The Unz Review • An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 TeasersiSteve Blog
Gregory Clark on Classical Liberalism
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
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

With “classical liberalism” suddenly fashionable as an ideological self-designation among Never Trumpers, Gregory Clark takes a look at the historical record back when Classical Liberalism was triumphant in the British Parliament. From Cliometrica:

Cliometrica

Welfare reform, 1834: Did the New Poor Law in England produce significant economic gains?

Gregory Clark, Marianne E. Page

First Online: 09 August 2018

Abstract

The English Old Poor Law, which before 1834 provided welfare to the elderly, children, the improvident, and the unfortunate, was a bête noire of the new discipline of Political Economy. Smith, Bentham, Malthus, and Ricardo all claimed it created significant social costs and increased rather than reduced poverty. The Poor Law Amendment Act of 1834, drafted by Political Economists, cuts payments sharply. Because local rules on eligibility and provision varied greatly before the 1834 reform, we can estimate the social costs of the extensive welfare provision of the Old Poor Law. Surprisingly there is no evidence of any of the alleged social costs that prompted the harsh treatment of the poor after 1834. Political economy, it seems, was born in sin.

My impression is that the sins of the Classical Liberals were fairly well exposed in 1960s popular culture, such as the 1968. Oscar-winning Best Picture “Oliver!” (I played Oliver Twist’s wealthy grandfather Mr. Brownlow in the 1970 St. Francis de Sales elementary school production, utilizing my main theatrical talent: tallness.)

But that’s all forgotten today.

 
Hide 102 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
  1. anonymous[909] • Disclaimer says:

    this “classical liberal” nonsense is also popular with the internet commentators and gurus who try to be hip and with it for the nascent alt-right kids these days.

    it’s not going to work. the real alt-right is filled with former libertarians and the kids who first get excited about someone calling out “SJWs” eventually discovers that individualism isnt the final solution.

    But we are. And we’re happy to take them when they decide to evolve past being anti-PC “classical liberals” watching their nations collapse around them.

    • Replies: @IHTG
    @anonymous

    *Everbody hates SJWs, they're obnoxious and overextended, they're the left's Achilles heel*

    "Hey guys, let's not hit the enemy where they're vulnerable! Let's attack them where they have a complete public advantage over us instead!"

    Your pathway to victory is to find a way to marry an immigration skeptic message to the anti-SJW movement, not calling out Jordan Peterson and Ben Shapiro fans as cucks

    Replies: @AndrewR, @notanon

    , @Cagey Beast
    @anonymous

    This “classical liberal” nonsense is also popular with the internet commentators and gurus who try to be hip and with it for the nascent alt-right kids these days.

    No people use the term "classical liberal" to distinguish themselves from the New Left, socialists, Antifa and SJWs, who Americans mislabel as "liberals". A smaller number of people, like Jordan Peterson, use the term to make clear to others that they're not Identitarian or Alt-Right. Kissing up to edgy Alt-Right kids is the opposite of what they're doing.

    Replies: @Crawfurdmuir

    , @LondonBob
    @anonymous

    I am a reformed libertarian, it is a good gateway drug. Once you give it some serious thought you realise it is the mirror image of marxism, utterly unworkable and completely ignorant of the human condition, promoted mainly by autists.

    Replies: @Desiderius

  2. Under the Old Poor Law it was illegal to move to another parish without getting permission from the parish to which you were moving, to ensure you wouldn’t be a charge on their welfare rolls. This created in effect a corrupt and dysfunctional internal passport system which had enormous indirect costs to the economy. Dissenters such as the Quakers who did not use the parish welfare system and were driving the industrial revolution nevertheless could not legally change residences.

    (The Quakers, besides virtually restarting mining in Britain, starting mass production of iron, coal, and lead (and associated silver), inventing rails, iron rails, rail wheels, passenger rail, commercial banking, production of fine measurement instruments and watches etc. etc., also introduced schools for workers’ children, humane insane asylums, and finally, the workhouse, which was at the time a progressive alternative to the prior alternatives of either starving on the streets – or if one were lucky, being a charge on the poor rolls – but many poor were not legal residents of the parish where they resided and had, in fact, no alternative to starvation prior to the introduction of the workhouse.)

    • Replies: @Redneck farmer
    @EH

    And had their non- Quaker foremen beat the s*** out of 10-year-olds if they were late for work.

    Replies: @Reg Cæsar

    , @notanon
    @EH


    This created in effect a corrupt and dysfunctional internal passport system which had enormous indirect costs to the economy.
     
    i doubt this for the same reason as

    Surprisingly there is no evidence of any of the alleged social costs that prompted the harsh treatment of the poor after 1834.
     
    it would mostly have been spent on people who were incapable - everyone capable worked cos public shaming or guilty conscience.
    , @JerseyJeffersonian
    @EH

    The Quakers were religious dissenters, and due to this many opportunities, particularly in universities, were foreclosed to them. They made it up through "going into trade" in a big way, and taking charge of their own community's uplift after they no longer were being hanged for their nonconforming religiosity. Unfortunately, sometimes these restrictive circumstances led to them getting involved in what are now - and even then - perceived to be rather unsavory pursuits that made them money, and which helped them to accrue power. Perhaps you can trace some similarities to another religiously nonconforming out group here, with the corresponding beneficial and deleterious effects on their perception in the wider society?

    Replies: @EH

    , @Reg Cæsar
    @EH

    They came to do good, and did well.

  3. Anonymous[276] • Disclaimer says:

    http://www.executedtoday.com/2017/10/16/1771-mary-jones-hanged-for-shoplifting/

    Mary was thought to be about eighteen or nineteen years old but was already married with two children when her husband, William, was press ganged into the Navy to go to the Falkland Islands, leaving her virtually destitute. She lived with her friend Ann Styles in Angel Alley in the Strand and was at times reduced to begging to feed herself and the infants. It is said that she had her baby with her in the cart as she was taken to Tyburn to be hanged.

    There had been a spate of shoplifting incidents in Ludgate Street area of London during 1771 and the shop keepers were on high alert and keeping watch for suspects. On Wednesday the 7th of August Mary, with one of her children in tow and Ann Styles went on a shop lifting expedition in the Ludgate Street….Finally the pair went to the drapery shop owned by a Mr. William Foot and expressed interest in buying a child’s frock. Nothing that they were shown appeared to be what they wanted and Mary made to leave the shop but Mr. Foot’s assistant, Christopher Preston, noticed that she had something concealed under her cloak. He went after her and brought her back into the shop where he discovered she had concealed four pieces of worked muslin which she had taken from the counter. Christopher Preston told the other assistant, Andrew Hawkins, to fetch a constable while he kept the women in the shop. The constable arrested them both and they were taken to the Compter (a local lock up jail).

    Both women were charged under the Shoplifting Act with the theft of the muslin which was valued at £5. 10s. (£5.50) The actual offence at this time being called “privately stealing in a shop”. The value of the goods stolen, being more than five shillings (25p), made it a capital crime….

    Mary and Ann were permitted to speak in their own defence. Mary told the court of her struggle to support two children without her husband and that she had always been an honest woman….

    The trial lasted no more than two hours and Mary was convicted as she was actually in possession of the stolen items but Ann was acquitted. Mary received the mandatory death sentence and was transferred to Newgate to await her trip to Tyburn. When the Recorder of London prepared his report for the King and Privy Council there was no recommendation to mercy for Mary, despite her age and circumstances….

    On the morning of Wednesday the 16th of October she was brought to the Press Yard of Newgate where the halter noose was put round her neck and her arms tied to her body with a cord above the elbows. She was made to get into the cart and sit on her own coffin…

    One can well understand why the law in this period in history is now referred to as the Bloody Code. Of the two hundred and ninety four people executed at Tyburn in the decade from 1765 to 1774 only twenty five were to die for murder and three for rape. The rest mostly suffered for various types of property related crime, such as highway robbery, burglary, housebreaking and forgery.

    It seems amazing today that a young mother should be hanged for what would now considered to be a minor crime, yet in 1771 nobody would have thought anything of it — it was a regular and perfectly normal event. If it was Mary’s first offence, as she claimed, she would probably get a community service order now, especially as he had dependant children. However Georgian justice was being applied increasingly severely at this time. Sixty-two men and six women received the death sentence during this year, of whom thirty four of the men and one of the women, Frances Allen, were to share Mary’s fate. Frances Allen was hanged on Wednesday the 7th of August for housebreaking.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    @Anonymous


    The value of the goods stolen, being more than five shillings (25p), made it a capital crime….
     
    I bet we'll end up this way again before it's all over.

    Replies: @another fred

    , @anon
    @Anonymous

    this is the scarlet letter defense
    "Oh it was such a minor crime and poor Hester Prynne had such extenuating circumstances",

    But then 200 years later we find half the children born out of wedlock another half aborted, marriages mostly ending in divorce, now even a crisis of no one will marry or have children so third world immigration is supposed to be the solution, and the crime and suffering associated with out of wedlock birth of all this is incalculable. Im sure someone could give a rough estimate. and all because half a dozen Hester Prynnes were shamed every year in the entire east coast was too much to bear for liberal bleeding hearts

    so smartass you have told us about the 30 a year hanged now give us the difference between the current years crime figures and the crime stats back then. Whats the net human suffering you have saved us all. Hint its orders of orders of magnitude more suffering you have caused just as your meddling with the Hester Prynne type crimes has caused.
    This is nothing but typical leftist bullshit where you use one failed experiment to justify the next and the next

    Replies: @Rosie, @Rosie

    , @AndrewR
    @Anonymous

    So the government forced young men into military service then executed their wives for stealing almost-worthless items in order to survive? And society was cool with this? Wow.

    And people wonder why I'm a misanthrope. In every place and every era, most people are scum.

    , @Almost Missouri
    @Anonymous

    For context, consider what the world of Georgian England was like.


    [T]he Prince of Wales, was celebrated for having bedded 7,000 women and snipped from each a keepsake hair. Twenty-five per cent of all unmarried females in London were whores; the average age of a prostitute was 16; and many brothels prided themselves on offering only girls under the age of 14. ... [I]n the 1790s, a good man could stroll past an 11-year-old prostitute on a London street without feeling a twinge of disgust or outrage; he accepted her as merely a feature of the landscape, like an ugly hill.
     
    In this milieu, offing an indigent shopliftress--with full due process no less--probably seemed a mercy. No, I'm not defending, just describing. This is the era of the nation about which Adam Smith famously remarked that "there is a deal of ruin in" it. He wasn't being metaphorical.

    If Georgian England,

    weedy faint-hearted mainstream churches, skanky celebs, weary provocations for jaded debauchees,
     
    sounds more than faintly familiar, that's because we've been here before, and having failed to maintain the lesson, we're going back.

    The much maligned Victorian Era (which the above-quoted Mark Steyn thinks was really the Wilberforcian Era) is what stood between us and that formerly former world. The social ills of Georgian England were addressed in Victorian England with what we would today call Broken Windows Theory: prevent the big stuff by fixing the small stuff. Or as others called it, ethics and morality.

    Our modern enthusiasm for demolishing the "pruderies" of Victorianism will re-establish the formerly lost world of Georgian England, at least the bad parts of it. And rapid execution of teenage shoplifters will again seem like a mercy.

    Replies: @The Last Real Calvinist

    , @Bill B.
    @Anonymous

    Harsh, as you say, by today's standards. But those centuries of extreme punishments did ultimately help to give Britain a remarkably calm and civil society. One were theft, idleness and out-of-wedlock child bearing were matters of shame.

    The UK has largely thrown away those hard-won gains by importing, willy-nilly, a population from societies much more prone to fierce jealousies, nepotism and dishonesty.

    Replies: @travell lyte

    , @Anonymous
    @Anonymous

    i.e. they hanged the Catholic thief but let off the Protestant thief

  4. Who is Gregory Clark? Is he someone whom iSteve readers should already be familiar with, know what is important about him?

    • Replies: @Dave Pinsen
    @Anon

    This is sort of like going to Starting Strength's forum and asking who Jim Steel is.

    Replies: @Anonymous, @Cagey Beast

    , @Peter Johnson
    @Anon

    Gregory Clark is a dissident economic historian who takes a hard-headed scientific approach and does not follow the party line. He has shown that the Industrial Revolution in England can be linked to eugenic trends in England over the few centuries preceding it -- in other words the English population became smarter and harder-working due to eugenic trends. He has a number of papers along those lines - he is a very important researcher.

    Replies: @Anon, @Dan Hayes, @dfordoom

    , @Edward
    @Anon

    In his book The Son Also Rises, Gregory Clark argues that social status runs in families for many generations, with very slow social mobility. Unlike the usual measures of social mobility which appear to demonstrate that social mobility rates differ between countries and between ages, Clark's research suggests that social mobility rates have been stable across both time and place. Why? Genetics. Like Sir Francis Galton, he uses surnames to look at high- and low-status families and their prevalence within high-status occupations and educational institutions.

    His work has important implications for iSteve readers. Firstly, as Clark states, it's all about the individual's genotype. If you know an individual's genotype, you don't need any further information about the individual's family (or race) to be able to predict his social status. Secondly, given that we tend not to know people's genotypes, the next best step is to look at the phenotypes of an individual's family. What is the educational and occupational status of his family members? What is the average IQ of his grandparents? This helps us to tell whether an individual has a high IQ because of "luck", or due to genes.

    Thus, regression to the family mean is more important than regression to the racial mean, as the family of an individual provides more information to us than the race of an individual. Ultimately, to say that there are mean differences between races is to say that there are more high-status individuals and families and sub-populations in one race as opposed to another. (Of course, when it comes to immigration policy, it's rather difficult to use individual or family phenotypes as a proxy.)

    It also explains why, as long as assortative mating occurs down the generations, regression to the mean won't occur. UJayMan explains this very well here:

    https://www.unz.com/jman/regression-to-the-mean/

    Replies: @stillCARealist

    , @pyrrhus
    @Anon

    Clark is the author of the British economic history/eugenics related A Farewell to Alms...

  5. @Anon
    Who is Gregory Clark? Is he someone whom iSteve readers should already be familiar with, know what is important about him?

    Replies: @Dave Pinsen, @Peter Johnson, @Edward, @pyrrhus

    This is sort of like going to Starting Strength’s forum and asking who Jim Steel is.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    @Dave Pinsen

    I doubt many iStevers know who he is. Greg Cochran? Probably. Gregory Clark? Probably not.

    Replies: @Dave Pinsen

    , @Cagey Beast
    @Dave Pinsen

    I've visited Steve's blog every day for more than a decade and Gregory Clark's name doesn't ring a bell.

    Replies: @res

  6. @Anonymous
    http://www.executedtoday.com/2017/10/16/1771-mary-jones-hanged-for-shoplifting/

    Mary was thought to be about eighteen or nineteen years old but was already married with two children when her husband, William, was press ganged into the Navy to go to the Falkland Islands, leaving her virtually destitute. She lived with her friend Ann Styles in Angel Alley in the Strand and was at times reduced to begging to feed herself and the infants. It is said that she had her baby with her in the cart as she was taken to Tyburn to be hanged.

    There had been a spate of shoplifting incidents in Ludgate Street area of London during 1771 and the shop keepers were on high alert and keeping watch for suspects. On Wednesday the 7th of August Mary, with one of her children in tow and Ann Styles went on a shop lifting expedition in the Ludgate Street....Finally the pair went to the drapery shop owned by a Mr. William Foot and expressed interest in buying a child’s frock. Nothing that they were shown appeared to be what they wanted and Mary made to leave the shop but Mr. Foot’s assistant, Christopher Preston, noticed that she had something concealed under her cloak. He went after her and brought her back into the shop where he discovered she had concealed four pieces of worked muslin which she had taken from the counter. Christopher Preston told the other assistant, Andrew Hawkins, to fetch a constable while he kept the women in the shop. The constable arrested them both and they were taken to the Compter (a local lock up jail).

