The Unz Review • An Alternative Media Selection$
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 TeasersiSteve Blog
Contemporary British Society Selects for Genes for ADHD, BMI, Stupidity, and Lack of Education
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

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

 
Hide 77 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
  1. So lots of obese tattooed women having kids with black high school dropouts? Sounds about right.

    • Agree: Polistra
    • Replies: @Sean
    @Ghost of Bull Moose

    The BBC is a quintessential British institution. Associative mating.


    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2000/jul/02/tracymcveigh.theobserver
    One of the world's most revered scientists has developed a theory that fat people are happier than thin ones. James Watson, the Nobel prize-winning geneticist who was jointly responsible for discovering the structure of DNA, believes that plumper women are also likely to enjoy a better sex life than their thin counterparts.
     
    High estrogen women reproducing with the highest testosterone men. What's to understand?

    Replies: @Ghost of Bull Moose

    , @Drapetomaniac
    @Ghost of Bull Moose

    Feed and breed a la the animal world.

  2. The left ought to pay more attention to this…..

    • Replies: @Anon
    @Daniel H

    To be fair, the right(at least the parts of it trying to ban abortion) is just as head-in-the-sand.

    Replies: @Almost Missouri

    , @Almost Missouri
    @Daniel H

    If HBDers ever succeed in the quixotic quest to persuade the Left that the foundational tenet of equalism is mistaken, what will NOT happen is that the Left will say, "Ah well, we were mistaken, let us bury the hatchet and just live and let live then."

    What WILL happen is that they will say—and they are not entirely wrong in this—is that genetics are just a part of the environment. They will conclude therefore that their real mistake in not recognizing genetic contributions was that they weren't controlling genetics the whole time along with everything else. And they will immediately set about "remediating" this oversight.

    If you think that battling the Left over every little policy detail was bad when it was simply a matter of who gets hired, who gets promoted, and who gets fired, imagine what it will be like once it becomes a battle over who breeds with whom, who gets born and who gets aborted. It will be at this point that the battle will move from the anteroom of unnecessary hells that the Left has opened into the grand ballroom of Unnecessary Hell. All of the genomics, genetic science, and the CRISPR technology that HBD has been arguing everyone should pay more attention to will now get that attention ... as it is all put into the service of the new Left project to create the new Soviet/SJW man from the chromosomes up.

    If you thought it was bad having to justify every employment, election, cultural and educational choice on the basis of race, now all of that will continue, only it will also extend to birth and death itself. The DIE commissars who were reluctantly accepted as unavoidable compromises with multiculturalism will now become quite literally what their acronym promised: apparatchiks with the literal power of life and death, in the name of Diversity, Inclusion and Equity.

    Only one kidney transplant available for two dialysis patients: the rapper with the modest rap sheet versus the mild mannered actuary? Guess who's gettin's dat kidney yo!

    White man wants to breed with white woman? "Do you have a breeding passport for that?" asks your local DIE Commissar.

    "Hey TradWife! You're lookin' pretty fine! Why are you not contributing your ancestral endowment to the state mandated Genetics Reparations Blender? Your husband will pay for it."

    Welcome to state-mandated race cuckolding. How do you expect to achieve Diversity, Inclusion, and Equity if you won't participate? What are you, A RACIST?!? There's only one race: the Human Race, and you will do your lifelong and genewide part to raise le 56% generation of racial reparators. As our totally legitimately elected President said, white people are becoming a minority, and that's a good thing! As Diversicrats, our job is to help a good thing along. You know, "we're from the government, and we're here to help," right down to the genetic level.

    HBD winning the genetics debate will not make the Left back down. It will make the Left realize that they now need to seize the Genetic Means Of Production too.

    Steve likes to say the "E" in DIE means they're coming for the Equity in your house. If only that were the limit of it. Ultimately, they're coming for the Equity in your 'nads. And the Inclusion.

    Replies: @Jenner Ickham Errican, @animalogic, @John Milton’s Ghost

    , @Hypnotoad666
    @Daniel H

    "The left should pay more attention to genetics," is like saying "vampires should pay more attention to garlic."

    , @Jiminy
    @Daniel H

    This guy can’t be Muslim. Where’s his prayer rug?
    Often when a British true crime show comes on, a lot of the people look rather inbred. Certainly not like the fictional detective series, where most of the characters look quite the opposite. Maybe the girls never left the village that their great-great grandparents never left as well.

  3. Modern society is selecting for bad traits and selecting against good traits. Sad!#Socialism!

    OK, or the Welfare State, whatever you want to call it.

  4. Since when does “the left” care about income and wealth disparities lmao

    • Replies: @Engels
    @AndrewR


    Since when does “the left” care about income and wealth disparities lmao
     
    From 1789 to 1991.
  5. Why ADHD?

    • Replies: @CMV
    @JohnnyWalker123

    It likely presdisposes you to do impulsive stuff, such as knock someone up/get knocked up when you cant properly afford to raise a baby. Jives with what I have seen in my personal life- anecdotal, but one guy I know had severe ADHD and fathered multiple kids with his long term partner before eventually dying of an overdose in his early 30's. OTOH, the negative impacts of autism on fertility don't seem as bad as you would expect- take that manosphere! Short, fat and stupid seems like the winning combination though.

  6. Those are some mighty low effect sizes.

  7. As a society, the left and the right prop up and enable stupidity and celebrate weakness, and prevent people from making bad choices when we should be allowing them to do so with full consequences. This is how people with bad traits are weeded out of a society.

    Ubiquitous warning signs and handicap spots are a good example of the former and seat belt laws are a good example of the latter.

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    @Mike Tre

    I frequently engage in drunken street racing without a seatbelt so that I can qualify for those sweet handicapped parking places. I'll never have to walk a long way from my parking spot again!

    Replies: @CorkyAgain, @Reg Cæsar, @Truth

    , @Almost Missouri
    @Mike Tre


    we should be allowing them to do so with full consequences.
     
    Unfortunately, once we embraced the welfare state, everyone gets to bear the costs of anyone's errors.

    Bearing the consequences of one's own actions. How quaint.
  8. This explains the Rochdale grooming scandal and why no one cares.

  9. @Daniel H

    The left ought to pay more attention to this.....
     
    https://static.independent.co.uk/s3fs-public/thumbnails/image/2015/04/30/07/Sand1.jpg

    Replies: @Anon, @Almost Missouri, @Hypnotoad666, @Jiminy

    To be fair, the right(at least the parts of it trying to ban abortion) is just as head-in-the-sand.

    • Replies: @Almost Missouri
    @Anon

    Abortion is dysgenic.

    https://www.unz.com/gdurocher/bumbling-towards-the-biosingularity/#comment-4596940

    It doesn't matter that anyone thinks that abortion should be eugenic in theory. In practice it keeps being dysgenic. And there's no reason that will change.

    Replies: @YetAnotherAnon, @Anon

  10. @Mike Tre
    As a society, the left and the right prop up and enable stupidity and celebrate weakness, and prevent people from making bad choices when we should be allowing them to do so with full consequences. This is how people with bad traits are weeded out of a society.

    Ubiquitous warning signs and handicap spots are a good example of the former and seat belt laws are a good example of the latter.

    Replies: @Steve Sailer, @Almost Missouri

    I frequently engage in drunken street racing without a seatbelt so that I can qualify for those sweet handicapped parking places. I’ll never have to walk a long way from my parking spot again!

    • LOL: Redneck farmer
    • Replies: @CorkyAgain
    @Steve Sailer

    We're gonna need more of them spots.

    , @Reg Cæsar
    @Steve Sailer


    I frequently engage in drunken street racing without a seatbelt so that I can qualify for those sweet handicapped parking places
     
    Hmm...anybody ever see both these fellows in the same room?


    https://static01.nyt.com/images/2020/07/27/multimedia/27xp-camera/27xp-camera-superJumbo.jpg

    https://alchetron.com/cdn/steve-sailer-f52c2220-095c-4315-9026-a31931a544d-resize-750.jpg

    https://www.baseball-reference.com/bullpen/Oldest_Living_MLB_Player


    Back to baseball, Roger Angell turns 101 this week. He's three months older than the oldest living player.


    Eddie Robinson, MLB's oldest living player, turns 100 years old

    Who has a podcast:

    https://www.listennotes.com/podcasts/the-golden-age-of-baseball-with-eddie-ZIRHWxlih9j/

    Replies: @Reg Cæsar

    , @Truth
    @Steve Sailer

    Steve-O, I always knew we had something in common.

  11. How do we calculate the difference (in standard deviations ) between the birth cohorts and population mean?

    For example, how much is a propensity to ADHD shifting by generation?

    • Replies: @res
    @JohnnyWalker123


    How do we calculate the difference (in standard deviations ) between the birth cohorts and population mean?
     
    From page 2.

    Several scores show consistent increases or declines over this 30-year period, of the order of 5% of a standard deviation.
     
    Figure 1 on page 3 shows the mean PGS for each trait by 5 year cohort.

    Footnote 1 on page 4 states (emphasis added):


    The selection effect 𝛽 equals 𝐶𝑜𝑣(𝑁, 𝑃𝐺𝑆)/𝑉 𝑎𝑟(𝑃𝐺𝑆) where 𝑁 is the number of children. Since PGS are normalized to variance 1 and mean 0, this reduces to 𝐶𝑜𝑣(𝑁, 𝑃𝐺𝑆) ≡ 𝐸(𝑁 𝑃𝐺𝑆) − 𝐸(𝑁)𝐸(𝑃𝐺𝑆) = 𝐸(𝑁 𝑃𝐺𝑆). This is the polygenic score weighted by the number of children, which is the average polygenic score in the next generation.
     
    This means things are normalized in a way which means the PGS scores are Z-scores (i.e. SD units).
    So Figure 1 is in SD units which should be exactly what you wanted.

    Not sure about how to interpret the effect sizes. Anyone know for sure?

    Back to you.

    For example, how much is a propensity to ADHD shifting by generation?

     

    The change is nonlinear. From -0.01 for birth year 1945 (and 1940) increasing to 0.02 for birth year 1960, but then declining to about 0.005 for birth year 1965.

    Direct link to the paper.
    https://ideas.repec.org/p/uea/ueaeco/2021-02.html

  12. And this is why it ain’t GREAT Britain anymore.

    • Replies: @Pericles
    @Redneck farmer

    Which reminds me, Little Britain was a very funny series. Banned now, of course.

    , @Simon Tugmutton
    @Redneck farmer

    Pedant's Corner:

    The "Great" is a geographical term for the island comprising England, Wales and Scotland, together with adjacent islands but excluding the Isle of Man and the Channel Islands. It has nothing to do with our sadly defunct prowess in stealing everything we could lay our hands on. That was pretty great, however, while it lasted.

    As for the burgeoning underclass – yet, it's all to do with the Welfare State.

  13. Pretty obvious that fertility is dysgenic–has been dysgenic for a couple three generations–in the welfare state and “you go girl!” female careerism West.

    The immigration is disaster is #1. But after that this dysgenic problem is pretty much top of the list.

    Steve floated this question up in his Taki Mag article:

    And what about poor genes? If a society generously chooses to subsidize the victims of poor genes, can it take any steps to lessen the chances of them passing on those poor genes and thus expensively victimizing future generations?

    Or is that eugenics, which is, of course, the worst thing ever?

    My take is important for same people who care about their nation to directly confront and win the “eugenics” battle against the minoritarian liars. They are always going to smear–racist!, anti-Semite!, Nazi!–no matter what. (It’s “who they are”.) There’s no ducking that. So i think rational people should just own it–and fight the good fight.

    “Yes, genes matter.” “The most important thing in any society is whom you share it with.” “Yes, we want healthy, capable, law-abiding and productive people to reproduce; not those who are unhealthy, addicted, mentally-ill, incompetent, unable to support themselves.” “If you want to call it eugenics fine.”

    This doesn’t have to involve any police statey stuff at all. Probably the biggest bang for the buck:

    “If you are unable to provide for yourself or take care of yourself and the taxpayers have to step in to help, then you should not be having children. Period. We’ll provide a safety net, but in return you do not have kids.”

    is actually something that has very broad common sense support, despite the wailing of “intellectuals”.

    From there, you can move on to the more complicated issues of encouraging productive and healthy young families to have more children.

    A simple approach is non-refundable tax-credits that essentially remove productive people from the tax rolls while they are in their child bearing and early rearing years. They can pay taxes later when they are at career peak with the kids off to school or in retirement. The childless can pay as well.

    And the other aspect is simply cultural. Returning the culture to one that prioritizes–heaps praise upon–families and having children. An immigration end, and healthy nationalism helps with that as well.

    • Replies: @Polistra
    @AnotherDad

    True of society and true down to the LCD street criminal who rails against his fate (and his handicaps) with violence and brutality. "Let's make more of these!" The rallying cry of the 'modern progressive'.

    , @Pericles
    @AnotherDad

    War is Peace*! Dysgenics are Eugenics!

