The Unz Review: An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 TeasersiSteve Blog
Jumping the Motte
🔊 Listen RSS
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

From my new column in Taki’s Magazine:

Motte and Bailey vs. Outpost and Heartland
Steve Sailer

January 08, 2020

One oddity of discourse is that novel phrases seem more likely to catch on if their meanings are opaque than if they are self-evident. Having to know a semisecret code makes phrases such as “motte and bailey argument” more popular, not less.

For example, as a term for when something passes its peak, “jump the shark” has become an instant cliché in the 21st century. This is curious because to grasp its meaning, you have to have heard of a 1977 episode of the TV sitcom Happy Days in which Henry Winkler’s Fonzie, waterskiing in the ocean, is vaguely menaced by stock footage of a Jaws-like great white shark.

Personally, I missed seeing that episode.

Read the whole thing there.

 
Hide 209 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
    []
  1. guest says:

    Motte and Bailey castles aren’t well-known here, because we weren’t conquered by Normans in the manner of England. Presumably they’re better-known there, where people can your them.

    I have no idea how well-known was the Jump the Shark episode before it became the internet watch-term for t.v. shows rounding the turn into intractable decline. Some things become what we might call Eponymously Famous. I’m other words, famous for providing the name of something else. Is this because it makes people “in the know” feel superior? Maybe.

    Maybe also it is just plain useful. Once you see the Fonze on water skis in his leather jacket, I think you get the idea of t.v. writers exhausting the premise (in this case, a bunch of regular 50s kids doing 50s kids, along with their Magical Greaser friend) and having to come up with more and more ridiculous scenarios.

  2. The problem with the Outpost and Heartland description is that the Outposts Hate the Heartland now.
    Joe Biden can tell energy workers “Learn to code”, but people who tell unemployed “journalists” that on Twitter are banned.

  3. guest says:

    Never cared for the thing known as the Continuum Fallacy. The Beard Fallacy appeals more to me, because I have a beard.

    There must be substitutes for motte-and-bailey friendly to the sensibilities of Regular Joe. We have fortifications in the U.S. Surely they contain harder parts and softer parts.

    The closest thing to a castle or fort most people walk into on a regular basis is probably a bank. Banks have heavily-protected vaults, of course. But they’re defensible at point-of-entry as well. With guards, metal detectors, security doors, etc.

    Lobby and Vault works the same as Motte and Bailey, I think.

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
  4. @guest

    Lobby and Vault runs into the same problem as Motte and Bailey — which one do you really want to defend?

  5. IHTG says:

    Banning scientific discussion of black-white IQ differences is largely an “outpost defense” of what they really care about, which is preventing awareness of gentile-Jewish IQ differences.

    I really don’t think this is true. Just the opposite, the outrage over Bret Stephens’ article seems to me like an “outpost defense” for the heartland of the black-white IQ differences.

  6. guest says:
    @Steve Sailer

    I don’t consider that a problem. You want to defend yourself and your point. Or your money, if you will. Whichever tactic is most conducive to that you use.

    Both have their drawbacks:

    Lobbies are easy to construct but hard to defend under concerted pressure.

    Vaults are expensive and you can get trapped in there.

    But really, the main thing is that people switch between the two when arguing. They present Soft or lobby arguments, then when you go after them retreat to Hard or vault arguments. But you don’t want to sit in a vault all day like Burgess Meredith, so you go back to the lobby when they leave.

    That’s the motte-and-bailey thing in essence.

    In the realm of race, for instance, the Vault Argument is that Race Doesn’t Exist. The Lobby Argument is genetics matter less than environment.

  7. MEH 0910 says:
    @IHTG

    I really don’t think this is true. Just the opposite, the outrage over Bret Stephens’ article seems to me like an “outpost defense” for the heartland of the black-white IQ differences.

    That’s what Matthew Yglesias appears to be arguing in his Bret Stephens piece in Vox:

    https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2019/12/30/21042733/bret-stephens-jewish-iq-new-york-times

    But beyond that, arguments about Ashkenazi intelligence that have no particular policy relevance are typically the thin edge of the wedge of an argument that ends up being about black inferiority.

    ******
    The stakes are quite high in the argument over whether outcomes for African Americans and people who grow up in poor households represent remediable matters of social justice or genetic realities that it would be counterproductive to try to solve.

    The stakes in the Ashkenazi intelligence debate, by contrast, are a little bit hard to discern. The debate appears to arise primarily because people with an anti-black agenda see it as a useful entry point into race science. This provokes antipathy from progressives less because of strongly held views about occupational choice in premodern Poland than because they see where the argument is heading over the long term.

  8. you have to have heard of a 1977 episode of the TV sitcom Happy Days in which Henry Winkler’s Fonzie, waterskiing in the ocean, is vaguely menaced by stock footage of a Jaws-like great white shark

    You also have to go back to the famous Spielberg movie Jaws (1976) and its sequels Jaws II , Jaws III and Jaws The Revenge. The original story by Peter Benchley was quite good, but the sequels became ever more bizarre and improbable, culminating in Jaws The Revenge, which was truly ridiculous with a ludicrous plot (for example the shark swims from New England to the Bahamas in 3 days to follow the Brody family) and leaned heavily on poorly executed special effects.

    Jaws The Revenge, also known as Jaws 4 is one of the films that usually makes it onto people’s list of the worst movies ever made. The shark jumping scene in Happy Days is actually a reference to this tendency of successful movies with sequels to descend into eventual absurdity.

  9. bjdubbs says:

    “Defense-in-depth” is Luttwak’s phrase for the Roman empire’s outpost-heartland strategy, although “defense-in-depth” is also unlikely to catch on.

    • Replies: @guest
    , @Almost Missouri
  10. SFG says:

    I like outpost and heartland for a separate concept, though I agree it probably won’t catch on. I’m also happy to see someone else has read Prisoners of Geography–I got it in the $5 remainder bin at Barnes and Noble.

    I don’t agree with the specific examples, though.

    1. The decline in straight marriage has occurred before gay marriage was legalized and continued since, first with blacks and then with whites. While there are no doubt numerous factors, I would argue (1) the permissive 60s culture slowly working its way through the body politic (‘divorce feels great, sister!’) and (2) the decline of opportunities for blue-collar and now middle-class men (the upper middle class still gets married, after all) are much more important.

    I’d argue gay marriage is more of something they used to rally the troops, and lacking that once they won they decided to go for World War T (which isn’t going all that well, but just wait until they get the White House) and BLM (which has produced lots of self-hating white people and attempts at ‘criminal justice reform’, since the kids are way too young to remember the 60s-80s crime wave).

    2. Jewish-gentile IQ vs black-white IQ. Obviously these intellectuals (mostly but not entirely Jewish) care about both. I’d argue it’s more that if black-white IQ differences exist (and are genetic), then the whole structure of affirmative action and diversity preferences gets called into question, with which they maintain loyalty and divide the working class along racial lines.