    Both women were charged under the Shoplifting Act with the theft of the muslin which was valued at £5. 10s. (£5.50) The actual offence at this time being called “privately stealing in a shop”. The value of the goods stolen, being more than five shillings (25p), made it a capital crime....

    Mary and Ann were permitted to speak in their own defence. Mary told the court of her struggle to support two children without her husband and that she had always been an honest woman....

    The trial lasted no more than two hours and Mary was convicted as she was actually in possession of the stolen items but Ann was acquitted. Mary received the mandatory death sentence and was transferred to Newgate to await her trip to Tyburn. When the Recorder of London prepared his report for the King and Privy Council there was no recommendation to mercy for Mary, despite her age and circumstances....

    On the morning of Wednesday the 16th of October she was brought to the Press Yard of Newgate where the halter noose was put round her neck and her arms tied to her body with a cord above the elbows. She was made to get into the cart and sit on her own coffin...

    One can well understand why the law in this period in history is now referred to as the Bloody Code. Of the two hundred and ninety four people executed at Tyburn in the decade from 1765 to 1774 only twenty five were to die for murder and three for rape. The rest mostly suffered for various types of property related crime, such as highway robbery, burglary, housebreaking and forgery.

    It seems amazing today that a young mother should be hanged for what would now considered to be a minor crime, yet in 1771 nobody would have thought anything of it — it was a regular and perfectly normal event. If it was Mary’s first offence, as she claimed, she would probably get a community service order now, especially as he had dependant children. However Georgian justice was being applied increasingly severely at this time. Sixty-two men and six women received the death sentence during this year, of whom thirty four of the men and one of the women, Frances Allen, were to share Mary’s fate. Frances Allen was hanged on Wednesday the 7th of August for housebreaking.
     

    Replies: @Anonymous, @anon, @AndrewR, @Almost Missouri, @Bill B., @Anonymous

    The value of the goods stolen, being more than five shillings (25p), made it a capital crime….

    I bet we’ll end up this way again before it’s all over.

    • Replies: @another fred
    @Anonymous

    The population is going to be winnowed one way or another. More likely, plagues will come and they will do the job we do not have the stomach for.

  7. Greg, wtf with the paywall articles? You are a rock star, publish in some open journals!

    The harshness of the English system was eugenic, making the English of today smarter, healthier, happier and more law-abiding than if the old welfare payments had continued.

    So, the cruelty of our forefathers to each other was kindness to us. More misery and suffering then, less now.

    There’s no real way to discount or weigh intertemporal transfers of utility like this. We ought not even try.

    Regarding the article’s suggestion that Smith, Bentham, Malthus, and Ricardo were wrong about one of the leading economic issue of their eras, I will need better evidence than describes in the abstract.

    If it is something Smith wanted decades prior, but only happened in 1834, it suggests that the larger and likely more intelligent post Great Reform Act electorate favored it, a substantial point in its favor in my opinion.

    • Replies: @Hail
    @Lot


    The harshness of the English system was eugenic, making the English of today smarter, healthier, happier and more law-abiding than if the old welfare payments had continued.

    So, the cruelty of our forefathers to each other was kindness to us. More misery and suffering then, less now.
     

    I believe Clark and others propose the eugenic benefits accrued to Britain happened over centuries and ended about the time in question (1834) or shortly thereafter (i.e., were in no way caused by the welfare cut under discussion). The dysgenic trend, i.e. genotypic IQ loss, was casued by the Industrial Revolution, such that by today, after 150+ years of dysgenic breeding, the British have probably given back what, five, even ten genotypic IQ points?

    Imagine what the British at their eugenic peak could have done with today's nutrition (peak eugenic period just before Industrial Revolution plus Flynn effect in lump sum).

    Replies: @Anon, @Desiderius, @Alec Leamas, @Lot, @dfordoom

    , @AndrewR
    @Lot


    the cruelty of our forefathers to each other was kindness to us
     
    "How do you do, fellow Anglos?"

    -Lot
    , @Anonymous
    @Lot

    Its one of the best examples of how culture can create a genetic layout for the future, indeed. Adam Smith, incidentally, complained pretty significantly about the Scottish who were less harsh on their treatment of petty crime, and less focused on forcing what we would consider "capitalist work" on everyone. Arguably the lesser calm of the Scottish may be a result of that to this day.

    Replies: @Cortes

  8. @Anon
    Who is Gregory Clark? Is he someone whom iSteve readers should already be familiar with, know what is important about him?

    Replies: @Dave Pinsen, @Peter Johnson, @Edward, @pyrrhus

    Gregory Clark is a dissident economic historian who takes a hard-headed scientific approach and does not follow the party line. He has shown that the Industrial Revolution in England can be linked to eugenic trends in England over the few centuries preceding it — in other words the English population became smarter and harder-working due to eugenic trends. He has a number of papers along those lines – he is a very important researcher.

    • Replies: @Anon
    @Peter Johnson

    Thanks

    , @Dan Hayes
    @Peter Johnson

    Peter Johnson:

    In addition to being an important economic researcher, Gregory Clark is notorious for the quirky punish titles of his major works: A Farewell to Alms and The Son Also Rises.

    , @dfordoom
    @Peter Johnson


    He has shown that the Industrial Revolution in England can be linked to eugenic trends in England over the few centuries preceding it — in other words the English population became smarter and harder-working due to eugenic trends.
     
    OK, that seems clear. Back in the bad old days before this eugenic revolution the English were a bunch of losers. I mean, what did they do? OK, they took on Spain, the greatest power in Europe, and won. And they amassed a gigantic empire. But apart from that nothing.

    After all that eugenic progress the English became so smart and hard-working that they lost their empire and they lost their economic supremacy. They became the winners that we see today.

    Sounds like this guy is onto something!

    Replies: @notanon

  9. Anonymous[184] • Disclaimer says:

    Classical Liberals exploit deliberate obliviousness to differences in human ability. Open borders, tickle-down economics, low tariffs and welfare-cuts result.

    The Left’s equality obsession makes it impossible for them to acknowledge INDIVIDUAL differences in their rhetoric, let alone group differences. Besides, it’d be hard for them to get votes if they admitted that many of their voters just aren’t intellectually capable of surviving in the modern world.

    If only politicians had the courage to deal with the obvious, and democracy didn’t incentivize them not to.

    • Replies: @cynthia curran
    @Anonymous

    High Tariffs are good. Joe Blow pays high tariffs and wages in the US were almost as worst as England. What kept wages a little higher in the US was a labor shortage compared to Europe but the left is right. The age of high tariffs met a lot of low paying jobs and kids also working at 10 years old for 16 hours without overtime. The tariff right here and Pat Buchanan never thinks that the gay 1890's had 10 percent homeless in the age of high tariffs in New York City.

  10. 1968 Oscar-winning Best Picture “Oliver!”

    1968 was a weak year for movies. The most memorable things about it were 2001 and 3 boobs: Olivia Hussey’s and Zero Mostel in The Producers. Hussey was underage for her topless scene much like Thora Birch was in American Beauty.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    @ScarletNumber

    Planet of the Apes was pretty memorable. They were still milking that franchise well into the 70s.

    Replies: @AndrewR

  11. @ScarletNumber

    1968 Oscar-winning Best Picture “Oliver!”
     
    1968 was a weak year for movies. The most memorable things about it were 2001 and 3 boobs: Olivia Hussey's and Zero Mostel in The Producers. Hussey was underage for her topless scene much like Thora Birch was in American Beauty.

    Replies: @Anonymous

    Planet of the Apes was pretty memorable. They were still milking that franchise well into the 70s.

    • Replies: @AndrewR
    @Anonymous

    They've milked it into 2018 by getting a heretic excommunicated for insulting a powerful former royal councilwoman.

  12. Let’s just cut to the chase and officially bring back serfdom. We’re pretty much there with things like Student Loans and property taxes.

    In some ways, the poor in the US are freer than the middle class.

    • Replies: @Alec Leamas
    @The Alarmist


    In some ways, the poor in the US are freer than the middle class.
     
    There is something quite free about being no use to anyone of import in modern America.

    You can do whatever you want and no one will let you starve.

    The mistake is thinking that it all isn't part of the big plan.

    Replies: @Reg Cæsar

    , @Crawfurdmuir
    @The Alarmist

    Student loans have introduced something more resembling debt peonage than serfdom. Government has taken them over completely, and they are not extinguishable by bankruptcy.

    Under serfdom (villeinage) the unfree tenant was tied to land, and went with the land when it was conveyed to another owner. The debt peon might have appeared superficially like a serf, because his creditor was ordinarily his landlord, but the mechanism was different. With student loans today, it doesn't matter where the debtor moves, or even if he is able to escape other debt through Chapter 7, his student debt persists.

    Property taxes are much more akin to feu duties than is student debt. However, even closer to the relationship between lord and vassal is that between the Bureau of Land Management and ranchers of the Cliven Bundy type in the western US. Their struggle against the BLM's formerly benign lordship, now become harsh and demanding under its recent environmentalist inheritors, resembles the "rent wars" that took place in upstate New York after the death of Stephen van Rensselaer.

    , @Flip
    @The Alarmist


    In some ways, the poor in the US are freer than the middle class.
     
    Yes. Free medical care, cheap public housing, free food, free money for your kids, and no need to work.

    A women I worked with (secretarial sort of job) said she would love to be at home with her young daughter but couldn't afford it and would love to have more kids. I commented that we paid taxes to support poor people who could have all the kids they wanted and didn't have to work.
  13. @Peter Johnson
    @Anon

    Gregory Clark is a dissident economic historian who takes a hard-headed scientific approach and does not follow the party line. He has shown that the Industrial Revolution in England can be linked to eugenic trends in England over the few centuries preceding it -- in other words the English population became smarter and harder-working due to eugenic trends. He has a number of papers along those lines - he is a very important researcher.

    Replies: @Anon, @Dan Hayes, @dfordoom

    Thanks

  14. @Dave Pinsen
    @Anon

    This is sort of like going to Starting Strength's forum and asking who Jim Steel is.

    Replies: @Anonymous, @Cagey Beast

    I doubt many iStevers know who he is. Greg Cochran? Probably. Gregory Clark? Probably not.

    • Replies: @Dave Pinsen
    @Anonymous

    Steve’s blogged about all of his books, IIRC, which have Hemingway-pun titles. Derbyshire reviewed one too, I think.

  15. @anonymous
    this "classical liberal" nonsense is also popular with the internet commentators and gurus who try to be hip and with it for the nascent alt-right kids these days.

    it's not going to work. the real alt-right is filled with former libertarians and the kids who first get excited about someone calling out "SJWs" eventually discovers that individualism isnt the final solution.

    But we are. And we're happy to take them when they decide to evolve past being anti-PC "classical liberals" watching their nations collapse around them.

    Replies: @IHTG, @Cagey Beast, @LondonBob

    *Everbody hates SJWs, they’re obnoxious and overextended, they’re the left’s Achilles heel*

    “Hey guys, let’s not hit the enemy where they’re vulnerable! Let’s attack them where they have a complete public advantage over us instead!”

    Your pathway to victory is to find a way to marry an immigration skeptic message to the anti-SJW movement, not calling out Jordan Peterson and Ben Shapiro fans as cucks

    • Replies: @AndrewR
    @IHTG

    Your comment is rather ambiguous.

    Wisdom = Hate the sin, love the sinner.

    The JP/BS fans themselves should not be insulted. And ideally one wouldn't personally insult JP or BS either, but those two, and similar pseudo-edgy hustlers, do need to be called out and exposed. They're peddling an über-kosher blue pill with a red coating. At best, they're stepping stones into true knowledge. At worst they are gatekeepers: "we are the legitimate political opposition; anyone who talks about the JQ and race realism is an evil racist who needs to be destroyed" (Shapiro has said the second part almost verbatim).

    So yes, Psychology 101 informs us that it's completely counterproductive to personally insult anyone whom you want to persuade/convert/recruit. And it's less counterproductive (but still unwise) to personally insult a public figure if you're trying to win over their fan base.

    Beyond that, there's no need to hold back.

    Replies: @Anonymous

    , @notanon
    @IHTG


    Your pathway to victory is to find a way to marry an immigration skeptic message to the anti-SJW movement, not calling out Jordan Peterson and Ben Shapiro fans as cucks
     
    the pathway to victory will be largely built on humor imo and there's a lot of humor in the media's attempts to promote... scary music.... the dark web
  16. anon[393] • Disclaimer says:
    @Anonymous
    http://www.executedtoday.com/2017/10/16/1771-mary-jones-hanged-for-shoplifting/

    Mary was thought to be about eighteen or nineteen years old but was already married with two children when her husband, William, was press ganged into the Navy to go to the Falkland Islands, leaving her virtually destitute. She lived with her friend Ann Styles in Angel Alley in the Strand and was at times reduced to begging to feed herself and the infants. It is said that she had her baby with her in the cart as she was taken to Tyburn to be hanged.

    There had been a spate of shoplifting incidents in Ludgate Street area of London during 1771 and the shop keepers were on high alert and keeping watch for suspects. On Wednesday the 7th of August Mary, with one of her children in tow and Ann Styles went on a shop lifting expedition in the Ludgate Street....Finally the pair went to the drapery shop owned by a Mr. William Foot and expressed interest in buying a child’s frock. Nothing that they were shown appeared to be what they wanted and Mary made to leave the shop but Mr. Foot’s assistant, Christopher Preston, noticed that she had something concealed under her cloak. He went after her and brought her back into the shop where he discovered she had concealed four pieces of worked muslin which she had taken from the counter. Christopher Preston told the other assistant, Andrew Hawkins, to fetch a constable while he kept the women in the shop. The constable arrested them both and they were taken to the Compter (a local lock up jail).

    Both women were charged under the Shoplifting Act with the theft of the muslin which was valued at £5. 10s. (£5.50) The actual offence at this time being called “privately stealing in a shop”. The value of the goods stolen, being more than five shillings (25p), made it a capital crime....

    Mary and Ann were permitted to speak in their own defence. Mary told the court of her struggle to support two children without her husband and that she had always been an honest woman....

    The trial lasted no more than two hours and Mary was convicted as she was actually in possession of the stolen items but Ann was acquitted. Mary received the mandatory death sentence and was transferred to Newgate to await her trip to Tyburn. When the Recorder of London prepared his report for the King and Privy Council there was no recommendation to mercy for Mary, despite her age and circumstances....

    On the morning of Wednesday the 16th of October she was brought to the Press Yard of Newgate where the halter noose was put round her neck and her arms tied to her body with a cord above the elbows. She was made to get into the cart and sit on her own coffin...

    One can well understand why the law in this period in history is now referred to as the Bloody Code. Of the two hundred and ninety four people executed at Tyburn in the decade from 1765 to 1774 only twenty five were to die for murder and three for rape. The rest mostly suffered for various types of property related crime, such as highway robbery, burglary, housebreaking and forgery.