    * over there so not over here, amirite?

    , @Rob
    @AnotherDad

    As one of the “unhealthy, addicted, mentally-ill, incompetent, unable to support themselves,” I agree completely.

    Given that so many occupations are currently sedentary, weeding out genes for easily damaged spines and hips should be at the top of the common physical problems list. It is cruel to have children who will just experience the same misery you did.

    There’s also the hedonic-utilitarian perspective. (Nearly) everyone wants to do something productive in life. Those who don’t, well, they usually want to accumulate status. Both those things are hard to do with serious physical and mental problems.

    I knew a guy Bill... something. Liked to be called Wild Bill. He was a drug dealer discovered senior year of high school. Never thought he was cool, but never thought he was scary, either. Next year, when I came back from college on break, he was changed, and not for the better. Greatly resented anyone who went to college. Was all “oh, college! So you get to get a good job and make lots of money, but I don’t cuz I’m ‘not college material’” Trust me, he was not college material. His only path to any money was dealing, and the user community was the only one in which he could accumulate status.

    I have no idea what happened to Bill. He stole my lighter and put a rifle in the face of a friend he had known since childhood. My friend josh snd I were like, ‘let’s leave - after this bowl.” People like Bill are not even lumpenproletariat. They are not cast-offs from the last economic order. Maybe there was a place for him back when strong (white) backs were in demand, and alcohol was the only drug people around here really had access to, but with Mexicans to do the work and cocaine to get him high, there was no socially beneficial place for him in the world. We need fewer Wild Bills. No happy guy puts a gun in his friend’s face.

    I’m torn on people like me. I think if I had been able to get medical when 7, or 13, or 16, or 18, or 22, or 28, when my broken back and hip got progressively more broken and the pain more all-encompassing and severe, then I would have turned out better. But my dad thought I was screaming at him that he needed surgery, and his back didn’t hurt enough for that. For twenty-odd years, and my mom was always “go talk to your father.” I love them, but I would have been better off never existing. I would not have been mentally ill, at least not severely, if I had been fully functioning in childhood, adolescence, and early adulthood. Instead of life, I had agony. If we had universal healthcare, it might have been different. If I got hurt a decade later, with health insurance, might have been different then, too.

    If the economy had a place for crazy, creative people, it might have been different. But it doesn’t. If society is going to have a miserable, abused underclass, maybe it shouldn’t have one, and rich people can get Roombas?

    Eugenics will make for healthier and happier people. It’s only an historical accident that the left turned against eugenics. But the nazis were a long time ago. Jews themselves practice eugenics here and in Israel. I think if blacks were smarter, American leftists would not be so opposed to eugenics. Let’s face it, any race-neutral application of eugenics that impacted whites would be devastating to blacks.

    Let’s remember that the precedent from the Supremes on eugenics is “three generations of imbeciles are enough.”

    Replies: @Pixo

    , @Veteran Aryan
    @AnotherDad


    “If you are unable to provide for yourself or take care of yourself and the taxpayers have to step in to help, then you should not be having children. Period. We’ll provide a safety net, but in return you do not have kids.”
     
    This one is much easier to promote:
    1st 100% X
    2nd 80%
    3rd 60%
    4th 40%
    5th 20%
    Max 3X
    No Bonus Money for not having Daddy in the house.
    Applies across all social strata.
    Center the debate around the definition of X.
    Stop making Human Puppy Mill an attractive career choice for the least productive members of society.
  14. No surprise here. I am a short fat extroverted agreeable smoker, and I have 8 kids with 7 babymamas.

    Cannabis never/ever? Ever ever ever!

    • Agree: Pixo
  15. GWAS evidence is welcome of course, but in this case like so many others it only confirms what we already knew (C. M. Kornbluth published his famous story The Marching Morons in 1951).

    Post-WW2 society (e.g., the welfare state) is dysgenic, and really the problem is somewhat older— once modern industrial management technics were widely applied, dysgenesis emerged in many spheres. 20th-Century militaries chose the smartest, healthiest, best-behaved men to charge the enemy machine guns; the scum in low draft categories were left home to breed. Farming was mechanized, depriving millions of morons and their spawn of jobs so they moved to cities where they could live off handouts or crime. Governments taxed the most productive workers to finance largess to the less useful so they wouldn’t rock the boat, making children less affordable for the former but (thanks to additional per-child grants) positively lucrative for the latter. Cynical elite managers and politicians implemented ‘affirmative action’ preferences to interpose a dependent client class between the elites and any challengers from the middle class, again favoring the genetically less productive. In these and many more ways modern industrial society is dysgenic and things are unlikely to improve before widespread genetic engineering of humans. Even then I fear that elite interest in forestalling competition for the places at the top will result in more genetic divergence not less.

    • Agree: Clyde
    • Disagree: Drapetomaniac
    • Replies: @peterike
    @Veracitor


    In these and many more ways modern industrial society is dysgenic and things are unlikely to improve before widespread genetic engineering of humans.
     
    I agree with what you've written. But I have a question for the audience: while modern Western industrial society is clearly dysgenic, what is the situation in China? Certainly, they don't coddle their criminal classes. But are the newer Chinese generations getting better -- i.e. becoming even more formidable competitors -- or getting worse?

    Replies: @Achmed E. Newman

    , @Drapetomaniac
    @Veracitor

    "Farming was mechanized, depriving millions of morons and their spawn of jobs so they moved to cities where they could live off handouts or crime."

    Do you even read or understand the garbage you post?

    Become a farmer then wait ten years and then comment.

    Replies: @Veracitor

  16. @Steve Sailer
    @Mike Tre

    I frequently engage in drunken street racing without a seatbelt so that I can qualify for those sweet handicapped parking places. I'll never have to walk a long way from my parking spot again!

    Replies: @CorkyAgain, @Reg Cæsar, @Truth

    We’re gonna need more of them spots.

  17. @AnotherDad
    Pretty obvious that fertility is dysgenic--has been dysgenic for a couple three generations--in the welfare state and "you go girl!" female careerism West.

    The immigration is disaster is #1. But after that this dysgenic problem is pretty much top of the list.

    Steve floated this question up in his Taki Mag article:

    And what about poor genes? If a society generously chooses to subsidize the victims of poor genes, can it take any steps to lessen the chances of them passing on those poor genes and thus expensively victimizing future generations?

    Or is that eugenics, which is, of course, the worst thing ever?
     
    My take is important for same people who care about their nation to directly confront and win the "eugenics" battle against the minoritarian liars. They are always going to smear--racist!, anti-Semite!, Nazi!--no matter what. (It's "who they are".) There's no ducking that. So i think rational people should just own it--and fight the good fight.

    "Yes, genes matter." "The most important thing in any society is whom you share it with." "Yes, we want healthy, capable, law-abiding and productive people to reproduce; not those who are unhealthy, addicted, mentally-ill, incompetent, unable to support themselves." "If you want to call it eugenics fine."

    This doesn't have to involve any police statey stuff at all. Probably the biggest bang for the buck:

    "If you are unable to provide for yourself or take care of yourself and the taxpayers have to step in to help, then you should not be having children. Period. We'll provide a safety net, but in return you do not have kids."

    is actually something that has very broad common sense support, despite the wailing of "intellectuals".

    From there, you can move on to the more complicated issues of encouraging productive and healthy young families to have more children.

    A simple approach is non-refundable tax-credits that essentially remove productive people from the tax rolls while they are in their child bearing and early rearing years. They can pay taxes later when they are at career peak with the kids off to school or in retirement. The childless can pay as well.

    And the other aspect is simply cultural. Returning the culture to one that prioritizes--heaps praise upon--families and having children. An immigration end, and healthy nationalism helps with that as well.

    Replies: @Polistra, @Pericles, @Rob, @Veteran Aryan

    True of society and true down to the LCD street criminal who rails against his fate (and his handicaps) with violence and brutality. “Let’s make more of these!” The rallying cry of the ‘modern progressive’.

  18. How bad is the problem already? Answer this math question…

    Which number is bigger? The children produced by Condalesa Rice, Oprah Winfrey, Michelle Obama, Stacey Abrams and London Breed…

    Or the number of children produced by George Floyd (that we know of)?

    • Replies: @Spect3r
    @Farenheit

    Considering how she is built, im not sure "Michelle" Obama ever had any kid!

  19. @Daniel H

    The left ought to pay more attention to this.....
     
    https://static.independent.co.uk/s3fs-public/thumbnails/image/2015/04/30/07/Sand1.jpg

    Replies: @Anon, @Almost Missouri, @Hypnotoad666, @Jiminy

    If HBDers ever succeed in the quixotic quest to persuade the Left that the foundational tenet of equalism is mistaken, what will NOT happen is that the Left will say, “Ah well, we were mistaken, let us bury the hatchet and just live and let live then.”

    What WILL happen is that they will say—and they are not entirely wrong in this—is that genetics are just a part of the environment. They will conclude therefore that their real mistake in not recognizing genetic contributions was that they weren’t controlling genetics the whole time along with everything else. And they will immediately set about “remediating” this oversight.

    If you think that battling the Left over every little policy detail was bad when it was simply a matter of who gets hired, who gets promoted, and who gets fired, imagine what it will be like once it becomes a battle over who breeds with whom, who gets born and who gets aborted. It will be at this point that the battle will move from the anteroom of unnecessary hells that the Left has opened into the grand ballroom of Unnecessary Hell. All of the genomics, genetic science, and the CRISPR technology that HBD has been arguing everyone should pay more attention to will now get that attention … as it is all put into the service of the new Left project to create the new Soviet/SJW man from the chromosomes up.

    If you thought it was bad having to justify every employment, election, cultural and educational choice on the basis of race, now all of that will continue, only it will also extend to birth and death itself. The DIE commissars who were reluctantly accepted as unavoidable compromises with multiculturalism will now become quite literally what their acronym promised: apparatchiks with the literal power of life and death, in the name of Diversity, Inclusion and Equity.

    Only one kidney transplant available for two dialysis patients: the rapper with the modest rap sheet versus the mild mannered actuary? Guess who’s gettin’s dat kidney yo!

    White man wants to breed with white woman? “Do you have a breeding passport for that?” asks your local DIE Commissar.

    “Hey TradWife! You’re lookin’ pretty fine! Why are you not contributing your ancestral endowment to the state mandated Genetics Reparations Blender? Your husband will pay for it.”

    Welcome to state-mandated race cuckolding. How do you expect to achieve Diversity, Inclusion, and Equity if you won’t participate? What are you, A RACIST?!? There’s only one race: the Human Race, and you will do your lifelong and genewide part to raise le 56% generation of racial reparators. As our totally legitimately elected President said, white people are becoming a minority, and that’s a good thing! As Diversicrats, our job is to help a good thing along. You know, “we’re from the government, and we’re here to help,” right down to the genetic level.

    HBD winning the genetics debate will not make the Left back down. It will make the Left realize that they now need to seize the Genetic Means Of Production too.

    Steve likes to say the “E” in DIE means they’re coming for the Equity in your house. If only that were the limit of it. Ultimately, they’re coming for the Equity in your ‘nads. And the Inclusion.

    • LOL: iffen, BB753
    • Replies: @Jenner Ickham Errican
    @Almost Missouri


    HBD winning the genetics debate will not make the Left back down.
     
    No, but that’s okay—more and more formerly bluepilled ‘normie’ Whites (and some non-Whites) would then be less likely to go with the anti-White, pro-“equity” flow.

    If the ‘conversation’ moves from “inequality is due to racial injustice” to “inequality is partly/mostly due to inherent group differences”, that weakens the ability of anti-Whites to force ‘tangibles’ to be paid. K.P. Harden’s book will be useful as an HBD fuck off citation to equity hustlers: “She’s a liberal, but even she says there are determinative cognitive differences—don’t you believe in science?”

    Then if the Left still tries to realize their dysgenic ‘reparations’ death wish, accept the Who/Whom ROE (if you haven’t already) and proceed from there.

    , @animalogic
    @Almost Missouri

    Yes, indeed you have something there.
    Just change "Left" to "Elites" & it will all be more objective.....

    , @John Milton’s Ghost
    @Almost Missouri

    I’ve started to wonder this more and more. Typically elites generally and the left specifically are willing to concede a point only when it doesn’t matter anymore. E.g. Ted Kennedy was a murderous creep is ok to say now, since he’s not voting or slandering his opponents from his warm seat in hell.

    By the time the consensus emerges in the mainstream on HBD, whites will be such a small minority that what policy is implemented will essentially seize and transfer wealth from them. Exempt will be elites who can demonstrate that they are gay or trans, or Jewish, or Hispanic (count on white hispanic being a term applied only to enemies of the state).

    Replies: @Dennis Dale

  20. @Mike Tre
    As a society, the left and the right prop up and enable stupidity and celebrate weakness, and prevent people from making bad choices when we should be allowing them to do so with full consequences. This is how people with bad traits are weeded out of a society.