    Frankly, I’d find talk about Jewish IQ much less threatening than talk about, say, other traits like ethnic nepotism or sneakiness (however you measure that–fraud convictions?) or, ah, sexual proclivities. ‘These people are smart, let’s exterminate them’ doesn’t make all that much sense to me–it’s possible Hitler would have gotten the A-bomb if he’d picked someone else to kill. Besides, everyone already figured it out sometime around Nobel #130. (sure, ethnic nepotism helps there, but you have to get enough scientists into the voting group to begin with.) Almost nobody seems to agree with me on this, though.

    Oh, and OT, STOP WAR WITH IRAN!

  11. Altai says:

    You can see this maximalist push in lots of places, the most self-conscious is the NRA. Once they adopted the maximalist push to fight for or defend rights they really weren’t bothered with, they had a better time defending the ones they did. There’s a lot of public debate ground you have to blitzkrieg through before you get to banning Jim’s old hunting rifle in 2020. It’s no different to the ideal of the ‘Overton window’.

    The other obvious one is how ‘open borders’ which used to be a weird fringe idea, has been taken up in apparent earnestness in many Western countries in the wake of the great triggering following Brexit and Trump by people who actually are triggered by the idea of an end to any immigration. You can see this because they’ll get triggered and angrily say things like ‘So you think things would just be better if everyone just stayed in their own country!’

    In truth, all political ideologies have a habit of doing this.

    In relation to your comments about China being concerned about foreign influence on borderlands or Egypt being concerned with the Nile dam being very healthy concerns, the same goes for ethnic displacement through immigration, particularly in the cities where media and political influence is most powerful.

  12. Maybe it’s because movies have lacked creativity, been ultra-PC, and just plain sucked, over the last 25 years (sorry to insult all your Hollywood friends, Steve), but are there any good new movie lines that people all know? Maybe I shouldn’t expect people to all know what I’m referring to by “we’re gonna need a bigger blog” or “don’t worry, my Dad’s a TV repairman” or “Welcome to the party, pal!” but I’ll say or write it anyway.

    Perhaps the new gems lie within the tweets.

    (You were off the air for, what a day or more? We were getting worried about you.)

  13. Bumpkin says:
    @MEH 0910

    Heh, hate to say it because Yglesias is a dunce, but he grasps the Realpolitik here far better than Sailer does. Steve waving that away with “there aren’t enough black intellectuals of the first rank to explain the popularity of this stratagem” is frankly ridiculous.

    They want to buy votes with the ObamaPhone and other goodies, but they have to make it seem like practically reparations: if there’s no IQ gap, they’re just combating the racism holding the blacks back. Lose that and you lose a major chunk of the Dem vote, as Queen Hilldog found out when they didn’t turn out for her.

    Meanwhile, what are you going to lose if you say the Jews do better on IQ tests, they switch parties in a huff for praising them? Seems like Steve got lost in all his historical analogies and didn’t realize his fundamental premise is absurd, even if the Jew influence is far more important.

  14. Altai says:
    @SFG

    The Israeli youths who gang raped a 19 year old English girl in Cyprus were acquitted after what the girl and many Cypriot lawyers say was a policed coerced retraction of her statement with the girl being threatened with prison time. (Eventually allowed get off after the British government intervened) When they returned home they received a ‘heroes welcome’ at the airport. Ie, not just their families and with the boys being pretty celebratory instead of sombre, almost like they knew they ‘won’ and got away with something. Israel makes Southern Italy look like Sweden. The Sabra was supposed to leave all that behind, instead they cultivated it to new levels.

    https://www.timesofisrael.com/some-in-israel-uneasy-with-heroes-welcome-for-teens-cleared-of-gang-rape/

    https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/.premium-sex-party-boys-cleared-of-rape-charges-in-cyprus-return-home-to-heroes-welcome-1.7603478

    Believe women, except when they accuse our glorious pre-IDF boys!

    • Replies: @Dissident
    , @Anonymous
  15. @Jonathan Mason

    The term that came from that movie is “voodoo shark” because apparently the novel for one of those movies explains that the reason for the shark behaving in such a bizarre way is that it was actually a magical voodoo shark and not an ordinary shark. When you explain an insane event with something even more insane that’s a voodoo shark.

    The term is way less popular than “jumped the shark”.

  16. Altai says:
    @MEH 0910

    You’re not supposed to ever draw any attention to Jewishness, you’re supposed to downplay it and even get away with calling it a just a religion.

    Admittedly not a very intellectual character but Niall Horan once laughed at somebody else’s 23andMe results, he was confused how anyone could be genetically ‘Jewish’, thinking it was like somebody being genetically ‘Anglican’ or ‘Catholic’. And that guy worked in the music industry since he was a teenager…

    So there are at least some people out there who this stuff works on.

  17. @SFG

    Frankly, I’d find talk about Jewish IQ much less threatening than talk about, say, other traits like ethnic nepotism or sneakiness (however you measure that–fraud convictions?)

    I think this is the true defense in depth position being defended.

    IQ is actually the easiest and cleanest explanation for Jewish overrepresentation at high levels of society but IQ differences also imply differences in other mental traits which are not confined to intelligence.

  18. guest says:
    @Steve Sailer

    By the way, it’s not about defending this or that particular argument. It’s about WINNING! You defend yourself.

    That’s why they call it the motte-and-bailley “fallacy.” Because truth and logic and such aren’t involved.

  19. @guest

    But you don’t want to sit in a vault all day like Burgess Meredith

    Congrats on employing another dead metaphor in the discussion of a dead metaphor. (Being near 70, I got it instantly.)

    • LOL: Coemgen
  20. The decline in straight marriage has occurred before gay marriage was legalized

    Yes. The cause and effect runs the other way. The rise in the divorce rate and increase in serial marriages, even among “conservatives”, devalued the sanctity of marriage as an institution, making it very difficult for traditionalists to make a principled argument against “gay marriage.” World War T is just filling a void in the culture created by the collapse of traditional religion.

    • Replies: @Ian M.
  21. @IHTG

    Yes.

    If Stephens had written the same column about black IQ being lower, he would have been memoryholed, not just the column.

  22. guest says:
    @bjdubbs

    Defense-in-depth just means that different parts of a defensive scheme can defend eachother. Be these lines of troops, separate fortifications, or whatever. Japanese island bunkers are probable best known to an American moviegoing audience.

    It allows you to conduct an overall defense from different positions, rather than just whatever set-up you have at the beginning. Also, keeps the enemy force occupied between its attack and your ability to break it up.

  23. @MEH 0910

    Thanks for reading and quote-mining Matt Yglesias’s stuff so the rest of us don’t have to.

  24. slumber_j says:

    One oddity of discourse is that novel phrases seem more likely to catch on if their meanings are opaque than if they are self-evident.

    And one of my problems with Slate Star Codex is exactly that: the incomprehensible (to me) title makes me not want to read the blog.

    I’ve had the same problem with other cultural goods in the past: Breaking Bad comes to mind, as does Game of Thrones. These are not phrases one would utter in the English language with which I’m familiar.