    It seems amazing today that a young mother should be hanged for what would now considered to be a minor crime, yet in 1771 nobody would have thought anything of it — it was a regular and perfectly normal event. If it was Mary’s first offence, as she claimed, she would probably get a community service order now, especially as he had dependant children. However Georgian justice was being applied increasingly severely at this time. Sixty-two men and six women received the death sentence during this year, of whom thirty four of the men and one of the women, Frances Allen, were to share Mary’s fate. Frances Allen was hanged on Wednesday the 7th of August for housebreaking.
     

    Replies: @Anonymous, @anon, @AndrewR, @Almost Missouri, @Bill B., @Anonymous

    this is the scarlet letter defense
    “Oh it was such a minor crime and poor Hester Prynne had such extenuating circumstances”,

    But then 200 years later we find half the children born out of wedlock another half aborted, marriages mostly ending in divorce, now even a crisis of no one will marry or have children so third world immigration is supposed to be the solution, and the crime and suffering associated with out of wedlock birth of all this is incalculable. Im sure someone could give a rough estimate. and all because half a dozen Hester Prynnes were shamed every year in the entire east coast was too much to bear for liberal bleeding hearts

    so smartass you have told us about the 30 a year hanged now give us the difference between the current years crime figures and the crime stats back then. Whats the net human suffering you have saved us all. Hint its orders of orders of magnitude more suffering you have caused just as your meddling with the Hester Prynne type crimes has caused.
    This is nothing but typical leftist bullshit where you use one failed experiment to justify the next and the next

    • Replies: @Rosie
    @anon


    this is the scarlet letter defense
    “Oh it was such a minor crime and poor Hester Prynne had such extenuating circumstances”,
     
    You assume that it's either Hester Prynne or total chaos. This is fatalistic and unimaginative, not to mention the slippery slope fallacy.

    You ignore numerous confounding factors, especially race and education. The data surrounding out-of-wedlock births and divorce often point to the needed solutions if you're willing to look. Granted, it's more fun to compete for status by posing as "more reactionary than thou," but it's also counterproductive and embarrassing to a movement that actually hopes to accomplish anything.
    , @Rosie
    @anon


    This is nothing but typical leftist bullshit where you use one failed experiment to justify the next and the next
     
    Your way of thinking reminds me of Phillipa Foot'a formulation of the trolley problem.

    Suppose that a judge or magistrate is faced with rioters demanding that a culprit be found for a certain crime and threatening otherwise to take their own bloody revenge on a particular section of the community. The real culprit being unknown, the judge sees himself as able to prevent the bloodshed only by framing some innocent person and having him executed.
     
    It's really a variation on human sacrifice.

    Fortunately, in the real world, we can try, try again till we get it right.
  17. @Lot
    Greg, wtf with the paywall articles? You are a rock star, publish in some open journals!

    The harshness of the English system was eugenic, making the English of today smarter, healthier, happier and more law-abiding than if the old welfare payments had continued.

    So, the cruelty of our forefathers to each other was kindness to us. More misery and suffering then, less now.

    There's no real way to discount or weigh intertemporal transfers of utility like this. We ought not even try.

    Regarding the article's suggestion that Smith, Bentham, Malthus, and Ricardo were wrong about one of the leading economic issue of their eras, I will need better evidence than describes in the abstract.

    If it is something Smith wanted decades prior, but only happened in 1834, it suggests that the larger and likely more intelligent post Great Reform Act electorate favored it, a substantial point in its favor in my opinion.

    Replies: @Hail, @AndrewR, @Anonymous

    The harshness of the English system was eugenic, making the English of today smarter, healthier, happier and more law-abiding than if the old welfare payments had continued.

    So, the cruelty of our forefathers to each other was kindness to us. More misery and suffering then, less now.

    I believe Clark and others propose the eugenic benefits accrued to Britain happened over centuries and ended about the time in question (1834) or shortly thereafter (i.e., were in no way caused by the welfare cut under discussion). The dysgenic trend, i.e. genotypic IQ loss, was casued by the Industrial Revolution, such that by today, after 150+ years of dysgenic breeding, the British have probably given back what, five, even ten genotypic IQ points?

    Imagine what the British at their eugenic peak could have done with today’s nutrition (peak eugenic period just before Industrial Revolution plus Flynn effect in lump sum).

    • Replies: @Anon
    @Hail

    Before the Great Caucasian Admixture, weren't the means and SDs of the various Northern European peoples quite varied? I think I've read ranges from 90 to 115 or so for means. The English were quite high, compared, for instance, to the Scots and Irish.

    , @Desiderius
    @Hail

    Perhaps the nutrition surge drove the dysgenesis, or maybe IQ doesn’t map exactly to eugenesis.

    , @Alec Leamas
    @Hail

    This is interesting. I've often thought that the expansion of the British Empire was eugenic. It presented the ambitious sons other than the first born with opportunities to chase wealth and power elsewhere, and as a consequence to have families of their own. Of course from time to time parts of it broke away.

    Replies: @Romanian

    , @Lot
    @Hail

    I think English fertility was probably eugenic until around 1870 or 1880.

    Replies: @Hail, @notanon

    , @dfordoom
    @Hail


    I believe Clark and others propose the eugenic benefits accrued to Britain happened over centuries and ended about the time in question (1834) or shortly thereafter (i.e., were in no way caused by the welfare cut under discussion). The dysgenic trend, i.e. genotypic IQ loss, was casued by the Industrial Revolution, such that by today, after 150+ years of dysgenic breeding, the British have probably given back what, five, even ten genotypic IQ points?
     
    OK, that makes sense. Sort of. I guess.
  18. @Anon
    Who is Gregory Clark? Is he someone whom iSteve readers should already be familiar with, know what is important about him?

    Replies: @Dave Pinsen, @Peter Johnson, @Edward, @pyrrhus

    In his book The Son Also Rises, Gregory Clark argues that social status runs in families for many generations, with very slow social mobility. Unlike the usual measures of social mobility which appear to demonstrate that social mobility rates differ between countries and between ages, Clark’s research suggests that social mobility rates have been stable across both time and place. Why? Genetics. Like Sir Francis Galton, he uses surnames to look at high- and low-status families and their prevalence within high-status occupations and educational institutions.

    His work has important implications for iSteve readers. Firstly, as Clark states, it’s all about the individual’s genotype. If you know an individual’s genotype, you don’t need any further information about the individual’s family (or race) to be able to predict his social status. Secondly, given that we tend not to know people’s genotypes, the next best step is to look at the phenotypes of an individual’s family. What is the educational and occupational status of his family members? What is the average IQ of his grandparents? This helps us to tell whether an individual has a high IQ because of “luck”, or due to genes.

    Thus, regression to the family mean is more important than regression to the racial mean, as the family of an individual provides more information to us than the race of an individual. Ultimately, to say that there are mean differences between races is to say that there are more high-status individuals and families and sub-populations in one race as opposed to another. (Of course, when it comes to immigration policy, it’s rather difficult to use individual or family phenotypes as a proxy.)

    It also explains why, as long as assortative mating occurs down the generations, regression to the mean won’t occur. UJayMan explains this very well here:

    https://www.unz.com/jman/regression-to-the-mean/

    • Replies: @stillCARealist
    @Edward

    Along with Peter Johnson's comment, so eugenics is good, right? Then we're all pretty sanguine about executing female thieves. No more of that phenotypical behavior! Oh wait, it's England. I mean behaviour.

  19. @IHTG
    @anonymous

    *Everbody hates SJWs, they're obnoxious and overextended, they're the left's Achilles heel*

    "Hey guys, let's not hit the enemy where they're vulnerable! Let's attack them where they have a complete public advantage over us instead!"

    Your pathway to victory is to find a way to marry an immigration skeptic message to the anti-SJW movement, not calling out Jordan Peterson and Ben Shapiro fans as cucks

    Replies: @AndrewR, @notanon

    Your comment is rather ambiguous.

    Wisdom = Hate the sin, love the sinner.

    The JP/BS fans themselves should not be insulted. And ideally one wouldn’t personally insult JP or BS either, but those two, and similar pseudo-edgy hustlers, do need to be called out and exposed. They’re peddling an über-kosher blue pill with a red coating. At best, they’re stepping stones into true knowledge. At worst they are gatekeepers: “we are the legitimate political opposition; anyone who talks about the JQ and race realism is an evil racist who needs to be destroyed” (Shapiro has said the second part almost verbatim).

    So yes, Psychology 101 informs us that it’s completely counterproductive to personally insult anyone whom you want to persuade/convert/recruit. And it’s less counterproductive (but still unwise) to personally insult a public figure if you’re trying to win over their fan base.

    Beyond that, there’s no need to hold back.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    @AndrewR


    So yes, Psychology 101 informs us that it’s completely counterproductive to personally insult anyone whom you want to persuade/convert/recruit.
     
    What sites Psych 101 tell us IS productive?
  20. “Classical liberals” across 19th Century Europe did all kinds of things that limited traditional freedoms and increased the power of governments. A good example is the imposition of public schooling.

    In other words, (classical) Libs R the Real Socialists.

  21. @Anonymous
    http://www.executedtoday.com/2017/10/16/1771-mary-jones-hanged-for-shoplifting/

    Mary was thought to be about eighteen or nineteen years old but was already married with two children when her husband, William, was press ganged into the Navy to go to the Falkland Islands, leaving her virtually destitute. She lived with her friend Ann Styles in Angel Alley in the Strand and was at times reduced to begging to feed herself and the infants. It is said that she had her baby with her in the cart as she was taken to Tyburn to be hanged.

    There had been a spate of shoplifting incidents in Ludgate Street area of London during 1771 and the shop keepers were on high alert and keeping watch for suspects. On Wednesday the 7th of August Mary, with one of her children in tow and Ann Styles went on a shop lifting expedition in the Ludgate Street....Finally the pair went to the drapery shop owned by a Mr. William Foot and expressed interest in buying a child’s frock. Nothing that they were shown appeared to be what they wanted and Mary made to leave the shop but Mr. Foot’s assistant, Christopher Preston, noticed that she had something concealed under her cloak. He went after her and brought her back into the shop where he discovered she had concealed four pieces of worked muslin which she had taken from the counter. Christopher Preston told the other assistant, Andrew Hawkins, to fetch a constable while he kept the women in the shop. The constable arrested them both and they were taken to the Compter (a local lock up jail).

    Both women were charged under the Shoplifting Act with the theft of the muslin which was valued at £5. 10s. (£5.50) The actual offence at this time being called “privately stealing in a shop”. The value of the goods stolen, being more than five shillings (25p), made it a capital crime....

    Mary and Ann were permitted to speak in their own defence. Mary told the court of her struggle to support two children without her husband and that she had always been an honest woman....

    The trial lasted no more than two hours and Mary was convicted as she was actually in possession of the stolen items but Ann was acquitted. Mary received the mandatory death sentence and was transferred to Newgate to await her trip to Tyburn. When the Recorder of London prepared his report for the King and Privy Council there was no recommendation to mercy for Mary, despite her age and circumstances....

    On the morning of Wednesday the 16th of October she was brought to the Press Yard of Newgate where the halter noose was put round her neck and her arms tied to her body with a cord above the elbows. She was made to get into the cart and sit on her own coffin...

    One can well understand why the law in this period in history is now referred to as the Bloody Code. Of the two hundred and ninety four people executed at Tyburn in the decade from 1765 to 1774 only twenty five were to die for murder and three for rape. The rest mostly suffered for various types of property related crime, such as highway robbery, burglary, housebreaking and forgery.

    It seems amazing today that a young mother should be hanged for what would now considered to be a minor crime, yet in 1771 nobody would have thought anything of it — it was a regular and perfectly normal event. If it was Mary’s first offence, as she claimed, she would probably get a community service order now, especially as he had dependant children. However Georgian justice was being applied increasingly severely at this time. Sixty-two men and six women received the death sentence during this year, of whom thirty four of the men and one of the women, Frances Allen, were to share Mary’s fate. Frances Allen was hanged on Wednesday the 7th of August for housebreaking.
     

    Replies: @Anonymous, @anon, @AndrewR, @Almost Missouri, @Bill B., @Anonymous

    So the government forced young men into military service then executed their wives for stealing almost-worthless items in order to survive? And society was cool with this? Wow.

    And people wonder why I’m a misanthrope. In every place and every era, most people are scum.

  22. @Lot
    Greg, wtf with the paywall articles? You are a rock star, publish in some open journals!

    The harshness of the English system was eugenic, making the English of today smarter, healthier, happier and more law-abiding than if the old welfare payments had continued.

    So, the cruelty of our forefathers to each other was kindness to us. More misery and suffering then, less now.

    There's no real way to discount or weigh intertemporal transfers of utility like this. We ought not even try.

    Regarding the article's suggestion that Smith, Bentham, Malthus, and Ricardo were wrong about one of the leading economic issue of their eras, I will need better evidence than describes in the abstract.

    If it is something Smith wanted decades prior, but only happened in 1834, it suggests that the larger and likely more intelligent post Great Reform Act electorate favored it, a substantial point in its favor in my opinion.

    Replies: @Hail, @AndrewR, @Anonymous

    the cruelty of our forefathers to each other was kindness to us

    “How do you do, fellow Anglos?”

    -Lot

  23. @Dave Pinsen
    @Anon

    This is sort of like going to Starting Strength's forum and asking who Jim Steel is.

    Replies: @Anonymous, @Cagey Beast

    I’ve visited Steve’s blog every day for more than a decade and Gregory Clark’s name doesn’t ring a bell.

    • Replies: @res
    @Cagey Beast

    Try doing a search for Gregory Clark in the iSteve archives. I see 26 hits with 11 of those in article titles. One of which was two weeks ago.

  24. @anonymous
    this "classical liberal" nonsense is also popular with the internet commentators and gurus who try to be hip and with it for the nascent alt-right kids these days.

    it's not going to work. the real alt-right is filled with former libertarians and the kids who first get excited about someone calling out "SJWs" eventually discovers that individualism isnt the final solution.

    But we are. And we're happy to take them when they decide to evolve past being anti-PC "classical liberals" watching their nations collapse around them.

    Replies: @IHTG, @Cagey Beast, @LondonBob

    This “classical liberal” nonsense is also popular with the internet commentators and gurus who try to be hip and with it for the nascent alt-right kids these days.

    No people use the term “classical liberal” to distinguish themselves from the New Left, socialists, Antifa and SJWs, who Americans mislabel as “liberals”. A smaller number of people, like Jordan Peterson, use the term to make clear to others that they’re not Identitarian or Alt-Right. Kissing up to edgy Alt-Right kids is the opposite of what they’re doing.

    • Agree: Desiderius
    • Replies: @Crawfurdmuir
    @Cagey Beast

    "Classical liberal" as a self-description on the part of someone like Jonah Goldberg is to "liberal," as "democratic socialist" is to "socialist." It's simply a way to soften the message.

    Goldberg and the other NeverTrumpers at NR can't bring themselves to identify as plain old conservatives during the ascendancy of Donald Trump, while "neoconservative" has a bad odor it acquired during Bush 43's administration. These people really are center-leftists at heart; they just feed the rubes in flyover country enough pro-life, pro-2nd amendment, Christian-Zionist pablum to keep them voting for establishment Republicans.

    Then they go to Washington to vote for unlimited immigration and "free" trade which is actually managed trade that is managed to the disadvantage of American citizens.

  25. @Anonymous
    @Anonymous


    The value of the goods stolen, being more than five shillings (25p), made it a capital crime….
     
    I bet we'll end up this way again before it's all over.

    Replies: @another fred

    The population is going to be winnowed one way or another. More likely, plagues will come and they will do the job we do not have the stomach for.

