
Whites have zero interest in preserving their own distinctive cultures. They have abandoned those cultures in favour of mass-market Hollywood trash, degenerate pop music, moronic super-hero movies, reality TV and every manifestation of American junk culture. Whites have destroyed their own cultures, willingly and enthusiastically.
Whites do not see immigration as a threat to the things they care about. Whites generally speaking care about virtue-signalling, status, mass-produced mass culture, shiny consumer goods and free porn. Rich whites care about money and power. Immigration does not threaten any of these things.
You're trying to save a civilisation that does not want to be saved.
This would be true even if Bernie Sanders were not 79 years old at the date of the potential inauguration.Replies: @Some Guy, @SunBakedSuburb, @Daniel H
You can’t possibly think Bernie Sanders could win the general election.
Bernie Sanders can definitely win, any Democrat can win. In fact, the election is for the Democrats to lose. The slim margins that gave Trump a victory in the midwestern states, PA and Florida are dead, buried and moldering in the ground. The newly enfranchised cohort of 18-22 year olds are young, significantly less white and poorer. Such a demographic votes left. ALWAYS. Additionally, how many millions have been naturalized in those states since 2016? Again, the newly naturalized will break for the left 70/30. And Florida? Forget about it. Over 1 million felons have been enfranchised since 2016. How many have been registered? Possibly several hundred thousand. How many of these will the GOP pickup?
Bernie is the best candidate for the simple reason he may make univeral healthcare his focal issue. Let’s hope.
The Republicans are losers. Good riddance. It sucks that a decent man and President, Donald Trump, may go down with them, but since 1965 we knew the day would come when a Republican couldn’t get elected dog catcher in this country. The time is now. Demographics suck, math sucks, but I’m glad the Cucks will be swept from the stage. Just say no to Cucks.
blacks also good dancers.
A California condor weighing 25 pounds with a wingspan of ten feet flying over the California Democrat Party presidential primary on March 3 might just see Bernie Sanders win the primary.
Some wag on the internet likes to joke that California takes weeks and weeks to determine the rough outlines of the outcomes of elections, so Bernie Sanders might have a belated victory bump out of California.
I still say Joe Biden is the presumptive Democrat Party nominee after March 3 but Bernie Sanders is set to get a big boost out of New Hampshire and the New Hampshire Democrat Party primary is run by towns and cities and municipalities and other jurisdictions, so there will be no election nonsense like the Iowa Caucus which was run by the crooked privatized crooks in the Iowa Democrat Party. The election results from New Hampshire shall be promptly reported and properly counted. The Iowa Republican Party is a bunch of crooked crooks, too, so I ain’t just singling out the damn Democrat Party crooks.
On to Nevada and South Carolina and then March 3 and then the two-party totalitarianism in the USA begins to implode.
Libertarian Party
Green Party
White Core America Party
Democrat Party
Republican Party
Some wag on the internet likes to joke that California takes weeks and weeks to determine the rough outlines of the outcomes of elections, so Bernie Sanders might have a belated victory bump out of California.
I still say Joe Biden is the presumptive Democrat Party nominee after March 3 but Bernie Sanders is set to get a big boost out of New Hampshire and the New Hampshire Democrat Party primary is run by towns and cities and municipalities and other jurisdictions, so there will be no election nonsense like the Iowa Caucus which was run by the crooked privatized crooks in the Iowa Democrat Party. The election results from New Hampshire shall be promptly reported and properly counted. The Iowa Republican Party is a bunch of crooked crooks, too, so I ain't just singling out the damn Democrat Party crooks.
On to Nevada and South Carolina and then March 3 and then the two-party totalitarianism in the USA begins to implode.
Libertarian Party
Green Party
White Core America Party
Democrat Party
Republican Party
https://twitter.com/Politics_Polls/status/1226979502162575374?s=20Replies: @Lot
https://youtube.com/watch?v=I5zKLtrX_vM
Americans certainly believe that their religion (liberalism) should be and indeed must be imposed on the entire planet. The belief that the United States should and must rule the world seems pretty widespread among Americans. The belief that the United States has the right to destroy any nation that does not adopt the American religion also seems to be pretty widespread.
After Trump, I think the Democratic party is dead serious about implementing race conscious (as Warren would say) laws, and although I think it will take some time to percolate, the backlash will be serious. Hard to predict exactly what happens, but it would seem to me that domestic tranquility would be difficult to maintain if a nation's largest group - which provides the lion's share of taxes and consumers a proportionally small share of public services - decides they aren't going to go along with this anymore.Replies: @dfordoom, @Audacious Epigone
I assume that when you talk about the nation’s largest group you mean whites? If so the problem is that they’re not a group. They’re a whole bunch of groups, most of whom hate each other. They’re hopelessly divided by class and ideology and by the urban/rural divide and they’re hopelessly divided culturally. They are never going to act as a group.
On the whole, whites are fine with white genocide. Look no further than Ireland: They've got a homosexual Indian PM, and they're rushing towards extinction and replacement at breakneck speed. It's quite a stretch to blame this entirely, or even mostly, on Jews.
...If anything, the WQ seems more pertinent!Replies: @anon, @dfordoom
Look no further than Ireland: They’ve got a homosexual Indian PM, and they’re rushing towards extinction and replacement at breakneck speed.
Homosexual Indian PM for now. That may change. Sinn Fein is having unexpected success.
https://www.rt.com/op-ed/480530-ireland-germany-elections-establishment/
Yeah, it’s an editorial from Russia Times. Because the western media is pure propaganda on stilts, lying about national elections so any real analysis is impossible in those organs. Boomers may find this confusing or even disorienting. They should just relax and enjoy the irony.
His performance among those 50 and older is atrocious, though.
The more a Jew tends to believe in those ‘ancient mythologies’, the less said Jew tends to have all these negative traits you ascribe to him, though.
If it is ‘baked into their DNA’, I guess it’s good that their outmarriage rates are so staggeringly high, upwards of 50% for the non-orthodox.
I always found it fascinating that the offspring of Jewish-East Asian inter-marriages almost always identified as Jewish, not Asian. Amy Chua’s tiger cubs did so and stated so... until mom became famous. ;)
For example?Replies: @Audacious Epigone
During the 19th century it became obvious to most observers that people divide into groups (classes, professions, guilds, clans, institutions, bureaucracies) and that these let’s call them “social groups” do indeed make choices and do indeed exhibit behaviors in such a way, as to benefit their groups.
All such groups have an “internal tension” that drives them to try to expand and take over as much territory as possible, and all such groups defend themselves. On an individual level there may even be cutthroat competition between the various members and sub-groups, but when you zoom out into the wider sociological levels, the members of these groups behave in ways which try to strengthen their groups, most often at the expense of other groups.
Mussolini’s doctrine was an attempt to juggle this as well.
Add to this the Western post-colonial societies (post-colonial in both sense, either as former center or as former colony), where imported ethnicities gradually, over generations, settle into specific “classes” or “castes”. This generally happened over the last century or more in most such places, but is also happening right now in Germany and Scandinavia, in front of our eyes, in real time.
**
Let’s say that in hypothetical Western “Country W”:
1) the Chinese become dry cleaners and engineers
2) the Turks become taxi drivers
3) the Latinos become farmhands
4) the Africans become musicians and sports performers
5) the eastern Europeans become blue collar workers
6) the Arabs and pakis become shopkeepers
7) the Jews take over media, the judiciary, and academia
After a certain point of such ethnicity-class realignments, they start to overlap to the extent that “Turk” and “taxi driver” become synonymous. Or “paki” and “shopkeeper”. Thus, when Turk taxidrivers as a class make decisions to benefit themselves as taxidrivers it is equal to it benefiting them as turks as well, and they don’t do it because of a “Turkish cabal”, they do it without conscious coordination, on the macroscopic sociological level at which such events take place.
Likewise when Paki shopkeepers behave like members of a specific class.
Likewise when Jew academics or pundits behave like members of a specific class.
**
In today’s America, certain classes have been over-saturate by Jews, this is a fact. But beyond this, Jews behave as a “meta-class” which is, cough, “intersectional” across all of the host society.
It is in their interest that:
1) They are invisible, thus they need as many outrageously visible groups as possible, in order to get lost in the noise and blend in
2) That as many “identity groups” exist as possible, and that instead of expecting individuals to assimilate, the host society accepts that there is a zillion different groups with different interests, and that’s supposed to be OK
3) That everybody behaves like Jews (grievance politics, shaming, whining, cheating, lawfare, pearl clutching, separate cultural enclaves), thus yet again helping them remain invisible
4) That preexisting social institutions are torn down, and the resulting void is filled with social conditioning and pharmaceutics
5) That the social contract of society as “a continuum between the dead, the living, and the unborn” is broken, with the ancestors seen as evil monsters, and the unborn as useless lumps of cells.
And so on. This is why a homogenous society with functioning traditional social institutions is “literally Hitler”, whereas a dysfunctional mess of arab trannies is “progressive”.
There is no need for a specific “cabal” of any sort for Jewish behavior to be explained—it is sociological class-based (intersectional meta-class) behavior, which strives to achieve certain results in order to pander to the Jewish idea of “how to make the host society safe and profitable for me”, while combined with a higher road of rationalization that all this is also “healing the world” and sheit.
**
Being race realist is not the same as being a racist, and being semitic-realist is not the same as being an anti-Semite. Being tranny-realist is not being a transphobe, and so on. There are many admirable Jews, Negros, trannies, and even jewish black trannies. However, on a larger, class level, they should not be allowed to go beyond a certain point, after which their actions start ruining whole cities (on the Negro level), and civilizations (on the Jewish level).
There is still a way to resolve this all peacefully and push the pendulum back into sanity, especially if modern Western democracies all shift right now into something like turbo-Swiss mode, where whatever degenerate elites come up with, has to be accepted or rejected by redneck Joe. That’s a very powerful brake for many bullshit proposals and underhanded deals. Including Zionist takeover of one's foreign policy.Replies: @Adam Smith, @Talha, @Audacious Epigone
Do Jews make an effort to make themselves invisible? Given the ire it often elicits, they seem to generally be quite open about their heritage.
After Trump, I think the Democratic party is dead serious about implementing race conscious (as Warren would say) laws, and although I think it will take some time to percolate, the backlash will be serious. Hard to predict exactly what happens, but it would seem to me that domestic tranquility would be difficult to maintain if a nation's largest group - which provides the lion's share of taxes and consumers a proportionally small share of public services - decides they aren't going to go along with this anymore.Replies: @dfordoom, @Audacious Epigone
It would utterly destroy the American legal system for the same reason that anti-racist, anti-misogynist, etc algorithms the social media companies put in place don’t work–if applied in a color-blind manner, they’d ensnare a much higher proportion of non-whites than they would whites. That’s easiest enough to get around when you control the Megaphone, but the courts are another story.
Trump is providing something of a firewall with the number of judges he has appointed, but it seems there are a lot of people on the left that would support court-packing to ensure the correct decisions are issued. Hopefully it doesn't come to pass, but if progressives have control of the presidency and Congress for an extended period of time, they will contort our laws and courts to ensure that discrimination in the name of social justice cannot be challenged.
Homosexual Indian PM for now. That may change. Sinn Fein is having unexpected success.
https://www.rt.com/op-ed/480530-ireland-germany-elections-establishment/Yeah, it's an editorial from Russia Times. Because the western media is pure propaganda on stilts, lying about national elections so any real analysis is impossible in those organs. Boomers may find this confusing or even disorienting. They should just relax and enjoy the irony.Replies: @Malenfant, @Audacious Epigone
My point exactly. Sinn Fein are not tough on immigration. To the contrary…
Again, the WQ here seems rather more pertinent than the JQ, much to Rosie’s dismay, I’m sure!
On the other hand, it seems that the offspring of those out-married Jews tend to identify as Jews or otherwise maintain some sense of identity as Jewish-affiliated. So Jewish identity is quite diffused, but also wide.
I always found it fascinating that the offspring of Jewish-East Asian inter-marriages almost always identified as Jewish, not Asian. Amy Chua’s tiger cubs did so and stated so… until mom became famous. 😉
Peace.Replies: @Audacious Epigone
Localism, in a nutshell. Imagine if the vast majority of the laws governing your daily life had to be ratified by plebiscite attended by all the adults who live in your neighborhood and no one else.
Peace.
Sounds quite nice.
Peace.
Homosexual Indian PM for now. That may change. Sinn Fein is having unexpected success.
https://www.rt.com/op-ed/480530-ireland-germany-elections-establishment/Yeah, it's an editorial from Russia Times. Because the western media is pure propaganda on stilts, lying about national elections so any real analysis is impossible in those organs. Boomers may find this confusing or even disorienting. They should just relax and enjoy the irony.Replies: @Malenfant, @Audacious Epigone
I keep seeing Sinn Fein described as “leftwing nationalist” and the like. I’m woefully uninformed about Irish politics. Give me a quick summation of what the results mean–not the difficulty in forming a government with three leading parties that refuse to work with each other–but what Sinn Fein’s growth indicates.