  25. Yeah, but that doesn’t make it benevolent or even neutral, pretending sodomites playing house is equivalent to the household of man, wife, and children is just another barrier to ever having a coherent working social order again. The alcoholism epidemic of post-soviet Russia didn’t cause the collapse of the USSR, but it was certainly still a blight.

  26. MEH 0910 says:
    @slumber_j

    And one of my problems with Slate Star Codex is exactly that: the incomprehensible (to me) title makes me not want to read the blog.

    I always dyslexically mix the name up in my head as Star Slate Codex.

    • Replies: @slumber_j
  27. Abe says:

    Very good article, Steve. On the initial point about coolness of various types of nomenclature, consider how hip it once was to give Internet startups whimsical Lewis Carolly-type names- Google, Yahoo, Fandango, Etsy, Uber. Some corporations do have fairly straightforward ones-Netflix, AirBnB, Lyft- but no one wants to be the next Microsoft, unless that comes back in an 80’s retro-chic/STRANGER THINGS sort of way.

    Regarding the more substantial point, our whole foreign policy mess since 9/11, which enabled even tangential disasters like Libya (done mainly so Madame Secretary could have a compelling story arc going into 2016, but only made possible by the fact that once you ruin one Middle Eastern country, ruining another is no biggy), was due to the fact that any sensible response to the Twin Towers attacks like stopping any further Muslim immigration seemed too much like greasing the wheels of the night train to Auschwitz .

  28. @guest

    In the realm of race, for instance, the Vault Argument is that Race Doesn’t Exist. The Lobby Argument is genetics matter less than environment.

    But if race doesn’t exist, then ‘diversity’ doesn’t exist as well.

    The PC klan is forced to make contradictory claims:

    1) There are inherent substantive differences based on demographics — ‘diversity’.

    2) There are no inherent substantive differences based on demographics — ‘equality of outcomes’.

    Alternating between “there are differences between peoples” and “there are no difference between peoples”, provides all the excuses necessary for infringing upon individual civil rights.

    This leads to our counterfeit civil rights where the exceptions have swallowed the rule about non-discrimination. We don’t have to fair to everyone, just equalize every group.

    This logical ‘fallacy of division’ values group results above individual treatment. This rhetorical trick seems to be a greater danger to individual civil rights.

    “We don’t have to be fair to you if we are equalizing group results.”

    • Agree: Almost Missouri
  29. The prohibition on talking about high Jewish IQ = “Please don’t throw me in the briar patch.”

    The prohibition on talking about low black IQ = Hitting the tar baby.

  30. TGGP says: • Website

    I mostly prefer more generic theories of political correctness, but I agree with Dan Moller contra Steve Sailer that the black-white IQ gap is the “heartland” rather than high Jewish IQ. Cochran/Harpending’s paper got some positive press when it was first published. He provides some evidence for that difference in his paper.

    • Agree: kaganovitch
    • Replies: @Lot
  31. MEH 0910 says:

    Slate Star Codex:

    Hardball Questions For The Next Debate (2020)
    Posted on January 5, 2020 by Scott Alexander

    Mr. Biden: Your son Hunter Biden was on the board of directors of Burisma, a Ukrainian energy company, during your vice-presidential term. The Ukrainian government was investigating Burisma for misdeeds, and Hunter was allegedly one of the targets of the investigation. President Trump alleges that you used your clout as VP to shut down the investigation into Hunter, which if true would constitute an impeachable abuse of power.

    My question for you is: if your son had been a daughter, would you have named her Gatherer?

    ******
    Mayor Buttigieg: You are a gay Navy veteran. Your last name is “Buttigieg”. You are mayor of “South Bend”. And you first achieved prominence on the national stage for a New York Times editorial about your travels in the Horn of Africa, which includes the country of “Djibouti”.

    My question is: is your campaign just the setup for a gay porno? Do you really think viewers want this much backstory?

    • LOL: Some Guy, TWS
    • Replies: @Harry Baldwin
  32. Reg Cæsar says: • Website

    One oddity of discourse is that novel phrases seem more likely to catch on if their meanings are opaque than if they are self-evident. Having to know a semisecret code makes phrases such as “motte and bailey argument” more popular, not less

    Because it’s that much cooler. It shows you’re in the In Crowd.

    There are two classes of Dobie– Gillis, and Gray.

    • Replies: @donut
  33. As far as who will drive discourse, I suspect White people, especially White guys, will have outsized influence in the future. Blacks have their niche, but it feels like we’ve passed their peak. Latinos aren’t likely to be cultural drivers. Neither are Asians.

    Oddly enough, as Whites head toward minority status, it feels like White Gentile heterosexual men will have more real voice than ever – more than say the Jewish community has for generations. I’m not sure why this is, except that as Whites become a minority, they no longer look to the “Establishment” in some passive way to provide guidance. As if Whites will become more assertive and populist.

  34. G. Poulin says:
    @Jonathan Mason

    So it was an episode about jumping the shark, that jumped the shark.

  35. Anonymous[415] • Disclaimer says:

    Strange.

    I would have thought that ‘Motte and Bailey’ would have meant ‘strong and secure’ – as strong and secure as a castle with a moat.
    Rather like the classic British idiom ‘belt and braces’ – a reference to a gent’s trousers being kept up by both ‘belt’ and ‘braces’, (suspenders, to you Yanks, which in the UK has a ‘naughty’ connotation). Thus when a British engineer talks of something being ‘belt and braces’, he means a large degree of static redundancy.

  36. TWS says:

    Not a good neologism. Good try but you jumped the shark. Which was a common phrase in the eighties.

  37. Nodwink says:

    I’m not convinced by this article, but I’m thankful it wasn’t written by Andrew Sullivan.

  38. Hemid says:

    Thinking Scott Alexander is superior to any other shitlib dork is your goofiest opinion. He did write a few striking paragraphs a few years back, almost every word of which he’s not only run away from but memory-holed. Go back to the good old posts you remember. They all have huge shark-bites of bowdlerization now. Look for what first got your attention. It’s not there.

    Also—and this is far more important—the dude is maximally, full-spectrum unfuckable. His fans are psych-med-castrated third-assistant-Reddit-moderator eunuchs who think the whole history of philosophy is obsoleted by Harry Potter fan fiction. How can you not feel the horror?

    You one o’ them sexless blob creeps, Steve?

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  39. Bitfu says:

    It used to be that people would create a foolish strawman in order to attack it. But the script has flipped in a rather bizarre manner: Now, the strawman is created in order to defend it. [Or, rather–daring others to attack it.]

    When you can look people in the eye and with a straight face declare that a grown man with hair on his back and his penis in his hand is capable of lactating AND those same people are fearful of contesting you…you have power. Kim Jong-un power in your own little microverse.

    We laugh when the North Korean Press reports Kim played 18 holes of golf, and shot 12 holes-in-one. But he laughs when the western press reports that our men need tampons. Power dynamics often look absurd to those outside its sphere of influence.

    Steve wrote that we live in an age where the best defense is a good offense. That phenomenon is even more pronounced socially—where flaunting a personal and ludicrous strawman in order to vaporize foolish opponents who dare to make eye-contact with the strawman is a surefire way to achieve social dominance.