  26. @Anon
    Who is Gregory Clark? Is he someone whom iSteve readers should already be familiar with, know what is important about him?

    Replies: @Dave Pinsen, @Peter Johnson, @Edward, @pyrrhus

    Clark is the author of the British economic history/eugenics related A Farewell to Alms…

  27. @Anonymous
    @ScarletNumber

    Planet of the Apes was pretty memorable. They were still milking that franchise well into the 70s.

    Replies: @AndrewR

    They’ve milked it into 2018 by getting a heretic excommunicated for insulting a powerful former royal councilwoman.

  28. iSteve–you went to St. Francis deSales? On Moorpark, right? My cousin taught there some years later (She lived on Longridge Ave. before voting with her feet and departing to the greener environs of Texas). Small world.

  29. @Hail
    @Lot


    The harshness of the English system was eugenic, making the English of today smarter, healthier, happier and more law-abiding than if the old welfare payments had continued.

    So, the cruelty of our forefathers to each other was kindness to us. More misery and suffering then, less now.
     

    I believe Clark and others propose the eugenic benefits accrued to Britain happened over centuries and ended about the time in question (1834) or shortly thereafter (i.e., were in no way caused by the welfare cut under discussion). The dysgenic trend, i.e. genotypic IQ loss, was casued by the Industrial Revolution, such that by today, after 150+ years of dysgenic breeding, the British have probably given back what, five, even ten genotypic IQ points?

    Imagine what the British at their eugenic peak could have done with today's nutrition (peak eugenic period just before Industrial Revolution plus Flynn effect in lump sum).

    Replies: @Anon, @Desiderius, @Alec Leamas, @Lot, @dfordoom

    Before the Great Caucasian Admixture, weren’t the means and SDs of the various Northern European peoples quite varied? I think I’ve read ranges from 90 to 115 or so for means. The English were quite high, compared, for instance, to the Scots and Irish.

  30. @Hail
    @Lot


    The harshness of the English system was eugenic, making the English of today smarter, healthier, happier and more law-abiding than if the old welfare payments had continued.

    So, the cruelty of our forefathers to each other was kindness to us. More misery and suffering then, less now.
     

    I believe Clark and others propose the eugenic benefits accrued to Britain happened over centuries and ended about the time in question (1834) or shortly thereafter (i.e., were in no way caused by the welfare cut under discussion). The dysgenic trend, i.e. genotypic IQ loss, was casued by the Industrial Revolution, such that by today, after 150+ years of dysgenic breeding, the British have probably given back what, five, even ten genotypic IQ points?

    Imagine what the British at their eugenic peak could have done with today's nutrition (peak eugenic period just before Industrial Revolution plus Flynn effect in lump sum).

    Replies: @Anon, @Desiderius, @Alec Leamas, @Lot, @dfordoom

    Perhaps the nutrition surge drove the dysgenesis, or maybe IQ doesn’t map exactly to eugenesis.

  31. @anonymous
    this "classical liberal" nonsense is also popular with the internet commentators and gurus who try to be hip and with it for the nascent alt-right kids these days.

    it's not going to work. the real alt-right is filled with former libertarians and the kids who first get excited about someone calling out "SJWs" eventually discovers that individualism isnt the final solution.

    But we are. And we're happy to take them when they decide to evolve past being anti-PC "classical liberals" watching their nations collapse around them.

    Replies: @IHTG, @Cagey Beast, @LondonBob

    I am a reformed libertarian, it is a good gateway drug. Once you give it some serious thought you realise it is the mirror image of marxism, utterly unworkable and completely ignorant of the human condition, promoted mainly by autists.

    • Agree: Bill
    • Replies: @Desiderius
    @LondonBob

    Meh.

    It’s a decent first pass/way to lean/burden of proof setter. Sort of an Occam’s Razor for political philosophy.

  32. OT:
    Niall Ferguson retweeted this, so he, Sam Harris, Yale University and the New York Times are all signalling that they take Nicholas A. Christakis’ side in that controversy. It’s nice to know where the boundaries are, I guess. Do whatever the hell you want, just don’t do it in their Green Zone.

    It’s the globalist-liberal credo: “your right to destroy western civilisation ends where my social class begins”.

  33. With “classical liberalism” suddenly fashionable as an ideological self-designation among Never Trumpers, Gregory Clark takes a look at the historical record back when Classical Liberalism was triumphant in the British Parliament.

    Classical Liberalism is a post-WWII term devised by people who think they are “classical liberals” and applied to a group of late C18th and C19th thinkers who were decidedly disparate in views. Adam Smith is a case in point. He did not support Free Trade, as his views on the Navigation Acts make clear. For the last 10 years of his life he was one of His Majesty’s Commissioners of Customs – no Free Trader there. Even John Stuart Mill became dubious about Free Trade late in life. I could continue, but don’t want to bore you.
    Classical Liberalism is a fake term used by Free Traders and Globalists to give their ideology an historical pedigree which is unwarranted and untrue..

  34. @Peter Johnson
    @Anon

    Gregory Clark is a dissident economic historian who takes a hard-headed scientific approach and does not follow the party line. He has shown that the Industrial Revolution in England can be linked to eugenic trends in England over the few centuries preceding it -- in other words the English population became smarter and harder-working due to eugenic trends. He has a number of papers along those lines - he is a very important researcher.

    Replies: @Anon, @Dan Hayes, @dfordoom

    Peter Johnson:

    In addition to being an important economic researcher, Gregory Clark is notorious for the quirky punish titles of his major works: A Farewell to Alms and The Son Also Rises.

  35. @The Alarmist
    Let's just cut to the chase and officially bring back serfdom. We're pretty much there with things like Student Loans and property taxes.

    In some ways, the poor in the US are freer than the middle class.

    Replies: @Alec Leamas, @Crawfurdmuir, @Flip

    In some ways, the poor in the US are freer than the middle class.

    There is something quite free about being no use to anyone of import in modern America.

    You can do whatever you want and no one will let you starve.

    The mistake is thinking that it all isn’t part of the big plan.

    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar
    @Alec Leamas



    In some ways, the poor in the US are freer than the middle class.


     

    The mistake is thinking that it all isn’t part of the big plan.

     

    It sure was on Airstrip One:

    So long as they [the Proles] continued to work and breed, their other activities were without importance. Left to themselves, like cattle turned loose upon the plains of Argentina, they had reverted to a style of life that appeared to be natural to them, a sort of ancestral pattern... Heavy physical work, the care of home and children, petty quarrels with neighbours, films, football, beer and above all, gambling filled up the horizon of their minds. To keep them in control was not difficult.

  36. @EH
    Under the Old Poor Law it was illegal to move to another parish without getting permission from the parish to which you were moving, to ensure you wouldn't be a charge on their welfare rolls. This created in effect a corrupt and dysfunctional internal passport system which had enormous indirect costs to the economy. Dissenters such as the Quakers who did not use the parish welfare system and were driving the industrial revolution nevertheless could not legally change residences.

    (The Quakers, besides virtually restarting mining in Britain, starting mass production of iron, coal, and lead (and associated silver), inventing rails, iron rails, rail wheels, passenger rail, commercial banking, production of fine measurement instruments and watches etc. etc., also introduced schools for workers' children, humane insane asylums, and finally, the workhouse, which was at the time a progressive alternative to the prior alternatives of either starving on the streets - or if one were lucky, being a charge on the poor rolls - but many poor were not legal residents of the parish where they resided and had, in fact, no alternative to starvation prior to the introduction of the workhouse.)

    Replies: @Redneck farmer, @notanon, @JerseyJeffersonian, @Reg Cæsar

    And had their non- Quaker foremen beat the s*** out of 10-year-olds if they were late for work.

    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar
    @Redneck farmer


    And had their non- Quaker foremen beat the s*** out of 10-year-olds if they were late for work.

     

    Simon Legree was a Yankee. So Mrs Stowe understood this process well.
  37. Steve Sailer once again reminds us that he’s tall. Us short people are so grateful.

    Jodie Foster is short, but her Dutch Boer French accent was a hoot in that Elysium movie directed by the District 9 guy. Charlize Theron is Dutch Boer French Norman, maybe Foster was having fun with that.

    Theron is tall.

    Jodie Foster is also pals with Mel Gibson. I bet I’m taller than Gibson, another shorty. Perhaps that’s why Foster and Gibson are pals.

  38. @Hail
    @Lot


    The harshness of the English system was eugenic, making the English of today smarter, healthier, happier and more law-abiding than if the old welfare payments had continued.

    So, the cruelty of our forefathers to each other was kindness to us. More misery and suffering then, less now.
     

    I believe Clark and others propose the eugenic benefits accrued to Britain happened over centuries and ended about the time in question (1834) or shortly thereafter (i.e., were in no way caused by the welfare cut under discussion). The dysgenic trend, i.e. genotypic IQ loss, was casued by the Industrial Revolution, such that by today, after 150+ years of dysgenic breeding, the British have probably given back what, five, even ten genotypic IQ points?

    Imagine what the British at their eugenic peak could have done with today's nutrition (peak eugenic period just before Industrial Revolution plus Flynn effect in lump sum).

    Replies: @Anon, @Desiderius, @Alec Leamas, @Lot, @dfordoom

    This is interesting. I’ve often thought that the expansion of the British Empire was eugenic. It presented the ambitious sons other than the first born with opportunities to chase wealth and power elsewhere, and as a consequence to have families of their own. Of course from time to time parts of it broke away.

    • Replies: @Romanian
    @Alec Leamas

    Didn't those sons keep dying from tropical diseases?

    We should not overlook the role that the "white man's grave" (Africa, but South America, the Caribbean, SE Asia can be called the same) played in thinning out some of the more adventurous sorts, if not the most intelligent, ambitious etc in the Empire.

    The eugenic part was related to the expansion of the habitat for a particularly industrious race, thereby expanding their numbers far beyond anything that could have been supported in the UK alone. But this did not occur in most places, not just because of pre-existing populations, but rather of civilizations, which prevented mass displacement.

    Replies: @anon

  39. With “classical liberalism” suddenly fashionable as an ideological self-designation among Never Trumpers,……………….

    Classical liberals like Joseph Stalin:

    https://www.unz.com/isteve/max-boot-i-would-sooner-vote-for-josef-stalin-than-i-would-vote-for-donald-trump/

    • Replies: @anonymous
    @Mr. Anon

    hey you almost have 9,000 comments here, you little bot.

    did you get a shekel for each comment for repeatedly acting like a stupid person who obsessively criticizes Jews, as if you had ever spent a day of your life as a real person with a real heart?

    Look there are many ways to criticize Max Boot, a true idiot, and you picked one of the stupidest ways. Stupid people like you should just shut up and let real people criticize the foolish Max Boot. It will be better that way. Idiots like you make Max Boot look better than he should, in comparison, Anon Mr,

    Enjoy your shekels, Mr Anon, we all know you are working to make the anti-Semites look stupid.

    "Knowledge is good" and "Mediocrity is not the same as knowledge"

    You are mediocre. You know that, don't you?

    Replies: @Mr. Anon

  40. Two of the people regarded as the greatest classical liberals of the 20th century were F.A. Hayek and Milton Friedman. Hayek endorsed the British Poor Law, and Friedman famously argued that a country could not have both open borders and a welfare state.

    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar
    @phil


    ...Friedman famously argued that a country could not have both open borders and a welfare state.

     

    Conversely (or obversely, whatever), you can't have a welfare state and closed borders.

    You've created a natural lobby to open those borders.

    Replies: @stillCARealist

  41. But that’s all forgotten today.

    not sure about that – seems to me their running with “classical liberalism” is partly a label retreat from “neo-liberalism” becoming a dirty word.

  42. @Anonymous
    http://www.executedtoday.com/2017/10/16/1771-mary-jones-hanged-for-shoplifting/

    Mary was thought to be about eighteen or nineteen years old but was already married with two children when her husband, William, was press ganged into the Navy to go to the Falkland Islands, leaving her virtually destitute. She lived with her friend Ann Styles in Angel Alley in the Strand and was at times reduced to begging to feed herself and the infants. It is said that she had her baby with her in the cart as she was taken to Tyburn to be hanged.

    There had been a spate of shoplifting incidents in Ludgate Street area of London during 1771 and the shop keepers were on high alert and keeping watch for suspects. On Wednesday the 7th of August Mary, with one of her children in tow and Ann Styles went on a shop lifting expedition in the Ludgate Street....Finally the pair went to the drapery shop owned by a Mr. William Foot and expressed interest in buying a child’s frock. Nothing that they were shown appeared to be what they wanted and Mary made to leave the shop but Mr. Foot’s assistant, Christopher Preston, noticed that she had something concealed under her cloak. He went after her and brought her back into the shop where he discovered she had concealed four pieces of worked muslin which she had taken from the counter. Christopher Preston told the other assistant, Andrew Hawkins, to fetch a constable while he kept the women in the shop. The constable arrested them both and they were taken to the Compter (a local lock up jail).

    Both women were charged under the Shoplifting Act with the theft of the muslin which was valued at £5. 10s. (£5.50) The actual offence at this time being called “privately stealing in a shop”. The value of the goods stolen, being more than five shillings (25p), made it a capital crime....

    Mary and Ann were permitted to speak in their own defence. Mary told the court of her struggle to support two children without her husband and that she had always been an honest woman....

    The trial lasted no more than two hours and Mary was convicted as she was actually in possession of the stolen items but Ann was acquitted. Mary received the mandatory death sentence and was transferred to Newgate to await her trip to Tyburn. When the Recorder of London prepared his report for the King and Privy Council there was no recommendation to mercy for Mary, despite her age and circumstances....

    On the morning of Wednesday the 16th of October she was brought to the Press Yard of Newgate where the halter noose was put round her neck and her arms tied to her body with a cord above the elbows. She was made to get into the cart and sit on her own coffin...

    One can well understand why the law in this period in history is now referred to as the Bloody Code. Of the two hundred and ninety four people executed at Tyburn in the decade from 1765 to 1774 only twenty five were to die for murder and three for rape. The rest mostly suffered for various types of property related crime, such as highway robbery, burglary, housebreaking and forgery.

    It seems amazing today that a young mother should be hanged for what would now considered to be a minor crime, yet in 1771 nobody would have thought anything of it — it was a regular and perfectly normal event. If it was Mary’s first offence, as she claimed, she would probably get a community service order now, especially as he had dependant children. However Georgian justice was being applied increasingly severely at this time. Sixty-two men and six women received the death sentence during this year, of whom thirty four of the men and one of the women, Frances Allen, were to share Mary’s fate. Frances Allen was hanged on Wednesday the 7th of August for housebreaking.
     

    Replies: @Anonymous, @anon, @AndrewR, @Almost Missouri, @Bill B., @Anonymous

    For context, consider what the world of Georgian England was like.

    [T]he Prince of Wales, was celebrated for having bedded 7,000 women and snipped from each a keepsake hair. Twenty-five per cent of all unmarried females in London were whores; the average age of a prostitute was 16; and many brothels prided themselves on offering only girls under the age of 14. … [I]n the 1790s, a good man could stroll past an 11-year-old prostitute on a London street without feeling a twinge of disgust or outrage; he accepted her as merely a feature of the landscape, like an ugly hill.

    In this milieu, offing an indigent shopliftress–with full due process no less–probably seemed a mercy. No, I’m not defending, just describing. This is the era of the nation about which Adam Smith famously remarked that “there is a deal of ruin in” it. He wasn’t being metaphorical.