They are probably in bed with GlobalHomo as much as the other two parties. So I don't expect any resolution of problems any time soon. But the Irish voters have partially rejected the two established parties. When the problems continue to fester, we can expect some other party to appear, and it will be viewed with alarm and called names, probably "Nazi" and "Racist" for a start.
This is only the first phase. Something similar is playing out in Italy with the Northern League and Five Star. Hungary is further along. Globalists are losing control of the electoral process. At some point they may decide to just chuck elections altogether, since the voters keep voting wrong and it's taking longer than expected to elect a new people on a country-by-country basis.
* The key word that begins with "immi...." almost never shows up on a search, yet it's obviously a huge part of the problem. Isn't it strange that Ireland and France and the US and other developed countries all have the same problems that are associated with "immm...." word that cannot be said?
Trump has no one to blame but himself. He listened to McConnell and Ryan. He pays the electoral price. I can promise you, though, future GOP insurgents will not be making that mistake. Romneyism has no future.
If Sanders is nominated, remains uncompromisingly populist on economic issues while backing away from the less popular stuff the primary politics is indulging in (open borders, new Cold War with Russia, etc) , and a guy like Bloomberg doesn’t decide to sink things by running a third party campaign, he will win, easily. I will make no such claims about other Democratic candidates, though, and am skeptical the DNC isn’t going to do something to mess up their electoral chances.
Not among the generation for whom the Middle Eastern messes that cost so much blood and treasure with toxic consequences all around was a formative experience. That’s the closest thing there is to a uniform political marker. Right or Left, the one thing everybody seems to agree on is that interventionist foreign policy was a disaster.
But it doesn’t matter, at least not any time soon. The geriatrics in charge are determined to hang onto power as long as possible. Looking at all their preferred policies in sum, from immigration to health care, from social bonds and what we choose to value as a society to our interactions with the outside world, “Apres moi, le deluge” sums up their attitude nicely. Total lack of responsibility. And people follow their elites.
“Not because I think they sit around together and plot the doom for the rest of us”.
Yes it’s anecdotal and a relatively small sample size but my experiences say you are absolutely right. I have never heard my Jewish family (including my cousin who I would put in the category of elite Jew) or friends even come close to that kind of talk. There is no us against them talk. Judaism rarely comes up at all. Nobody talks about anything that serious. They talk about SWPL type subjects, sports, the weather, their vacations, just normal boring subjects.
It’s okay to talk frankly about Jews calling anti-Semite to get themselves off the hook for bad behavior when they get caught. People have seen this happen in their own lives with other groups and maybe even Jews. That’s about as far as people are ready to go right now. Maybe ever. The topic of Jews wanting more immigration because they are paranoid about another holocaust is potentially okay after you feel out the target. The angle is that they are insane and we would absolutely never do that. Under no circumstances should you say shit that makes people think you want to do it.
People, normies, are on the edge of agreeing with us about capitalism, modernity, technology, media, just about everything else. There’s no reason to make a big deal about the one little
thing they’ve been conditioned the hardest to reject immediately.Replies: @Rosie, @dfordoom, @Mike Tre
I agree that normies are reachable on issues like capitalism, modernity, technology, media and also globalism, they’re even reachable to some extent on the excesses of feminism and the LGBT lobby (most normies are not OK with the idea of men in dresses in girls’ locker rooms). You might even get them to listen to economic arguments against immigration.
But there are certain things that cause normies to switch off immediately and to conclude that the speaker is a dangerous lunatic. If you start talking nonsense about white genocide, if you start suggesting breaking the country into ethnostates, if you start talking about forced segregation, if you start ranting about Jewish conspiracies (or other wacky conspiracy theories) or you start talking about HBD (which to normal people sounds like an updated version of scientific racism) then you lose the normies. They put you straight into the dangerous lunatic category.
It’s almost as if there’s a whole bunch of people on the far right who are determined to do everything they can to discredit and marginalise their own movements. Maybe they’re just so crazy or so blinded by hate that they can’t see it.
But, yes, white genocide, ethno-state talk, legal segregation, “JQ,”* and the like immediately paint you as a nut.
*You can occasionally get away with talks about Jews with non-whites, but never with SWPL.Replies: @dfordoom
On the whole, whites are fine with white genocide. Look no further than Ireland: They've got a homosexual Indian PM, and they're rushing towards extinction and replacement at breakneck speed. It's quite a stretch to blame this entirely, or even mostly, on Jews.
...If anything, the WQ seems more pertinent!Replies: @anon, @dfordoom
Whites are fine with immigration. They don’t see it as genocide because it isn’t actually genocide. The term white genocide just makes anyone who uses it sound deranged. Normies think of genocide as being what happens when people are loaded into cattle trucks and shipped off to death camps, or lined up and machine-gunned and buried in mass graves. Since that is clearly not happening to whites normies conclude that people who talk about white genocide are either insane or lying.
Mass immigration does have disastrous cultural, social and economic consequences but calling it genocide is stupid and counter-productive.
And whites on the whole couldn’t care less about those disastrous cultural, social and economic consequences. Not unless it actually happens in their street. Even though they don’t care very much unless they are personally affected, and most whites are not personally affected.
Whites have zero interest in preserving their own distinctive cultures. They have abandoned those cultures in favour of mass-market Hollywood trash, degenerate pop music, moronic super-hero movies, reality TV and every manifestation of American junk culture. Whites have destroyed their own cultures, willingly and enthusiastically.
Whites do not see immigration as a threat to the things they care about. Whites generally speaking care about virtue-signalling, status, mass-produced mass culture, shiny consumer goods and free porn. Rich whites care about money and power. Immigration does not threaten any of these things.
You’re trying to save a civilisation that does not want to be saved.
But there are certain things that cause normies to switch off immediately and to conclude that the speaker is a dangerous lunatic. If you start talking nonsense about white genocide, if you start suggesting breaking the country into ethnostates, if you start talking about forced segregation, if you start ranting about Jewish conspiracies (or other wacky conspiracy theories) or you start talking about HBD (which to normal people sounds like an updated version of scientific racism) then you lose the normies. They put you straight into the dangerous lunatic category.
It's almost as if there's a whole bunch of people on the far right who are determined to do everything they can to discredit and marginalise their own movements. Maybe they're just so crazy or so blinded by hate that they can't see it.Replies: @Twinkie
I was with you until the HBD issue. I’ve found that, so long as you avoid the IQ talk (“East Asians are inherently smarter than sub-Saharan Africans”), most people who understand rudimentary genetics and heredity (“Smart parents are more likely to have smart kids,” “Athletic parents are more likely to have athletic kids”) seem to get HBD instinctively. After all, it’s right in front of their lying eyes.
But, yes, white genocide, ethno-state talk, legal segregation, “JQ,”* and the like immediately paint you as a nut.
*You can occasionally get away with talks about Jews with non-whites, but never with SWPL.
But people who believe in HBD do want to relate it to race. That's why they're attracted to HBD in the first place.Replies: @Intelligent Dasein, @iffen
So how come you still have an interventionist foreign policy? How come you still have military bases all over the globe if both Left and Right have decided that an interventionist foreign policy is a bad idea? How come you still have a ginormous military machine that exists for one purpose and one purpose only – to implement an interventionist foreign policy?
But, yes, white genocide, ethno-state talk, legal segregation, “JQ,”* and the like immediately paint you as a nut.
*You can occasionally get away with talks about Jews with non-whites, but never with SWPL.Replies: @dfordoom
People will accept HBD as long as you don’t relate it to race. Once you relate it to race you’re straight into the dangerous extremist lunatic category.
But people who believe in HBD do want to relate it to race. That’s why they’re attracted to HBD in the first place.
If you want to talk about race, then by God just talk about race. Don't dress it up in a bunch of biological poppycock that makes you sound like a spergy, drawer-sniffing fetishist. Everyone already knows that people come in different races; they don't dispute the fact, but they rightfully regard all HBD-talk as a wimpy attempt to smuggle in some kind of supremicism by people who lack the balls to actually act superior. All partisan appeals to data always come off like this. It's like having your mom call in sick to work for you.
If history is any guide, the first replies to my comment will take the form of brief, tongue-clucking rejoineders asking how it is possible to talk about race without mentioning biology, which just goes to show that the whole subject hasn't been understood in the least. Race is not "biological." It is either an integral property of one's existence or it is a mere word; there is no middle path. A race-realist must be committed to the former idea, but HBDers do not want to face its metaphysical implications (or indeed any other metaphysical implications), so they bring in biology as a sort of stalking horse, forcing it to do the work that they do not want to do; work which, moreover, it is entirely unsuited for.Replies: @anon, @dfordoom
This is only true for some people, and I've told you that more than once, so stop saying it.
I’m not in Ireland. As far as I can tell, Ireland has a serious housing price problem and a hospital / medical problem. Muh Socialized Medicine isn’t working and adult children are moving back with their parents because they can’t afford to live on their own, especially in Dublin which is insanely expensive. Sinn Fein made talk in this election about both issues*. They got votes. Lots. Will they deliver? Doubtful.
They are probably in bed with GlobalHomo as much as the other two parties. So I don’t expect any resolution of problems any time soon. But the Irish voters have partially rejected the two established parties. When the problems continue to fester, we can expect some other party to appear, and it will be viewed with alarm and called names, probably “Nazi” and “Racist” for a start.
This is only the first phase. Something similar is playing out in Italy with the Northern League and Five Star. Hungary is further along. Globalists are losing control of the electoral process. At some point they may decide to just chuck elections altogether, since the voters keep voting wrong and it’s taking longer than expected to elect a new people on a country-by-country basis.
* The key word that begins with “immi….” almost never shows up on a search, yet it’s obviously a huge part of the problem. Isn’t it strange that Ireland and France and the US and other developed countries all have the same problems that are associated with “immm….” word that cannot be said?
But people who believe in HBD do want to relate it to race. That's why they're attracted to HBD in the first place.Replies: @Intelligent Dasein, @iffen
HBD is ridiculous. Is that candid enough for everyone?
If you want to talk about race, then by God just talk about race. Don’t dress it up in a bunch of biological poppycock that makes you sound like a spergy, drawer-sniffing fetishist. Everyone already knows that people come in different races; they don’t dispute the fact, but they rightfully regard all HBD-talk as a wimpy attempt to smuggle in some kind of supremicism by people who lack the balls to actually act superior. All partisan appeals to data always come off like this. It’s like having your mom call in sick to work for you.
If history is any guide, the first replies to my comment will take the form of brief, tongue-clucking rejoineders asking how it is possible to talk about race without mentioning biology, which just goes to show that the whole subject hasn’t been understood in the least. Race is not “biological.” It is either an integral property of one’s existence or it is a mere word; there is no middle path. A race-realist must be committed to the former idea, but HBDers do not want to face its metaphysical implications (or indeed any other metaphysical implications), so they bring in biology as a sort of stalking horse, forcing it to do the work that they do not want to do; work which, moreover, it is entirely unsuited for.
Sure thing, "comrade".
http://www.quotationof.com/images/trofim-lysenkos-quotes-2.jpg
https://www.azquotes.com/picture-quotes/quote-darwinism-as-presented-by-darwin-contradicted-idealistic-philosophy-and-this-contradiction-trofim-lysenko-77-49-42.jpg
http://image.slideserve.com/1223441/trofim-lysenko-scientific-views-l.jpgReplies: @SFG
They're also fond of that weasel word race-realism.Replies: @iffen
If you want to talk about race, then by God just talk about race. Don't dress it up in a bunch of biological poppycock that makes you sound like a spergy, drawer-sniffing fetishist. Everyone already knows that people come in different races; they don't dispute the fact, but they rightfully regard all HBD-talk as a wimpy attempt to smuggle in some kind of supremicism by people who lack the balls to actually act superior. All partisan appeals to data always come off like this. It's like having your mom call in sick to work for you.
If history is any guide, the first replies to my comment will take the form of brief, tongue-clucking rejoineders asking how it is possible to talk about race without mentioning biology, which just goes to show that the whole subject hasn't been understood in the least. Race is not "biological." It is either an integral property of one's existence or it is a mere word; there is no middle path. A race-realist must be committed to the former idea, but HBDers do not want to face its metaphysical implications (or indeed any other metaphysical implications), so they bring in biology as a sort of stalking horse, forcing it to do the work that they do not want to do; work which, moreover, it is entirely unsuited for.Replies: @anon, @dfordoom
Race is not “biological.”