  40. If I was building that sentence I would write motte and bailey versus heartland and outpost. The way you have written it appears exactly bass ackwards.

  41. guest says:
    @slumber_j

    “Game of Thrones” is perfectly comprehensible to me, even if I’ve never heard it uttered outside the context of that show. Either you’re playing a game which has many kingships in it, or you are one of the kings playing games with other kings or would-be kings.

    “Breaking Bad” sounded weird to me until I found out it was a regional colloquialism. Then the import became clear. “Break” means “interrupt,” and the premise of the show is that a normal sort of guy suddenly turns to a life of crime. I also associate “breaking” with a sudden change of direction, as when balls break in pool or a sharp turn in a motor vehicle is a car breaking.

    • Agree: Harry Baldwin
  42. I can’t even hear “motte and bailey” without immediately thinking of Slate Star Codex, or is it Star Slate Codex?

    Other mildly annoying linguistic tics I first noticed there are “priors” referring to your set of beliefs and assumptions, and “map” in the sense of aligning or matching rather than geographic mapping. E.g. “your anecdote maps neatly with my own priors.”

    Scott is a valuable resource but the “effective altruist” commentariat there can get tiresome. My plan would be for various blogs to stay fresh by rotating their regular comment posses. Send the CWII preppers at Z over to SSC for a month.

    • Replies: @Pericles
  43. Along with obscure phrases we’ve also seen an internet-fueled boom in various “laws” and “effects” from science and pop-science. Briffault’s Law, the Gell-Mann Effect, Conquest’s First Law and of course Godwin’s Law etc etc

    I love curling up with this list:

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

    I used to be a bit sad that I would never be knighted and be known as Sir so and so, but now despite a generally happy life I’m much more disappointed that I’ll never have some Law or Effect named after me.

    • Replies: @kaganovitch
    , @res
  44. @IHTG

    Yeah, I agree that the direction is ambiguous here. Perhaps best if we group these IQ poles together and label them monatomic, literally ‘of one atom’, or ‘one entity’.

    I think the Fonz used that term in a punchline, in an early Happy Days episode … well, you know, before the eponymous watershed scene in 1977. It might have been the one where the whole gang goes on vacation in Israel, and visits Masada. That zany episode was Henry Winkler’s idea. Y’know, ‘Fonzarelli’ was pretty sharp for a greaser, abandoned by his father, who only bequeathed to his son the advice of “Don’t go out in the rain in your socks.” Fun stuff. Great times. ‘Happy days’, indeed.

  45. Bill P says:

    The outpost heartland concept is useful, but the idea that Jews consider it vitally important to hide their intelligence is totally unbelievable.

    If anything, you’ve got the outpost and heartland mixed up here. In order to preserve what remains of the black-Jewish alliance (heartland), liberal Jews have to pretend that IQ differences don’t exist between populations (outpost).

    Everybody knows that Jews are smart, and nobody is particularly sore about it. There are, to be sure, plenty of things that Jews really don’t want gentiles to think about – e.g. what they really think of Jesus – but their intelligence sure ain’t one of them.

  46. @MEH 0910

    Isn’t “Motte and Bailey” (I’d never heard the term before), just a variation on the old “slippery slope” metaphor? That is, the idea that once you give an inch, it’s all downhill with progressively less defensible positions. Better to make your do-or-die stand at the Crest of the hill.

    Maybe “Crest of the Slippery Slope” would have been a better defensive metaphor. Or maybe just the simpler “forward defense.”

    • Replies: @Known Fact
    , @guest
  47. slumber_j says:
    @MEH 0910

    Makes sense. I think that indicates that at some level you consider it gibberish. A related phenomenon is my ongoing inability to remember anything about Freudianism.

    • Replies: @guest
    , @Ian M.
  48. @Hypnotoad666

    It reminds me more of bait-and-switch — trying to employ a point that’s blandly self-evident to sugar-coat or Trojan-Horse a point that’s absurdly extreme

    • Replies: @Hypnotoad666
  49. H I says:

    I predict it will catch on. Outpost and heartland captures the offensive essence of the trick, whereas motte and bailey suggests a defensive stance. They never stop. Once secured the outpost becomes the new heartland (e.g. gay marriage).

  50. Anon[391] • Disclaimer says:

    I think of M&B as a straw man with deniability.

    When you think of it, combined with the doctrine of deplatforming, it’s the perfect form of argument. You don’t even have to invoke the deniability because you have decided not to respond to or even listen to the arguments of your cancelled foe.

  51. H I says:

    The account of how James Damore was fired is another example of outpost and heartland, from the other side. When the executive team met to decide what to do, there was discussion back and forth. Some, including the (black) general counsel defended Damore’s right to speak. Then Susan W. (the head of Youtube, can’t spell her name) asked what happens if Damore’s argument is extended from sex to race. Then everyone agreed Damore had to go.

    • Replies: @Bumpkin
  52. @SFG

    “The decline in straight marriage has occurred before gay marriage was legalized and continued since, … there are no doubt numerous factors, “

    Don’t forget feminists using federal highway funds as an end-run around the Constitution to force every state to rewrite their divorce laws such that marriage is now the only contract where one party can break the contract at will and be massively rewarded instead of penalized. And the incentives go up the more kids you have. It was an atomic legal time-bomb, a jurisprudential WMD.

    The gay marriage thing was just to salt the earth over the grave of real marriage.

    • Replies: @SFG
  53. H I says:
    @Bill P

    Agree. Stephens didn’t dare touch the black/white issue. Cochran talked about the Jews rather than blacks and he flew below the radar. Murray talked about the blacks and all hell broke loose.

  54. CPK says:

    Be careful about confusing “Jewish” with “managerial class”. People in the managerial class have a strong interest in the blank slate: anyone can rise to the top, therefore the people who are at the top (them) deserve to be there, and vice versa.

    We see this from managerial-class types who aren’t Jewish at all. While a lot of people in the managerial class are (nominally) Jews, they tend to be the least “Jewish” ones — the most secular, the most assimilated, the most likely to marry non-Jews. So I’d argue this is a class thing, not a Jewish thing.

    Orthodox Jews, by contrast, seem fairly open to the idea of heritable intelligence — not surprising, since their whole belief system is based on them having a distinct inheritance as a people. Plus, on a more concrete level, they have experience with the problems as well as the advantages of genetics (e.g. Tay-Sachs).

    • Agree: Dissident
  55. Jack D says:
    @IHTG

    I agree with you. Knee-jerk blank slatism aside, the propagation of some stereotypical racial attribute that is flattering to your race (Jewish intelligence, black athletic ability, etc.) is not hard to take by itself, certainly a lot easier than one that is negative. But once you admit the former then the latter may follow – see the Andrew Sullivan organ size thing where the black woman had to angrily deny (or was it insist on – I’m still confused?) such differences because they implied that racial differences are possible.

    This leaves aside the question of why Jews are sticking up for black people (but never vice versa). The answer here seems to be “in order to stick it to the goyim”, but that doesn’t seem adequate. Communism having failed, egalitarianism seems to be the new substitute religion for secular Jews.