    Ubiquitous warning signs and handicap spots are a good example of the former and seat belt laws are a good example of the latter.

    Replies: @Steve Sailer, @Almost Missouri

    we should be allowing them to do so with full consequences.

    Unfortunately, once we embraced the welfare state, everyone gets to bear the costs of anyone’s errors.

    Bearing the consequences of one’s own actions. How quaint.

    • Agree: Drapetomaniac
  21. As an only occasional comments lurker, I have to ask: how is it that Mike Judge’s documentary/prophecy Idiocracy hasn’t been mentioned yet?

    • Replies: @El Dato
    @Frogger

    It is mentioned regularly, actually.

    , @Achmed E. Newman
    @Frogger

    Because everyone here already knows this clip by heart. ;-} It goes without saying, but this scene goes along pretty well with AnotherDad's comment above.

    That's about my 2nd favorite scene from the movie.

    .

    [EDIT] Just watched it again. Yeah, maybe that is my favorite scene.

  22. Novelist Tibor Fischer writing in the London Telegraph four years ago. Sorry for the long post but I think it’s pretty apt.

    My fellow lecturers won’t say it in public, but students today are moaning, illiterate snowflakes

    When I tell people who have had nothing to do with universities recently that I’ve taught British undergraduates who are simply incapable of writing a correct sentence in English, most smirk in disbelief…When I raise this with fellow lecturers, however, they nod mournfully.

    There is still a mania that everyone should go to university and every endeavour should be a degree… There’s an “everyone must pass” attitude, which is compounded by the “sick note” epidemic. The student who is currently suing Oxford University because it allegedly “didn’t take her anxiety seriously enough” isn’t an unusual figure.

    [MORE]

    Lecturers don’t like to speak out about this because life is precarious in the academic world, but in private I don’t come across anyone who disagrees with what I’m about to say. Here goes.

    Almost every fourth essay you have to mark has a cover sheet pleading extenuating circumstances: Asperger’s, autism, anxiety, depression, ADHD, OCD, dyslexia, dyspraxia. In my day, extenuating circumstances meant that your family had died in a car crash a month before your finals.

    And if you don’t pass, no need to worry because you’ll almost certainly have the chance of a resit or a resubmission. Essentially, if you can be bothered to turn up, you’ll get a degree.

    When I suggested to my department head that it might be beneficial to axe one or two students to gee up the performance of the rest, he commented, without any hint of irony: “We can’t fail them, because then they’d leave.”

    I taught English literature for four years at Christ Church University in Canterbury. I taught some 120 first‑year undergrads, of whom I asked the question: “What is a sentence?”

    Only six came up with the formula: subject, verb, object (and two of them were foreign students). They hadn’t heard of this grammar stuff. Some were even shaky on what an adjective is. And these weren’t physicists or business studies students, this was the literature class.

    Everyone is guilty. The Labour Party for comprehensive education…Margaret Thatcher for the turn your shed-into-a-university policy. Tony Blair for abolishing the requirement for foreign languages.

    And then of course the Equality Act, which requires Universities to make “reasonable adjustment” for those less able. What a gloriously flexible, litigious word “reasonable” is…I had experiences with students who had some “disorder” who were extraordinarily able in using their disability to their advantage.

  23. If the poor had more money, they would have the opportunity to make better choices.

    But no, you’re against giving anybody money. Even though we all give untold trillions to billionaires every single day of the year. But that’s not welfare or handouts or anything. That’s cool. Because aren’t we all temporarily embarrassed billionaires?

    No, you just want to make it impossible for the poor to have any choices at all, and then blame them for it. Good logic. I hope something happens and you end up poor. Poverty concentrates the mind wonderfully. You’ll see.

    • Troll: El Dato
  24. Serendipitous juxtaposition to “Why Are Eurasian Places That First Had Agriculture the Most Fractious Today?”, given theories in evolutionary psychology that what is now pathologised as ‘ADHD’ is a product of genes selected for as advantageous in hunter-gatherer societies—encompassing most of human existence—but maladaptive in sedentary agricultural societies. Wiki calls it the ‘Hunter vs. farmer hypothesis‘.

    ADHD is oft diagnosed in boys who behave too much like boys, particularly in evolutionarily novel environments like formal schooling requiring boys sit for hours in a classroom prison every day, expected to learn in an atmosphere designed by women to fit how girls learn. Throughout history, young men seldom spent all day in the village with the women. In contrast to farm life (or school/office life), no two days in the life of a hunter were identical.

    As with autism diagnoses, ADHD may be making a pathology out of strongly male-typical traits that don’t conform well to feminized modern society. Today ADHD may still correlate with ‘hunter’ traits seen as desirable in a potential mate.

    Misnamed ADHD is not a “deficit” in attention but dysregulation, unable to force focus on tedious tasks expected in modern society (yet anything but natural in human history).

    People with ADHD have power to hyperfocus intensely on activities that naturally interest them and provide stimuli their minds crave—thus more individually imaginative, creative, innovative, stronger at divergent thinking—spend days daydreaming rather than pay attention in class to know what answers teacher wants memorized for an A grade. (Again, in an almost exclusively male behavioral pattern, some daydreamers may get ideas for inventions in their head—and make a risky impulsive ADHD-driven decision to drop out of school to devote all their attention to pursue their world-changing idea…)

    Being good at school doesn’t mean smart. Contrary to popular misconception, ADHD itself is not a learning disability. ‘Schooling disability’ perhaps—but that reflects the society. [e.g. Finland was one of the last countries in Europe to be converted from nomadic to sedentary lifestyle. Now Finnish education system ranks among the best in the world, competing with Asian countries. But in stark contrast to Asian ‘Tiger Mom’ model, Finnish schoolchildren spend the fewest hours in the classroom, get the least homework; Finns don’t start school ’til age 7. As if it were a system designed for a society with behavioral norms that would be pathologised as ADHD (and/or autism) in today’s U.K. or U.S.

    Living in ADHD hunter-gatherer tribes in dark snowy woods for thousands of years after peoples of Ancient Near East exploited their fertile soil to cultivate agriculture for sedentary settlement…nowadays the Nordic countries are not only far less ‘fractious’, but outperform Mesopotamia on any measure of advanced human development.]

    • Agree: Travis
  25. The sharp-sighted Auberon Waugh (the English Tom Wolfe) noticed modern Britain’s increasingly dysgenic social policies from the 70s onwards. Writing here in 1981 on the end of aspiration:

    I attribute the disintegration of the upper reaches of British society in no small measure to the[…]ban on the creation of new hereditary peerages. The hereditary peerage was both the symbol and the embodiment of[…]human aspiration. … I may as well admit that throughout my youth and early manhood I always hoped I would end my days as an earl…When I first started work for the Daily Telegraph in 1960 I wore a dark suit and stiff white collar every day. There was still hope. What possible motive is now left for deference or good behaviour?

    And on the cult of the disabled:

    In a country which is torn by conflicting interests and class antagonisms, tender sentiments towards the disabled are just about the only thing we can all agree on. As I have said before, those ostentatious signs advertising toilet facilities for the disabled which greet travellers at Heathrow Airport are far more a symbol of the nation, and of its precarious unity, than the Royal coat of arms or the Union Jack. One day, perhaps, the wheelchair motif will be adopted as our national flag, and the mysterious third sex which has begun to appear at motorway comfort stations—Men, Women and semi-ambulant Duos—will be adopted as our official sexual identity.

    On the laziness of British workers (in 1985):

    British prostitutes have the reputation for being not only the ugliest and greediest but also the laziest in the world.  Few even pretend to enjoy the job, they make no secret of despising their customers and being in it only for the money.

  26. @Almost Missouri
    @Daniel H

    If HBDers ever succeed in the quixotic quest to persuade the Left that the foundational tenet of equalism is mistaken, what will NOT happen is that the Left will say, "Ah well, we were mistaken, let us bury the hatchet and just live and let live then."

    What WILL happen is that they will say—and they are not entirely wrong in this—is that genetics are just a part of the environment. They will conclude therefore that their real mistake in not recognizing genetic contributions was that they weren't controlling genetics the whole time along with everything else. And they will immediately set about "remediating" this oversight.

    If you think that battling the Left over every little policy detail was bad when it was simply a matter of who gets hired, who gets promoted, and who gets fired, imagine what it will be like once it becomes a battle over who breeds with whom, who gets born and who gets aborted. It will be at this point that the battle will move from the anteroom of unnecessary hells that the Left has opened into the grand ballroom of Unnecessary Hell. All of the genomics, genetic science, and the CRISPR technology that HBD has been arguing everyone should pay more attention to will now get that attention ... as it is all put into the service of the new Left project to create the new Soviet/SJW man from the chromosomes up.

    If you thought it was bad having to justify every employment, election, cultural and educational choice on the basis of race, now all of that will continue, only it will also extend to birth and death itself. The DIE commissars who were reluctantly accepted as unavoidable compromises with multiculturalism will now become quite literally what their acronym promised: apparatchiks with the literal power of life and death, in the name of Diversity, Inclusion and Equity.

    Only one kidney transplant available for two dialysis patients: the rapper with the modest rap sheet versus the mild mannered actuary? Guess who's gettin's dat kidney yo!

    White man wants to breed with white woman? "Do you have a breeding passport for that?" asks your local DIE Commissar.

    "Hey TradWife! You're lookin' pretty fine! Why are you not contributing your ancestral endowment to the state mandated Genetics Reparations Blender? Your husband will pay for it."

    Welcome to state-mandated race cuckolding. How do you expect to achieve Diversity, Inclusion, and Equity if you won't participate? What are you, A RACIST?!? There's only one race: the Human Race, and you will do your lifelong and genewide part to raise le 56% generation of racial reparators. As our totally legitimately elected President said, white people are becoming a minority, and that's a good thing! As Diversicrats, our job is to help a good thing along. You know, "we're from the government, and we're here to help," right down to the genetic level.

    HBD winning the genetics debate will not make the Left back down. It will make the Left realize that they now need to seize the Genetic Means Of Production too.

    Steve likes to say the "E" in DIE means they're coming for the Equity in your house. If only that were the limit of it. Ultimately, they're coming for the Equity in your 'nads. And the Inclusion.

    Replies: @Jenner Ickham Errican, @animalogic, @John Milton’s Ghost

    HBD winning the genetics debate will not make the Left back down.

    No, but that’s okay—more and more formerly bluepilled ‘normie’ Whites (and some non-Whites) would then be less likely to go with the anti-White, pro-“equity” flow.

    If the ‘conversation’ moves from “inequality is due to racial injustice” to “inequality is partly/mostly due to inherent group differences”, that weakens the ability of anti-Whites to force ‘tangibles’ to be paid. K.P. Harden’s book will be useful as an HBD fuck off citation to equity hustlers: “She’s a liberal, but even she says there are determinative cognitive differences—don’t you believe in science?”

    Then if the Left still tries to realize their dysgenic ‘reparations’ death wish, accept the Who/Whom ROE (if you haven’t already) and proceed from there.

  27. @Ghost of Bull Moose
    So lots of obese tattooed women having kids with black high school dropouts? Sounds about right.

    Replies: @Sean, @Drapetomaniac

    The BBC is a quintessential British institution. Associative mating.

    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2000/jul/02/tracymcveigh.theobserver
    One of the world’s most revered scientists has developed a theory that fat people are happier than thin ones. James Watson, the Nobel prize-winning geneticist who was jointly responsible for discovering the structure of DNA, believes that plumper women are also likely to enjoy a better sex life than their thin counterparts.

    High estrogen women reproducing with the highest testosterone men. What’s to understand?

    • Replies: @Ghost of Bull Moose
    @Sean

    Not 'high estrogen,' 'plumper' women. Big fat pigs.

    It's related to the idea that people who are good at basketball like basketball because they are good at basketball: Fat pigs like shiftless boogies because shiftless boogies like them. These pigs are shut out of the hypergamy game.

    High value white males always have first pick, of white women but also of pretty much any other race. High value black men can do better than some porky white prole, given the reality that they partner outside their own race very frequently, as we know from the constant lamentations of black women.

    These porkers have to compete with Asian women, attractive doogas, Latinas, even your good looking high yella broads. They miss out on the 2nd and 3rd tier white men, and so they end up with a choice between the lowest value white men and blacks who can at least manage to impregnate them, even if the porkers know going in there isn't any possibility of long term commitment or support.

    These are the genetic implications of 'multiculturalism' that haven't been much considered. People find their level in terms of reproductive partners, it's well established by now.

    Replies: @Truth

  28. I think one of the simpler ideas that is indeed not well understood by non-HBD aware folks, is simply gene-culture co-evolution.

    Humans are top of the heap in altering their environment. And the last 10,000 years since the agricultural revolution it is precisely this process–humans altering their material culture, then that culture driving selection for people well suited to it; i.e. gene-culture co-evolution–that has created such amazing HBD.