Sure thing, “comrade”.
Hopefully it’s not Meghan Markle
But people who believe in HBD do want to relate it to race. That's why they're attracted to HBD in the first place.Replies: @Intelligent Dasein, @iffen
But people who believe in HBD do want to relate it to race. That’s why they’re attracted to HBD in the first place.
This is only true for some people, and I’ve told you that more than once, so stop saying it.
Sure thing, "comrade".
http://www.quotationof.com/images/trofim-lysenkos-quotes-2.jpg
https://www.azquotes.com/picture-quotes/quote-darwinism-as-presented-by-darwin-contradicted-idealistic-philosophy-and-this-contradiction-trofim-lysenko-77-49-42.jpg
http://image.slideserve.com/1223441/trofim-lysenko-scientific-views-l.jpgReplies: @SFG
Quite a few Russians starved to death thanks to Lysenko, too.
What a moron.
“I’d rather that we designed our society where they are channeled to productive and beneficial ends for all, rather than paint them as some nefarious cabal of boogeymen to be burned.”
I agree.
But it’s the 0.01% who have been “designing” the whole world for their purposes for the last 40-50 years.
If you want to talk about race, then by God just talk about race. Don't dress it up in a bunch of biological poppycock that makes you sound like a spergy, drawer-sniffing fetishist. Everyone already knows that people come in different races; they don't dispute the fact, but they rightfully regard all HBD-talk as a wimpy attempt to smuggle in some kind of supremicism by people who lack the balls to actually act superior. All partisan appeals to data always come off like this. It's like having your mom call in sick to work for you.
If history is any guide, the first replies to my comment will take the form of brief, tongue-clucking rejoineders asking how it is possible to talk about race without mentioning biology, which just goes to show that the whole subject hasn't been understood in the least. Race is not "biological." It is either an integral property of one's existence or it is a mere word; there is no middle path. A race-realist must be committed to the former idea, but HBDers do not want to face its metaphysical implications (or indeed any other metaphysical implications), so they bring in biology as a sort of stalking horse, forcing it to do the work that they do not want to do; work which, moreover, it is entirely unsuited for.Replies: @anon, @dfordoom
I do agree that HBD seems like an attempt to sneak racism in by the back door. And a way to be racist whilst maintaining plausible deniability.
They’re also fond of that weasel word race-realism.
even if Jews have an average IQ of 110 this would not be high enough to account for the under-representation of whites among these positions
There are about 7 million Jews in America and 215 million whites.
11 million Whites have IQs above 125 and if we calculate that Jews have an average IQ of 110 then 950,000 Jews would have an IQ over 125. There would still be 12 times as many whites with IQs above 125 than Jews.
1. For some of the high cognitive professions IQ of 125 is too low. As the IQ threshold increases, the groups that are shifted toward the right become highly over-represented. For example, at the very high end of the SAT scores, Asians account for the majority of the high scorers (or close to the majority depending on the cutoff) despite being only 5% of the population.
2. You assume that both Jews and non-Jewish whites have identically shaped bell curves. That may not be the case. Jewish bell curve could be flatter or shaped fatter toward the right.
3. Average IQ of 110 (or whatever number you pick) is a composite of verbal, quantitative, and visuospatial. Jewish IQ is highly loaded toward the verbal, so the gap in this particular component of IQ between Jews vs. non-Jews is likely much greater than indicated by average composite differences.
4. There are also non-IQ factors - broadly what I called the network effect. Jewish population is highly concentrated in urban areas where cognitively-demanding professions and academia are concentrated. They can take advantage of these opportunities more easily and then the effects of this compounds over generations as the network/nepotism effect kicks in.
Now just a minute.
“I do agree that HBD seems like an attempt to sneak racism in by the back door. And a way to be racist whilst maintaining plausible deniability.”
You mean blacks are not better dancers because make claims that are made of their genes. That can’t be true for singing as well. The biological determinants for health related issues are tangible and research into human genetics is valuable , perhaps vital. But the application to cognition is in my view so associated with so many nongenetic variables, that it is simply not definitive enough to
To imagine that science could ever conclusively prove that a single factor such as genetics is the crucial factor that determines intelligence or behaviour is just one of those fantasies to which right-wingers are so very prone.
And that's even assuming that we have a complete definition of and understanding of intelligence that are both universally accepted. And it's assuming that we have a way of measuring intelligence that we can absolutely guarantee is free of all cultural contamination.
The fact that we still have arguments over whether some populations have a mysterious factor called "creativity" that somehow explains the achievements of the West is a good illustration of just how muddled our understanding of intelligence is.
HBD is like climate science. In both cases we're dealing with fantastically complicated processes that are certainly affected by multiple factors. In both cases we have people who want to insist that the science is settled because they want us to accept an explanation that they personally find to be emotionally satisfying and politically advantageous. That's not rational thinking. It's wishful thinking.Replies: @iffen, @Twinkie, @Mr. Rational, @Audacious Epigone
They're also fond of that weasel word race-realism.Replies: @iffen
Audacious Epigone/HBD & GSS
Do you think of yourself as inside the bubble trying to break out, or outside the bubble trying to break in?
When Steve Sailer's HBD list was in its heyday in the late 1990s, it was a harmless term (it still is, properly understood)--there were progressives on that list that had no problem with it. The Great Awokening has tried to make it a hate incantation. We are becoming an increasingly superstitious species.Replies: @dfordoom
I agree it would mean the destruction of our legal system as we experience it today, but obviously there are plenty of examples of judges issuing opinions saying the law should be applied the way they want it to rather than what was clearly intended.
Trump is providing something of a firewall with the number of judges he has appointed, but it seems there are a lot of people on the left that would support court-packing to ensure the correct decisions are issued. Hopefully it doesn’t come to pass, but if progressives have control of the presidency and Congress for an extended period of time, they will contort our laws and courts to ensure that discrimination in the name of social justice cannot be challenged.
This has been said already but I want to reiterate.
“What’s done is done: even if immigration is fully halted tomorrow, demographics are what they are, with tens of millions of new citizens. ”
Not on your life.
A third of modern-day Poland was German, a hundred fifty years ago. Kosovo was Serbian. The Anatolian littoral was populated nearly entirely by Greeks. What is now South Africa was equally divided between a black Zulu kingdom and white republics. Another half-century earlier, the Great Plains from the Texas panhandle to Wyoming were the unquestioned domain of the Comanches, as had been the case for the preceding three centuries. Three hundred years ago, Nova Scotia was French and Louisiana far less so. Six centuries back, North America was entirely inhabited by a very different people than one finds now.
It is entirely possible to change demographics. You just need to be willing to do it.
You need to value the existence of your people more than you are bothered by harm to those who are not yours.
It’s not a very high bar to clear, and the fact that it hasn’t been passed yet is testament to how tremendously easy life still is even in the days of fracturing empire.
The first thing you'd have to do is to convince a large chunk of the population (including at least some of the people with actual power and influence) that it would be a good idea. Personally I don't think you have a snowball's chance in Hell of doing that.
Your ideas just don't have any real support out there in the real world. The average sane person sees ethnic cleansing as the sort of thing that is likely to lead to a bloodbath and/or civil war. That's why 99% of the population is not going to support you.Replies: @Mr. Rational
“The white racial politics that our betters on the left (and some on the right) think animates American politics and culture doesn’t really exist but would be birthed into existence by the politics and policies an increasing share of the Democratic party is advocating for. I don’t think they get this at all . . .”
Every time I would like to distance myself from the color commentary, I read something such as the above. It’s hard to believe that anyone with even a cursory view of history in the US can dismiss the reality that the country has a deep history of practice regarding skin color.
What gives the left force is the pretense that color politics was and is a figment of others imagination.
Yep.
http://www.startribune.com/minneapolis-police-to-no-longer-ticket-for-equipment-violations-under-new-policy/567406922/
Every time I would like to distance myself from the color commentary, I read something such as the above. It's hard to believe that anyone with even a cursory view of history in the US can dismiss the reality that the country has a deep history of practice regarding skin color.
What gives the left force is the pretense that color politics was and is a figment of others imagination.Replies: @anon
It’s hard to believe that anyone with even a cursory view of history in the US can dismiss the reality that the country has a deep history of practice regarding skin color.
Yep.
http://www.startribune.com/minneapolis-police-to-no-longer-ticket-for-equipment-violations-under-new-policy/567406922/
“Yep.”
Uhhh No. That article hardly provides an overview of history but rather a snippet of a current discussion.
More like this as history
https://www.uscurrency.gov/history
note how it covers a periods of time. That’s just one example of color history. Not a historical moment.
Here’s another . . .
https://www.npr.org/sections/codeswitch/2014/03/30/295931070/the-journey-from-colored-to-minorities-to-people-of-color
Now had you placed the matter in the context of timeline reference maybe. But no that isn’t an example that really qualifies. interesting article, especially the reference of disparity in ticketing regarding traffic stops. I wonder if investigation would yield a record in which one part of town penalized the other part of town to finance city services as was uncovered in Ferguson.
But the history of greenbacks was interesting.
"I do agree that HBD seems like an attempt to sneak racism in by the back door. And a way to be racist whilst maintaining plausible deniability."
You mean blacks are not better dancers because make claims that are made of their genes. That can't be true for singing as well. The biological determinants for health related issues are tangible and research into human genetics is valuable , perhaps vital. But the application to cognition is in my view so associated with so many nongenetic variables, that it is simply not definitive enough toReplies: @dfordoom
That’s the problem. Human cognition and human behaviour are almost certainly massively overdetermined. There are countless factors that could and almost certainly do have an effect. Genetics. Numerous factors that could affect a child before birth – the mother’s nutrition, chemicals, etc. Upbringing. Education. Peer group pressure can affect learning. Cultural factors. The list goes on.
To imagine that science could ever conclusively prove that a single factor such as genetics is the crucial factor that determines intelligence or behaviour is just one of those fantasies to which right-wingers are so very prone.
And that’s even assuming that we have a complete definition of and understanding of intelligence that are both universally accepted. And it’s assuming that we have a way of measuring intelligence that we can absolutely guarantee is free of all cultural contamination.
The fact that we still have arguments over whether some populations have a mysterious factor called “creativity” that somehow explains the achievements of the West is a good illustration of just how muddled our understanding of intelligence is.
HBD is like climate science. In both cases we’re dealing with fantastically complicated processes that are certainly affected by multiple factors. In both cases we have people who want to insist that the science is settled because they want us to accept an explanation that they personally find to be emotionally satisfying and politically advantageous. That’s not rational thinking. It’s wishful thinking.
Yes, they are both based upon scientific facts.Replies: @dfordoom, @Audacious Epigone
Denying the high degree of role that heredity plays in determining the intelligence (or height, personality, etc.) of offspring is contrary to biology as we know it is truly science-denial.
Aside from the lunatics (yes, on Unz) who ascribe 100% to heredity, the battle in the mainstream is between blank-slaters, aka environmentarians (100% environment) and hereditarians (mix of heredity and environment). Steve Sailer falls on the latter and often writes about the intuitive 50-50 mix being validated by research in many cases.Replies: @dfordoom
To imagine that science could ever conclusively prove that a single factor such as genetics is the crucial factor that determines intelligence or behaviour is just one of those fantasies to which right-wingers are so very prone.
And that's even assuming that we have a complete definition of and understanding of intelligence that are both universally accepted. And it's assuming that we have a way of measuring intelligence that we can absolutely guarantee is free of all cultural contamination.
The fact that we still have arguments over whether some populations have a mysterious factor called "creativity" that somehow explains the achievements of the West is a good illustration of just how muddled our understanding of intelligence is.
HBD is like climate science. In both cases we're dealing with fantastically complicated processes that are certainly affected by multiple factors. In both cases we have people who want to insist that the science is settled because they want us to accept an explanation that they personally find to be emotionally satisfying and politically advantageous. That's not rational thinking. It's wishful thinking.Replies: @iffen, @Twinkie, @Mr. Rational, @Audacious Epigone
HBD is like climate science.
Yes, they are both based upon scientific facts.
You can tell that AGW and HBD are irrational belief systems because their followers believe with a truly religious and unshakeable zeal. They believe because they must believe. If their faith wavered their worlds would collapse. They're cults.Replies: @anon, @neutral
And viewing their nepotism (and much of it very obviously is nepotism) and control of various institutions as negative and intentional (like in the case of hollywood; anti-white messaging isn't an accident of the most efficient money-maker, it's the expression of ethnic animus), isn't the same as viewing them as incorrigable vermin. You let foreigners exert great influence over you with minimal mechanisms to punish them for screwing you, and amazingly they get used to screwing you and take it as a given. This is entirely predictable, and is practically a restatement of the premise of the original post. The intractable tendency to treat other peoples with less care than their own is part of why there are seperate countries in the first place.