    • Agree: Buzz Mohawk, Dissident
  56. Jack D says:
    @guest

    Speaking of lobbies and castles, I noticed the last time I was in Italy that many banks have vestibules constructed as man traps. There are two sets of locking bulletproof doors. I think the idea is that as the bank robber is on the way out you lock those doors and the bank robber gets stuck in between.

    • Replies: @guest
    , @Lot
    , @Buzz Mohawk
  57. Arguments in favour of mass immigration provide an example of the Motte and Bailey.

    The Motte that is strongly defended is the “Proposition Nation” argument, itself somewhat dubious. The Bailey is that immigrants need not assent to the sacred Propositions!

    An example of the Outlier and Heartland is the assault on Trump over the Bidens’ activities in Ukraine. Democrats fight Trump over this outlier, as the forward defense of their Heartland (Biden’s well-documented culpability).

  58. Jack D says:
    @SFG

    As for decline in straight marriage, economics (as well as the lack of social stigma concerning out of wedlock children) plays a role. For lower class women (black and increasingly white), they wanted children but full time husbands were more bother than they were worth, even if you could find one who was willing to sign up and who would stick around. Thru welfare, working, etc. you could put together a life without a husband that was better than one with and no one would think ill of you for it. This was different than in the past.

    • Replies: @Art Deco
  59. @Bill P

    The outpost heartland concept is useful, but the idea that Jews consider it vitally important to hide their intelligence is totally unbelievable.

    I have to agree. What they have an interest in hiding is the extent of their wealth. In fact, given their disproportionate financial success jews are playing with fire by promoting the whole “white privilege” theory.

    Under this theory, Whites earning 40% more than Blacks is supposed to be prima facie evidence of their unfair advantage — thereby triggering a need to take Whites down a peg or two. But what then must it mean that Jews earns around 400% of black income and 250% of white income?

    When Jews succeed it’s hard work, education, good values, yadda yadda. But per leftists (often jewish) anything whites have is due to their “white privilege.”

    BTW, one application of the “Motte and Bailey” defence was an article I recently saw from Slate (I think). It was trying very hard to reframe the recent Black vs. Orthodox attacks in NY. Basically, it was saying that people need to stop talking about any specific facts related to the orthodox or the blacks that could play a role (such as orthodox moving into and dominating certain black neighborhoods). Instead, the conflict must be discussed solely in terms of a generalized evil force of “anti-semitism” attacking those who just happen to be visibly jewish.

    The real point of the article, I suppose, was to act as a Motte to protect the main Bailey Argument that any and all friction with Jews must, by definition, spring solely from irrational anti-semitism.

    • Replies: @kaganovitch
    , @Lot
  60. njguy73 says:
    @Steve Sailer

    I’d say that a colloquial expression would be better. Like in Games People Play there’s the “let’s you and him fight” and the “let’s pull a fast one on Joey.”

    I suggest instead of motte-bailey, outpost-heartland, or lobby-vault, it should be the “oh please don’t hurt my nice place!”

  61. guest says:
    @MEH 0910

    Why would such arguments end up being about black inferiority? I think relative white inferiority is more to the point.

    That negromania from which mainstream culture suffers is not what’s on the mind of a Bret Stephens when he exalts Jewish intelligence.

    Of course, Yglesias is correct about “particular policy relevance” because the Black Gap in particular justifies more policy than the status of ten other races combined. But that has *nothing* to do with “Hey, how come Jews are so overrepresented in fields supposedly requiring high intelligence?”

  62. @Hypnotoad666

    The real point of the article, I suppose, was to act as a Motte to protect the main Bailey Argument that any and all friction with Jews must, by definition, spring solely from irrational anti-semitism.

    Alternatively, the Bailey is to protect the Left’s special friends i.e. the “African-American Community” from scrutiny.

  63. Arclight says:
    @MEH 0910

    Agree that a lot of the resistance on the left to the concept of race and the effects of genes on outcomes is basically all of the left’s (and a lot of the trad right’s) policy prescriptions depend on blank slatism – if that concept is wrong, then it means admitting trillions in taxpayer money and the ideas of our best and brightest academics and think tanks for perfecting society were/are a near total waste. Added to this is black political loyalty to the left, and of course you can’t say to a critical constituency “hey, it turns out you’re probably going to stay at the bottom of society no matter what we do, but please keep voting for us anyway”.

    The fact that we are having this debate and the accumulation of evidence makes me think that in the not too distant future the left will abandon the insistence that outcomes in life are 100% environmental and then just say we need more intensive social welfare and redistribution of resources because people cannot be blamed for their genetic inheritance. They won’t put it so bluntly, but reality will be too difficult to ignore eventually, and frankly most people no matter their politics understand that who your family is has a lot to do with who you are.

  64. guest says:
    @Hypnotoad666

    No, not at all. Because you can always go back to the bailey once you get tired of sitting in your motte. There is usually no such thing as “do or die” in debate. One rarely sees Last Stands, outside of kids crossing their arms and stomping their feet.

    The way you talk, everyone would be retreating into the strongest possible position for every argument. But then we wouldn’t even have any intercourse, because we’d each be sitting in our castles.

    A better way to think about it, perhaps, is the difference between arguing with normies on Facebook versus a place like Unz, where posters are likely to possess more specialized knowledge. The sort of terminology and logic on display for a general audience is easy, loose, and informal. But when you come here, you’re more likely to employ well-defined terms and textbook logic.

    No reason why you can’t go from one place to the other, back and forth. Unless someone catches you and calls you on what is essentially a dishonest game.

  65. Lot says:

    If AJs, who are about 1.5% of the world’s white population but 20-50% of certain very g-loaded accomplishments, have an IQ of 100, that could either imply the highly flattering “scholarly and hard working culture” as Stephens likes, or International Jew conspiracies.

    Indeed, it is a boost to both of these theories which are not incompatible.

    Steve’s proposal that blocking talk of black IQ is about AJ IQ I don’t think is wrong so much as only a minor cause.

    The biggest reasons I believe are simply not wanting to hurt the feelings of blacks, or to discourage black children in school.

    The second biggest reason is just strong egalitarianism, both of a leftist and Christian varieties.

    Another big one is lack of understanding of statistics. “I know plenty of smart black people.” And “the black people I work with are just as smart as anyone else.”

    Finally, all these operate together to make race and IQ inquiries dangerous.

    • Replies: @Hypnotoad666
    , @Ian M.
  66. Lot says:
    @Jack D

    This is pretty standard on bank branches in US suburbs built or renovated the past 20 years.

  67. Cordell says:

    I hope Steve Sailer isn’t getting “the Jew thing” (aka “seeing Jews in your sandwich”). Society is obviously very heavily invested in remedying black/white socioeconomic differences, for example though affirmative action, and not at all invested in remedying Jewish/Gentile socioeconomic differences. So it seems obvious that denying any possible genetic basis for these differences is mostly out of concern for the former rather than the latter. Steve’s view is at the very least counterintuitive and would need some hard evidence (minimizing confirmation bias) to back it up. Of course most Jews oppose anything that looks like an attempt at reviving “scientific racism” at the expense of any group, as being ultimately bad for the Jews as well.