    In the modern West, our culture create selects for people … who are really ill-suited for creating and maintaining the culture they live in. Our culture’s selection actually pushes toward a population that would be incapable of creating or maintaining our culture. Self-negation. It’s a pretty unique situation.

    And again … some nation/civilization will develop the special sauce of eugenic replacement (or replacement plus) fertility … and that nation will win.

    (I wish it would be us–the West. But it sure doesn’t look that way now.)

  29. @Steve Sailer
    @Mike Tre

    I frequently engage in drunken street racing without a seatbelt so that I can qualify for those sweet handicapped parking places. I'll never have to walk a long way from my parking spot again!

    Replies: @CorkyAgain, @Reg Cæsar, @Truth

    I frequently engage in drunken street racing without a seatbelt so that I can qualify for those sweet handicapped parking places

    Hmm…anybody ever see both these fellows in the same room?


    https://www.baseball-reference.com/bullpen/Oldest_Living_MLB_Player

    Back to baseball, Roger Angell turns 101 this week. He’s three months older than the oldest living player.

    Eddie Robinson, MLB’s oldest living player, turns 100 years old

    Who has a podcast:

    https://www.listennotes.com/podcasts/the-golden-age-of-baseball-with-eddie-ZIRHWxlih9j/

    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar
    @Reg Cæsar

    Looks like Angell has four more players to surpass. Chet Hoff lived to 107. His successor in longevity, Ike Kahdot, was an Indian who played a week for the Indians. His successor, Karl Swanson, was born in the 19th century and lived into the 21st.

    Oldest Living MLB Player

    Back on topic, to British genes-- how old do cricketers get?

  30. @Reg Cæsar
    @Steve Sailer


    I frequently engage in drunken street racing without a seatbelt so that I can qualify for those sweet handicapped parking places
     
    Hmm...anybody ever see both these fellows in the same room?


    https://static01.nyt.com/images/2020/07/27/multimedia/27xp-camera/27xp-camera-superJumbo.jpg

    https://alchetron.com/cdn/steve-sailer-f52c2220-095c-4315-9026-a31931a544d-resize-750.jpg

    https://www.baseball-reference.com/bullpen/Oldest_Living_MLB_Player


    Back to baseball, Roger Angell turns 101 this week. He's three months older than the oldest living player.


    Eddie Robinson, MLB's oldest living player, turns 100 years old

    Who has a podcast:

    https://www.listennotes.com/podcasts/the-golden-age-of-baseball-with-eddie-ZIRHWxlih9j/

    Replies: @Reg Cæsar

    Looks like Angell has four more players to surpass. Chet Hoff lived to 107. His successor in longevity, Ike Kahdot, was an Indian who played a week for the Indians. His successor, Karl Swanson, was born in the 19th century and lived into the 21st.

    Oldest Living MLB Player

    Back on topic, to British genes– how old do cricketers get?

  31. @Daniel H

    The left ought to pay more attention to this.....
     
    https://static.independent.co.uk/s3fs-public/thumbnails/image/2015/04/30/07/Sand1.jpg

    Replies: @Anon, @Almost Missouri, @Hypnotoad666, @Jiminy

    “The left should pay more attention to genetics,” is like saying “vampires should pay more attention to garlic.”

    • LOL: Achmed E. Newman
  32. Aldous Huxley and his biologist brother Julian were all over this from the 1920s onward.

    Aldous gave them names – Deltas and Epsilons. Their numbers were then under direct control via production quotas to the hatcheries. Today, immigration policy provides that population balance.

    Julian became the first director of UNESCO and pushed birth control for the wogs in the face of opposition from both the Catholic Church and from the international Communists.

    I will say that a stupid population is partially the fault of we males of the species. Men don’t particularly select their female mates for high IQ. But the high IQ women I’ve been in relationships with tended to be impossible to live with – give me sweet, balanced, and average!

  33. Addictive birth control pills (for women and men). Pregnancy would then require a specific and coordinated effort by both parents, resulting in strong selection in favor of intelligence and conscientiousness.

    • Agree: epebble
    • Replies: @epebble
    @jamie b.

    If some International Aid group like Gates Foundation invests in this low hanging fruit, they can radically improve the development prospects in Africa and elsewhere.

    , @Achmed E. Newman
    @jamie b.

    That's a hell of an idea, Jamie!

  34. @Redneck farmer
    And this is why it ain't GREAT Britain anymore.

    Replies: @Pericles, @Simon Tugmutton

    Which reminds me, Little Britain was a very funny series. Banned now, of course.

  35. @AnotherDad
    Pretty obvious that fertility is dysgenic--has been dysgenic for a couple three generations--in the welfare state and "you go girl!" female careerism West.

    The immigration is disaster is #1. But after that this dysgenic problem is pretty much top of the list.

    Steve floated this question up in his Taki Mag article:

    And what about poor genes? If a society generously chooses to subsidize the victims of poor genes, can it take any steps to lessen the chances of them passing on those poor genes and thus expensively victimizing future generations?

    Or is that eugenics, which is, of course, the worst thing ever?
     
    My take is important for same people who care about their nation to directly confront and win the "eugenics" battle against the minoritarian liars. They are always going to smear--racist!, anti-Semite!, Nazi!--no matter what. (It's "who they are".) There's no ducking that. So i think rational people should just own it--and fight the good fight.

    "Yes, genes matter." "The most important thing in any society is whom you share it with." "Yes, we want healthy, capable, law-abiding and productive people to reproduce; not those who are unhealthy, addicted, mentally-ill, incompetent, unable to support themselves." "If you want to call it eugenics fine."

    This doesn't have to involve any police statey stuff at all. Probably the biggest bang for the buck:

    "If you are unable to provide for yourself or take care of yourself and the taxpayers have to step in to help, then you should not be having children. Period. We'll provide a safety net, but in return you do not have kids."

    is actually something that has very broad common sense support, despite the wailing of "intellectuals".

    From there, you can move on to the more complicated issues of encouraging productive and healthy young families to have more children.

    A simple approach is non-refundable tax-credits that essentially remove productive people from the tax rolls while they are in their child bearing and early rearing years. They can pay taxes later when they are at career peak with the kids off to school or in retirement. The childless can pay as well.

    And the other aspect is simply cultural. Returning the culture to one that prioritizes--heaps praise upon--families and having children. An immigration end, and healthy nationalism helps with that as well.

    Replies: @Polistra, @Pericles, @Rob, @Veteran Aryan

    War is Peace*! Dysgenics are Eugenics!

    * over there so not over here, amirite?

  36. @AndrewR
    Since when does "the left" care about income and wealth disparities lmao

    Replies: @Engels

    Since when does “the left” care about income and wealth disparities lmao

    From 1789 to 1991.

  37. I believe Andy Rooney publicly speculated on the dysgenic fertility patterns in American blacks a couple of decades ago. Rooney was put in the penalty box for a while, but returned to “60 Minutes” because: 1) it wasn’t 2021; and 2) Rooney was the only personality on the show anyone in the audience could stand.

  38. @Almost Missouri
    @Daniel H

    If HBDers ever succeed in the quixotic quest to persuade the Left that the foundational tenet of equalism is mistaken, what will NOT happen is that the Left will say, "Ah well, we were mistaken, let us bury the hatchet and just live and let live then."

    What WILL happen is that they will say—and they are not entirely wrong in this—is that genetics are just a part of the environment. They will conclude therefore that their real mistake in not recognizing genetic contributions was that they weren't controlling genetics the whole time along with everything else. And they will immediately set about "remediating" this oversight.

    If you think that battling the Left over every little policy detail was bad when it was simply a matter of who gets hired, who gets promoted, and who gets fired, imagine what it will be like once it becomes a battle over who breeds with whom, who gets born and who gets aborted. It will be at this point that the battle will move from the anteroom of unnecessary hells that the Left has opened into the grand ballroom of Unnecessary Hell. All of the genomics, genetic science, and the CRISPR technology that HBD has been arguing everyone should pay more attention to will now get that attention ... as it is all put into the service of the new Left project to create the new Soviet/SJW man from the chromosomes up.

    If you thought it was bad having to justify every employment, election, cultural and educational choice on the basis of race, now all of that will continue, only it will also extend to birth and death itself. The DIE commissars who were reluctantly accepted as unavoidable compromises with multiculturalism will now become quite literally what their acronym promised: apparatchiks with the literal power of life and death, in the name of Diversity, Inclusion and Equity.

    Only one kidney transplant available for two dialysis patients: the rapper with the modest rap sheet versus the mild mannered actuary? Guess who's gettin's dat kidney yo!

    White man wants to breed with white woman? "Do you have a breeding passport for that?" asks your local DIE Commissar.

    "Hey TradWife! You're lookin' pretty fine! Why are you not contributing your ancestral endowment to the state mandated Genetics Reparations Blender? Your husband will pay for it."

    Welcome to state-mandated race cuckolding. How do you expect to achieve Diversity, Inclusion, and Equity if you won't participate? What are you, A RACIST?!? There's only one race: the Human Race, and you will do your lifelong and genewide part to raise le 56% generation of racial reparators. As our totally legitimately elected President said, white people are becoming a minority, and that's a good thing! As Diversicrats, our job is to help a good thing along. You know, "we're from the government, and we're here to help," right down to the genetic level.

    HBD winning the genetics debate will not make the Left back down. It will make the Left realize that they now need to seize the Genetic Means Of Production too.

    Steve likes to say the "E" in DIE means they're coming for the Equity in your house. If only that were the limit of it. Ultimately, they're coming for the Equity in your 'nads. And the Inclusion.

    Replies: @Jenner Ickham Errican, @animalogic, @John Milton’s Ghost

    Yes, indeed you have something there.
    Just change “Left” to “Elites” & it will all be more objective…..

  39. @Anon
    @Daniel H

    To be fair, the right(at least the parts of it trying to ban abortion) is just as head-in-the-sand.

    Replies: @Almost Missouri

    Abortion is dysgenic.

    https://www.unz.com/gdurocher/bumbling-towards-the-biosingularity/#comment-4596940

    It doesn’t matter that anyone thinks that abortion should be eugenic in theory. In practice it keeps being dysgenic. And there’s no reason that will change.

    • Replies: @YetAnotherAnon
    @Almost Missouri

    In the UK nearly all unplanned middle class pregnancies are aborted. Guardianista Zoe Williams and maybe-I-wish-I-hadn't Jody Day are two typical abortion-as-self-care women.

    Sixty years ago they would either not have got pregnant, or had the baby. While I hate his politics, the lefty BBC "comedian" Mark Steel is someone who would never have been born today, when 'termination' is easy to come by and there's little residual Christianity to put a girl off it.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_Steel#Early_life


    I knew I was adopted, strangely, before I knew where babies came from. I didn’t feel different or special, and I don’t ever remember giving the slightest damn about it. I knew because my very lovely auntie Gwen would tell the story of how she got talking to a blonde girl, Frances, who had moved into a flat in the same house in London. She was 19. She was in a bit of a state because she was pregnant. Her parents didn’t know and she’d run away from home. It was 1959, so this wasn’t easy to deal with. So my auntie Gwen said to her, 'Well, I've got a solution. Have the baby and give it to my brother.' So this girl had me in 1960 and I was handed over to Doreen and Ernie.

    Just last night I discovered that five years ago he (Steels's biological father) bought a house for $12m. […] He said he remembered Frances vividly but it [Steel getting in touch by email] was all a bit of a shock because he had made all the arrangements to have me dispensed with. But she took the money and didn't go through with it, bless her.
     
    Not so much at the bottom end of the scale. A baby means a house - or at least a flat - of your own, plus an income for caring for it.
    , @Anon
    @Almost Missouri


    Yes, I know that superficially it looks like mass abortion should help white majorities because non-whites abort more than whites do, but in the real world that hasn’t happened. The reason appears to be that however many children non-whites abort, they end up carrying even more unintended pregnancies to term. So contrary to the seductively simple conclusion that one abortion = one fewer person, what happens in the real world seems to be: abortion availability = lots more “lazy” pregnancies = some of those lazy pregnancies get aborted but about an equal chunk go on to be additional births that wouldn’t have happened otherwise. So paradoxically, abortion availability stimulates unintended births!
     
    Occam's razor is that a measure that reduces births reduces births. What you posit has been observed, but it's rare that the measure to counter X leads to more of X. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Risk_compensation#Risky_sexual_behavior_and_HIV/AIDS

    The "lazy" pregnancies are happening because society used to shame that behavior and has ceased to do so. The anti-abortion right is unwilling to argue for bringing that back, thus the magical thinking that they can accomplish the same goal by banning abortion.

    This is not so strange really. The perspicacious have remarked before on how great episodes of violent death (e.g., wars) lead to surges in births and life (e.g., Baby Boom followed WWII). Abortion is quiet mass violent death against fetuses. It should be unsurprising that Nature compensates by bringing about a lot more fetuses.
     