Also speaking of the original post, redpill me on asian control of gambling and why they rigged Saturday night's title fight to steal my 40 dollars.Replies: @Rosie
Ill-intent or lack thereof is totally beside the point. Is their behavior harmful or not? That is the only question.
It’s the same with blacks. Although there will always be gaps between blacks and whites, only a few decades ago, the black rate of illegitimate births was lower than that of whites today. Even setting aside the moral considerations, it’s useless and counterproductive to condemn blacks as a whole. It’s better to fashion our society as best as we can to encourage and guide blacks to stay out of trouble, work productively, marry, and lead good family lives. That benefits all of us, non-blacks included.
As I wrote before, I have criticized Jews on Unz. Nonetheless, I see no utility, let alone virtue, in condemning them wholesale. I’d rather we encouraged more and more of them to adopt the political outlook of, say, Stephen Miller and contribute their considerable talents to our shared cause of making America great again.Replies: @Ash Williams, @Rosie, @dfordoom
Yes, they are both based upon scientific facts.Replies: @dfordoom, @Audacious Epigone
They are both based on tendentious and emotional interpretations of data. Some of the data is interesting, some is meaningless. But it’s all in the interpretation.
You can tell that AGW and HBD are irrational belief systems because their followers believe with a truly religious and unshakeable zeal. They believe because they must believe. If their faith wavered their worlds would collapse. They’re cults.
Replies: @dfordoom
You can tell that AGW and HBD are irrational belief systems because their followers believe with a truly religious and unshakeable zeal. They believe because they must believe. If their faith wavered their worlds would collapse. They're cults.Replies: @anon, @neutral
Ah, so they are just like leftists / socialists? Thanks! Most clarifying!
People believe what they want to believe. If a belief is consistent with their prejudices and their political views and it makes them feel good they will believe it. This applies across the political spectrum, and it applies particularly to those who already hold extreme political views.
It also applies to both men and women.
There's one other thing that everybody has in common - we all think that our own beliefs are rational even when they aren't (or especially when they aren't) and we all think that the beliefs of our political enemies are irrational.
That is not the only question. Whites are more likely to commit violent crimes, use drugs, have children out of wedlock, and utilize welfare than Asians are in this country. Does that mean whites as a whole should be condemned for their higher rates of anti-social behaviors? Of corse not. You criticize the individuals for the transgressive behaviors and, better yet, try to structure the society in ways to discourage vice and encourage industry, thrift, and virtue among whites, especially the downscale ones who exhibit these negative behaviors.
It’s the same with blacks. Although there will always be gaps between blacks and whites, only a few decades ago, the black rate of illegitimate births was lower than that of whites today. Even setting aside the moral considerations, it’s useless and counterproductive to condemn blacks as a whole. It’s better to fashion our society as best as we can to encourage and guide blacks to stay out of trouble, work productively, marry, and lead good family lives. That benefits all of us, non-blacks included.
As I wrote before, I have criticized Jews on Unz. Nonetheless, I see no utility, let alone virtue, in condemning them wholesale. I’d rather we encouraged more and more of them to adopt the political outlook of, say, Stephen Miller and contribute their considerable talents to our shared cause of making America great again.
There are about 7 million Jews in America and 215 million whites.
11 million Whites have IQs above 125 and if we calculate that Jews have an average IQ of 110 then 950,000 Jews would have an IQ over 125. There would still be 12 times as many whites with IQs above 125 than Jews.Replies: @Twinkie
Your numbers assume lots of things that may not be:
1. For some of the high cognitive professions IQ of 125 is too low. As the IQ threshold increases, the groups that are shifted toward the right become highly over-represented. For example, at the very high end of the SAT scores, Asians account for the majority of the high scorers (or close to the majority depending on the cutoff) despite being only 5% of the population.
2. You assume that both Jews and non-Jewish whites have identically shaped bell curves. That may not be the case. Jewish bell curve could be flatter or shaped fatter toward the right.
3. Average IQ of 110 (or whatever number you pick) is a composite of verbal, quantitative, and visuospatial. Jewish IQ is highly loaded toward the verbal, so the gap in this particular component of IQ between Jews vs. non-Jews is likely much greater than indicated by average composite differences.
4. There are also non-IQ factors – broadly what I called the network effect. Jewish population is highly concentrated in urban areas where cognitively-demanding professions and academia are concentrated. They can take advantage of these opportunities more easily and then the effects of this compounds over generations as the network/nepotism effect kicks in.
To imagine that science could ever conclusively prove that a single factor such as genetics is the crucial factor that determines intelligence or behaviour is just one of those fantasies to which right-wingers are so very prone.
And that's even assuming that we have a complete definition of and understanding of intelligence that are both universally accepted. And it's assuming that we have a way of measuring intelligence that we can absolutely guarantee is free of all cultural contamination.
The fact that we still have arguments over whether some populations have a mysterious factor called "creativity" that somehow explains the achievements of the West is a good illustration of just how muddled our understanding of intelligence is.
HBD is like climate science. In both cases we're dealing with fantastically complicated processes that are certainly affected by multiple factors. In both cases we have people who want to insist that the science is settled because they want us to accept an explanation that they personally find to be emotionally satisfying and politically advantageous. That's not rational thinking. It's wishful thinking.Replies: @iffen, @Twinkie, @Mr. Rational, @Audacious Epigone
Yes, there is a long list, but those variables have different coefficients. The current science is that heredity has the highest coefficient on intelligence (setting aside obviously deleterious externalities such as poor nutrition, dirty water, lead contamination, high disease load, and so forth).
Denying the high degree of role that heredity plays in determining the intelligence (or height, personality, etc.) of offspring is contrary to biology as we know it is truly science-denial.
Aside from the lunatics (yes, on Unz) who ascribe 100% to heredity, the battle in the mainstream is between blank-slaters, aka environmentarians (100% environment) and hereditarians (mix of heredity and environment). Steve Sailer falls on the latter and often writes about the intuitive 50-50 mix being validated by research in many cases.
A concept can be both a scientific hypothesis and a political ideology. Anthropogenic climate change and HBD are clearly both scientific hypotheses and political ideologies.
As a political ideology HBD is going to be a gigantic train wreck.
Aside from which, while different races obviously exist race is a fuzzy concept. How many races are there? Where are the dividing lines? There are various populations that don't fit all that neatly into races. There are mixed-race people who complicate things. And are the major variations actually between races or ethnicities. HBDers mention Jewish intelligence but Jews aren't a race. They also talk about Asian intelligence when they actually mean East Asian intelligence, but are East Asians a race? And there are Hispanics, many of whom are clearly racially white Caucasian Europeans.
As I think I said earlier, HBD is fine as a general concept long as you don't try to relate it race. When you do try to relate it to race you run into problems.Replies: @iffen, @Mr. Rational
It’s the same with blacks. Although there will always be gaps between blacks and whites, only a few decades ago, the black rate of illegitimate births was lower than that of whites today. Even setting aside the moral considerations, it’s useless and counterproductive to condemn blacks as a whole. It’s better to fashion our society as best as we can to encourage and guide blacks to stay out of trouble, work productively, marry, and lead good family lives. That benefits all of us, non-blacks included.
As I wrote before, I have criticized Jews on Unz. Nonetheless, I see no utility, let alone virtue, in condemning them wholesale. I’d rather we encouraged more and more of them to adopt the political outlook of, say, Stephen Miller and contribute their considerable talents to our shared cause of making America great again.Replies: @Ash Williams, @Rosie, @dfordoom
It wasn’t always this way.
It’s the same with blacks. Although there will always be gaps between blacks and whites, only a few decades ago, the black rate of illegitimate births was lower than that of whites today. Even setting aside the moral considerations, it’s useless and counterproductive to condemn blacks as a whole. It’s better to fashion our society as best as we can to encourage and guide blacks to stay out of trouble, work productively, marry, and lead good family lives. That benefits all of us, non-blacks included.
As I wrote before, I have criticized Jews on Unz. Nonetheless, I see no utility, let alone virtue, in condemning them wholesale. I’d rather we encouraged more and more of them to adopt the political outlook of, say, Stephen Miller and contribute their considerable talents to our shared cause of making America great again.Replies: @Ash Williams, @Rosie, @dfordoom
I don’t condemn them wholesale. Indeed, I would rather avoid the JQ altogether and just talk about “globalists” or what have you. (Not all globalists are Jews, after all.) Of course, then we’re accused of “dog-whistling.”
“Human cognition and human behaviour are almost certainly massively overdetermined.”
I lean in that direction. Clearly biological capacity plays a role. But they overstate the case, in my view. And what’s worse they attempt to make others look incapable of comprehending the arguments or the science by number crunching and use of technical terms.
Denying the high degree of role that heredity plays in determining the intelligence (or height, personality, etc.) of offspring is contrary to biology as we know it is truly science-denial.
Aside from the lunatics (yes, on Unz) who ascribe 100% to heredity, the battle in the mainstream is between blank-slaters, aka environmentarians (100% environment) and hereditarians (mix of heredity and environment). Steve Sailer falls on the latter and often writes about the intuitive 50-50 mix being validated by research in many cases.Replies: @dfordoom
That’s assuming that we have a complete understanding of the rôles of things like culture and family environment. If we don’t then there’s no way of assigning an accurate coefficient to such a variable.
Those who ascribe to HBD as a political ideology pay lip service to the idea that other factors may be involved but it’s clear that they believe that intelligence is 100% (or close to 100%) heredity.
A concept can be both a scientific hypothesis and a political ideology. Anthropogenic climate change and HBD are clearly both scientific hypotheses and political ideologies.
As a political ideology HBD is going to be a gigantic train wreck.
Aside from which, while different races obviously exist race is a fuzzy concept. How many races are there? Where are the dividing lines? There are various populations that don’t fit all that neatly into races. There are mixed-race people who complicate things. And are the major variations actually between races or ethnicities. HBDers mention Jewish intelligence but Jews aren’t a race. They also talk about Asian intelligence when they actually mean East Asian intelligence, but are East Asians a race? And there are Hispanics, many of whom are clearly racially white Caucasian Europeans.
As I think I said earlier, HBD is fine as a general concept long as you don’t try to relate it race. When you do try to relate it to race you run into problems.
1. It will end the fruitless quest for whatever variety of "racism" causes black problems, rather than properly attributing them to factors like low IQ, high time preference, high impulsiveness and tendency toward violence.
2. It will end the rationale for integration, affirmative action and all "disparate impact" doctrines. We will recognize that the policies are useless because they are based on false assumptions, and hopefully discontinue them. Most of the dead weight of HR departments and such will disappear.
3. Racial differences in the frequency of e.g. traffic stops and criminal prosecutions will be recognized as consequences of the factors in #1, not some nefarious "racist" plot.
4. The tendency of people to separate into groups of those like themselves will be recognized as natural and normal, not a pathology.
Of course, there's always this:
5. American blacks will lose most of the higher-paying jobs that they currently hold because of affirmative action and protected status. Most of today's black middle class will disappear and go back to the 'hood, which is the only place they will be able to afford to live.
6. There will be a lot more blacks behind bars.
But the flip side of that is,
7. There will be a lot less crime, including against blacks.
And best of all,
8. The guilt bludgeon that the left uses against Whites to grab unmerited money and power goes away. I suspect that's what bothers you the most.Replies: @dfordoom
It’s the same with blacks. Although there will always be gaps between blacks and whites, only a few decades ago, the black rate of illegitimate births was lower than that of whites today. Even setting aside the moral considerations, it’s useless and counterproductive to condemn blacks as a whole. It’s better to fashion our society as best as we can to encourage and guide blacks to stay out of trouble, work productively, marry, and lead good family lives. That benefits all of us, non-blacks included.
As I wrote before, I have criticized Jews on Unz. Nonetheless, I see no utility, let alone virtue, in condemning them wholesale. I’d rather we encouraged more and more of them to adopt the political outlook of, say, Stephen Miller and contribute their considerable talents to our shared cause of making America great again.Replies: @Ash Williams, @Rosie, @dfordoom
You’re making sensible constructive suggestions. That won’t win you any friends around these parts!
A concept can be both a scientific hypothesis and a political ideology. Anthropogenic climate change and HBD are clearly both scientific hypotheses and political ideologies.
As a political ideology HBD is going to be a gigantic train wreck.
Aside from which, while different races obviously exist race is a fuzzy concept. How many races are there? Where are the dividing lines? There are various populations that don't fit all that neatly into races. There are mixed-race people who complicate things. And are the major variations actually between races or ethnicities. HBDers mention Jewish intelligence but Jews aren't a race. They also talk about Asian intelligence when they actually mean East Asian intelligence, but are East Asians a race? And there are Hispanics, many of whom are clearly racially white Caucasian Europeans.