    • Agree: Jack D
    • Replies: @Pericles
  68. I attribute the descent into Clown World to 3 or 4 factors, more related to human nature than any conscious “battle plan” (e.g. fighting the war on your opponents turf, etc.)

    1. Human beings, by nature, just don’t know when to stop. It’s like that episode of The Simpson’s where Homer starts out as a hero for lobbying for more traffic signs, but ends up pubic enemy number one when he doesn’t know when to cut it out. “Enough already!” I think the headline in the Springfield paper said. Not being nasty to homosexuals becomes “let’s make everyone’s kids homosexual!” It’s a strange kind of inertia that takes over.

    2. There’s a certain… I dunno, rush, you get from watching an oppressed underdog give a good smack to his oppressor. Whether it’s the exhilaration you feel when the “Cutters” beat the frat guys in Breaking Away, or the karate kid beats his blonde, blue-eyed tormenters in the karate tournament, or Rocky Balboa knocks out Clubber, etc. This feeling of being outraged and then letting the bullies get what they deserve can be addictive, almost like a drug. Hence, the Woke all took to Twitter to wish death upon a bunch of white Catholic school kids who were just… standing there. Gotta get that fix. The problem is, eventually you run out of drugs or need ever increasing dosages to get that “high,” and your behavior starts to be as unpleasant or as unhinged as a junkie in need of a fix. Women seem particularly prone to this affliction.

    3. Our society is wealthy and soft enough to be able to indulge this nonsense. Like a teenager with a trust fund who throws lavish parties every weekend and totals a new car every month: If you’ve got the money and the time… It’s a different story when you need masculine strength to ward off saber tooth cats or bring down woolly mammoths, and women need to have as many kids as possible because most of them are going to die in infancy. “Gurl power!” silliness will get your clan eliminated pretty quickly in that setting.

    4. The Power of Provocation: This is equal parts conscious and subconscious. If you repeatedly piss off 90 million people, eventually a few are going to snap and use the “N word” or even the “J word,” or worse, and the whole program of insults and demonization becomes justified. “I mean, you bastards really are racists! Just look at these tweets!”

  69. Lot says:
    @Hypnotoad666

    “ What they have an interest in hiding is the extent of their wealth.”

    They often don’t realize how wealthy they collectively and on median are.

    I’ve noted here to agreement that a lot of whites only interact with blacks with 95+ IQs in workplaces, or highly agreeable and honest ones a bit lower (eg jovial security guards who undergo background checks and drug testing).

    The underclass of sub-80 IQ blacks is mostly hidden on a day to day basis.

    The average US Jew has a similar experience with non-Jewish whites. Sure, there’s a vague awareness of middle america. But for daily life, the NJWs they interact with and who’ve married into their family are roughly as wealthy and educated as the Jews are. And when they do meet Middle Americans, it is often upper middle class types from, say, the best suburb of Kansas City who was raised in a 4500sf house who got a good job in New York after going to a good college.

    • Agree: TWS
    • Replies: @Arclight
  70. Sean says:
    @Steve Sailer

    American Heist (2014)

    If you’re gonna rob a bank, Frankie…
    you fucking go in, you empty the tills,
    then you run out, you fucking drive like fuck.
    Nobody actually goes for the vault.
    That’s just in the fucking movies, bro.
    […] !

  71. @Bill P

    The outpost heartland concept is useful, but the idea that Jews consider it vitally important to hide their intelligence is totally unbelievable.

    Jews know that they are more intelligent than Gentiles, and they don’t care if we know it. What they do not want us to know is that part of that IQ advantage is inborn. They want us to believe that their advantage is entirely to do with their family culture, respect for education, and so on. This allows them to tell us that the same opportunities are open to everyone, if only we were willing to do the same things as they do.

    Perhaps Jews are afraid that, if we knew they had a racial advantage over Gentiles, this would encourage anti-semitism. Personally, I have no problem with the idea that Jews are over-represented in well-paid and prestigious jobs because they are brighter than Gentiles. It is a far more likely explanation than ethno-nepotism or other conspiracies.

    Whenever I see a newspaper article by a Jewish writer complaining that blacks and hispanics are less successful than whites because white racism is holding them down, I wonder what game the writer is playing. It is as stupid as saying that Gentiles are less successful than Jews because the latter are holding them down. Why do they write such nonsense?

    • Replies: @lanskrim
    , @Anonymous
  72. J.Ross says:

    Here he goes again! Bet your bottom dollar that James Shupe works best under pressure: having been the first man to legally transition to “non-binary,” Shupe is not falling in love with trannyism, and has not only reversed his “non-binary” transition, but completely repudiated the trannyist activism which he now calls lies. In fact Shupe makes the average tranny activist sound like a retard.
    https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2020/01/07/james-shupe-leaves-fraud-transgender-lifestyle/

    Shupe added the “non-binary” sex designation is “fraud and legal fiction based on pseudoscience.”
    “I was indoctrinated to believe that I had this thing called a gender identity and that suppressing it was causing my mental health problems,” he added. “It was all a lie.”

  73. Neuday says:
    @slumber_j

    Do you find “Ok, boomer” incomprehensible?

    • Replies: @slumber_j
    , @kimchilover
  74. iSteve:

    My informant attended a Harvard reunion. Yes, we all know that a reunion, especially one where Institutional Development is in hyperdrive, is a way to stroke your feelz to get you to crack open your checkbook.

    What was interesting was “they” (the speakers sanctioned by Harvard and therefore expressing Harvard-mainstream if not more general Cathedral views) informed the assembled alumni that the technical challenges of climate change/decarbonization/sustainable power sources are on a pathway to being met. Closing the Achievement Gap, not so much.

    We can argue global warming/climate change another time and whether Alternative Energy is a corrupt get-rich scheme for the connected. Now I only heard this second-hand through my source and didn’t press with questions. But am I missing something. Proclaiming the Achievement Gap as uncloseable is as much as being Red Pilled, believing in HBD, and commenting on iSteve as a Harvard professor under your legal name?

    The throwing of more money at public education and continued scolding of people as being racist couldn’t be more resource-intensive than converting our entire electric grid to undependable windmills, everyone buying a Tesla and fueling our airplanes with pixie dust (I hear it is a real problem with wear-and-tear on turbine blades)?

    Maybe “Hahvahd” is completely uncoupled from any technological realism of how decarbonization will bankrupt the First World and condemn everyone else to misery, but that someone in from of an alumni reunion group was realistic about the difficulty of Closing the Achievement Gap, this is a real “iSteve, hold your next blog post!” moment?

    • Replies: @J.Ross
  75. Lot says:
    @TGGP

    “ Cochran/Harpending’s paper got some positive press when it was first published.”

    2005 was a different world.

    For one thing, the most important of that positive press was Nicholas Wade’s write-up in the NYT, which tends to set the tone for the rest of the prestige press.