    Nature? If you mean God, then say God. Which is a problem for me because I don't believe in God or karma or Gaia or anything else. There's no force of nature that brought back the neanderthals or the wolly mammoths or the Akkadian language. WWII led to a baby boon, but WWI and the civil war led to prolonged periods of lower fertility.

    In the US this is masked by the fact that blacks and browns abort more often than whites. But disaggregate the ethnic groups—as we seem to remember to do with everything except abortion—and you start to notice that within each ethnic group it is mostly the middle and upper echelons who bother to abort their unintended pregnancies.
     
    I looked and couldn't find any data that disaggregates this.

    Replies: @epebble, @Almost Missouri

  40. @AnotherDad
    Pretty obvious that fertility is dysgenic--has been dysgenic for a couple three generations--in the welfare state and "you go girl!" female careerism West.

    The immigration is disaster is #1. But after that this dysgenic problem is pretty much top of the list.

    Steve floated this question up in his Taki Mag article:

    And what about poor genes? If a society generously chooses to subsidize the victims of poor genes, can it take any steps to lessen the chances of them passing on those poor genes and thus expensively victimizing future generations?

    Or is that eugenics, which is, of course, the worst thing ever?
     
    My take is important for same people who care about their nation to directly confront and win the "eugenics" battle against the minoritarian liars. They are always going to smear--racist!, anti-Semite!, Nazi!--no matter what. (It's "who they are".) There's no ducking that. So i think rational people should just own it--and fight the good fight.

    "Yes, genes matter." "The most important thing in any society is whom you share it with." "Yes, we want healthy, capable, law-abiding and productive people to reproduce; not those who are unhealthy, addicted, mentally-ill, incompetent, unable to support themselves." "If you want to call it eugenics fine."

    This doesn't have to involve any police statey stuff at all. Probably the biggest bang for the buck:

    "If you are unable to provide for yourself or take care of yourself and the taxpayers have to step in to help, then you should not be having children. Period. We'll provide a safety net, but in return you do not have kids."

    is actually something that has very broad common sense support, despite the wailing of "intellectuals".

    From there, you can move on to the more complicated issues of encouraging productive and healthy young families to have more children.

    A simple approach is non-refundable tax-credits that essentially remove productive people from the tax rolls while they are in their child bearing and early rearing years. They can pay taxes later when they are at career peak with the kids off to school or in retirement. The childless can pay as well.

    And the other aspect is simply cultural. Returning the culture to one that prioritizes--heaps praise upon--families and having children. An immigration end, and healthy nationalism helps with that as well.

    Replies: @Polistra, @Pericles, @Rob, @Veteran Aryan

    As one of the “unhealthy, addicted, mentally-ill, incompetent, unable to support themselves,” I agree completely.

    Given that so many occupations are currently sedentary, weeding out genes for easily damaged spines and hips should be at the top of the common physical problems list. It is cruel to have children who will just experience the same misery you did.

    [MORE]

    There’s also the hedonic-utilitarian perspective. (Nearly) everyone wants to do something productive in life. Those who don’t, well, they usually want to accumulate status. Both those things are hard to do with serious physical and mental problems.

    I knew a guy Bill… something. Liked to be called Wild Bill. He was a drug dealer discovered senior year of high school. Never thought he was cool, but never thought he was scary, either. Next year, when I came back from college on break, he was changed, and not for the better. Greatly resented anyone who went to college. Was all “oh, college! So you get to get a good job and make lots of money, but I don’t cuz I’m ‘not college material’” Trust me, he was not college material. His only path to any money was dealing, and the user community was the only one in which he could accumulate status.

    I have no idea what happened to Bill. He stole my lighter and put a rifle in the face of a friend he had known since childhood. My friend josh snd I were like, ‘let’s leave – after this bowl.” People like Bill are not even lumpenproletariat. They are not cast-offs from the last economic order. Maybe there was a place for him back when strong (white) backs were in demand, and alcohol was the only drug people around here really had access to, but with Mexicans to do the work and cocaine to get him high, there was no socially beneficial place for him in the world. We need fewer Wild Bills. No happy guy puts a gun in his friend’s face.

    I’m torn on people like me. I think if I had been able to get medical when 7, or 13, or 16, or 18, or 22, or 28, when my broken back and hip got progressively more broken and the pain more all-encompassing and severe, then I would have turned out better. But my dad thought I was screaming at him that he needed surgery, and his back didn’t hurt enough for that. For twenty-odd years, and my mom was always “go talk to your father.” I love them, but I would have been better off never existing. I would not have been mentally ill, at least not severely, if I had been fully functioning in childhood, adolescence, and early adulthood. Instead of life, I had agony. If we had universal healthcare, it might have been different. If I got hurt a decade later, with health insurance, might have been different then, too.

    If the economy had a place for crazy, creative people, it might have been different. But it doesn’t. If society is going to have a miserable, abused underclass, maybe it shouldn’t have one, and rich people can get Roombas?

    Eugenics will make for healthier and happier people. It’s only an historical accident that the left turned against eugenics. But the nazis were a long time ago. Jews themselves practice eugenics here and in Israel. I think if blacks were smarter, American leftists would not be so opposed to eugenics. Let’s face it, any race-neutral application of eugenics that impacted whites would be devastating to blacks.

    Let’s remember that the precedent from the Supremes on eugenics is “three generations of imbeciles are enough.”

    • Replies: @Pixo
    @Rob


    As one of the “unhealthy, addicted, mentally-ill, incompetent, unable to support themselves,”
     
    You are smart and a good writer. If you’re on disability, please get started fighting to keep the truth on HBD issues online in wikipedia edit wars. You will be a huge credit to your race, and I personally will appreciate your labor.
  41. @Redneck farmer
    And this is why it ain't GREAT Britain anymore.

    Replies: @Pericles, @Simon Tugmutton

    Pedant’s Corner:

    The “Great” is a geographical term for the island comprising England, Wales and Scotland, together with adjacent islands but excluding the Isle of Man and the Channel Islands. It has nothing to do with our sadly defunct prowess in stealing everything we could lay our hands on. That was pretty great, however, while it lasted.

    As for the burgeoning underclass – yet, it’s all to do with the Welfare State.

  42. @Almost Missouri
    @Anon

    Abortion is dysgenic.

    https://www.unz.com/gdurocher/bumbling-towards-the-biosingularity/#comment-4596940

    It doesn't matter that anyone thinks that abortion should be eugenic in theory. In practice it keeps being dysgenic. And there's no reason that will change.

    Replies: @YetAnotherAnon, @Anon

    In the UK nearly all unplanned middle class pregnancies are aborted. Guardianista Zoe Williams and maybe-I-wish-I-hadn’t Jody Day are two typical abortion-as-self-care women.

    Sixty years ago they would either not have got pregnant, or had the baby. While I hate his politics, the lefty BBC “comedian” Mark Steel is someone who would never have been born today, when ‘termination’ is easy to come by and there’s little residual Christianity to put a girl off it.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_Steel#Early_life

    I knew I was adopted, strangely, before I knew where babies came from. I didn’t feel different or special, and I don’t ever remember giving the slightest damn about it. I knew because my very lovely auntie Gwen would tell the story of how she got talking to a blonde girl, Frances, who had moved into a flat in the same house in London. She was 19. She was in a bit of a state because she was pregnant. Her parents didn’t know and she’d run away from home. It was 1959, so this wasn’t easy to deal with. So my auntie Gwen said to her, ‘Well, I’ve got a solution. Have the baby and give it to my brother.’ So this girl had me in 1960 and I was handed over to Doreen and Ernie.

    Just last night I discovered that five years ago he (Steels’s biological father) bought a house for \$12m. […] He said he remembered Frances vividly but it [Steel getting in touch by email] was all a bit of a shock because he had made all the arrangements to have me dispensed with. But she took the money and didn’t go through with it, bless her.

    Not so much at the bottom end of the scale. A baby means a house – or at least a flat – of your own, plus an income for caring for it.

  43. Anon[172] • Disclaimer says:

    Abortion is dysgenic.

    I didn’t read the TL;DR post of Ron’s, but black women use abortion wildly disproportionately compared to whites, Hispanics, and Asians, almost three times their population percentage.

    https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/69/ss/ss6907a1.htm

    Search for “Age Group, Race/Ethnicity, and Marital Status”

    The percentages need to be compared to population percentages. Wikipedia “United States Demographics” will help. Blacks are 12.7 percent. The data can be downloaded if you can handle R or another stats package.

    There’s one more data set for U.S. abortions, from the Guttmacher Institute. I’m not sure if they have race data.

    At any rate given the percentages, a black baby aborted is eugenic in terms of IQ, almost by definition. The black-white per capita rate is like, what, five to one? This really surprised me when I read the CDC data. It’s never mentioned in abortion discussions. It’s like the weird fact that most Title IX sexual assault cases are black guys on white girls. You’d never hear that if don’t read Emily Yoffe’s stuff.

  44. @Veracitor
    GWAS evidence is welcome of course, but in this case like so many others it only confirms what we already knew (C. M. Kornbluth published his famous story The Marching Morons in 1951).

    Post-WW2 society (e.g., the welfare state) is dysgenic, and really the problem is somewhat older— once modern industrial management technics were widely applied, dysgenesis emerged in many spheres. 20th-Century militaries chose the smartest, healthiest, best-behaved men to charge the enemy machine guns; the scum in low draft categories were left home to breed. Farming was mechanized, depriving millions of morons and their spawn of jobs so they moved to cities where they could live off handouts or crime. Governments taxed the most productive workers to finance largess to the less useful so they wouldn’t rock the boat, making children less affordable for the former but (thanks to additional per-child grants) positively lucrative for the latter. Cynical elite managers and politicians implemented ‘affirmative action’ preferences to interpose a dependent client class between the elites and any challengers from the middle class, again favoring the genetically less productive. In these and many more ways modern industrial society is dysgenic and things are unlikely to improve before widespread genetic engineering of humans. Even then I fear that elite interest in forestalling competition for the places at the top will result in more genetic divergence not less.

    Replies: @peterike, @Drapetomaniac

    In these and many more ways modern industrial society is dysgenic and things are unlikely to improve before widespread genetic engineering of humans.

    I agree with what you’ve written. But I have a question for the audience: while modern Western industrial society is clearly dysgenic, what is the situation in China? Certainly, they don’t coddle their criminal classes. But are the newer Chinese generations getting better — i.e. becoming even more formidable competitors — or getting worse?

    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
    @peterike

    It's not a genetic factor, but they are getting spoiled as all get-out, Peter. Many are raised by 6 adults, tiger mother, tiger mother-in-law, tiger grandma, etc. I'm sure they will be very educated, but I wonder about the snowflake factor.

    OTOH, that gets them a lot closer to the future I envisioned from Sci-fi books I used to read - in a century or two there could be a much lower and smarter population, with lots of resources lots of automation, and lots of leisure time, well, as in the novels I used to read. (Note the few seconds in Frogger's Idiocracy clip showing the envisioned future before the Welfare State induced dysgenics*.)

    Then again, lately the Winnie-the-Pooh run CCP has headed in a hard-core Orwellian direction. I would take my chances here over China, if that were a choice.

    .

    * Mike Judge didn't have time to really explain that, and also notice that he picked redneck Cletus vs, the hood - you gotta get the film out there, so ...

    Replies: @Dennis Dale, @Truth

  45. @Sean
    @Ghost of Bull Moose

    The BBC is a quintessential British institution. Associative mating.


    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2000/jul/02/tracymcveigh.theobserver
    One of the world's most revered scientists has developed a theory that fat people are happier than thin ones. James Watson, the Nobel prize-winning geneticist who was jointly responsible for discovering the structure of DNA, believes that plumper women are also likely to enjoy a better sex life than their thin counterparts.
     
    High estrogen women reproducing with the highest testosterone men. What's to understand?

    Replies: @Ghost of Bull Moose

    Not ‘high estrogen,’ ‘plumper’ women. Big fat pigs.

    It’s related to the idea that people who are good at basketball like basketball because they are good at basketball: Fat pigs like shiftless boogies because shiftless boogies like them. These pigs are shut out of the hypergamy game.

    High value white males always have first pick, of white women but also of pretty much any other race. High value black men can do better than some porky white prole, given the reality that they partner outside their own race very frequently, as we know from the constant lamentations of black women.

    These porkers have to compete with Asian women, attractive doogas, Latinas, even your good looking high yella broads. They miss out on the 2nd and 3rd tier white men, and so they end up with a choice between the lowest value white men and blacks who can at least manage to impregnate them, even if the porkers know going in there isn’t any possibility of long term commitment or support.

    These are the genetic implications of ‘multiculturalism’ that haven’t been much considered. People find their level in terms of reproductive partners, it’s well established by now.

    • Replies: @Truth
    @Ghost of Bull Moose

    Other than that, Mrs. Lincoln...