As I think I said earlier, HBD is fine as a general concept long as you don't try to relate it race. When you do try to relate it to race you run into problems.Replies: @iffen, @Mr. Rational
Aside from which, while different races obviously exist race is a fuzzy concept. How many races are there?
This is one of those areas, like many, where one has to rely upon the experts in the field.
Like, for example, if you are confused as to whether knowledge of the socially constructed identity of a crime victim or crime perpetrator is germane, you need to rely on the experts employed by a paper like The NYT to tell you. As is well known, the socially constructed identity of the Central Park Five is definitive of the crime while the identities of the victims and perpetrators in the other hundreds of rapes and robberies commited that month are of no consequence.
“Don’t dress it up in a bunch of biological poppycock that makes you sound like a spergy, drawer-sniffing fetishist. Everyone already knows that people come in different races; they don’t dispute the fact, but they rightfully regard all HBD-talk as a wimpy attempt to smuggle in some kind of supremicism by people who lack the balls to actually act superior.”
Hmmmm . . . I am not sure that is the case. I don’t buy the contend that someone from Norway is a different race. The human species is well defined and clear from other species (races). But within that sphere of species (humans), there is an array of breeds.
“The more a Jew tends to believe in those ‘ancient mythologies’, the less said Jew tends to have all these negative traits you ascribe to him, though. ”
For example?
It’s okay to talk frankly about Jews calling anti-Semite to get themselves off the hook for bad behavior when they get caught. People have seen this happen in their own lives with other groups and maybe even Jews. That’s about as far as people are ready to go right now. Maybe ever. The topic of Jews wanting more immigration because they are paranoid about another holocaust is potentially okay after you feel out the target. The angle is that they are insane and we would absolutely never do that. Under no circumstances should you say shit that makes people think you want to do it.
People, normies, are on the edge of agreeing with us about capitalism, modernity, technology, media, just about everything else. There’s no reason to make a big deal about the one little
thing they’ve been conditioned the hardest to reject immediately.Replies: @Rosie, @dfordoom, @Mike Tre
So what we really need are more committees, to have honest discussions, that raise awareness.
Comments are predictably short on honesty though, or solutions for that matter, about saving this once great former nation.
A state (this is no longer a nation) comprised of countless minority groups all working to promote their own interests is a failed state. Chaotic, unfamiliar, and lacking trust. It’s not going to end well and that is not some LARP fantasy. I am not looking forward to it. Prattle on.
Replies: @dfordoom
They’re proof that leftists/socialists don’t have a monopoly on irrationality. Most of the beliefs held by most people, regardless of their political orientation, are irrational. People are irrational creatures. The Right is every bit as prone to irrational emotive thinking (and wishful thinking and magical thinking) as the Left.
People believe what they want to believe. If a belief is consistent with their prejudices and their political views and it makes them feel good they will believe it. This applies across the political spectrum, and it applies particularly to those who already hold extreme political views.
It also applies to both men and women.
There’s one other thing that everybody has in common – we all think that our own beliefs are rational even when they aren’t (or especially when they aren’t) and we all think that the beliefs of our political enemies are irrational.
You can tell that AGW and HBD are irrational belief systems because their followers believe with a truly religious and unshakeable zeal. They believe because they must believe. If their faith wavered their worlds would collapse. They're cults.Replies: @anon, @neutral
There is zero evidence that blacks are equal to whites, absolutely zero. There is overwhelming evidence in so many different forms to show that blacks are an inferior race, absolutely overwhelming. Yet here you are spouting your ridiculous religious beliefs of equality and saying you have science behind you – idiotic.
dfordoom is an Aussie I believe – basically the mom’s basement of Western Civ- and has never had any real interaction with the American negro.
The overwhelming majority of people who defend the behavior of American negroes, from the left or the right, are people who have never had to endure living/working/recreating/schooling among them for any significant length of time. These are the people who believe that “peaceful separation” will somehow magically cure the American negro of his inability to function in Western Civ.
These are the people who also believe that The Constitution can apply practically to them (blacks). It can’t. Negroes as a group lack the requirements to function in a high trust, classically liberal, constitutional republic. Further, it is cruel to expect them to, like expecting a 2 year old to pilot a helicopter. It’s not hate, or bigotry, or raaccccccism, or what have you that draws that conclusion. It is simply observing reality, something humans in general and Westerners in particular were very good at until about 100 years ago.
Australia has already opened the door to Sudanese for whatever perplexing reason, the flood of blacks will overwhelm their Aussie magic dirt rapidly. I have zero sympathy when this happens, people who operate at such pathological levels of stupidity deserve every robbery, rape, murder and civilizational destruction committed by their pet blacks.
He appears to think that a class based socialist party would be a better political strategy than a race based white socialist party. Some of the white socialists on here want an intra-white socialism where they don’t have to share the welfare state pie with nonwhites and there are just wealth transfers from richer whites to poorer whites. They would be against a class based socialist party made up of both poor whites and nonwhites for that reason.
Most libertarians, of which I am one, share a belief with traditional socialists in class analysis and political coalitions based on class. Whereas socialists see things in terms of rich versus poor, though, libertarians see things in terms of people who use the government to enrich themselves versus people who gain wealth through voluntary transactions in a free market economy. Sometimes libertarians and socialists will end up on the same side against the wealthy if increasing numbers of the wealthy have gained their wealth through using political connections to push through policies that benefit them. The current increasing income inequality in the U.S. may be a case of that happening.
A class based socialist party might have some chance of success. A race based white socialist party, or a race based white party of any complexion, would have zero chance of success. A race based white party is political suicide.
A race based white party would enjoy zero elite support and minimal mass support. And that minimal mass support is inexorably declining. Such a party would in any case be ruthlessly crushed.
That's reality. Some people don't like reality. They prefer daydreams in which the races they hate will be made to magically disappear.Yup.
Which means you have to be clear about the identity of your principal enemy. In the current situation it seems like there's a cabal of the very rich and the very powerful (two groups which overlap but are not necessarily identical) which has made itself the enemy of just about everyone else. This cabal includes both individuals and corporations. They're supported by a much larger group of clients, dependents, hangers-on and wannabe elites. Defeating them will require a broad-based coalition.
I honestly don't see any prospect whatsoever of a broad-based coalition based on membership of the White Race. There are too many whites who are on the side of the elites. A broad-based coalition based on class has a better chance.
Class interests are more immediate and more real to most people even if they're not aware that they're dealing with class interests. Housing costs, health care, job prospects for their kids, the near-impossibility of achieving economic security under the present system, increasing energy costs - these are things that matter to real people in the here and now. And most people already have a pretty fair idea that the elites are screwing them.
Laugh . . . I am certainly going to applaud, defend, encourage . . .
https://www.inquisitr.com/2361387/why-black-churches-are-thriving-while-americas-christianity-is-declining/
https://www.marketwatch.com/story/college-graduation-rates-for-african-americans-are-at-an-all-time-high-so-why-arent-their-finances-2018-03-01
“As an educator, coach, private facilitator . . . my experience would be that this,
“The overwhelming majority of people who defend the behavior of American negroes, from the left or the right, are people who have never had to endure living/working/recreating/schooling among them for any significant length of time. ”
is nonsense.
https://www.blackengineer.com/
https://www.nabse.org/
And in completely contradicting your comment there are black lawyers, police officers, mayors
https://blackdemographics.com/culture/black-politics/black-mayors/
some operated more successful admin than others.
https://www.ourmayors.org/Home
https://ballotpedia.org/List_of_current_mayors_of_the_top_100_cities_in_the_United_States
one: https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/data/is-seattle-dying-not-if-you-look-crime-rates-from-the-80s-and-90s/
————————–
It’s hard for me to support wholesale of such a small population — however, in the case of illegal immigration, the numbers are 100% law breakers in the millions and the same undermining the economic viability of US citizens.
Most libertarians, of which I am one, share a belief with traditional socialists in class analysis and political coalitions based on class. Whereas socialists see things in terms of rich versus poor, though, libertarians see things in terms of people who use the government to enrich themselves versus people who gain wealth through voluntary transactions in a free market economy. Sometimes libertarians and socialists will end up on the same side against the wealthy if increasing numbers of the wealthy have gained their wealth through using political connections to push through policies that benefit them. The current increasing income inequality in the U.S. may be a case of that happening.Replies: @dfordoom, @dfordoom
Yup.
A class based socialist party might have some chance of success. A race based white socialist party, or a race based white party of any complexion, would have zero chance of success. A race based white party is political suicide.
A race based white party would enjoy zero elite support and minimal mass support. And that minimal mass support is inexorably declining. Such a party would in any case be ruthlessly crushed.
That’s reality. Some people don’t like reality. They prefer daydreams in which the races they hate will be made to magically disappear.
Yup.
Most libertarians, of which I am one, share a belief with traditional socialists in class analysis and political coalitions based on class. Whereas socialists see things in terms of rich versus poor, though, libertarians see things in terms of people who use the government to enrich themselves versus people who gain wealth through voluntary transactions in a free market economy. Sometimes libertarians and socialists will end up on the same side against the wealthy if increasing numbers of the wealthy have gained their wealth through using political connections to push through policies that benefit them. The current increasing income inequality in the U.S. may be a case of that happening.Replies: @dfordoom, @dfordoom
The thing to remember about political coalitions is that sometimes you have to form such coalitions with people you don’t particularly like. It’s the “the enemy of my enemy is my friend” situation.
Which means you have to be clear about the identity of your principal enemy. In the current situation it seems like there’s a cabal of the very rich and the very powerful (two groups which overlap but are not necessarily identical) which has made itself the enemy of just about everyone else. This cabal includes both individuals and corporations. They’re supported by a much larger group of clients, dependents, hangers-on and wannabe elites. Defeating them will require a broad-based coalition.
I honestly don’t see any prospect whatsoever of a broad-based coalition based on membership of the White Race. There are too many whites who are on the side of the elites. A broad-based coalition based on class has a better chance.
Class interests are more immediate and more real to most people even if they’re not aware that they’re dealing with class interests. Housing costs, health care, job prospects for their kids, the near-impossibility of achieving economic security under the present system, increasing energy costs – these are things that matter to real people in the here and now. And most people already have a pretty fair idea that the elites are screwing them.
"What’s done is done: even if immigration is fully halted tomorrow, demographics are what they are, with tens of millions of new citizens. "
Not on your life.
A third of modern-day Poland was German, a hundred fifty years ago. Kosovo was Serbian. The Anatolian littoral was populated nearly entirely by Greeks. What is now South Africa was equally divided between a black Zulu kingdom and white republics. Another half-century earlier, the Great Plains from the Texas panhandle to Wyoming were the unquestioned domain of the Comanches, as had been the case for the preceding three centuries. Three hundred years ago, Nova Scotia was French and Louisiana far less so. Six centuries back, North America was entirely inhabited by a very different people than one finds now.
It is entirely possible to change demographics. You just need to be willing to do it.
You need to value the existence of your people more than you are bothered by harm to those who are not yours.
It's not a very high bar to clear, and the fact that it hasn't been passed yet is testament to how tremendously easy life still is even in the days of fracturing empire.Replies: @eah, @dfordoom
Also more than your fear of being called names.
A certain Härte will be needed to save white countries (hart aber fair, tough but fair, is the name of a German TV/talk show) — I think every identitarian/WN understands this to some extent.
To imagine that science could ever conclusively prove that a single factor such as genetics is the crucial factor that determines intelligence or behaviour is just one of those fantasies to which right-wingers are so very prone.
And that's even assuming that we have a complete definition of and understanding of intelligence that are both universally accepted. And it's assuming that we have a way of measuring intelligence that we can absolutely guarantee is free of all cultural contamination.
The fact that we still have arguments over whether some populations have a mysterious factor called "creativity" that somehow explains the achievements of the West is a good illustration of just how muddled our understanding of intelligence is.
HBD is like climate science. In both cases we're dealing with fantastically complicated processes that are certainly affected by multiple factors. In both cases we have people who want to insist that the science is settled because they want us to accept an explanation that they personally find to be emotionally satisfying and politically advantageous. That's not rational thinking. It's wishful thinking.Replies: @iffen, @Twinkie, @Mr. Rational, @Audacious Epigone
As opposed to insisting that evolution stopped at the neck 200,000 years ago and there cannot be any mental or psychological differences between races, and the only reason for black underperformance and dysfunction is White racism? (talk about PROJECTION…)
Clever. Instead of talking about differences, insist that we have to “universally accept” the definition and understanding, which we allegedly don’t have yet. In other words, there’s nothing TO discuss.
This, in a world where marked differences in behavior of newborns is attributed to “culture” and any other explanation is a cancellation-level taboo.