    Now the biggest name writing about these types of issues in the press is Angela “Shut up, racist” Saini.

    • Replies: @TGGP
  76. danand says:

    “Likewise, as the genetics of race become ever more scientifically apparent in the age of Ancestry.com and 23andMe, the claim that race does not exist genetically has become ever more often insisted upon. race does not exist genetically has become ever more often insisted upon.”

    Michael Strahan was joyed to learn he possessed the DNA of kings. He readily accepted the link between his successes and those of the ancestors. Linked is just a short snippet from the PBS show “Finding Your Roots S5 E5” in which Michael makes his more interesting/forthright comments:

    https://www.thirteen.org/programs/finding-your-roots/michael-strahan-related-royalty-whzakj/

    Motte & Bailey, the old Town & Country, Neighborhood & Nation, Backyard & World.

    Side note: I like Strahan, he seems like a good guy. On the boob tube ~10Hrs a week hosting a wide variety of shows.

  77. Rob says:
    @slumber_j

    Slate Star Codex is an anagram of Scott Alexander, if that helps.

    • Thanks: MEH 0910
    • Replies: @Rob
    , @ScarletNumber
  78. BB753 says:

    I have to admit I’ve never heard the phrase “motte and bailey”, but I do remember Mott the Hoople.

  79. Arclight says:
    @Lot

    You can apply this to the professional class in general most of whom have extremely limited contact with the bottom third of society, so they think they are like the 95 IQ security guard, cashier, or whatever (and take your pick of race/ethnicity). They have no idea how most people in the bottom third live their lives, have never seen up close what kind of decisions they make on a daily basis or their explanations for them. So most of the media, academia, think thank/advocacy group staff are almost entirely disconnected from the people they claim to care about, and conclude the year after year failure is because of malevolent and unseen forces like white supremacy.

    One of the best jobs to understand how the other half lives is property management – put a NYT reporter/college professor/SJW in charge of a decent-sized apartment project in a low income area for a year and after spending all that time chasing down rent, seeing how people keep house, refereeing disputes and listening to community gossip, and they will realize that the bottom half is very, very different place from the top half of society.

  80. I missed the episode too, and so thought to look up the clip a few years ago on youtube. Never mind the shark, seeing The Fonz in swim trunks was jarring enough. But “putting The Fonz in a bathing suit” would have been too wordy to catch on.

  81. Rob says:
    @Rob

    Also anagrams:

    George Herbert Walker Bush = huge berserk rebel warthog.

    Ronald Wilson Reagan = insane Anglo warlord.

    • Replies: @slumber_j
    , @njguy73
  82. conatus says:

    It is my experience that the ‘motte’ in polite suburbia is you are not even supposed to think in terms of difference. If you even categorize anyone or anything as ‘Black’ or ‘Jewish’ you have crossed the battlements to ‘racist’ and ‘antl-Semite’. Thus, discussions of differences are, most of the time, strangled in the womb, aborted on the ‘motte’, and nothing happens but nervous eye-darting glances.

    “How dare you!”

  83. J.Ross says:

    How can Atlanta, Georgia fight back against the deadly scourge of taxpayers wanting to live in Atlanta? Got it — the cessation of public safety services and the de facto legalization of violent crime! Man, they need new Nobel Prize categories for ideas this brilliant.
    https://postimg.cc/q6zH7299

  84. Art Deco says:
    @Jack D

    1. Again, the population of the U.S. has increased by 20% since 1995, while the census of the TANF (ne AFDC) rolls have declined by 2/3.

    2. About 40% of all children are born out of wedlock. The practice extends well beyond the lumpenproletarian population. It’s now the modal form of reproduction among the wage-earning strata.

    3. A comfortable majority of divorces are initiated by wives (about 2/3 when there are children involved; the proportion of wives initiating is higher among couples with children).

    4. It’s a reasonable guess that most of the out-of-wedlock child-bearing in this country is undertaken by (1) women who then shoo the men away; and (2) crooked paternity-trappers.

    5. There are men who abandon their children, but, for the most part, that’s not what’s been happening in this country. What’s been happening is that there is a large constituency among women which prefers a child-support economy to a marriage economy. This preference is found in every stratum of society (just not equally prevalent in each stratum).

  85. J.Ross says:
    @Inquiring Mind

    This great comment is the twin of Arclight’s response to Lot below (currently #81) and both remind of the early Bolshveiki baffled that Ukranian farmers actually wanted to sell their grain for money. Possible explanation for why it’s okay to claim that the Climate Fairies are propitiated by your green Learjet but it’s apparently also necessary to admit that Deontae can’t read, to continue to prefer the Soviet model, is that some things are deniable (say, capitalist vitality and superiority in all fields) and some things are undeniable (say, the Wehrmacht rolling up to Leningrad). Everybody knows Deontae can’t read, they know it as soon as they have any interaction with him. Climate arguments in either direction require data and analysis.

  86. Anonymous[206] • Disclaimer says:

    I’d ignore the history if I had to define it and just improvise a comparison, e.g. “panic-room argument”(tm) because I don’t expect mottes & baileys to come back in style. This is worse than a dead metaphor, it’s a resuscitated one. Archaic or obscure allusions are pretentious status-signaling stuff unless decoding them actually helps you understand the thing.

    Lumpen-academia enjoy being so unhelpful in this way, because 1) it broadcasts cheap solidarity with non-English-speaking academics; and 2) like a signature or patent, the namer secures his own relative importance, increasing his ranking in search databases if the name catches on.

    “Charm quark” and “tau lepton” are terrible names. In German “quark” means cottage cheese. “Neutrino” is a good name, because of analogy to both an established concept and the linguistic convention, and being actually coined by two Italians.

  87. Bill P says:

    I don’t think they care too much whether people think it’s genetic, but I’m pretty sure they don’t want people (including your average Jew) to think too hard about how it got to be that way.

  88. @Jonathan Mason

    This isn’t true. Jaws 2 didn’t come out until 1978, while the Jump the Shark episode of Happy Days, called Hollywood: Part 3, came out in 1977.

    • Agree: Ben tillman
  89. If you were a little younger the term Jump the Shark wouldn’t have seemed so obscure, because there was a website with that name, and before the popularity of message boards people would email their thoughts about when series would jump the shark. Also, the owners of the website went on the radio a lot to promote the website. Therefore, the phrase didn’t spring up organically, rather it was the result of marketing.

  90. Scott Alexander’s biggest drawback is that he doesn’t have an editor. He is very long-winded and often incomprehensible. Bill James’ biggest asset is that he is an excellent writer. His theories in the hands of a different author wouldn’t have taken off. He was an English major is college, not math or statistics. Scott Alexander needs someone with the ability to write, much like Levitt needed Dubner.

    An interesting thing about Bill James that he really doesn’t discuss is that he was an English teacher when he got out of the army. People generally don’t quit public employment to be the night watchman at the pork-and-beans cannery. Therefore, he must have flamed out as a teacher. I am curious as to why.

  91. @Lot

    The biggest reasons I believe are simply not wanting to hurt the feelings of blacks, or to discourage black children in school.