    If Georgian England,

    weedy faint-hearted mainstream churches, skanky celebs, weary provocations for jaded debauchees,

    sounds more than faintly familiar, that’s because we’ve been here before, and having failed to maintain the lesson, we’re going back.

    The much maligned Victorian Era (which the above-quoted Mark Steyn thinks was really the Wilberforcian Era) is what stood between us and that formerly former world. The social ills of Georgian England were addressed in Victorian England with what we would today call Broken Windows Theory: prevent the big stuff by fixing the small stuff. Or as others called it, ethics and morality.

    Our modern enthusiasm for demolishing the “pruderies” of Victorianism will re-establish the formerly lost world of Georgian England, at least the bad parts of it. And rapid execution of teenage shoplifters will again seem like a mercy.

    • Agree: dfordoom
    • Replies: @The Last Real Calvinist
    @Almost Missouri


    Our modern enthusiasm for demolishing the “pruderies” of Victorianism will re-establish the formerly lost world of Georgian England, at least the bad parts of it. And rapid execution of teenage shoplifters will again seem like a mercy.

     

    Great comment. I hope it does not come to this, but I agree that at this point it's all systems go.
  43. @EH
    Under the Old Poor Law it was illegal to move to another parish without getting permission from the parish to which you were moving, to ensure you wouldn't be a charge on their welfare rolls. This created in effect a corrupt and dysfunctional internal passport system which had enormous indirect costs to the economy. Dissenters such as the Quakers who did not use the parish welfare system and were driving the industrial revolution nevertheless could not legally change residences.

    (The Quakers, besides virtually restarting mining in Britain, starting mass production of iron, coal, and lead (and associated silver), inventing rails, iron rails, rail wheels, passenger rail, commercial banking, production of fine measurement instruments and watches etc. etc., also introduced schools for workers' children, humane insane asylums, and finally, the workhouse, which was at the time a progressive alternative to the prior alternatives of either starving on the streets - or if one were lucky, being a charge on the poor rolls - but many poor were not legal residents of the parish where they resided and had, in fact, no alternative to starvation prior to the introduction of the workhouse.)

    Replies: @Redneck farmer, @notanon, @JerseyJeffersonian, @Reg Cæsar

    This created in effect a corrupt and dysfunctional internal passport system which had enormous indirect costs to the economy.

    i doubt this for the same reason as

    Surprisingly there is no evidence of any of the alleged social costs that prompted the harsh treatment of the poor after 1834.

    it would mostly have been spent on people who were incapable – everyone capable worked cos public shaming or guilty conscience.

  44. @IHTG
    @anonymous

    *Everbody hates SJWs, they're obnoxious and overextended, they're the left's Achilles heel*

    "Hey guys, let's not hit the enemy where they're vulnerable! Let's attack them where they have a complete public advantage over us instead!"

    Your pathway to victory is to find a way to marry an immigration skeptic message to the anti-SJW movement, not calling out Jordan Peterson and Ben Shapiro fans as cucks

    Replies: @AndrewR, @notanon

    Your pathway to victory is to find a way to marry an immigration skeptic message to the anti-SJW movement, not calling out Jordan Peterson and Ben Shapiro fans as cucks

    the pathway to victory will be largely built on humor imo and there’s a lot of humor in the media’s attempts to promote… scary music…. the dark web

  45. @EH
    Under the Old Poor Law it was illegal to move to another parish without getting permission from the parish to which you were moving, to ensure you wouldn't be a charge on their welfare rolls. This created in effect a corrupt and dysfunctional internal passport system which had enormous indirect costs to the economy. Dissenters such as the Quakers who did not use the parish welfare system and were driving the industrial revolution nevertheless could not legally change residences.

    (The Quakers, besides virtually restarting mining in Britain, starting mass production of iron, coal, and lead (and associated silver), inventing rails, iron rails, rail wheels, passenger rail, commercial banking, production of fine measurement instruments and watches etc. etc., also introduced schools for workers' children, humane insane asylums, and finally, the workhouse, which was at the time a progressive alternative to the prior alternatives of either starving on the streets - or if one were lucky, being a charge on the poor rolls - but many poor were not legal residents of the parish where they resided and had, in fact, no alternative to starvation prior to the introduction of the workhouse.)

    Replies: @Redneck farmer, @notanon, @JerseyJeffersonian, @Reg Cæsar

    The Quakers were religious dissenters, and due to this many opportunities, particularly in universities, were foreclosed to them. They made it up through “going into trade” in a big way, and taking charge of their own community’s uplift after they no longer were being hanged for their nonconforming religiosity. Unfortunately, sometimes these restrictive circumstances led to them getting involved in what are now – and even then – perceived to be rather unsavory pursuits that made them money, and which helped them to accrue power. Perhaps you can trace some similarities to another religiously nonconforming out group here, with the corresponding beneficial and deleterious effects on their perception in the wider society?

    • Replies: @EH
    @JerseyJeffersonian

    The Jews and Quakers were almost mirror images. The Jews always haggled, and had a general reputation for lying and cheating if not watched closely, while Quakers invented the fixed-price shop and succeeded in business on the basis of their reputation for scrupulous honesty. Most of the persecution of the Quakers was for refusing to swear any oaths because they claimed to always tell the truth, and they came close enough to make themselves the most trusted group in English business for centuries.

    Replies: @Cagey Beast, @Rosamond Vincy

  46. utilizing my main theatrical talent: tallness

    You sell yourself short Steve.

    I have to work hard to even try to be funny, for you it seems effortless.

    So, 74% of 794 million is, like, a lot.

    See?

    • Replies: @Rosie
    @Stan d Mute

    You have to admit, this headline was pretty hysterical!

    https://www.unz.com/isteve/nyt-we-need-to-have-a-conversation-about-the-conversation-about-chicago-murder-rates/

  47. Anonymous[164] • Disclaimer says:
    @Lot
    Greg, wtf with the paywall articles? You are a rock star, publish in some open journals!

    The harshness of the English system was eugenic, making the English of today smarter, healthier, happier and more law-abiding than if the old welfare payments had continued.

    So, the cruelty of our forefathers to each other was kindness to us. More misery and suffering then, less now.

    There's no real way to discount or weigh intertemporal transfers of utility like this. We ought not even try.

    Regarding the article's suggestion that Smith, Bentham, Malthus, and Ricardo were wrong about one of the leading economic issue of their eras, I will need better evidence than describes in the abstract.

    If it is something Smith wanted decades prior, but only happened in 1834, it suggests that the larger and likely more intelligent post Great Reform Act electorate favored it, a substantial point in its favor in my opinion.

    Replies: @Hail, @AndrewR, @Anonymous

    Its one of the best examples of how culture can create a genetic layout for the future, indeed. Adam Smith, incidentally, complained pretty significantly about the Scottish who were less harsh on their treatment of petty crime, and less focused on forcing what we would consider “capitalist work” on everyone. Arguably the lesser calm of the Scottish may be a result of that to this day.

    • Replies: @Cortes
    @Anonymous

    Banishment was a widely used sanction in the Scotland of Smith’s day. No inconsiderable matter. * Quite often economic crimes were accompanied by forced indentured service in America. A viable emigration option for the poor.

    * https://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/banishment

  48. The Poor law did not exist in isolation, in particular, the Corn Laws are important.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/English_Poor_Laws#Old_Poor_Law

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corn_Laws
    The Corn Laws were tariffs and other trade restrictions on imported food and grain (“corn”) enforced in Great Britain between 1815 and 1846.

    Notice the key date in both the poor law and the corn law is 1815, the end of the Napoleonic Wars leaving those that profited from the war trying to keep the good times rolling along even in peace. So the policy was to increase food prices while cutting taxes.

    Riots in 1830
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swing_Riots

  49. [T]he Prince of Wales, was celebrated for having bedded 7,000 women and snipped from each a keepsake hair. Twenty-five per cent of all unmarried females in London were whores; the average age of a prostitute was 16; and many brothels prided themselves on offering only girls under the age of 14. … [I]n the 1790s, a good man could stroll past an 11-year-old prostitute on a London street without feeling a twinge of disgust or outrage; he accepted her as merely a feature of the landscape, like an ugly hill.

    You see, AM, life has no meaning unless,there are 11-year-old prostitutes walking the streets.

    Just ask Daniel Chieh.

    • Replies: @Rosie
    @Rosie

    Lest I be accused of exaggerating, here he is on why the welfare state is an abomination:


    They can be protected by their families. At the end of the day, no one in this world “deserves” to be immune from misfortune and misery.

    Not men, and not women.

    And indeed, for there to be any real greatness, much needs to be able to be gained, risked, and lost. This grey world where all are allowed their their minimalistic inoffensive existence, without either catastrophe or triumph, is the ultimate hollowing: life devoid of vitality, death without dying.
     
    I find this feature of neoreaction very curious. I am a temperamentally conservative person, but here's the thing. The intellectual force of conservatism comes from a recognition that societies evolve to address real problems, and tinkering may therefore bring unintended consequences. Yet, reaction obviously risks the same catastrophic disruption as revolution. I am suspicious of both.

    Replies: @Daniel Chieh, @Peter Johnson

    , @MBlanc46
    @Rosie

    Life still has meaning. It’s just not as interesting.

  50. Anon[311] • Disclaimer says:

    My own opinion is that reading had more eugenic effects than any economist realizes. When it became a necessity to read to be able to work a middle-class office job during the Victorian era, this had a massive eugenic effect. All of a sudden, those persons with good verbal IQs were able to obtain jobs that paid a decent, middle-class wage in comparison to working class wages. That’s were all those middle-class Victorian families with 4-6 kids came from. A segment of the population that averages 4-6 kids bred in each generation for 3 generations alone will cause a significant shift in the IQ in the general population if the poor have fewer average surviving kids for those generations

    Also, being able to read pamphlets and books about basic medical health benefited middle-class families. As late as the 1880s, illiterate slum dwellers in England were still dying in significant numbers from a whole string of diseases such as diphtheria, measles, typhoid, cholera, smallpox, TB, etc., but the middle-class had learned about the germ theory of disease and had adopted habits to avoiding the contagions, which gave them an edge in allowing their numbers to increase over the poor.

    Methinks your man Clark makes far too much fuss over the good or bad effects of welfare. Most of the people who weren’t doing well in England in the 1700s and 1800s just migrated to the US, Canada, Australia, or New Zealand, which weakened any eugenic or diseugenic effect welfare might have had. For what it’s worth, the US didn’t implement any sort of welfare until the 1930s, yet we have, minus minorities, a pretty smart population. I think reading, more than anything else, by allow higher IQ people to get better paying jobs than before, allowed higher IQ people to enter a period of outbreeding the poor.

  51. @Anonymous
    @Dave Pinsen

    I doubt many iStevers know who he is. Greg Cochran? Probably. Gregory Clark? Probably not.

    Replies: @Dave Pinsen

    Steve’s blogged about all of his books, IIRC, which have Hemingway-pun titles. Derbyshire reviewed one too, I think.

  52. @Rosie

    [T]he Prince of Wales, was celebrated for having bedded 7,000 women and snipped from each a keepsake hair. Twenty-five per cent of all unmarried females in London were whores; the average age of a prostitute was 16; and many brothels prided themselves on offering only girls under the age of 14. … [I]n the 1790s, a good man could stroll past an 11-year-old prostitute on a London street without feeling a twinge of disgust or outrage; he accepted her as merely a feature of the landscape, like an ugly hill.
     
    You see, AM, life has no meaning unless,there are 11-year-old prostitutes walking the streets.

    Just ask Daniel Chieh.

    Replies: @Rosie, @MBlanc46

    Lest I be accused of exaggerating, here he is on why the welfare state is an abomination:

    They can be protected by their families. At the end of the day, no one in this world “deserves” to be immune from misfortune and misery.

    Not men, and not women.

    And indeed, for there to be any real greatness, much needs to be able to be gained, risked, and lost. This grey world where all are allowed their their minimalistic inoffensive existence, without either catastrophe or triumph, is the ultimate hollowing: life devoid of vitality, death without dying.

    I find this feature of neoreaction very curious. I am a temperamentally conservative person, but here’s the thing. The intellectual force of conservatism comes from a recognition that societies evolve to address real problems, and tinkering may therefore bring unintended consequences. Yet, reaction obviously risks the same catastrophic disruption as revolution. I am suspicious of both.

    • Replies: @Daniel Chieh
    @Rosie

    Last Man Mindset: The Greatest Goal of Existence is Existence At the End of History, coming to a bookstore near you.

    , @Peter Johnson
    @Rosie

    Well said, Rosie. HBD and alt-right advocates need to steer clear of excessive neo-reaction. We should fight against the left-imposed Narrative, but do so carefully and thoughtfully and avoid extremist sentiments.

  53. @EH
    Under the Old Poor Law it was illegal to move to another parish without getting permission from the parish to which you were moving, to ensure you wouldn't be a charge on their welfare rolls. This created in effect a corrupt and dysfunctional internal passport system which had enormous indirect costs to the economy. Dissenters such as the Quakers who did not use the parish welfare system and were driving the industrial revolution nevertheless could not legally change residences.

    (The Quakers, besides virtually restarting mining in Britain, starting mass production of iron, coal, and lead (and associated silver), inventing rails, iron rails, rail wheels, passenger rail, commercial banking, production of fine measurement instruments and watches etc. etc., also introduced schools for workers' children, humane insane asylums, and finally, the workhouse, which was at the time a progressive alternative to the prior alternatives of either starving on the streets - or if one were lucky, being a charge on the poor rolls - but many poor were not legal residents of the parish where they resided and had, in fact, no alternative to starvation prior to the introduction of the workhouse.)

    Replies: @Redneck farmer, @notanon, @JerseyJeffersonian, @Reg Cæsar

    They came to do good, and did well.

  54. @Redneck farmer
    @EH

    And had their non- Quaker foremen beat the s*** out of 10-year-olds if they were late for work.

    Replies: @Reg Cæsar

    And had their non- Quaker foremen beat the s*** out of 10-year-olds if they were late for work.

    Simon Legree was a Yankee. So Mrs Stowe understood this process well.

  55. @Rosie
    @Rosie

    Lest I be accused of exaggerating, here he is on why the welfare state is an abomination:


    They can be protected by their families. At the end of the day, no one in this world “deserves” to be immune from misfortune and misery.

    Not men, and not women.

    And indeed, for there to be any real greatness, much needs to be able to be gained, risked, and lost. This grey world where all are allowed their their minimalistic inoffensive existence, without either catastrophe or triumph, is the ultimate hollowing: life devoid of vitality, death without dying.
     
    I find this feature of neoreaction very curious. I am a temperamentally conservative person, but here's the thing. The intellectual force of conservatism comes from a recognition that societies evolve to address real problems, and tinkering may therefore bring unintended consequences. Yet, reaction obviously risks the same catastrophic disruption as revolution. I am suspicious of both.

    Replies: @Daniel Chieh, @Peter Johnson

    Last Man Mindset: The Greatest Goal of Existence is Existence At the End of History, coming to a bookstore near you.

  56. @Alec Leamas
    @The Alarmist


    In some ways, the poor in the US are freer than the middle class.
     
    There is something quite free about being no use to anyone of import in modern America.

    You can do whatever you want and no one will let you starve.

    The mistake is thinking that it all isn't part of the big plan.

    Replies: @Reg Cæsar

    In some ways, the poor in the US are freer than the middle class.

    The mistake is thinking that it all isn’t part of the big plan.