Given the record of when and where so many world-changing inventions were invented, and who invented them, the fact that anyone is still arguing that there might not be anything called “creativity” or that it might not be evenly distributed across all human populations proves at best a deeply disturbing level of brainwashing.
Which have so many obvious correlations that they’ve been basic knowledge for literally thousands of years. With the advent of the science of statistics we can pin down the relative contributions of various factors to intelligence: shared environment ~20%, unshared environment/idiosyncratic factors 20%, genes 60%. But we have known for thousands of years that smart parents tend to have smart children, dumb parents tend to have dumb children, and races differ in average intelligence.
You are describing the equalists here. If “white racism” is the only explanation allowed for black problems (you’re not supposed to notice that e.g. E. Asians do better than whites), they can parlay that into money, power and social status.
“I had nothing to do with it, stop blaming me” is perfectly rational. More than that, not accepting it if it’s true is downright evil.
I’m looking forward to midnight on the 29th, because
MARCH IS STOP BLAMING WHITE PEOPLE MONTH!
A concept can be both a scientific hypothesis and a political ideology. Anthropogenic climate change and HBD are clearly both scientific hypotheses and political ideologies.
As a political ideology HBD is going to be a gigantic train wreck.
Aside from which, while different races obviously exist race is a fuzzy concept. How many races are there? Where are the dividing lines? There are various populations that don't fit all that neatly into races. There are mixed-race people who complicate things. And are the major variations actually between races or ethnicities. HBDers mention Jewish intelligence but Jews aren't a race. They also talk about Asian intelligence when they actually mean East Asian intelligence, but are East Asians a race? And there are Hispanics, many of whom are clearly racially white Caucasian Europeans.
As I think I said earlier, HBD is fine as a general concept long as you don't try to relate it race. When you do try to relate it to race you run into problems.Replies: @iffen, @Mr. Rational
As a legal and policy principle, HBD will solve many huge problems almost overnight:
1. It will end the fruitless quest for whatever variety of “racism” causes black problems, rather than properly attributing them to factors like low IQ, high time preference, high impulsiveness and tendency toward violence.
2. It will end the rationale for integration, affirmative action and all “disparate impact” doctrines. We will recognize that the policies are useless because they are based on false assumptions, and hopefully discontinue them. Most of the dead weight of HR departments and such will disappear.
3. Racial differences in the frequency of e.g. traffic stops and criminal prosecutions will be recognized as consequences of the factors in #1, not some nefarious “racist” plot.
4. The tendency of people to separate into groups of those like themselves will be recognized as natural and normal, not a pathology.
Of course, there’s always this:
5. American blacks will lose most of the higher-paying jobs that they currently hold because of affirmative action and protected status. Most of today’s black middle class will disappear and go back to the ‘hood, which is the only place they will be able to afford to live.
6. There will be a lot more blacks behind bars.
But the flip side of that is,
7. There will be a lot less crime, including against blacks.
And best of all,
8. The guilt bludgeon that the left uses against Whites to grab unmerited money and power goes away. I suspect that’s what bothers you the most.
The first possibility would be to just let the chips fall as they may. The result would be a rigidly stratified society, very much like medieval society. At the top you'd have the nobility, the cognitive aristocracy, and they would have an even tighter monopoly on wealth, power and influence than our current elites enjoy.
Below them you'd have the middle class, and below them you'd have a massive underclass. That underclass might well be half the population. The underclass would know that there was no hope for them, that the future could only hold misery and poverty. You think that would be a stable situation? It could only be maintained by a police state.
The second possibility is that people accept that equality of opportunity is nonsense. A vast segment of the population simply cannot compete on a level playing field. And it's not their fault. It's an accident of birth that they weren't born into the cognitive nobility. The only solution would be for the government to intervene to ensure reasonably equal outcomes. That would mean a massive expansion of the welfare state.
But those at the bottom of the heap, entirely dependent on the welfare stare, will still know that there is no hope. The best they can expect is that the nobility will keep them alive. They will know that they are regarded merely as useless mouths. They would turn to drugs, alcohol and crime. Again, a situation that would require a police state to maintain order.
Both these possibilities seem to me to be worse than what we have now.Replies: @Mr. Rational, @iffen
“As a legal and policy principle, HBD will solve many huge problems almost overnight:
1. It will end the fruitless quest for whatever variety of “racism” causes black problems, rather than properly attributing them to factors like low IQ, high time preference, high impulsiveness and tendency toward violence.
2. It will end the rationale for integration, affirmative action and all “disparate impact” doctrines. We will recognize that the policies are useless because they are based on false assumptions, and hopefully discontinue them. Most of the dead weight of HR departments and such will disappear.
Laugh.
HBD is speculative science at best. but I will ply ball here with your assail.
a. First if you mandate diversity dynamic as law, if one could, you’d have dismantle the both the philosophy and law — just tear up both. Because they are not predicated on people being equal. They are predicated on all people being treated equally – there’s difference. This suggestion is as obtuse as the rest. They are not different races of humans, there are various adaptations. Now such a system would be based on biology and as the commenter makes clear — the diversity in the US in so vast that whatever law you design would be impractical. Because that law would be unique to the biology across variations. In otherwords, whites as a group would have to gave laws that meet their diverse status. Afterall, the overgeneralized observations that apply to blacks has been applied to: italians, irish, poles, germans, certain scotts, even englanders from various locals in England. In fact, the US is stoked with criminals shipped to the colonies as irretrievably criminal.
In fact historically, your hbd has a lot of work to explain the genetic drift that caused the change if one exists. But that record debunks the argument regarding skin color and crime. for most US history, the percentage of whites were the major criminal.
And none of your pesky rationales — show it by the dna results, and not merely the tangential frequency hop scotch regression models — that work for biology, but are pure speculation when it comes to cognition. good grief, your foundation is done with thew first response. Human beings have not bred as one breeds dogs . . . as much as the suggestion is made – even then dog breeds are not predictable across environments.
b. The false assumptions — of which you fail to reference a single one, suggests that conduct or social behavioral conduct has no population impacts, in other worse even applying the hbd utopia you imagine would have long term effects as policy — which of course undermines your fist suggestion that lays claim to consequence of social policy of implementing hbd as law —-
It will be interesting how you manage. I take it you have evidence 1900 immigration policies had no long term consequences for the families that arrived.
Let’s start there
laugh . . .
If one takes the HBD seriously then they know — it does not stop at skin color. It will be interesting to see the laws advcoated
And let’s avoid the nonsense about defending blacks. this about the veracity of argument not defending aberrant behavior.
I have never won any brownie points from blacks for my positions.
One would think that after the impeachment issues, People who support the current exec would have better meat than the ever trite black bad contentions that have existed since prior to the founding.
“3. Racial differences in the frequency of e.g. traffic stops and criminal prosecutions will be recognized as consequences of the factors in #1, not some nefarious “racist” plot.
4. The tendency of people to separate into groups of those like themselves will be recognized as natural and normal, not a pathology.”
c. of course three makes no sense. As is ever the case frequency correlates as much with behavior as skin color — and as such hardly represents a standard that one can conclude is objective to genetics alone.
I am curious if in fact white dna is so homogeneous and represents a higher standard of morality and order, explain the near back to back two global wars.
Laugh.
d. if so explain why whites artificially engaged in separating them themselves then proceed by way of force commence to invading peoples who wanted nothing to do with them. I will certainly enjoy your explanation of miscegenation laws and rules – clearly such laws and rules violate natural selection, driven by one’s genetic determination.
I take it this is the Miss Ann Coulter school of socialization and politics.
"What’s done is done: even if immigration is fully halted tomorrow, demographics are what they are, with tens of millions of new citizens. "
Not on your life.
A third of modern-day Poland was German, a hundred fifty years ago. Kosovo was Serbian. The Anatolian littoral was populated nearly entirely by Greeks. What is now South Africa was equally divided between a black Zulu kingdom and white republics. Another half-century earlier, the Great Plains from the Texas panhandle to Wyoming were the unquestioned domain of the Comanches, as had been the case for the preceding three centuries. Three hundred years ago, Nova Scotia was French and Louisiana far less so. Six centuries back, North America was entirely inhabited by a very different people than one finds now.
It is entirely possible to change demographics. You just need to be willing to do it.
You need to value the existence of your people more than you are bothered by harm to those who are not yours.
It's not a very high bar to clear, and the fact that it hasn't been passed yet is testament to how tremendously easy life still is even in the days of fracturing empire.Replies: @eah, @dfordoom
The problem for WNs is that there is only a tiny handful of keyboard warriors who actually think ethnic cleansing on a vast scale is a good idea. 99% of the population believe it’s a terrible idea. That 99% includes 100% of the people with actual power and influence.
The first thing you’d have to do is to convince a large chunk of the population (including at least some of the people with actual power and influence) that it would be a good idea. Personally I don’t think you have a snowball’s chance in Hell of doing that.
Your ideas just don’t have any real support out there in the real world. The average sane person sees ethnic cleansing as the sort of thing that is likely to lead to a bloodbath and/or civil war. That’s why 99% of the population is not going to support you.
The first thing you'd have to do is to convince a large chunk of the population (including at least some of the people with actual power and influence) that it would be a good idea. Personally I don't think you have a snowball's chance in Hell of doing that.
Your ideas just don't have any real support out there in the real world. The average sane person sees ethnic cleansing as the sort of thing that is likely to lead to a bloodbath and/or civil war. That's why 99% of the population is not going to support you.Replies: @Mr. Rational
The thing you don’t understand is that it’s very easy to reverse the opinion of the contrary 99%. Ideally you do this by making an example of a criminal. Otherwise you make an example of someone else.
1. It will end the fruitless quest for whatever variety of "racism" causes black problems, rather than properly attributing them to factors like low IQ, high time preference, high impulsiveness and tendency toward violence.
2. It will end the rationale for integration, affirmative action and all "disparate impact" doctrines. We will recognize that the policies are useless because they are based on false assumptions, and hopefully discontinue them. Most of the dead weight of HR departments and such will disappear.
3. Racial differences in the frequency of e.g. traffic stops and criminal prosecutions will be recognized as consequences of the factors in #1, not some nefarious "racist" plot.
4. The tendency of people to separate into groups of those like themselves will be recognized as natural and normal, not a pathology.
Of course, there's always this:
5. American blacks will lose most of the higher-paying jobs that they currently hold because of affirmative action and protected status. Most of today's black middle class will disappear and go back to the 'hood, which is the only place they will be able to afford to live.
6. There will be a lot more blacks behind bars.
But the flip side of that is,
7. There will be a lot less crime, including against blacks.
And best of all,
8. The guilt bludgeon that the left uses against Whites to grab unmerited money and power goes away. I suspect that's what bothers you the most.Replies: @dfordoom
OK, for the sake of argument, let’s assume HBD is true and it gets adopted as a legal and policy principle. This would be likely to lead to one of two results.
The first possibility would be to just let the chips fall as they may. The result would be a rigidly stratified society, very much like medieval society. At the top you’d have the nobility, the cognitive aristocracy, and they would have an even tighter monopoly on wealth, power and influence than our current elites enjoy.
Below them you’d have the middle class, and below them you’d have a massive underclass. That underclass might well be half the population. The underclass would know that there was no hope for them, that the future could only hold misery and poverty. You think that would be a stable situation? It could only be maintained by a police state.
The second possibility is that people accept that equality of opportunity is nonsense. A vast segment of the population simply cannot compete on a level playing field. And it’s not their fault. It’s an accident of birth that they weren’t born into the cognitive nobility. The only solution would be for the government to intervene to ensure reasonably equal outcomes. That would mean a massive expansion of the welfare state.
But those at the bottom of the heap, entirely dependent on the welfare stare, will still know that there is no hope. The best they can expect is that the nobility will keep them alive. They will know that they are regarded merely as useless mouths. They would turn to drugs, alcohol and crime. Again, a situation that would require a police state to maintain order.
Both these possibilities seem to me to be worse than what we have now.
So the executions will continue until everybody agrees with you? Thanks for your valuable input Comrade Stalin.
The first possibility would be to just let the chips fall as they may. The result would be a rigidly stratified society, very much like medieval society. At the top you'd have the nobility, the cognitive aristocracy, and they would have an even tighter monopoly on wealth, power and influence than our current elites enjoy.
Below them you'd have the middle class, and below them you'd have a massive underclass. That underclass might well be half the population. The underclass would know that there was no hope for them, that the future could only hold misery and poverty. You think that would be a stable situation? It could only be maintained by a police state.
The second possibility is that people accept that equality of opportunity is nonsense. A vast segment of the population simply cannot compete on a level playing field. And it's not their fault. It's an accident of birth that they weren't born into the cognitive nobility. The only solution would be for the government to intervene to ensure reasonably equal outcomes. That would mean a massive expansion of the welfare state.