  46. Watch a week of British Telly and you’ll understand why.

  47. Embrace it. Invest in pharmaceuticals and health care providers positioned to take on the diabetes and related illnesses surge, booze and weed retailers and private security firms.

  48. there are no such “genes for”. the only people dumber than negroes are hereditists.

    but is this controlled for race, ethnicity?

    • Replies: @jamie b.
    @anon


    there are no such “genes for”.
     
    Tell that to someone with a defective EYA1 gene. Oh wait, you can't. They'd be deaf.

    the only people dumber than negroes are hereditists.
     
    Well, you're obviously the expert on 'hereditism.'
  49. @jamie b.
    Addictive birth control pills (for women and men). Pregnancy would then require a specific and coordinated effort by both parents, resulting in strong selection in favor of intelligence and conscientiousness.

    Replies: @epebble, @Achmed E. Newman

    If some International Aid group like Gates Foundation invests in this low hanging fruit, they can radically improve the development prospects in Africa and elsewhere.

  50. @Almost Missouri
    @Daniel H

    If HBDers ever succeed in the quixotic quest to persuade the Left that the foundational tenet of equalism is mistaken, what will NOT happen is that the Left will say, "Ah well, we were mistaken, let us bury the hatchet and just live and let live then."

    What WILL happen is that they will say—and they are not entirely wrong in this—is that genetics are just a part of the environment. They will conclude therefore that their real mistake in not recognizing genetic contributions was that they weren't controlling genetics the whole time along with everything else. And they will immediately set about "remediating" this oversight.

    If you think that battling the Left over every little policy detail was bad when it was simply a matter of who gets hired, who gets promoted, and who gets fired, imagine what it will be like once it becomes a battle over who breeds with whom, who gets born and who gets aborted. It will be at this point that the battle will move from the anteroom of unnecessary hells that the Left has opened into the grand ballroom of Unnecessary Hell. All of the genomics, genetic science, and the CRISPR technology that HBD has been arguing everyone should pay more attention to will now get that attention ... as it is all put into the service of the new Left project to create the new Soviet/SJW man from the chromosomes up.

    If you thought it was bad having to justify every employment, election, cultural and educational choice on the basis of race, now all of that will continue, only it will also extend to birth and death itself. The DIE commissars who were reluctantly accepted as unavoidable compromises with multiculturalism will now become quite literally what their acronym promised: apparatchiks with the literal power of life and death, in the name of Diversity, Inclusion and Equity.

    Only one kidney transplant available for two dialysis patients: the rapper with the modest rap sheet versus the mild mannered actuary? Guess who's gettin's dat kidney yo!

    White man wants to breed with white woman? "Do you have a breeding passport for that?" asks your local DIE Commissar.

    "Hey TradWife! You're lookin' pretty fine! Why are you not contributing your ancestral endowment to the state mandated Genetics Reparations Blender? Your husband will pay for it."

    Welcome to state-mandated race cuckolding. How do you expect to achieve Diversity, Inclusion, and Equity if you won't participate? What are you, A RACIST?!? There's only one race: the Human Race, and you will do your lifelong and genewide part to raise le 56% generation of racial reparators. As our totally legitimately elected President said, white people are becoming a minority, and that's a good thing! As Diversicrats, our job is to help a good thing along. You know, "we're from the government, and we're here to help," right down to the genetic level.

    HBD winning the genetics debate will not make the Left back down. It will make the Left realize that they now need to seize the Genetic Means Of Production too.

    Steve likes to say the "E" in DIE means they're coming for the Equity in your house. If only that were the limit of it. Ultimately, they're coming for the Equity in your 'nads. And the Inclusion.

    Replies: @Jenner Ickham Errican, @animalogic, @John Milton’s Ghost

    I’ve started to wonder this more and more. Typically elites generally and the left specifically are willing to concede a point only when it doesn’t matter anymore. E.g. Ted Kennedy was a murderous creep is ok to say now, since he’s not voting or slandering his opponents from his warm seat in hell.

    By the time the consensus emerges in the mainstream on HBD, whites will be such a small minority that what policy is implemented will essentially seize and transfer wealth from them. Exempt will be elites who can demonstrate that they are gay or trans, or Jewish, or Hispanic (count on white hispanic being a term applied only to enemies of the state).

    • Replies: @Dennis Dale
    @John Milton’s Ghost

    Well, its not ideal but as long as no icky white nationalist movement develops.

    And our sportsball will be endlessly fascinating. I can't wait to see who dominates badminton!

  51. @John Milton’s Ghost
    @Almost Missouri

    I’ve started to wonder this more and more. Typically elites generally and the left specifically are willing to concede a point only when it doesn’t matter anymore. E.g. Ted Kennedy was a murderous creep is ok to say now, since he’s not voting or slandering his opponents from his warm seat in hell.

    By the time the consensus emerges in the mainstream on HBD, whites will be such a small minority that what policy is implemented will essentially seize and transfer wealth from them. Exempt will be elites who can demonstrate that they are gay or trans, or Jewish, or Hispanic (count on white hispanic being a term applied only to enemies of the state).

    Replies: @Dennis Dale

    Well, its not ideal but as long as no icky white nationalist movement develops.

    And our sportsball will be endlessly fascinating. I can’t wait to see who dominates badminton!

  52. @JohnnyWalker123
    How do we calculate the difference (in standard deviations ) between the birth cohorts and population mean?

    For example, how much is a propensity to ADHD shifting by generation?

    Replies: @res

    How do we calculate the difference (in standard deviations ) between the birth cohorts and population mean?

    From page 2.

    Several scores show consistent increases or declines over this 30-year period, of the order of 5% of a standard deviation.

    Figure 1 on page 3 shows the mean PGS for each trait by 5 year cohort.

    Footnote 1 on page 4 states (emphasis added):

    The selection effect 𝛽 equals 𝐶𝑜𝑣(𝑁, 𝑃𝐺𝑆)/𝑉 𝑎𝑟(𝑃𝐺𝑆) where 𝑁 is the number of children. Since PGS are normalized to variance 1 and mean 0, this reduces to 𝐶𝑜𝑣(𝑁, 𝑃𝐺𝑆) ≡ 𝐸(𝑁 𝑃𝐺𝑆) − 𝐸(𝑁)𝐸(𝑃𝐺𝑆) = 𝐸(𝑁 𝑃𝐺𝑆). This is the polygenic score weighted by the number of children, which is the average polygenic score in the next generation.

    This means things are normalized in a way which means the PGS scores are Z-scores (i.e. SD units).
    So Figure 1 is in SD units which should be exactly what you wanted.

    Not sure about how to interpret the effect sizes. Anyone know for sure?

    Back to you.

    For example, how much is a propensity to ADHD shifting by generation?

    The change is nonlinear. From -0.01 for birth year 1945 (and 1940) increasing to 0.02 for birth year 1960, but then declining to about 0.005 for birth year 1965.

    Direct link to the paper.
    https://ideas.repec.org/p/uea/ueaeco/2021-02.html

    • Thanks: JohnnyWalker123
  53. @Frogger
    As an only occasional comments lurker, I have to ask: how is it that Mike Judge's documentary/prophecy Idiocracy hasn't been mentioned yet?
    https://youtu.be/gJDcoqrh1ac

    Replies: @El Dato, @Achmed E. Newman

    It is mentioned regularly, actually.

  54. @Ghost of Bull Moose
    So lots of obese tattooed women having kids with black high school dropouts? Sounds about right.

    Replies: @Sean, @Drapetomaniac

    Feed and breed a la the animal world.

  55. @Frogger
    As an only occasional comments lurker, I have to ask: how is it that Mike Judge's documentary/prophecy Idiocracy hasn't been mentioned yet?
    https://youtu.be/gJDcoqrh1ac

    Replies: @El Dato, @Achmed E. Newman

    Because everyone here already knows this clip by heart. ;-} It goes without saying, but this scene goes along pretty well with AnotherDad’s comment above.

    That’s about my 2nd favorite scene from the movie.

    .

    [EDIT] Just watched it again. Yeah, maybe that is my favorite scene.

  56. @peterike
    @Veracitor


    In these and many more ways modern industrial society is dysgenic and things are unlikely to improve before widespread genetic engineering of humans.
     
    I agree with what you've written. But I have a question for the audience: while modern Western industrial society is clearly dysgenic, what is the situation in China? Certainly, they don't coddle their criminal classes. But are the newer Chinese generations getting better -- i.e. becoming even more formidable competitors -- or getting worse?

    Replies: @Achmed E. Newman

    It’s not a genetic factor, but they are getting spoiled as all get-out, Peter. Many are raised by 6 adults, tiger mother, tiger mother-in-law, tiger grandma, etc. I’m sure they will be very educated, but I wonder about the snowflake factor.

    OTOH, that gets them a lot closer to the future I envisioned from Sci-fi books I used to read – in a century or two there could be a much lower and smarter population, with lots of resources lots of automation, and lots of leisure time, well, as in the novels I used to read. (Note the few seconds in Frogger’s Idiocracy clip showing the envisioned future before the Welfare State induced dysgenics*.)

    Then again, lately the Winnie-the-Pooh run CCP has headed in a hard-core Orwellian direction. I would take my chances here over China, if that were a choice.

    .

    * Mike Judge didn’t have time to really explain that, and also notice that he picked redneck Cletus vs, the hood – you gotta get the film out there, so …

    • Replies: @Dennis Dale
    @Achmed E. Newman


    Then again, lately the Winnie-the-Pooh run CCP has headed in a hard-core Orwellian direction. I would take my chances here over China, if that were a choice.
     
    Where is this alternate universe you reside in, and do you have cable television?

    Replies: @Achmed E. Newman

    , @Truth
    @Achmed E. Newman


    in a century or two there could be a much lower and smarter population, with lots of resources lots of automation, and lots of leisure time...
     
    Correction; "in a year or two," and correspondingly, yes, no, no, no and no.
  57. @jamie b.
    Addictive birth control pills (for women and men). Pregnancy would then require a specific and coordinated effort by both parents, resulting in strong selection in favor of intelligence and conscientiousness.

    Replies: @epebble, @Achmed E. Newman

    That’s a hell of an idea, Jamie!

  58. @Veracitor
    GWAS evidence is welcome of course, but in this case like so many others it only confirms what we already knew (C. M. Kornbluth published his famous story The Marching Morons in 1951).

    Post-WW2 society (e.g., the welfare state) is dysgenic, and really the problem is somewhat older— once modern industrial management technics were widely applied, dysgenesis emerged in many spheres. 20th-Century militaries chose the smartest, healthiest, best-behaved men to charge the enemy machine guns; the scum in low draft categories were left home to breed. Farming was mechanized, depriving millions of morons and their spawn of jobs so they moved to cities where they could live off handouts or crime. Governments taxed the most productive workers to finance largess to the less useful so they wouldn’t rock the boat, making children less affordable for the former but (thanks to additional per-child grants) positively lucrative for the latter. Cynical elite managers and politicians implemented ‘affirmative action’ preferences to interpose a dependent client class between the elites and any challengers from the middle class, again favoring the genetically less productive. In these and many more ways modern industrial society is dysgenic and things are unlikely to improve before widespread genetic engineering of humans. Even then I fear that elite interest in forestalling competition for the places at the top will result in more genetic divergence not less.

    Replies: @peterike, @Drapetomaniac

    “Farming was mechanized, depriving millions of morons and their spawn of jobs so they moved to cities where they could live off handouts or crime.”

    Do you even read or understand the garbage you post?

    Become a farmer then wait ten years and then comment.

    • Replies: @Veracitor
    @Drapetomaniac

    Drapeto, amigo, I think you must somehow have missed my point. I wrote about the massive shift in the farming economy and population during the last Century. As you can easily read for yourself,


    In 1900, just under 40 percent of the total US population lived on farms, and 60 percent lived in rural areas. Today [2016], the respective figures are only about 1 percent and 20 percent.
     
    Also

    Whereas farm households earned lower incomes than other households before the 1970s, since the mid-1990s, farm households have consistently earned more than other US households. In addition to earning higher incomes, farm households today tend to have substantially higher net worth than the average US household.
     
    If you don't like that source then check out another, because they all agree. (You may want to read the whole article I link. I think it's pretty interesting. But note that I've been reading about this stuff for decades.)

    You wrote "Become a farmer then wait ten years and then comment." Well, yeah, if you become a farmer now, in 2021 then you are entering a highly-concentrated, capital-intensive business run by highly-educated, high-IQ people.

    But if you were a farmhand in 1930 (or a sharecropper, or a fractionating-inheritance small farmer) your situation was different. As I pointed out, the mechanization of farming eliminated many, many low-skilled jobs which had been filled by low-skilled people since time immemorial. Over decades farm-owners (increasingly big businesses) laid off low-skilled labor while retaining chiefly high-skilled labor (gotta fix those tractors as well as drive them). The surplus agricultural labor, and the corresponding small-town support labor, moved on to the cities seeking industrial work and eventually landing in urban underemployment.