    It sure was on Airstrip One:

    So long as they [the Proles] continued to work and breed, their other activities were without importance. Left to themselves, like cattle turned loose upon the plains of Argentina, they had reverted to a style of life that appeared to be natural to them, a sort of ancestral pattern… Heavy physical work, the care of home and children, petty quarrels with neighbours, films, football, beer and above all, gambling filled up the horizon of their minds. To keep them in control was not difficult.

  57. @Rosie
    @Rosie

    Lest I be accused of exaggerating, here he is on why the welfare state is an abomination:


    They can be protected by their families. At the end of the day, no one in this world “deserves” to be immune from misfortune and misery.

    Not men, and not women.

    And indeed, for there to be any real greatness, much needs to be able to be gained, risked, and lost. This grey world where all are allowed their their minimalistic inoffensive existence, without either catastrophe or triumph, is the ultimate hollowing: life devoid of vitality, death without dying.
     
    I find this feature of neoreaction very curious. I am a temperamentally conservative person, but here's the thing. The intellectual force of conservatism comes from a recognition that societies evolve to address real problems, and tinkering may therefore bring unintended consequences. Yet, reaction obviously risks the same catastrophic disruption as revolution. I am suspicious of both.

    Replies: @Daniel Chieh, @Peter Johnson

    Well said, Rosie. HBD and alt-right advocates need to steer clear of excessive neo-reaction. We should fight against the left-imposed Narrative, but do so carefully and thoughtfully and avoid extremist sentiments.

  58. @anon
    @Anonymous

    this is the scarlet letter defense
    "Oh it was such a minor crime and poor Hester Prynne had such extenuating circumstances",

    But then 200 years later we find half the children born out of wedlock another half aborted, marriages mostly ending in divorce, now even a crisis of no one will marry or have children so third world immigration is supposed to be the solution, and the crime and suffering associated with out of wedlock birth of all this is incalculable. Im sure someone could give a rough estimate. and all because half a dozen Hester Prynnes were shamed every year in the entire east coast was too much to bear for liberal bleeding hearts

    so smartass you have told us about the 30 a year hanged now give us the difference between the current years crime figures and the crime stats back then. Whats the net human suffering you have saved us all. Hint its orders of orders of magnitude more suffering you have caused just as your meddling with the Hester Prynne type crimes has caused.
    This is nothing but typical leftist bullshit where you use one failed experiment to justify the next and the next

    Replies: @Rosie, @Rosie

    this is the scarlet letter defense
    “Oh it was such a minor crime and poor Hester Prynne had such extenuating circumstances”,

    You assume that it’s either Hester Prynne or total chaos. This is fatalistic and unimaginative, not to mention the slippery slope fallacy.

    You ignore numerous confounding factors, especially race and education. The data surrounding out-of-wedlock births and divorce often point to the needed solutions if you’re willing to look. Granted, it’s more fun to compete for status by posing as “more reactionary than thou,” but it’s also counterproductive and embarrassing to a movement that actually hopes to accomplish anything.

  59. @Stan d Mute

    utilizing my main theatrical talent: tallness
     
    You sell yourself short Steve.

    I have to work hard to even try to be funny, for you it seems effortless.

    So, 74% of 794 million is, like, a lot.
     
    See?

    Replies: @Rosie

  60. @Hail
    @Lot


    The harshness of the English system was eugenic, making the English of today smarter, healthier, happier and more law-abiding than if the old welfare payments had continued.

    So, the cruelty of our forefathers to each other was kindness to us. More misery and suffering then, less now.
     

    I believe Clark and others propose the eugenic benefits accrued to Britain happened over centuries and ended about the time in question (1834) or shortly thereafter (i.e., were in no way caused by the welfare cut under discussion). The dysgenic trend, i.e. genotypic IQ loss, was casued by the Industrial Revolution, such that by today, after 150+ years of dysgenic breeding, the British have probably given back what, five, even ten genotypic IQ points?

    Imagine what the British at their eugenic peak could have done with today's nutrition (peak eugenic period just before Industrial Revolution plus Flynn effect in lump sum).

    Replies: @Anon, @Desiderius, @Alec Leamas, @Lot, @dfordoom

    I think English fertility was probably eugenic until around 1870 or 1880.

    • Replies: @Hail
    @Lot

    Please elaborate on that.

    Replies: @Lot

    , @notanon
    @Lot

    that's my view also - England (or more accurately NW Europe as a whole) developed a eugenic fertility pattern over the centuries before the industrial revolution (and probably the cause of it imo) but the new social conditions it created increased the reproductive success of the bottom layer so they expanded as a percentage of the total population.

  61. Anonymous [AKA "Hardcore Libertarian"] says:

    Please, Steve, you’re a highlight in normal peeps’ reading list, especially your movie reviews and Taki columns in general. General American pop-culture stuff on the blog is enlightening as well.

    But when it comes to economics, just please stop, it’s plain incompetence.

    You’re like a lot of intellectuals, who hold strong opinions on topics they’re simply misinformed on, and are far off their regular, solid, mostly some-researched topics. (just to give you a taste, I’m Polish and you drank the entire cool-aid, we’re a German/Jewish/American colony.)

    • Replies: @notanon
    @Anonymous


    But when it comes to economics, just please stop, it’s plain incompetence.
     
    in a culture where welfare is only provided to the incapable it has zero effect on anything
  62. @anon
    @Anonymous

    this is the scarlet letter defense
    "Oh it was such a minor crime and poor Hester Prynne had such extenuating circumstances",

    But then 200 years later we find half the children born out of wedlock another half aborted, marriages mostly ending in divorce, now even a crisis of no one will marry or have children so third world immigration is supposed to be the solution, and the crime and suffering associated with out of wedlock birth of all this is incalculable. Im sure someone could give a rough estimate. and all because half a dozen Hester Prynnes were shamed every year in the entire east coast was too much to bear for liberal bleeding hearts

    so smartass you have told us about the 30 a year hanged now give us the difference between the current years crime figures and the crime stats back then. Whats the net human suffering you have saved us all. Hint its orders of orders of magnitude more suffering you have caused just as your meddling with the Hester Prynne type crimes has caused.
    This is nothing but typical leftist bullshit where you use one failed experiment to justify the next and the next

    Replies: @Rosie, @Rosie

    This is nothing but typical leftist bullshit where you use one failed experiment to justify the next and the next

    Your way of thinking reminds me of Phillipa Foot’a formulation of the trolley problem.

    Suppose that a judge or magistrate is faced with rioters demanding that a culprit be found for a certain crime and threatening otherwise to take their own bloody revenge on a particular section of the community. The real culprit being unknown, the judge sees himself as able to prevent the bloodshed only by framing some innocent person and having him executed.

    It’s really a variation on human sacrifice.

    Fortunately, in the real world, we can try, try again till we get it right.

  63. @The Alarmist
    Let's just cut to the chase and officially bring back serfdom. We're pretty much there with things like Student Loans and property taxes.

    In some ways, the poor in the US are freer than the middle class.

    Replies: @Alec Leamas, @Crawfurdmuir, @Flip

    Student loans have introduced something more resembling debt peonage than serfdom. Government has taken them over completely, and they are not extinguishable by bankruptcy.

    Under serfdom (villeinage) the unfree tenant was tied to land, and went with the land when it was conveyed to another owner. The debt peon might have appeared superficially like a serf, because his creditor was ordinarily his landlord, but the mechanism was different. With student loans today, it doesn’t matter where the debtor moves, or even if he is able to escape other debt through Chapter 7, his student debt persists.

    Property taxes are much more akin to feu duties than is student debt. However, even closer to the relationship between lord and vassal is that between the Bureau of Land Management and ranchers of the Cliven Bundy type in the western US. Their struggle against the BLM’s formerly benign lordship, now become harsh and demanding under its recent environmentalist inheritors, resembles the “rent wars” that took place in upstate New York after the death of Stephen van Rensselaer.

  64. @Cagey Beast
    @anonymous

    This “classical liberal” nonsense is also popular with the internet commentators and gurus who try to be hip and with it for the nascent alt-right kids these days.

    No people use the term "classical liberal" to distinguish themselves from the New Left, socialists, Antifa and SJWs, who Americans mislabel as "liberals". A smaller number of people, like Jordan Peterson, use the term to make clear to others that they're not Identitarian or Alt-Right. Kissing up to edgy Alt-Right kids is the opposite of what they're doing.

    Replies: @Crawfurdmuir

    “Classical liberal” as a self-description on the part of someone like Jonah Goldberg is to “liberal,” as “democratic socialist” is to “socialist.” It’s simply a way to soften the message.

    Goldberg and the other NeverTrumpers at NR can’t bring themselves to identify as plain old conservatives during the ascendancy of Donald Trump, while “neoconservative” has a bad odor it acquired during Bush 43’s administration. These people really are center-leftists at heart; they just feed the rubes in flyover country enough pro-life, pro-2nd amendment, Christian-Zionist pablum to keep them voting for establishment Republicans.

    Then they go to Washington to vote for unlimited immigration and “free” trade which is actually managed trade that is managed to the disadvantage of American citizens.

  65. @AndrewR
    @IHTG

    Your comment is rather ambiguous.

    Wisdom = Hate the sin, love the sinner.

    The JP/BS fans themselves should not be insulted. And ideally one wouldn't personally insult JP or BS either, but those two, and similar pseudo-edgy hustlers, do need to be called out and exposed. They're peddling an über-kosher blue pill with a red coating. At best, they're stepping stones into true knowledge. At worst they are gatekeepers: "we are the legitimate political opposition; anyone who talks about the JQ and race realism is an evil racist who needs to be destroyed" (Shapiro has said the second part almost verbatim).

    So yes, Psychology 101 informs us that it's completely counterproductive to personally insult anyone whom you want to persuade/convert/recruit. And it's less counterproductive (but still unwise) to personally insult a public figure if you're trying to win over their fan base.

    Beyond that, there's no need to hold back.

    Replies: @Anonymous

    So yes, Psychology 101 informs us that it’s completely counterproductive to personally insult anyone whom you want to persuade/convert/recruit.

    What sites Psych 101 tell us IS productive?

  66. @The Alarmist
    Let's just cut to the chase and officially bring back serfdom. We're pretty much there with things like Student Loans and property taxes.

    In some ways, the poor in the US are freer than the middle class.

    Replies: @Alec Leamas, @Crawfurdmuir, @Flip

    In some ways, the poor in the US are freer than the middle class.

    Yes. Free medical care, cheap public housing, free food, free money for your kids, and no need to work.

    A women I worked with (secretarial sort of job) said she would love to be at home with her young daughter but couldn’t afford it and would love to have more kids. I commented that we paid taxes to support poor people who could have all the kids they wanted and didn’t have to work.

  67. Goldberg and the other NeverTrumpers at NR can’t bring themselves to identify as plain old conservatives… These people really are center-leftists at heart…

    In other words, they speak for the “Greatest Generation”.

  68. @JerseyJeffersonian
    @EH

    The Quakers were religious dissenters, and due to this many opportunities, particularly in universities, were foreclosed to them. They made it up through "going into trade" in a big way, and taking charge of their own community's uplift after they no longer were being hanged for their nonconforming religiosity. Unfortunately, sometimes these restrictive circumstances led to them getting involved in what are now - and even then - perceived to be rather unsavory pursuits that made them money, and which helped them to accrue power. Perhaps you can trace some similarities to another religiously nonconforming out group here, with the corresponding beneficial and deleterious effects on their perception in the wider society?

    Replies: @EH

    The Jews and Quakers were almost mirror images. The Jews always haggled, and had a general reputation for lying and cheating if not watched closely, while Quakers invented the fixed-price shop and succeeded in business on the basis of their reputation for scrupulous honesty. Most of the persecution of the Quakers was for refusing to swear any oaths because they claimed to always tell the truth, and they came close enough to make themselves the most trusted group in English business for centuries.

    • Replies: @Cagey Beast
    @EH

    They also seem to have built a good reputation for themselves in Ireland for the relief work they did during the Famine. It's sad that Quakers ended up having one of their schools in Washington DC, Sidwell Friends, become the la-di-dah place for warmongers to send their kids. Anne Applebaum went there and she's about as Quaker-like as Napoleon.

    Replies: @William Badwhite

    , @Rosamond Vincy
    @EH

    Nixon was a Quaker. So much for stereotypes.

    Replies: @EH

  69. @Anonymous
    http://www.executedtoday.com/2017/10/16/1771-mary-jones-hanged-for-shoplifting/

    Mary was thought to be about eighteen or nineteen years old but was already married with two children when her husband, William, was press ganged into the Navy to go to the Falkland Islands, leaving her virtually destitute. She lived with her friend Ann Styles in Angel Alley in the Strand and was at times reduced to begging to feed herself and the infants. It is said that she had her baby with her in the cart as she was taken to Tyburn to be hanged.

    There had been a spate of shoplifting incidents in Ludgate Street area of London during 1771 and the shop keepers were on high alert and keeping watch for suspects. On Wednesday the 7th of August Mary, with one of her children in tow and Ann Styles went on a shop lifting expedition in the Ludgate Street....Finally the pair went to the drapery shop owned by a Mr. William Foot and expressed interest in buying a child’s frock. Nothing that they were shown appeared to be what they wanted and Mary made to leave the shop but Mr. Foot’s assistant, Christopher Preston, noticed that she had something concealed under her cloak. He went after her and brought her back into the shop where he discovered she had concealed four pieces of worked muslin which she had taken from the counter. Christopher Preston told the other assistant, Andrew Hawkins, to fetch a constable while he kept the women in the shop. The constable arrested them both and they were taken to the Compter (a local lock up jail).

    Both women were charged under the Shoplifting Act with the theft of the muslin which was valued at £5. 10s. (£5.50) The actual offence at this time being called “privately stealing in a shop”. The value of the goods stolen, being more than five shillings (25p), made it a capital crime....

    Mary and Ann were permitted to speak in their own defence. Mary told the court of her struggle to support two children without her husband and that she had always been an honest woman....

    The trial lasted no more than two hours and Mary was convicted as she was actually in possession of the stolen items but Ann was acquitted. Mary received the mandatory death sentence and was transferred to Newgate to await her trip to Tyburn. When the Recorder of London prepared his report for the King and Privy Council there was no recommendation to mercy for Mary, despite her age and circumstances....

    On the morning of Wednesday the 16th of October she was brought to the Press Yard of Newgate where the halter noose was put round her neck and her arms tied to her body with a cord above the elbows. She was made to get into the cart and sit on her own coffin...

    One can well understand why the law in this period in history is now referred to as the Bloody Code. Of the two hundred and ninety four people executed at Tyburn in the decade from 1765 to 1774 only twenty five were to die for murder and three for rape. The rest mostly suffered for various types of property related crime, such as highway robbery, burglary, housebreaking and forgery.

    It seems amazing today that a young mother should be hanged for what would now considered to be a minor crime, yet in 1771 nobody would have thought anything of it — it was a regular and perfectly normal event. If it was Mary’s first offence, as she claimed, she would probably get a community service order now, especially as he had dependant children. However Georgian justice was being applied increasingly severely at this time. Sixty-two men and six women received the death sentence during this year, of whom thirty four of the men and one of the women, Frances Allen, were to share Mary’s fate. Frances Allen was hanged on Wednesday the 7th of August for housebreaking.
     

    Replies: @Anonymous, @anon, @AndrewR, @Almost Missouri, @Bill B., @Anonymous

    Harsh, as you say, by today’s standards. But those centuries of extreme punishments did ultimately help to give Britain a remarkably calm and civil society. One were theft, idleness and out-of-wedlock child bearing were matters of shame.