But those at the bottom of the heap, entirely dependent on the welfare stare, will still know that there is no hope. The best they can expect is that the nobility will keep them alive. They will know that they are regarded merely as useless mouths. They would turn to drugs, alcohol and crime. Again, a situation that would require a police state to maintain order.
Both these possibilities seem to me to be worse than what we have now.Replies: @Mr. Rational, @iffen
No, it’ll lead to ONE result, which you have omitted.
That was what we had under meritocracy, which was forcibly abandoned for radical equality (which turned out to be untenable).
The entire point of standardized testing was to identify non-noble children of merit who could enter and contribute to the elites. Forcing entry by racial/ethnic quota is totally opposed to that ethos.
See above.
Do you have any idea how England became what allowed it to spawn America? The upper classes had more children than could remain among the nobles, so they filtered down to the middle class. As the middle classes degenerated, their failures became part of the underclasses, failed to replace themselves and disappeared from the gene pool. All very Darwinian. All very OBVIOUSLY desirable for any society wishing to maintain itself.
You are equating equality of opportunity with equality of outcome. But you are “dfordoom”, whose bullshit I have debunked before. Get lost, you moron.
No, I’m pointing out that if equality of opportunity is nonsense (because those who are unlucky in the genetic lottery clearly do not have equality of opportunity) then there will be pressure to enforce equality of outcomes in order to avoid the threat of instability posed by the losers in the genetic lottery.
And that is all the time I'm going to give your deceitful crap.
The first possibility would be to just let the chips fall as they may. The result would be a rigidly stratified society, very much like medieval society. At the top you'd have the nobility, the cognitive aristocracy, and they would have an even tighter monopoly on wealth, power and influence than our current elites enjoy.
Below them you'd have the middle class, and below them you'd have a massive underclass. That underclass might well be half the population. The underclass would know that there was no hope for them, that the future could only hold misery and poverty. You think that would be a stable situation? It could only be maintained by a police state.
The second possibility is that people accept that equality of opportunity is nonsense. A vast segment of the population simply cannot compete on a level playing field. And it's not their fault. It's an accident of birth that they weren't born into the cognitive nobility. The only solution would be for the government to intervene to ensure reasonably equal outcomes. That would mean a massive expansion of the welfare state.
But those at the bottom of the heap, entirely dependent on the welfare stare, will still know that there is no hope. The best they can expect is that the nobility will keep them alive. They will know that they are regarded merely as useless mouths. They would turn to drugs, alcohol and crime. Again, a situation that would require a police state to maintain order.
Both these possibilities seem to me to be worse than what we have now.Replies: @Mr. Rational, @iffen
The “rational” position is to throw the dead weight overboard. I think that you need to argue for having a bigger boat.
“No, I’m pointing out that if equality of opportunity is nonsense (because those who are unlucky in the genetic lottery clearly do not have equality of opportunity) then there will be pressure to enforce equality of outcomes in order to avoid the threat of instability posed by the losers in the genetic lottery.”
Hence the dangers of granting out nonsense. They don;t have to deal with the criteria that undermines their premise. They just roll over the hard the to address issues, because they are inconvenient.
——————————————
“You are equating equality of opportunity with equality of outcome.”
Excuse me, but the point is outcomes. If you deny opportunity, then you have no idea of outcome, you assume that alleles frequency guarantees some outcome. But we know that is false, because lots of lo frequency individuals excel above the stated or noted standard.
Laugh. I think its strange to listen to people who are descendants of a population that rejected the caste system calling for its return. Given the moral and intellectual failings of the upper echelons that debunk its superior claim to power . . . high IQ thinking indeed.
Just because you don’t have equal ability doesn’t mean you don’t have equal opportunity; you could win by working harder than the better guy. You’re arguing for forced levelling, which is a poison killing the USA right now.
And that is all the time I’m going to give your deceitful crap.
“Just because you don’t have equal ability doesn’t mean you don’t have equal opportunity; you could win by working harder than the better guy. You’re arguing for forced levelling, which is a poison killing the USA right now.”
Spoeaking of misdirection. HBD would mean by definition a dna and subsequent allelles frequency test would limit what one would qualify for. Afterall if your dna says you are incapable why waste the time, effort, money and whatall considering anything else.
none of this is new
Brave New World
Gattica
Flowers for Algernon
and others introduce us to the world biological determinism even Welle’s Time Machine
This little experiment provides one result: candor and tribalism cannot coexist.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PChN2A_uL6oReplies: @Twinkie
That’s the preferred designation of our esteemed editor-in-chief. While I don’t use it anymore, I don’t really mind the acronym. When generally unfamiliar jargon becomes ‘toxic’, it’s usually expedient to leave it behind.
When Steve Sailer’s HBD list was in its heyday in the late 1990s, it was a harmless term (it still is, properly understood)–there were progressives on that list that had no problem with it. The Great Awokening has tried to make it a hate incantation. We are becoming an increasingly superstitious species.
The difficulty with HBD as a political ideology is that it attracts a lot of people who really are motivated solely by racial hatred. And those HBDers who are not motivated by hatred are strangely resistant to the idea of admitting that HBD really does attract a very nasty fringe element who like HBD because they believe it "proves" that whites are superior to blacks.
Of course HBD also "proves" that East Asians, Jews and high-caste subcontinental Indians are superior to whites but they get around that by arguing for the Magical Creativity Factor which they confidently believe that once it's discovered it will prove that East Asians, Jews and high-caste subcontinental Indians are really inferior to whites.
Anyone who wants to adopt HBD as a political ideology or as a basis for social policy is going to have to come to terms with the reality of the existence of that subset of HBDers who really are actual racial haters. And they will have to face the fact that those racial haters will almost certainly ensure that HBD as a political movement is going to face defeat.Replies: @iffen, @Mr. Rational
To imagine that science could ever conclusively prove that a single factor such as genetics is the crucial factor that determines intelligence or behaviour is just one of those fantasies to which right-wingers are so very prone.
And that's even assuming that we have a complete definition of and understanding of intelligence that are both universally accepted. And it's assuming that we have a way of measuring intelligence that we can absolutely guarantee is free of all cultural contamination.
The fact that we still have arguments over whether some populations have a mysterious factor called "creativity" that somehow explains the achievements of the West is a good illustration of just how muddled our understanding of intelligence is.
HBD is like climate science. In both cases we're dealing with fantastically complicated processes that are certainly affected by multiple factors. In both cases we have people who want to insist that the science is settled because they want us to accept an explanation that they personally find to be emotionally satisfying and politically advantageous. That's not rational thinking. It's wishful thinking.Replies: @iffen, @Twinkie, @Mr. Rational, @Audacious Epigone
There’s one huge point of difference. In the case of human behavior, anything other than biology having absolutely nothing to do with anything is considered ‘extreme’. You’re creating a straw man by insinuating that people who think biology/genetics has some influence on human behavior think biology/genetics are the only things that matter. Virtually no one believes that.
I'm sure it's true that scientists and academics working in this field don't believe that biology/genetics is everything, but among the grass-roots supporters of HBD as a political ideology are many who do believe that.
HBD as a political ideology (as distinct from a scientific hypothesis) is based on the belief that biology/genetics is the key to everything. Anyone who believes that HBD should be used as the basis for social policy cannot believe that without believing that everything comes down to biology/genetics.
But you do have to draw a distinction between the proponents of HBD as a scientific hypothesis and the proponents of HBD as a political ideology. As a political ideology it's pretty extreme, and pretty ugly.Replies: @Twinkie
Yes, they are both based upon scientific facts.Replies: @dfordoom, @Audacious Epigone
Tangentially, the dog whistle analogy is a dumb one. If the dogs in this case are the racists, then only racists will be able to hear the whistle. In pointing out that you can detect the dog whistle, you’re confessing to being a dog.
For example?Replies: @Audacious Epigone
The Hasidim in NYC are a lot less antagonistic towards us than the elite secular leftists in NYC who think everything about the Jewish religious faith is silly superstition.
This is an important observation, I think. I’m not convinced that the impending revolution in our understanding of human behavior is going to somehow be devastating for the left. It’ll be “oops, looks like everyone (those of us out here on the ‘fringes’ who were right all along will simply be ignored) was wrong about some of the causes but we know now that massive redistribution is the only equitable thing.”
Conan and Subatai be my aspiration:
You should try visiting an internet site called Unz Review. There you’ll find lots of people who appear to believe biology/genetics are the only things that matter. Some pretend to believe that other factors matter as well but if you read what they say you’ll find it difficult to believe that they think that anything other than biology/genetics matters.
I’m sure it’s true that scientists and academics working in this field don’t believe that biology/genetics is everything, but among the grass-roots supporters of HBD as a political ideology are many who do believe that.
HBD as a political ideology (as distinct from a scientific hypothesis) is based on the belief that biology/genetics is the key to everything. Anyone who believes that HBD should be used as the basis for social policy cannot believe that without believing that everything comes down to biology/genetics.
But you do have to draw a distinction between the proponents of HBD as a scientific hypothesis and the proponents of HBD as a political ideology. As a political ideology it’s pretty extreme, and pretty ugly.
So you are holding up a straw man constructed from a minority of a minority of a minority. Tiny ones at that.
Yep. I don’t see any prospect of HBD leading to a victory for the Cultural Right. The Cultural Right has managed to lose every battle it’s fought for more than 60 years. The Cultural Left is better organised and they have the elites and the media backing them up, and (it saddens me to say) they seem to be smarter, more politically sophisticated and more politically flexible than the Cultural Right. The Cultural Left will look at HBD and they’ll ask themselves, how can we make political capital out of this?
When Steve Sailer's HBD list was in its heyday in the late 1990s, it was a harmless term (it still is, properly understood)--there were progressives on that list that had no problem with it. The Great Awokening has tried to make it a hate incantation. We are becoming an increasingly superstitious species.Replies: @dfordoom
I don’t think that people like yourself and iffen and Steve Sailer believe that genetics/biology is the entire explanation for racial differences in outcomes. But I think you might be falling for a variant of the No True Scotsman fallacy when you argue that No True HBDer believes that genetics/biology is the only factor that matters.
The difficulty with HBD as a political ideology is that it attracts a lot of people who really are motivated solely by racial hatred. And those HBDers who are not motivated by hatred are strangely resistant to the idea of admitting that HBD really does attract a very nasty fringe element who like HBD because they believe it “proves” that whites are superior to blacks.
Of course HBD also “proves” that East Asians, Jews and high-caste subcontinental Indians are superior to whites but they get around that by arguing for the Magical Creativity Factor which they confidently believe that once it’s discovered it will prove that East Asians, Jews and high-caste subcontinental Indians are really inferior to whites.
Anyone who wants to adopt HBD as a political ideology or as a basis for social policy is going to have to come to terms with the reality of the existence of that subset of HBDers who really are actual racial haters. And they will have to face the fact that those racial haters will almost certainly ensure that HBD as a political movement is going to face defeat.
When those others get passes on antisocial behavior and even outright criminality while you get branded "racist" for daring to mention it, the hate you feel for them is deserved. It needs no excuse.
Delegitimizing the genocidal level of undeserved blame aimed at the posterity of the founders of the USA is not "racial hatred". It's barely even corrective. It's true, as Abraham Lincoln himself stated, that Africans oppress others by their mere presence (proven by the way everyone who is not allowed to fight to keep Africans out is forced to flee them), and HBD is the best current explanation for that undeniable truth. It also explains the academic underperformance of Mexicans and other pure and mixed non-European populations of the Americas; reading, writing and 'rithmetic are just not things they were ever selected for.The way to fix that is to stop censoring HBD to keep it out of the mainstream. Not long ago some people trolled the SJWs by drinking milk on-camera, as it was something that mainly White people are able to do. Is drinking milk a "nasty fringe" activity?They're being viciously demonized and dispossessed, and you think "race hate" is the problem? You talk like a Jew.
HBD explains why you're just not going to get many good AA engineers or doctors (though we'd probably get more if most of the best prospects weren't pulled into easier programs). Pulling people with low MCAT scores into med school to the exclusion of more able candidates because "diversity and inclusion" is bad for society as a whole (e.g. "Doctor" Kermit Gosnell). Putting people with low mental ability through engineering school is also bad for society (e.g. FIU bridge collapse). These policies literally endanger the public, and those in charge KNOW it. HBD explains WHY they endanger the public, and provide a rationale for ending them.
HBD would not provide a basis for permanent affirmative action. It explains why affirmative action will never produce equality, as the "White privilege" explanation holds. HBD-aligned policy would do things like paying the low IQ not to have children instead of paying them to multiply. No violence, leading to a better society rather than the death spiral we're in today.