  59. @Achmed E. Newman
    @peterike

    It's not a genetic factor, but they are getting spoiled as all get-out, Peter. Many are raised by 6 adults, tiger mother, tiger mother-in-law, tiger grandma, etc. I'm sure they will be very educated, but I wonder about the snowflake factor.

    OTOH, that gets them a lot closer to the future I envisioned from Sci-fi books I used to read - in a century or two there could be a much lower and smarter population, with lots of resources lots of automation, and lots of leisure time, well, as in the novels I used to read. (Note the few seconds in Frogger's Idiocracy clip showing the envisioned future before the Welfare State induced dysgenics*.)

    Then again, lately the Winnie-the-Pooh run CCP has headed in a hard-core Orwellian direction. I would take my chances here over China, if that were a choice.

    .

    * Mike Judge didn't have time to really explain that, and also notice that he picked redneck Cletus vs, the hood - you gotta get the film out there, so ...

    Replies: @Dennis Dale, @Truth

    Then again, lately the Winnie-the-Pooh run CCP has headed in a hard-core Orwellian direction. I would take my chances here over China, if that were a choice.

    Where is this alternate universe you reside in, and do you have cable television?

    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
    @Dennis Dale

    I most certainly DON'T have cable television and haven't for over 22 years. So, you're saying it's the cable TV, rather than my lyin' eyes and Chinese connections that tells the truth, Dennis? Have you been there lately? Have you read about the social credit, health scores, and transition to payment by phone?

    I urge you to read a book called We Have Been Harmonized by a German guy named Kai Strittmatter. I have a four part review:

    Part 1
    Part 2
    Part 3
    Part 4

  60. @anon
    there are no such "genes for". the only people dumber than negroes are hereditists.

    but is this controlled for race, ethnicity?
    https://memecreator.org/static/images/memes/5354025.jpg

    Replies: @jamie b.

    there are no such “genes for”.

    Tell that to someone with a defective EYA1 gene. Oh wait, you can’t. They’d be deaf.

    the only people dumber than negroes are hereditists.

    Well, you’re obviously the expert on ‘hereditism.’

  61. @Dennis Dale
    @Achmed E. Newman


    Then again, lately the Winnie-the-Pooh run CCP has headed in a hard-core Orwellian direction. I would take my chances here over China, if that were a choice.
     
    Where is this alternate universe you reside in, and do you have cable television?

    Replies: @Achmed E. Newman

    I most certainly DON’T have cable television and haven’t for over 22 years. So, you’re saying it’s the cable TV, rather than my lyin’ eyes and Chinese connections that tells the truth, Dennis? Have you been there lately? Have you read about the social credit, health scores, and transition to payment by phone?

    I urge you to read a book called We Have Been Harmonized by a German guy named Kai Strittmatter. I have a four part review:

    Part 1
    Part 2
    Part 3
    Part 4

  62. Not saying cable news is accurate. An old joke about isolation. Just the notion China has taken a hard turn toward authoritirianism and not us is silly.
    More important, it’s irrelevant. Who cares? And calling Zi names is cope.
    Would China be better off if they had followed the globalist path set out for them in Tianamen? We might be, sure, having turned them into a giant degenerate marketplace. Is that what your pissed about?
    You’re being manipulated.

    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
    @Dennis Dale

    I didn't say that America hasn't taken a hard turn toward authoritarianism too, Dennis. However, you are in better position to fight it when you are not dependent on a phone app that can be deactivated to buy your groceries, and a health app that can determine you can't go home for a month because it's yellow.

    The Kung Flu PanicFest has been planned, or if nothing else, used, to implement Totalitarianism, but it's not over with over here. Once you go Orwellian (you've got to read the book, Dennis, to understand how far gone - if nothing else, read my Part 3 of the review), there is no way for people to fight anything. Have you read Orwell's 1984? China's government has taken that book and built back better!

    I'm not pissed about anything regarding China, because I don't live there. I don't know why you would infer that.

    It's harder to be manipulated when you get off your ass and see things in person, Dennis, which I have. Ron Unz is a great example. He (along with Fred Reed, who did take that 2-week vacation package, so knows everything now) don't know shit about what's going on in China. They see the gleaming infrastructure which I too was amazed at, but they don't know what's really going on. I told Mr. Unz to visit the place back in '19. He's got the money, he could have gotten a tourist visa in a week, and he could have hired a trusted Chinese friend to show him what's what. I wish he'd listened to me. It was too late by early '20. (Maybe Ron Unz could have gone to Wuhan even, to visit the lab, and see what's on the slab ...)

  63. Anon[246] • Disclaimer says:
    @Almost Missouri
    @Anon

    Abortion is dysgenic.

    https://www.unz.com/gdurocher/bumbling-towards-the-biosingularity/#comment-4596940

    It doesn't matter that anyone thinks that abortion should be eugenic in theory. In practice it keeps being dysgenic. And there's no reason that will change.

    Replies: @YetAnotherAnon, @Anon

    Yes, I know that superficially it looks like mass abortion should help white majorities because non-whites abort more than whites do, but in the real world that hasn’t happened. The reason appears to be that however many children non-whites abort, they end up carrying even more unintended pregnancies to term. So contrary to the seductively simple conclusion that one abortion = one fewer person, what happens in the real world seems to be: abortion availability = lots more “lazy” pregnancies = some of those lazy pregnancies get aborted but about an equal chunk go on to be additional births that wouldn’t have happened otherwise. So paradoxically, abortion availability stimulates unintended births!

    Occam’s razor is that a measure that reduces births reduces births. What you posit has been observed, but it’s rare that the measure to counter X leads to more of X. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Risk_compensation#Risky_sexual_behavior_and_HIV/AIDS

    The “lazy” pregnancies are happening because society used to shame that behavior and has ceased to do so. The anti-abortion right is unwilling to argue for bringing that back, thus the magical thinking that they can accomplish the same goal by banning abortion.

    This is not so strange really. The perspicacious have remarked before on how great episodes of violent death (e.g., wars) lead to surges in births and life (e.g., Baby Boom followed WWII). Abortion is quiet mass violent death against fetuses. It should be unsurprising that Nature compensates by bringing about a lot more fetuses.

    Nature? If you mean God, then say God. Which is a problem for me because I don’t believe in God or karma or Gaia or anything else. There’s no force of nature that brought back the neanderthals or the wolly mammoths or the Akkadian language. WWII led to a baby boon, but WWI and the civil war led to prolonged periods of lower fertility.

    In the US this is masked by the fact that blacks and browns abort more often than whites. But disaggregate the ethnic groups—as we seem to remember to do with everything except abortion—and you start to notice that within each ethnic group it is mostly the middle and upper echelons who bother to abort their unintended pregnancies.

    I looked and couldn’t find any data that disaggregates this.

    • Replies: @epebble
    @Anon

    society used to shame that behavior

    There is no need; Levonorgestrel (Plan B) is Over the Counter. Ulipristal acetate (Ella) needs a Rx but has a longer time frame. Even a lazy person can make an occasional visit to a pharmacy.

    , @Almost Missouri
    @Anon

    Almost Missouri: "It doesn’t matter that anyone thinks that abortion should be eugenic in theory. In practice it keeps being dysgenic."

    Anon: [140 words of theory]

    Almost Missouri: [rolls eyes]

    Sailer explains the assumptions behind the theory and why the theory doesn't work here:

    https://isteve.blogspot.com/2005/05/gregg-easterbrook-falls-for-levitts.html


    I looked and couldn’t find any data that disaggregates this.
     
    Admittedly, it is not so easy to get hold of, but you can eavesdrop on two giants discussing it here:

    https://isteve.blogspot.com/2014/04/does-abortion-prevent-crime-steve_26.html

    https://isteve.blogspot.com/2014/04/does-abortion-prevent-crime-steve.html

  64. @JohnnyWalker123
    Why ADHD?

    Replies: @CMV

    It likely presdisposes you to do impulsive stuff, such as knock someone up/get knocked up when you cant properly afford to raise a baby. Jives with what I have seen in my personal life- anecdotal, but one guy I know had severe ADHD and fathered multiple kids with his long term partner before eventually dying of an overdose in his early 30’s. OTOH, the negative impacts of autism on fertility don’t seem as bad as you would expect- take that manosphere! Short, fat and stupid seems like the winning combination though.

    • Thanks: JohnnyWalker123
  65. @Daniel H

    The left ought to pay more attention to this.....
     
    https://static.independent.co.uk/s3fs-public/thumbnails/image/2015/04/30/07/Sand1.jpg

    Replies: @Anon, @Almost Missouri, @Hypnotoad666, @Jiminy

    This guy can’t be Muslim. Where’s his prayer rug?
    Often when a British true crime show comes on, a lot of the people look rather inbred. Certainly not like the fictional detective series, where most of the characters look quite the opposite. Maybe the girls never left the village that their great-great grandparents never left as well.

  66. @Anon
    @Almost Missouri


    Yes, I know that superficially it looks like mass abortion should help white majorities because non-whites abort more than whites do, but in the real world that hasn’t happened. The reason appears to be that however many children non-whites abort, they end up carrying even more unintended pregnancies to term. So contrary to the seductively simple conclusion that one abortion = one fewer person, what happens in the real world seems to be: abortion availability = lots more “lazy” pregnancies = some of those lazy pregnancies get aborted but about an equal chunk go on to be additional births that wouldn’t have happened otherwise. So paradoxically, abortion availability stimulates unintended births!
     
    Occam's razor is that a measure that reduces births reduces births. What you posit has been observed, but it's rare that the measure to counter X leads to more of X. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Risk_compensation#Risky_sexual_behavior_and_HIV/AIDS

    The "lazy" pregnancies are happening because society used to shame that behavior and has ceased to do so. The anti-abortion right is unwilling to argue for bringing that back, thus the magical thinking that they can accomplish the same goal by banning abortion.

    This is not so strange really. The perspicacious have remarked before on how great episodes of violent death (e.g., wars) lead to surges in births and life (e.g., Baby Boom followed WWII). Abortion is quiet mass violent death against fetuses. It should be unsurprising that Nature compensates by bringing about a lot more fetuses.
     
    Nature? If you mean God, then say God. Which is a problem for me because I don't believe in God or karma or Gaia or anything else. There's no force of nature that brought back the neanderthals or the wolly mammoths or the Akkadian language. WWII led to a baby boon, but WWI and the civil war led to prolonged periods of lower fertility.

    In the US this is masked by the fact that blacks and browns abort more often than whites. But disaggregate the ethnic groups—as we seem to remember to do with everything except abortion—and you start to notice that within each ethnic group it is mostly the middle and upper echelons who bother to abort their unintended pregnancies.
     
    I looked and couldn't find any data that disaggregates this.

    Replies: @epebble, @Almost Missouri

    society used to shame that behavior

    There is no need; Levonorgestrel (Plan B) is Over the Counter. Ulipristal acetate (Ella) needs a Rx but has a longer time frame. Even a lazy person can make an occasional visit to a pharmacy.

  67. @Farenheit
    How bad is the problem already? Answer this math question...

    Which number is bigger? The children produced by Condalesa Rice, Oprah Winfrey, Michelle Obama, Stacey Abrams and London Breed...

    Or the number of children produced by George Floyd (that we know of)?

    Replies: @Spect3r

    Considering how she is built, im not sure “Michelle” Obama ever had any kid!

  68. @Dennis Dale
    Not saying cable news is accurate. An old joke about isolation. Just the notion China has taken a hard turn toward authoritirianism and not us is silly.
    More important, it's irrelevant. Who cares? And calling Zi names is cope.
    Would China be better off if they had followed the globalist path set out for them in Tianamen? We might be, sure, having turned them into a giant degenerate marketplace. Is that what your pissed about?
    You're being manipulated.

    Replies: @Achmed E. Newman

    I didn’t say that America hasn’t taken a hard turn toward authoritarianism too, Dennis. However, you are in better position to fight it when you are not dependent on a phone app that can be deactivated to buy your groceries, and a health app that can determine you can’t go home for a month because it’s yellow.

    The Kung Flu PanicFest has been planned, or if nothing else, used, to implement Totalitarianism, but it’s not over with over here. Once you go Orwellian (you’ve got to read the book, Dennis, to understand how far gone – if nothing else, read my Part 3 of the review), there is no way for people to fight anything. Have you read Orwell’s 1984? China’s government has taken that book and built back better!

    I’m not pissed about anything regarding China, because I don’t live there. I don’t know why you would infer that.