    The UK has largely thrown away those hard-won gains by importing, willy-nilly, a population from societies much more prone to fierce jealousies, nepotism and dishonesty.

    • Replies: @travell lyte
    @Bill B.

    Singapore.
    Lee Kuan Yew.
    Didn't take centuries, ~50 years
    A special harshness?

    Replies: @Romanian

  70. @Alec Leamas
    @Hail

    This is interesting. I've often thought that the expansion of the British Empire was eugenic. It presented the ambitious sons other than the first born with opportunities to chase wealth and power elsewhere, and as a consequence to have families of their own. Of course from time to time parts of it broke away.

    Replies: @Romanian

    Didn’t those sons keep dying from tropical diseases?

    We should not overlook the role that the “white man’s grave” (Africa, but South America, the Caribbean, SE Asia can be called the same) played in thinning out some of the more adventurous sorts, if not the most intelligent, ambitious etc in the Empire.

    The eugenic part was related to the expansion of the habitat for a particularly industrious race, thereby expanding their numbers far beyond anything that could have been supported in the UK alone. But this did not occur in most places, not just because of pre-existing populations, but rather of civilizations, which prevented mass displacement.

    • Replies: @anon
    @Romanian

    The ''White Man's Grave'' is Sierra Leone.
    The story there is the British Army took their loyal Blacks back to England after the Revolutionary War to save them from retribution.

    By 1788 their colorful ways had become too much for the Poms, so they founded Sierra Leone, and deported the lot.

  71. @EH
    @JerseyJeffersonian

    The Jews and Quakers were almost mirror images. The Jews always haggled, and had a general reputation for lying and cheating if not watched closely, while Quakers invented the fixed-price shop and succeeded in business on the basis of their reputation for scrupulous honesty. Most of the persecution of the Quakers was for refusing to swear any oaths because they claimed to always tell the truth, and they came close enough to make themselves the most trusted group in English business for centuries.

    Replies: @Cagey Beast, @Rosamond Vincy

    They also seem to have built a good reputation for themselves in Ireland for the relief work they did during the Famine. It’s sad that Quakers ended up having one of their schools in Washington DC, Sidwell Friends, become the la-di-dah place for warmongers to send their kids. Anne Applebaum went there and she’s about as Quaker-like as Napoleon.

    • Agree: Dan Hayes
    • Replies: @William Badwhite
    @Cagey Beast

    The Obama girls also went to Sidwell Friends, as did Chelsea Clinton. Also Charles Lindbergh briefly while his father was a congressman.

  72. @phil
    Two of the people regarded as the greatest classical liberals of the 20th century were F.A. Hayek and Milton Friedman. Hayek endorsed the British Poor Law, and Friedman famously argued that a country could not have both open borders and a welfare state.

    Replies: @Reg Cæsar

    …Friedman famously argued that a country could not have both open borders and a welfare state.

    Conversely (or obversely, whatever), you can’t have a welfare state and closed borders.

    You’ve created a natural lobby to open those borders.

    • Replies: @stillCARealist
    @Reg Cæsar

    Is a welfare state in a first world nation inevitable? Seems like a lot of people here think so.

    Replies: @Reg Cæsar

  73. @Almost Missouri
    @Anonymous

    For context, consider what the world of Georgian England was like.


    [T]he Prince of Wales, was celebrated for having bedded 7,000 women and snipped from each a keepsake hair. Twenty-five per cent of all unmarried females in London were whores; the average age of a prostitute was 16; and many brothels prided themselves on offering only girls under the age of 14. ... [I]n the 1790s, a good man could stroll past an 11-year-old prostitute on a London street without feeling a twinge of disgust or outrage; he accepted her as merely a feature of the landscape, like an ugly hill.
     
    In this milieu, offing an indigent shopliftress--with full due process no less--probably seemed a mercy. No, I'm not defending, just describing. This is the era of the nation about which Adam Smith famously remarked that "there is a deal of ruin in" it. He wasn't being metaphorical.

    If Georgian England,

    weedy faint-hearted mainstream churches, skanky celebs, weary provocations for jaded debauchees,
     
    sounds more than faintly familiar, that's because we've been here before, and having failed to maintain the lesson, we're going back.

    The much maligned Victorian Era (which the above-quoted Mark Steyn thinks was really the Wilberforcian Era) is what stood between us and that formerly former world. The social ills of Georgian England were addressed in Victorian England with what we would today call Broken Windows Theory: prevent the big stuff by fixing the small stuff. Or as others called it, ethics and morality.

    Our modern enthusiasm for demolishing the "pruderies" of Victorianism will re-establish the formerly lost world of Georgian England, at least the bad parts of it. And rapid execution of teenage shoplifters will again seem like a mercy.

    Replies: @The Last Real Calvinist

    Our modern enthusiasm for demolishing the “pruderies” of Victorianism will re-establish the formerly lost world of Georgian England, at least the bad parts of it. And rapid execution of teenage shoplifters will again seem like a mercy.

    Great comment. I hope it does not come to this, but I agree that at this point it’s all systems go.

  74. @Anonymous
    @Lot

    Its one of the best examples of how culture can create a genetic layout for the future, indeed. Adam Smith, incidentally, complained pretty significantly about the Scottish who were less harsh on their treatment of petty crime, and less focused on forcing what we would consider "capitalist work" on everyone. Arguably the lesser calm of the Scottish may be a result of that to this day.

    Replies: @Cortes

    Banishment was a widely used sanction in the Scotland of Smith’s day. No inconsiderable matter. * Quite often economic crimes were accompanied by forced indentured service in America. A viable emigration option for the poor.

    * https://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/banishment

  75. anonymous[259] • Disclaimer says:
    @Mr. Anon

    With “classical liberalism” suddenly fashionable as an ideological self-designation among Never Trumpers,...................
     
    Classical liberals like Joseph Stalin:

    https://www.unz.com/isteve/max-boot-i-would-sooner-vote-for-josef-stalin-than-i-would-vote-for-donald-trump/

    Replies: @anonymous

    hey you almost have 9,000 comments here, you little bot.

    did you get a shekel for each comment for repeatedly acting like a stupid person who obsessively criticizes Jews, as if you had ever spent a day of your life as a real person with a real heart?

    Look there are many ways to criticize Max Boot, a true idiot, and you picked one of the stupidest ways. Stupid people like you should just shut up and let real people criticize the foolish Max Boot. It will be better that way. Idiots like you make Max Boot look better than he should, in comparison, Anon Mr,

    Enjoy your shekels, Mr Anon, we all know you are working to make the anti-Semites look stupid.

    “Knowledge is good” and “Mediocrity is not the same as knowledge”

    You are mediocre. You know that, don’t you?

    • Replies: @Mr. Anon
    @anonymous

    And who are you, anonymous nobody?

    Max Boot is an a**hole. So are you.

  76. @anonymous
    @Mr. Anon

    hey you almost have 9,000 comments here, you little bot.

    did you get a shekel for each comment for repeatedly acting like a stupid person who obsessively criticizes Jews, as if you had ever spent a day of your life as a real person with a real heart?

    Look there are many ways to criticize Max Boot, a true idiot, and you picked one of the stupidest ways. Stupid people like you should just shut up and let real people criticize the foolish Max Boot. It will be better that way. Idiots like you make Max Boot look better than he should, in comparison, Anon Mr,

    Enjoy your shekels, Mr Anon, we all know you are working to make the anti-Semites look stupid.

    "Knowledge is good" and "Mediocrity is not the same as knowledge"

    You are mediocre. You know that, don't you?

    Replies: @Mr. Anon

    And who are you, anonymous nobody?

    Max Boot is an a**hole. So are you.

  77. @Lot
    @Hail

    I think English fertility was probably eugenic until around 1870 or 1880.

    Replies: @Hail, @notanon

    Please elaborate on that.

    • Replies: @Lot
    @Hail

    Sorry, I don't have a citation, but I think I've seen this conclusion in several places.

    It just happened to be around the time upper class fertility started to fall and the wage:food price ratio allowed the lower classes to have larger surviving families.

  78. @Cagey Beast
    @Dave Pinsen

    I've visited Steve's blog every day for more than a decade and Gregory Clark's name doesn't ring a bell.

    Replies: @res

    Try doing a search for Gregory Clark in the iSteve archives. I see 26 hits with 11 of those in article titles. One of which was two weeks ago.

  79. @Peter Johnson
    @Anon

    Gregory Clark is a dissident economic historian who takes a hard-headed scientific approach and does not follow the party line. He has shown that the Industrial Revolution in England can be linked to eugenic trends in England over the few centuries preceding it -- in other words the English population became smarter and harder-working due to eugenic trends. He has a number of papers along those lines - he is a very important researcher.

    Replies: @Anon, @Dan Hayes, @dfordoom

    He has shown that the Industrial Revolution in England can be linked to eugenic trends in England over the few centuries preceding it — in other words the English population became smarter and harder-working due to eugenic trends.

    OK, that seems clear. Back in the bad old days before this eugenic revolution the English were a bunch of losers. I mean, what did they do? OK, they took on Spain, the greatest power in Europe, and won. And they amassed a gigantic empire. But apart from that nothing.

    After all that eugenic progress the English became so smart and hard-working that they lost their empire and they lost their economic supremacy. They became the winners that we see today.

    Sounds like this guy is onto something!

    • Replies: @notanon
    @dfordoom

    eugenic fertility pattern
    ->
    agricultural revolution
    ->
    industrial revolution
    ->
    dysgenic fertility pattern

    i imagine this process has recurred a bunch of times in history - a population somewhere develops an edge leading to a golden age of some kind but then something in some way connected to the wealth and success of the golden age destroys that initial advantageous edge.

    Replies: @Hail, @dfordoom

  80. @Hail
    @Lot


    The harshness of the English system was eugenic, making the English of today smarter, healthier, happier and more law-abiding than if the old welfare payments had continued.

    So, the cruelty of our forefathers to each other was kindness to us. More misery and suffering then, less now.
     

    I believe Clark and others propose the eugenic benefits accrued to Britain happened over centuries and ended about the time in question (1834) or shortly thereafter (i.e., were in no way caused by the welfare cut under discussion). The dysgenic trend, i.e. genotypic IQ loss, was casued by the Industrial Revolution, such that by today, after 150+ years of dysgenic breeding, the British have probably given back what, five, even ten genotypic IQ points?

    Imagine what the British at their eugenic peak could have done with today's nutrition (peak eugenic period just before Industrial Revolution plus Flynn effect in lump sum).

    Replies: @Anon, @Desiderius, @Alec Leamas, @Lot, @dfordoom

    I believe Clark and others propose the eugenic benefits accrued to Britain happened over centuries and ended about the time in question (1834) or shortly thereafter (i.e., were in no way caused by the welfare cut under discussion). The dysgenic trend, i.e. genotypic IQ loss, was casued by the Industrial Revolution, such that by today, after 150+ years of dysgenic breeding, the British have probably given back what, five, even ten genotypic IQ points?

    OK, that makes sense. Sort of. I guess.

  81. @EH
    @JerseyJeffersonian

    The Jews and Quakers were almost mirror images. The Jews always haggled, and had a general reputation for lying and cheating if not watched closely, while Quakers invented the fixed-price shop and succeeded in business on the basis of their reputation for scrupulous honesty. Most of the persecution of the Quakers was for refusing to swear any oaths because they claimed to always tell the truth, and they came close enough to make themselves the most trusted group in English business for centuries.

    Replies: @Cagey Beast, @Rosamond Vincy

    Nixon was a Quaker. So much for stereotypes.

    • Replies: @EH
    @Rosamond Vincy

    Nixon normalized relations with China, ended the last vestige of the gold standard and founded the EPA, all of which were fairly terrible ideas that would have gotten him praise if he had been a Democrat. Watergate was quite different from how it was reported by the MOCKINGBIRD media, then at its peak. The idea for the break-in didn't come from Nixon or anyone who wished him well.

    But it is fun to point out to Quakers that Nixon was a Quaker, then note that he started the EPA, it gives 'em mental whiplash. He wasn't in any way an exemplary Quaker, though.

  82. But “As Long as He Needs Me” is the anthem of a Co-dependent Victim of Learned Helplessness in the face of a Hostile Patriarchy that oh never mind, I’m even boring myself now.

    • Replies: @notanon
    @Rosamond Vincy

    back in the jungle where kill or be killed was the whole of the law women who were attracted to violent men would have sons who survived better even if it wasn't that pleasant for the women - hence female masochism.

    over the intervening centuries of K-selection those genes dropped in frequency but they're still there lurking in the background - hence "50 Shades of Grey" billionaire (80% K-selection) combined with a bit of physical domination (20% r-selection).

    Replies: @Rosamond Vincy

  83. anon[267] • Disclaimer says:
    @Romanian
    @Alec Leamas

    Didn't those sons keep dying from tropical diseases?

    We should not overlook the role that the "white man's grave" (Africa, but South America, the Caribbean, SE Asia can be called the same) played in thinning out some of the more adventurous sorts, if not the most intelligent, ambitious etc in the Empire.

    The eugenic part was related to the expansion of the habitat for a particularly industrious race, thereby expanding their numbers far beyond anything that could have been supported in the UK alone. But this did not occur in most places, not just because of pre-existing populations, but rather of civilizations, which prevented mass displacement.

    Replies: @anon

    The ”White Man’s Grave” is Sierra Leone.
    The story there is the British Army took their loyal Blacks back to England after the Revolutionary War to save them from retribution.

    By 1788 their colorful ways had become too much for the Poms, so they founded Sierra Leone, and deported the lot.

  84. @Lot
    @Hail

    I think English fertility was probably eugenic until around 1870 or 1880.

    Replies: @Hail, @notanon

    that’s my view also – England (or more accurately NW Europe as a whole) developed a eugenic fertility pattern over the centuries before the industrial revolution (and probably the cause of it imo) but the new social conditions it created increased the reproductive success of the bottom layer so they expanded as a percentage of the total population.

  85. @Anonymous
    Please, Steve, you're a highlight in normal peeps' reading list, especially your movie reviews and Taki columns in general. General American pop-culture stuff on the blog is enlightening as well.

    But when it comes to economics, just please stop, it's plain incompetence.

    You're like a lot of intellectuals, who hold strong opinions on topics they're simply misinformed on, and are far off their regular, solid, mostly some-researched topics. (just to give you a taste, I'm Polish and you drank the entire cool-aid, we're a German/Jewish/American colony.)

    Replies: @notanon

    But when it comes to economics, just please stop, it’s plain incompetence.

    in a culture where welfare is only provided to the incapable it has zero effect on anything

  86. @dfordoom
    @Peter Johnson


    He has shown that the Industrial Revolution in England can be linked to eugenic trends in England over the few centuries preceding it — in other words the English population became smarter and harder-working due to eugenic trends.
     
    OK, that seems clear. Back in the bad old days before this eugenic revolution the English were a bunch of losers. I mean, what did they do? OK, they took on Spain, the greatest power in Europe, and won. And they amassed a gigantic empire. But apart from that nothing.

    After all that eugenic progress the English became so smart and hard-working that they lost their empire and they lost their economic supremacy. They became the winners that we see today.

    Sounds like this guy is onto something!

    Replies: @notanon

    eugenic fertility pattern
    ->
    agricultural revolution
    ->
    industrial revolution
    ->
    dysgenic fertility pattern

    i imagine this process has recurred a bunch of times in history – a population somewhere develops an edge leading to a golden age of some kind but then something in some way connected to the wealth and success of the golden age destroys that initial advantageous edge.