It's in the interest of the poor and disabled for there to not be too many of them, because there are only so many burdens the rest of society can bear. However, I suspect that things are too far gone for gentle measures to avoid a massive social spasm. "Progressive" policies are almost entirely responsible for what's coming.Replies: @iffen
” . . . I don’t see any prospect of HBD leading to a victory for the Cultural Right. The Cultural Right has managed to lose every battle it’s fought for more than 60 years.”
I am not sure i agree withe above. The biological determinism argument has been around since the first colonists arrived aided of course of the use of scripture as ordained and created by God, himself to be thus.
Nonsense. The shifts that have taken place have been gradual with increased speed. Had that not been the case, some ethos and practice such as same sex marriage would have been reached long before the 2010’s.
It is not that left is better organized. There are not, The real issue is that they hold the reins of education and wealth, media. Now it may be that as the general population begins to comprehend what is taking place they will push back. However, the real hurdle is that by the time they catch on
the systems will be in place. The main stream churches have been hit hard. Education may be a complete wash. A larger problem for the right, they have often been complicit in very unhealthy conceits. Most of which have fed the very goal they desire. Didn’t want AA for blacks — well, the right got its way, it went to whites: homosexuals and white women. Yet, the constant complaint is to blacks. Blacks for sure have issues. That’s a human reality. But before making a case one would have access whether the population has had access to the same avenues that that have been reaily available to the majority o the country.
This has nothing to do with defending black dysfunction. And it certainly does not require any critical studies critique on the social dilemmas. Te real gambit has been the play of of whites to use women as the so to cause of denial when in fact the record is very clear that when it comes to opportunity women have by choice accepted promoted, defended, and maintained the system of men as providers and protectors. It is totally false given that reality that women have suffered irreparable harm as a population at the hands of men. In fact, in the case of white women, men and women both were complicit in denying equal and fair access. to the benefit of whites. my own comments elicit a call in the breast of “white men” to come to the white woman’s defense, in the name of protecting her a virtue as old as men and women. And white women have played that for all its worth and more and continue to do so. They are no less culpable and perhaps even more, given that so much is done on behalf of white women’s virtue — whether said virtue exists or not.
The difficulty with HBD as a political ideology is that it attracts a lot of people who really are motivated solely by racial hatred. And those HBDers who are not motivated by hatred are strangely resistant to the idea of admitting that HBD really does attract a very nasty fringe element who like HBD because they believe it "proves" that whites are superior to blacks.
Of course HBD also "proves" that East Asians, Jews and high-caste subcontinental Indians are superior to whites but they get around that by arguing for the Magical Creativity Factor which they confidently believe that once it's discovered it will prove that East Asians, Jews and high-caste subcontinental Indians are really inferior to whites.
Anyone who wants to adopt HBD as a political ideology or as a basis for social policy is going to have to come to terms with the reality of the existence of that subset of HBDers who really are actual racial haters. And they will have to face the fact that those racial haters will almost certainly ensure that HBD as a political movement is going to face defeat.Replies: @iffen, @Mr. Rational
The difficulty with HBD as a political ideology is that it attracts a lot of people who really are motivated solely by racial hatred.
HBD is not a political ideology. It is a body of scientific knowledge that needs to be keep in mind when choosing among political ideologies and policies.
Ronald Reagan: “Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passions, they cannot alter the states of facts and evidence.”
BTW, you use guilt by association the same way that the SJWs do. Not that I’m saying there is anything wrong with that. I think we need to learn from the winners– whether that be SJWs, the ruling elites or “The Jews.”
The way to defeat the WN use of HBD is to not be a WN.
Politics is not a game for gentlemen. It's not played by the Marquess of Queensbury Rules. It's a street fight. If there's a broken bottle lying on the ground and you don't use it your opponent will. That's the reality of politics.Replies: @Mr. Rational
Now the country following the practice of seasoning instituted during slavery will be happy to en;list black women, and hispanic women in the country’s game of marginalizing black males —
all the while bemoaning a system that benefits the majority.
The difficulty with HBD as a political ideology is that it attracts a lot of people who really are motivated solely by racial hatred. And those HBDers who are not motivated by hatred are strangely resistant to the idea of admitting that HBD really does attract a very nasty fringe element who like HBD because they believe it "proves" that whites are superior to blacks.
Of course HBD also "proves" that East Asians, Jews and high-caste subcontinental Indians are superior to whites but they get around that by arguing for the Magical Creativity Factor which they confidently believe that once it's discovered it will prove that East Asians, Jews and high-caste subcontinental Indians are really inferior to whites.
Anyone who wants to adopt HBD as a political ideology or as a basis for social policy is going to have to come to terms with the reality of the existence of that subset of HBDers who really are actual racial haters. And they will have to face the fact that those racial haters will almost certainly ensure that HBD as a political movement is going to face defeat.Replies: @iffen, @Mr. Rational
When you’re doing poorly when those objectively less able than you are pushed ahead of you by public policy, the hate you feel for them is deserved. It needs no excuse.
When those others get passes on antisocial behavior and even outright criminality while you get branded “racist” for daring to mention it, the hate you feel for them is deserved. It needs no excuse.
Delegitimizing the genocidal level of undeserved blame aimed at the posterity of the founders of the USA is not “racial hatred”. It’s barely even corrective. It’s true, as Abraham Lincoln himself stated, that Africans oppress others by their mere presence (proven by the way everyone who is not allowed to fight to keep Africans out is forced to flee them), and HBD is the best current explanation for that undeniable truth. It also explains the academic underperformance of Mexicans and other pure and mixed non-European populations of the Americas; reading, writing and ‘rithmetic are just not things they were ever selected for.
The way to fix that is to stop censoring HBD to keep it out of the mainstream. Not long ago some people trolled the SJWs by drinking milk on-camera, as it was something that mainly White people are able to do. Is drinking milk a “nasty fringe” activity?
They’re being viciously demonized and dispossessed, and you think “race hate” is the problem? You talk like a Jew.
HBD explains why you’re just not going to get many good AA engineers or doctors (though we’d probably get more if most of the best prospects weren’t pulled into easier programs). Pulling people with low MCAT scores into med school to the exclusion of more able candidates because “diversity and inclusion” is bad for society as a whole (e.g. “Doctor” Kermit Gosnell). Putting people with low mental ability through engineering school is also bad for society (e.g. FIU bridge collapse). These policies literally endanger the public, and those in charge KNOW it. HBD explains WHY they endanger the public, and provide a rationale for ending them.
HBD would not provide a basis for permanent affirmative action. It explains why affirmative action will never produce equality, as the “White privilege” explanation holds. HBD-aligned policy would do things like paying the low IQ not to have children instead of paying them to multiply. No violence, leading to a better society rather than the death spiral we’re in today.
It’s in the interest of the poor and disabled for there to not be too many of them, because there are only so many burdens the rest of society can bear. However, I suspect that things are too far gone for gentle measures to avoid a massive social spasm. “Progressive” policies are almost entirely responsible for what’s coming.
You wouldn't hold that against him, would you, Mr. R?
LOLReplies: @Mr. Rational
When those others get passes on antisocial behavior and even outright criminality while you get branded "racist" for daring to mention it, the hate you feel for them is deserved. It needs no excuse.
Delegitimizing the genocidal level of undeserved blame aimed at the posterity of the founders of the USA is not "racial hatred". It's barely even corrective. It's true, as Abraham Lincoln himself stated, that Africans oppress others by their mere presence (proven by the way everyone who is not allowed to fight to keep Africans out is forced to flee them), and HBD is the best current explanation for that undeniable truth. It also explains the academic underperformance of Mexicans and other pure and mixed non-European populations of the Americas; reading, writing and 'rithmetic are just not things they were ever selected for.The way to fix that is to stop censoring HBD to keep it out of the mainstream. Not long ago some people trolled the SJWs by drinking milk on-camera, as it was something that mainly White people are able to do. Is drinking milk a "nasty fringe" activity?They're being viciously demonized and dispossessed, and you think "race hate" is the problem? You talk like a Jew.
HBD explains why you're just not going to get many good AA engineers or doctors (though we'd probably get more if most of the best prospects weren't pulled into easier programs). Pulling people with low MCAT scores into med school to the exclusion of more able candidates because "diversity and inclusion" is bad for society as a whole (e.g. "Doctor" Kermit Gosnell). Putting people with low mental ability through engineering school is also bad for society (e.g. FIU bridge collapse). These policies literally endanger the public, and those in charge KNOW it. HBD explains WHY they endanger the public, and provide a rationale for ending them.
HBD would not provide a basis for permanent affirmative action. It explains why affirmative action will never produce equality, as the "White privilege" explanation holds. HBD-aligned policy would do things like paying the low IQ not to have children instead of paying them to multiply. No violence, leading to a better society rather than the death spiral we're in today.
It's in the interest of the poor and disabled for there to not be too many of them, because there are only so many burdens the rest of society can bear. However, I suspect that things are too far gone for gentle measures to avoid a massive social spasm. "Progressive" policies are almost entirely responsible for what's coming.Replies: @iffen
You talk like a Jew.
You wouldn’t hold that against him, would you, Mr. R?
LOL
You wouldn't hold that against him, would you, Mr. R?
LOLReplies: @Mr. Rational
Yes. Yes, I would. I’m fed up with disingenuous people.
I’m fed up with disingenuous people.
Look, hardly anyone appreciates the value of a good ad hominem argument more than me, but unwarranted accusations of disingenuity just because you disagree with someone is a particularly weak one. Doom gives no indication that he doesn’t sincerely believe the nonsense that he writes like climate science denialism.
I did jump on that cafeteria table and soccer-kick that kid who threw food at me the first week of my junior high school in the U.S. (and got “detention” for it). ;)Replies: @iffen
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PChN2A_uL6oReplies: @Twinkie
When you bleed together, you become brothers.
I'm sure it's true that scientists and academics working in this field don't believe that biology/genetics is everything, but among the grass-roots supporters of HBD as a political ideology are many who do believe that.
HBD as a political ideology (as distinct from a scientific hypothesis) is based on the belief that biology/genetics is the key to everything. Anyone who believes that HBD should be used as the basis for social policy cannot believe that without believing that everything comes down to biology/genetics.
But you do have to draw a distinction between the proponents of HBD as a scientific hypothesis and the proponents of HBD as a political ideology. As a political ideology it's pretty extreme, and pretty ugly.Replies: @Twinkie
First of all, that fraction of commenters is probably in the minority. And commenters are a tiny minority of readers. And people who read Unz are themselves a minuscule minority of the public at large.
So you are holding up a straw man constructed from a minority of a minority of a minority. Tiny ones at that.
I agree and urge you to heed your own words.
I did jump on that cafeteria table and soccer-kick that kid who threw food at me the first week of my junior high school in the U.S. (and got “detention” for it). 😉
I did jump on that cafeteria table and soccer-kick that kid who threw food at me the first week of my junior high school in the U.S. (and got “detention” for it). ;)Replies: @iffen
I agree and urge you to heed your own words.
Okay, I can do that. Can you you acknowledge that I said that was the only item of many that I doubted?
No point in opening up anything. It wasn’t because I disagree with you, it was because I don’t like you and that led me to allow my evil twin who is ignorant and rude to take over, but I went to the floor with him and I won.
Everybody does. Including the Right. Look at the way the Right smears Bernie Sanders by claiming that he’s a socialist and then claiming that therefore he must be just like Stalin. The same tactics were used against Jeremy Corbyn. It’s the way politics works.
That won’t work. Not unless HBDers are prepared to explicitly and strongly disassociate themselves from WN. If they don’t then they will be smeared through guilt by association. As long as HBDers associate HBD with race they will be smeared as racists. And as long as the supporters of HBD include a significant body of people who really are motivated by racial hatred that smear will sound plausible to normies.
Politics is not a game for gentlemen. It’s not played by the Marquess of Queensbury Rules. It’s a street fight. If there’s a broken bottle lying on the ground and you don’t use it your opponent will. That’s the reality of politics.
Politics is not a game for gentlemen. It's not played by the Marquess of Queensbury Rules. It's a street fight. If there's a broken bottle lying on the ground and you don't use it your opponent will. That's the reality of politics.Replies: @Mr. Rational
Yet unless you deny that race is more than a “social construct”, you are denounced as a WN.
It’s time to ignore the slurs and stop letting the enemy’s frame define us. HBD is real. Public policy needs to be informed by the reality of HBD. Nothing less can get us out of the mess that the equalists have put us into, laughing all the way.
It makes no difference whether something is true or not. What matters is whether you can convince people to believe it.
How much chance do you think there is of that happening? How much progress have you made so far in selling the idea of HBD?
It makes no difference whether something is true or not. What matters is whether you can convince people to believe it.