    It’s harder to be manipulated when you get off your ass and see things in person, Dennis, which I have. Ron Unz is a great example. He (along with Fred Reed, who did take that 2-week vacation package, so knows everything now) don’t know shit about what’s going on in China. They see the gleaming infrastructure which I too was amazed at, but they don’t know what’s really going on. I told Mr. Unz to visit the place back in ’19. He’s got the money, he could have gotten a tourist visa in a week, and he could have hired a trusted Chinese friend to show him what’s what. I wish he’d listened to me. It was too late by early ’20. (Maybe Ron Unz could have gone to Wuhan even, to visit the lab, and see what’s on the slab …)

    • Thanks: Dennis Dale
  69. @Steve Sailer
    @Mike Tre

    I frequently engage in drunken street racing without a seatbelt so that I can qualify for those sweet handicapped parking places. I'll never have to walk a long way from my parking spot again!

    Replies: @CorkyAgain, @Reg Cæsar, @Truth

    Steve-O, I always knew we had something in common.

  70. @Ghost of Bull Moose
    @Sean

    Not 'high estrogen,' 'plumper' women. Big fat pigs.

    It's related to the idea that people who are good at basketball like basketball because they are good at basketball: Fat pigs like shiftless boogies because shiftless boogies like them. These pigs are shut out of the hypergamy game.

    High value white males always have first pick, of white women but also of pretty much any other race. High value black men can do better than some porky white prole, given the reality that they partner outside their own race very frequently, as we know from the constant lamentations of black women.

    These porkers have to compete with Asian women, attractive doogas, Latinas, even your good looking high yella broads. They miss out on the 2nd and 3rd tier white men, and so they end up with a choice between the lowest value white men and blacks who can at least manage to impregnate them, even if the porkers know going in there isn't any possibility of long term commitment or support.

    These are the genetic implications of 'multiculturalism' that haven't been much considered. People find their level in terms of reproductive partners, it's well established by now.

    Replies: @Truth

    Other than that, Mrs. Lincoln…

  71. @Achmed E. Newman
    @peterike

    It's not a genetic factor, but they are getting spoiled as all get-out, Peter. Many are raised by 6 adults, tiger mother, tiger mother-in-law, tiger grandma, etc. I'm sure they will be very educated, but I wonder about the snowflake factor.

    OTOH, that gets them a lot closer to the future I envisioned from Sci-fi books I used to read - in a century or two there could be a much lower and smarter population, with lots of resources lots of automation, and lots of leisure time, well, as in the novels I used to read. (Note the few seconds in Frogger's Idiocracy clip showing the envisioned future before the Welfare State induced dysgenics*.)

    Then again, lately the Winnie-the-Pooh run CCP has headed in a hard-core Orwellian direction. I would take my chances here over China, if that were a choice.

    .

    * Mike Judge didn't have time to really explain that, and also notice that he picked redneck Cletus vs, the hood - you gotta get the film out there, so ...

    Replies: @Dennis Dale, @Truth

    in a century or two there could be a much lower and smarter population, with lots of resources lots of automation, and lots of leisure time…

    Correction; “in a year or two,” and correspondingly, yes, no, no, no and no.

  72. @Anon
    @Almost Missouri


    Yes, I know that superficially it looks like mass abortion should help white majorities because non-whites abort more than whites do, but in the real world that hasn’t happened. The reason appears to be that however many children non-whites abort, they end up carrying even more unintended pregnancies to term. So contrary to the seductively simple conclusion that one abortion = one fewer person, what happens in the real world seems to be: abortion availability = lots more “lazy” pregnancies = some of those lazy pregnancies get aborted but about an equal chunk go on to be additional births that wouldn’t have happened otherwise. So paradoxically, abortion availability stimulates unintended births!
     
    Occam's razor is that a measure that reduces births reduces births. What you posit has been observed, but it's rare that the measure to counter X leads to more of X. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Risk_compensation#Risky_sexual_behavior_and_HIV/AIDS

    The "lazy" pregnancies are happening because society used to shame that behavior and has ceased to do so. The anti-abortion right is unwilling to argue for bringing that back, thus the magical thinking that they can accomplish the same goal by banning abortion.

    This is not so strange really. The perspicacious have remarked before on how great episodes of violent death (e.g., wars) lead to surges in births and life (e.g., Baby Boom followed WWII). Abortion is quiet mass violent death against fetuses. It should be unsurprising that Nature compensates by bringing about a lot more fetuses.
     
    Nature? If you mean God, then say God. Which is a problem for me because I don't believe in God or karma or Gaia or anything else. There's no force of nature that brought back the neanderthals or the wolly mammoths or the Akkadian language. WWII led to a baby boon, but WWI and the civil war led to prolonged periods of lower fertility.

    In the US this is masked by the fact that blacks and browns abort more often than whites. But disaggregate the ethnic groups—as we seem to remember to do with everything except abortion—and you start to notice that within each ethnic group it is mostly the middle and upper echelons who bother to abort their unintended pregnancies.
     
    I looked and couldn't find any data that disaggregates this.

    Replies: @epebble, @Almost Missouri

    Almost Missouri: “It doesn’t matter that anyone thinks that abortion should be eugenic in theory. In practice it keeps being dysgenic.”

    Anon: [140 words of theory]

    Almost Missouri: [rolls eyes]

    Sailer explains the assumptions behind the theory and why the theory doesn’t work here:

    https://isteve.blogspot.com/2005/05/gregg-easterbrook-falls-for-levitts.html

    I looked and couldn’t find any data that disaggregates this.

    Admittedly, it is not so easy to get hold of, but you can eavesdrop on two giants discussing it here:

    https://isteve.blogspot.com/2014/04/does-abortion-prevent-crime-steve_26.html

    https://isteve.blogspot.com/2014/04/does-abortion-prevent-crime-steve.html

  73. This is the premise of the movie idiocracy, with Luke Wilson. Everyone gets stupider because only stupid people have children, and smart people don’t

  74. @AnotherDad
    Pretty obvious that fertility is dysgenic--has been dysgenic for a couple three generations--in the welfare state and "you go girl!" female careerism West.

    The immigration is disaster is #1. But after that this dysgenic problem is pretty much top of the list.

    Steve floated this question up in his Taki Mag article:

    And what about poor genes? If a society generously chooses to subsidize the victims of poor genes, can it take any steps to lessen the chances of them passing on those poor genes and thus expensively victimizing future generations?

    Or is that eugenics, which is, of course, the worst thing ever?
     
    My take is important for same people who care about their nation to directly confront and win the "eugenics" battle against the minoritarian liars. They are always going to smear--racist!, anti-Semite!, Nazi!--no matter what. (It's "who they are".) There's no ducking that. So i think rational people should just own it--and fight the good fight.

    "Yes, genes matter." "The most important thing in any society is whom you share it with." "Yes, we want healthy, capable, law-abiding and productive people to reproduce; not those who are unhealthy, addicted, mentally-ill, incompetent, unable to support themselves." "If you want to call it eugenics fine."

    This doesn't have to involve any police statey stuff at all. Probably the biggest bang for the buck:

    "If you are unable to provide for yourself or take care of yourself and the taxpayers have to step in to help, then you should not be having children. Period. We'll provide a safety net, but in return you do not have kids."

    is actually something that has very broad common sense support, despite the wailing of "intellectuals".

    From there, you can move on to the more complicated issues of encouraging productive and healthy young families to have more children.

    A simple approach is non-refundable tax-credits that essentially remove productive people from the tax rolls while they are in their child bearing and early rearing years. They can pay taxes later when they are at career peak with the kids off to school or in retirement. The childless can pay as well.

    And the other aspect is simply cultural. Returning the culture to one that prioritizes--heaps praise upon--families and having children. An immigration end, and healthy nationalism helps with that as well.

    Replies: @Polistra, @Pericles, @Rob, @Veteran Aryan

    “If you are unable to provide for yourself or take care of yourself and the taxpayers have to step in to help, then you should not be having children. Period. We’ll provide a safety net, but in return you do not have kids.”

    This one is much easier to promote:
    1st 100% X
    2nd 80%
    3rd 60%
    4th 40%
    5th 20%
    Max 3X
    No Bonus Money for not having Daddy in the house.
    Applies across all social strata.
    Center the debate around the definition of X.
    Stop making Human Puppy Mill an attractive career choice for the least productive members of society.

  75. @Rob
    @AnotherDad

    As one of the “unhealthy, addicted, mentally-ill, incompetent, unable to support themselves,” I agree completely.

    Given that so many occupations are currently sedentary, weeding out genes for easily damaged spines and hips should be at the top of the common physical problems list. It is cruel to have children who will just experience the same misery you did.

    There’s also the hedonic-utilitarian perspective. (Nearly) everyone wants to do something productive in life. Those who don’t, well, they usually want to accumulate status. Both those things are hard to do with serious physical and mental problems.

    I knew a guy Bill... something. Liked to be called Wild Bill. He was a drug dealer discovered senior year of high school. Never thought he was cool, but never thought he was scary, either. Next year, when I came back from college on break, he was changed, and not for the better. Greatly resented anyone who went to college. Was all “oh, college! So you get to get a good job and make lots of money, but I don’t cuz I’m ‘not college material’” Trust me, he was not college material. His only path to any money was dealing, and the user community was the only one in which he could accumulate status.

    I have no idea what happened to Bill. He stole my lighter and put a rifle in the face of a friend he had known since childhood. My friend josh snd I were like, ‘let’s leave - after this bowl.” People like Bill are not even lumpenproletariat. They are not cast-offs from the last economic order. Maybe there was a place for him back when strong (white) backs were in demand, and alcohol was the only drug people around here really had access to, but with Mexicans to do the work and cocaine to get him high, there was no socially beneficial place for him in the world. We need fewer Wild Bills. No happy guy puts a gun in his friend’s face.

    I’m torn on people like me. I think if I had been able to get medical when 7, or 13, or 16, or 18, or 22, or 28, when my broken back and hip got progressively more broken and the pain more all-encompassing and severe, then I would have turned out better. But my dad thought I was screaming at him that he needed surgery, and his back didn’t hurt enough for that. For twenty-odd years, and my mom was always “go talk to your father.” I love them, but I would have been better off never existing. I would not have been mentally ill, at least not severely, if I had been fully functioning in childhood, adolescence, and early adulthood. Instead of life, I had agony. If we had universal healthcare, it might have been different. If I got hurt a decade later, with health insurance, might have been different then, too.

    If the economy had a place for crazy, creative people, it might have been different. But it doesn’t. If society is going to have a miserable, abused underclass, maybe it shouldn’t have one, and rich people can get Roombas?

    Eugenics will make for healthier and happier people. It’s only an historical accident that the left turned against eugenics. But the nazis were a long time ago. Jews themselves practice eugenics here and in Israel. I think if blacks were smarter, American leftists would not be so opposed to eugenics. Let’s face it, any race-neutral application of eugenics that impacted whites would be devastating to blacks.

    Let’s remember that the precedent from the Supremes on eugenics is “three generations of imbeciles are enough.”

    Replies: @Pixo

    As one of the “unhealthy, addicted, mentally-ill, incompetent, unable to support themselves,”

    You are smart and a good writer. If you’re on disability, please get started fighting to keep the truth on HBD issues online in wikipedia edit wars. You will be a huge credit to your race, and I personally will appreciate your labor.

  76. @Drapetomaniac
    @Veracitor

    "Farming was mechanized, depriving millions of morons and their spawn of jobs so they moved to cities where they could live off handouts or crime."

    Do you even read or understand the garbage you post?

    Become a farmer then wait ten years and then comment.

    Replies: @Veracitor

    Drapeto, amigo, I think you must somehow have missed my point. I wrote about the massive shift in the farming economy and population during the last Century. As you can easily read for yourself,

    In 1900, just under 40 percent of the total US population lived on farms, and 60 percent lived in rural areas. Today [2016], the respective figures are only about 1 percent and 20 percent.

    Also

    Whereas farm households earned lower incomes than other households before the 1970s, since the mid-1990s, farm households have consistently earned more than other US households. In addition to earning higher incomes, farm households today tend to have substantially higher net worth than the average US household.

    If you don’t like that source then check out another, because they all agree. (You may want to read the whole article I link. I think it’s pretty interesting. But note that I’ve been reading about this stuff for decades.)

    You wrote “Become a farmer then wait ten years and then comment.” Well, yeah, if you become a farmer now, in 2021 then you are entering a highly-concentrated, capital-intensive business run by highly-educated, high-IQ people.

    But if you were a farmhand in 1930 (or a sharecropper, or a fractionating-inheritance small farmer) your situation was different. As I pointed out, the mechanization of farming eliminated many, many low-skilled jobs which had been filled by low-skilled people since time immemorial. Over decades farm-owners (increasingly big businesses) laid off low-skilled labor while retaining chiefly high-skilled labor (gotta fix those tractors as well as drive them). The surplus agricultural labor, and the corresponding small-town support labor, moved on to the cities seeking industrial work and eventually landing in urban underemployment.

Comments are closed.

Subscribe to All Steve Sailer Comments via RSS
PastClassics
The Shaping Event of Our Modern World
The Hidden Information in Our Government Archives
Analyzing the History of a Controversial Movement
The unspoken statistical reality of urban crime over the last quarter century.
How America was neoconned into World War IV