    • Replies: @Hail
    @notanon


    a population somewhere develops an edge leading to a golden age of some kind but then something in some way connected to the wealth and success of the golden age destroys that initial advantageous edge.
     
    This is Dr. Elmer Pendell (1894-1982)'s thesis in his Why Civilizations Self-Destruct (1977).

    Essentially, dysgenic fertility trends are allowed by easy times, and that is really why almost all civilizations 'self-destruct' for Pendell. He traces dysgenic and eugenic trends across history, back to the Paleolithic. I recall he even provides evidence for dysgenic/eugenic trends in Stone Age European populations, as associated with Ice Ages (eugenic) and warm periods (dysgenic).

    I recall him singling out agriculture as one of the single most dysgenic innovations ever. He proposes that pre-agriculture European Man at one of his post-Ice Age peaks was (would have been), given equal nutrition and institutions, our (modern man's) clear intellectual superior, and not by a close margin.

    Pendell's analysis may seem obvious, but I have not seen it in laid out quite in full form elsewhere. It is reminiscent of Ibn Khaldun, but the latter does not propose a eugenic/dysgenic framework really and instead proposes asabiyyah (group solidarity feeling, roughly in our terms perhaps nationalistic pride and feeling of destiny) as the civilizational fall/rise mechanism.
    , @dfordoom
    @notanon


    i imagine this process has recurred a bunch of times in history – a population somewhere develops an edge leading to a golden age of some kind but then something in some way connected to the wealth and success of the golden age destroys that initial advantageous edge.
     
    It sounds possible. But how would you prove it? What exactly are the eugenic benefits that supposedly gave them that edge? Do we have any actual data on significant genetic changes over the course of so many centuries? It all seems a bit subjective.
  87. @Rosamond Vincy
    But "As Long as He Needs Me" is the anthem of a Co-dependent Victim of Learned Helplessness in the face of a Hostile Patriarchy that oh never mind, I'm even boring myself now.

    Replies: @notanon

    back in the jungle where kill or be killed was the whole of the law women who were attracted to violent men would have sons who survived better even if it wasn’t that pleasant for the women – hence female masochism.

    over the intervening centuries of K-selection those genes dropped in frequency but they’re still there lurking in the background – hence “50 Shades of Grey” billionaire (80% K-selection) combined with a bit of physical domination (20% r-selection).

    • Replies: @Rosamond Vincy
    @notanon

    A psychopathic mate like Bill Sikes means your kids may not survive long enough to pass on any genes; therefore, it is evolutionarily counter-productive.

  88. @Anonymous
    Classical Liberals exploit deliberate obliviousness to differences in human ability. Open borders, tickle-down economics, low tariffs and welfare-cuts result.

    The Left's equality obsession makes it impossible for them to acknowledge INDIVIDUAL differences in their rhetoric, let alone group differences. Besides, it'd be hard for them to get votes if they admitted that many of their voters just aren't intellectually capable of surviving in the modern world.

    If only politicians had the courage to deal with the obvious, and democracy didn't incentivize them not to.

    Replies: @cynthia curran

    High Tariffs are good. Joe Blow pays high tariffs and wages in the US were almost as worst as England. What kept wages a little higher in the US was a labor shortage compared to Europe but the left is right. The age of high tariffs met a lot of low paying jobs and kids also working at 10 years old for 16 hours without overtime. The tariff right here and Pat Buchanan never thinks that the gay 1890’s had 10 percent homeless in the age of high tariffs in New York City.

  89. @Edward
    @Anon

    In his book The Son Also Rises, Gregory Clark argues that social status runs in families for many generations, with very slow social mobility. Unlike the usual measures of social mobility which appear to demonstrate that social mobility rates differ between countries and between ages, Clark's research suggests that social mobility rates have been stable across both time and place. Why? Genetics. Like Sir Francis Galton, he uses surnames to look at high- and low-status families and their prevalence within high-status occupations and educational institutions.

    His work has important implications for iSteve readers. Firstly, as Clark states, it's all about the individual's genotype. If you know an individual's genotype, you don't need any further information about the individual's family (or race) to be able to predict his social status. Secondly, given that we tend not to know people's genotypes, the next best step is to look at the phenotypes of an individual's family. What is the educational and occupational status of his family members? What is the average IQ of his grandparents? This helps us to tell whether an individual has a high IQ because of "luck", or due to genes.

    Thus, regression to the family mean is more important than regression to the racial mean, as the family of an individual provides more information to us than the race of an individual. Ultimately, to say that there are mean differences between races is to say that there are more high-status individuals and families and sub-populations in one race as opposed to another. (Of course, when it comes to immigration policy, it's rather difficult to use individual or family phenotypes as a proxy.)

    It also explains why, as long as assortative mating occurs down the generations, regression to the mean won't occur. UJayMan explains this very well here:

    https://www.unz.com/jman/regression-to-the-mean/

    Replies: @stillCARealist

    Along with Peter Johnson’s comment, so eugenics is good, right? Then we’re all pretty sanguine about executing female thieves. No more of that phenotypical behavior! Oh wait, it’s England. I mean behaviour.

  90. @LondonBob
    @anonymous

    I am a reformed libertarian, it is a good gateway drug. Once you give it some serious thought you realise it is the mirror image of marxism, utterly unworkable and completely ignorant of the human condition, promoted mainly by autists.

    Replies: @Desiderius

    Meh.

    It’s a decent first pass/way to lean/burden of proof setter. Sort of an Occam’s Razor for political philosophy.

  91. @Reg Cæsar
    @phil


    ...Friedman famously argued that a country could not have both open borders and a welfare state.

     

    Conversely (or obversely, whatever), you can't have a welfare state and closed borders.

    You've created a natural lobby to open those borders.

    Replies: @stillCARealist

    Is a welfare state in a first world nation inevitable? Seems like a lot of people here think so.

    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar
    @stillCARealist


    Is a welfare state in a first world nation inevitable? Seems like a lot of people here think so.

     

    If so, then the sellout of the people is also inevitable.

    That's why I support separation of welfare and state.
  92. @Bill B.
    @Anonymous

    Harsh, as you say, by today's standards. But those centuries of extreme punishments did ultimately help to give Britain a remarkably calm and civil society. One were theft, idleness and out-of-wedlock child bearing were matters of shame.

    The UK has largely thrown away those hard-won gains by importing, willy-nilly, a population from societies much more prone to fierce jealousies, nepotism and dishonesty.

    Replies: @travell lyte

    Singapore.
    Lee Kuan Yew.
    Didn’t take centuries, ~50 years
    A special harshness?

    • Replies: @Romanian
    @travell lyte


    A special harshness
     
    This sounds like the title of a great biography!
  93. @travell lyte
    @Bill B.

    Singapore.
    Lee Kuan Yew.
    Didn't take centuries, ~50 years
    A special harshness?

    Replies: @Romanian

    A special harshness

    This sounds like the title of a great biography!

  94. @stillCARealist
    @Reg Cæsar

    Is a welfare state in a first world nation inevitable? Seems like a lot of people here think so.

    Replies: @Reg Cæsar

    Is a welfare state in a first world nation inevitable? Seems like a lot of people here think so.

    If so, then the sellout of the people is also inevitable.

    That’s why I support separation of welfare and state.

  95. @notanon
    @dfordoom

    eugenic fertility pattern
    ->
    agricultural revolution
    ->
    industrial revolution
    ->
    dysgenic fertility pattern

    i imagine this process has recurred a bunch of times in history - a population somewhere develops an edge leading to a golden age of some kind but then something in some way connected to the wealth and success of the golden age destroys that initial advantageous edge.

    Replies: @Hail, @dfordoom

    a population somewhere develops an edge leading to a golden age of some kind but then something in some way connected to the wealth and success of the golden age destroys that initial advantageous edge.

    This is Dr. Elmer Pendell (1894-1982)’s thesis in his Why Civilizations Self-Destruct (1977).

    Essentially, dysgenic fertility trends are allowed by easy times, and that is really why almost all civilizations ‘self-destruct’ for Pendell. He traces dysgenic and eugenic trends across history, back to the Paleolithic. I recall he even provides evidence for dysgenic/eugenic trends in Stone Age European populations, as associated with Ice Ages (eugenic) and warm periods (dysgenic).

    I recall him singling out agriculture as one of the single most dysgenic innovations ever. He proposes that pre-agriculture European Man at one of his post-Ice Age peaks was (would have been), given equal nutrition and institutions, our (modern man’s) clear intellectual superior, and not by a close margin.

    Pendell’s analysis may seem obvious, but I have not seen it in laid out quite in full form elsewhere. It is reminiscent of Ibn Khaldun, but the latter does not propose a eugenic/dysgenic framework really and instead proposes asabiyyah (group solidarity feeling, roughly in our terms perhaps nationalistic pride and feeling of destiny) as the civilizational fall/rise mechanism.

  96. @Cagey Beast
    @EH

    They also seem to have built a good reputation for themselves in Ireland for the relief work they did during the Famine. It's sad that Quakers ended up having one of their schools in Washington DC, Sidwell Friends, become the la-di-dah place for warmongers to send their kids. Anne Applebaum went there and she's about as Quaker-like as Napoleon.

    Replies: @William Badwhite

    The Obama girls also went to Sidwell Friends, as did Chelsea Clinton. Also Charles Lindbergh briefly while his father was a congressman.

  97. @notanon
    @Rosamond Vincy

    back in the jungle where kill or be killed was the whole of the law women who were attracted to violent men would have sons who survived better even if it wasn't that pleasant for the women - hence female masochism.

    over the intervening centuries of K-selection those genes dropped in frequency but they're still there lurking in the background - hence "50 Shades of Grey" billionaire (80% K-selection) combined with a bit of physical domination (20% r-selection).

    Replies: @Rosamond Vincy

    A psychopathic mate like Bill Sikes means your kids may not survive long enough to pass on any genes; therefore, it is evolutionarily counter-productive.

  98. @notanon
    @dfordoom

    eugenic fertility pattern
    ->
    agricultural revolution
    ->
    industrial revolution
    ->
    dysgenic fertility pattern

    i imagine this process has recurred a bunch of times in history - a population somewhere develops an edge leading to a golden age of some kind but then something in some way connected to the wealth and success of the golden age destroys that initial advantageous edge.

    Replies: @Hail, @dfordoom

    i imagine this process has recurred a bunch of times in history – a population somewhere develops an edge leading to a golden age of some kind but then something in some way connected to the wealth and success of the golden age destroys that initial advantageous edge.

    It sounds possible. But how would you prove it? What exactly are the eugenic benefits that supposedly gave them that edge? Do we have any actual data on significant genetic changes over the course of so many centuries? It all seems a bit subjective.

  99. @Anonymous
    http://www.executedtoday.com/2017/10/16/1771-mary-jones-hanged-for-shoplifting/

    Mary was thought to be about eighteen or nineteen years old but was already married with two children when her husband, William, was press ganged into the Navy to go to the Falkland Islands, leaving her virtually destitute. She lived with her friend Ann Styles in Angel Alley in the Strand and was at times reduced to begging to feed herself and the infants. It is said that she had her baby with her in the cart as she was taken to Tyburn to be hanged.

    There had been a spate of shoplifting incidents in Ludgate Street area of London during 1771 and the shop keepers were on high alert and keeping watch for suspects. On Wednesday the 7th of August Mary, with one of her children in tow and Ann Styles went on a shop lifting expedition in the Ludgate Street....Finally the pair went to the drapery shop owned by a Mr. William Foot and expressed interest in buying a child’s frock. Nothing that they were shown appeared to be what they wanted and Mary made to leave the shop but Mr. Foot’s assistant, Christopher Preston, noticed that she had something concealed under her cloak. He went after her and brought her back into the shop where he discovered she had concealed four pieces of worked muslin which she had taken from the counter. Christopher Preston told the other assistant, Andrew Hawkins, to fetch a constable while he kept the women in the shop. The constable arrested them both and they were taken to the Compter (a local lock up jail).

    Both women were charged under the Shoplifting Act with the theft of the muslin which was valued at £5. 10s. (£5.50) The actual offence at this time being called “privately stealing in a shop”. The value of the goods stolen, being more than five shillings (25p), made it a capital crime....

    Mary and Ann were permitted to speak in their own defence. Mary told the court of her struggle to support two children without her husband and that she had always been an honest woman....

    The trial lasted no more than two hours and Mary was convicted as she was actually in possession of the stolen items but Ann was acquitted. Mary received the mandatory death sentence and was transferred to Newgate to await her trip to Tyburn. When the Recorder of London prepared his report for the King and Privy Council there was no recommendation to mercy for Mary, despite her age and circumstances....

    On the morning of Wednesday the 16th of October she was brought to the Press Yard of Newgate where the halter noose was put round her neck and her arms tied to her body with a cord above the elbows. She was made to get into the cart and sit on her own coffin...

    One can well understand why the law in this period in history is now referred to as the Bloody Code. Of the two hundred and ninety four people executed at Tyburn in the decade from 1765 to 1774 only twenty five were to die for murder and three for rape. The rest mostly suffered for various types of property related crime, such as highway robbery, burglary, housebreaking and forgery.

    It seems amazing today that a young mother should be hanged for what would now considered to be a minor crime, yet in 1771 nobody would have thought anything of it — it was a regular and perfectly normal event. If it was Mary’s first offence, as she claimed, she would probably get a community service order now, especially as he had dependant children. However Georgian justice was being applied increasingly severely at this time. Sixty-two men and six women received the death sentence during this year, of whom thirty four of the men and one of the women, Frances Allen, were to share Mary’s fate. Frances Allen was hanged on Wednesday the 7th of August for housebreaking.
     

    Replies: @Anonymous, @anon, @AndrewR, @Almost Missouri, @Bill B., @Anonymous

    i.e. they hanged the Catholic thief but let off the Protestant thief

  100. @Hail
    @Lot

    Please elaborate on that.

    Replies: @Lot

    Sorry, I don’t have a citation, but I think I’ve seen this conclusion in several places.

    It just happened to be around the time upper class fertility started to fall and the wage:food price ratio allowed the lower classes to have larger surviving families.

  101. @Rosamond Vincy
    @EH

    Nixon was a Quaker. So much for stereotypes.

    Replies: @EH

    Nixon normalized relations with China, ended the last vestige of the gold standard and founded the EPA, all of which were fairly terrible ideas that would have gotten him praise if he had been a Democrat. Watergate was quite different from how it was reported by the MOCKINGBIRD media, then at its peak. The idea for the break-in didn’t come from Nixon or anyone who wished him well.

    But it is fun to point out to Quakers that Nixon was a Quaker, then note that he started the EPA, it gives ’em mental whiplash. He wasn’t in any way an exemplary Quaker, though.

  102. @Rosie

    [T]he Prince of Wales, was celebrated for having bedded 7,000 women and snipped from each a keepsake hair. Twenty-five per cent of all unmarried females in London were whores; the average age of a prostitute was 16; and many brothels prided themselves on offering only girls under the age of 14. … [I]n the 1790s, a good man could stroll past an 11-year-old prostitute on a London street without feeling a twinge of disgust or outrage; he accepted her as merely a feature of the landscape, like an ugly hill.
     
    You see, AM, life has no meaning unless,there are 11-year-old prostitutes walking the streets.

    Just ask Daniel Chieh.

    Replies: @Rosie, @MBlanc46

    Life still has meaning. It’s just not as interesting.

Comments are closed.

Subscribe to All Steve Sailer Comments via RSS