    I wonder what percentage of the “you can’t go there” people actually know the truth about IQ distribution and racial differences but are making their arguments strategically — i.e., perhaps for what they believe are good reasons, but still in intellectual bad faith. It has to be a lot.

    Yglesias, for example, certainly knows better. In a long Vox article about why Charles Murray should be de-platformed, Yglesias never actually denies the data but instead engages in a very long sleight-of-hand that basically says: (a) talking about racial IQ differences would tend to undermine the policy case for affirmative action and welfare; (b) these are good programs that benefit blacks; (c) therefore, talking or thinking about IQ in the context of public policy is racist and verboten (even if the facts are true):

    To put it bluntly, insisting that we pay more attention to ambiguous evidence about the role of IQ heritability in driving group differences is not a disinterested gesture of scientific inquiry, but a political move initiated by political polemicists who aim to heighten racial salience where it’s counterproductive and diminish it where it could be constructive.

    * * *
    But to say that actual scientists should continue doing scientific research into the genetic bases of human cognition is a far cry from saying that lay journalists and policy analysts ought to go out of our way to promote the hypothesis that America’s class system reflects irremediable aspects of human biology. This is an idea that exerts too much rather than too little influence over American politics and public policy, and the racialized version of the hypothesis that Murray is known for is particularly damaging.

    https://www.vox.com/2018/4/10/17182692/bell-curve-charles-murray-policy-wrong

    Thus, although its buried in mountains of standard-issue PC talking-points, Yglesias is absolutely explicitly in telling “journalists and policy analysts” to suppress all talk of HBD issues if they know what’s good for them. Indeed, it’s precisely because the facts are so inimical to the Left’s policy agenda that they must be suppressed.

  92. Anonymous[337] • Disclaimer says:

    The new one is, ” shave the balls.”

    Peak trans.

  93. “But is protecting the self-esteem of blacks the ultimate heartland in this ploy?”

    Personal experience leads me to believe there is too much bad blood between the Ice and Sun peoples for there to be a resolution to the ongoing racial situation. Compound this strife with the inherit differences betwixt blacks and whites and the reach for peace becomes a pipe-dream.

    “how IQ gaps between gentiles and Jews explain perhaps even more.”

    i.e.: How Jews cloak their efficiency at deceiving the goyim into believing Diversity is their Strength. Merkel’s African and Arab migrant flows into Europe, and the well-funded, politically-supported, and successful attempts to breach the U.S. border with a mass of brown bodies (Tee-Hee) is evidence enough of a concerted effort towards population replacement. But who is wielding this demographic weapon against whitey? The Jeff Epstein story uncovered a wealth of conspiratorial goodies. The most significant, in my view, is the nest of Jewish billionaires called MEGA, a consortium intertwined with Israeli intelligence. One of the members of MEGA, Les Wexner, served as a kind of godfather to Jeff while the creepy Ms. Maxwell served as Jeff’s Katsa. I use the term Zionist to describe the conspirators of MEGA because Zionism, at its core, is racial supremacy. And again speaking from personal experience, the American Jews I’ve interacted with are smart, ambitious, mostly family-oriented, and just as dysfunctional as the goys. Definitely not part of the active Zionist conspiracy to erase whitey.

    Another interesting and well-written article from the SailerSimulation.

  94. moshe says:

    Steve, I was about to comment how much I liked this article as a jumping off point for all sorts of research and intellectual stimulation for all sorts of interests but unfortunately you ended it with your usual sermonic ending about bla bla bla, the same stuff you always talk about.

    Don’t get me wrong, it may in fact be that I myself simply don’t want people discussing above average Jewish IQ so I try to verbotenize discussion of Black IQ. Cool. But you say that sort of thing ALL THE TIME and even if it’s As True As The Sun, it still gets boring and tends to narrow one’s soul rather than expand it. Not due to it’s Dangerous Idea’ness but because it’s your constant f’n mantra.

    This article though was one that I really enjoyed because there was so much that I didn’t yet understand! Also your promotion of SSC is admirable. Public intellectuals who aren’t on the exact same team tend not to effuse over each other, especially when the efusement is unsolicited and one-sided but offered because it’s deserved. Bravo!!

    I jist wish you could have left it at that and saved the whole jews and blacks and liberals and gays thing for a separate post so that we could all digest this really nice one before being offered our regular gruel.

    But overall, well f’n done.

    You’re in the arena Steve and I thibk this was a great post because of how novel it was and bevause of the new thinking-out-loud ideas you offered us. If it ended with a retreat to the motte? bailey? (I haven’t yet bothered to fully comprehend the analogy just yet) then it can be chalked up to the complications faced by men in the arena and by standing on tipeetoes we can choose to overlook it.

    Again, thanks Steve. And for the love of God, please do more of this. Please let your mind investigate new subjects, absolutely regardless of whether you still return to the hitherto-usual ones.

    For example – prescribed drugs. Human HBD yadda yadda yes but have you moneyballed any safe meds/drugs we should pretty much all be taking or whatever?

    I’ll never forget your post on ranbaxy about 7 years ago. It was enlightening and fascinating. MOAR new stuff….please?

    Thanks again and God Bless and have a sweet new year.

    Moshe

  95. @Known Fact

    Ok. I’m starting to get the hang of it. It might be like arguing that that there is an irrefutable correlation between A and B, and then sneakily sliding that into an unwarranted assumption that A, in fact, causes B.

    I think Steve’s “Outpost and Heartland” is more evocative.

    But either way, the fortress metaphor feels flawed to me because the one making the argument seems to be more in the position of seizing ground, rather than defending it. So the initial easy argument seems more like the “thin side of a wedge” or a “camel’s nose under the tent” than a two-tiered fortress structure.

    Motte and bailey (MAB) is a combination of bait-and-switch and equivocation in which someone switches between a “motte” (an easy-to-defend and often common-sense statement, such as “culture shapes our experiences”) and a “bailey” (a hard-to-defend and more controversial statement, such as “cultural knowledge is just as valid as scientific knowledge”) in order to defend a viewpoint. Someone will argue the easy-to-defend position (motte) temporarily, to ward off critics, while the less-defensible position (bailey) remains the desired belief, yet is never actually defended.

    In short: instead of defending a weak position (the “bailey”), the arguer retreats to a strong position (the “motte”), while acting as though the positions are equivalent. When the motte has been accepted (or found impenetrable) by an opponent, the arguer continues to believe (and perhaps promote) the bailey.

    Note that the MAB works only if the motte and the bailey are sufficiently similar (at least superficially) that one can switch between them while pretending that they are equivalent. There exist a number of common rhetorical ploys and ‘sleights-of-tongue’ which can mask the apparency of such a transition.

    The MAB is a fallacious argument style. https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Motte_and_bailey

  96. @Jack D

    They should just put a sexy Italian girl in there to romance him. That’s a man trap. Hell, hire an underage girl, and then she’s jailbait. Law enforcement may yet mourn the loss of Jeff Epstein and the disappearance of his helicopter pilot, Madam Ghislaine Maxwell.

  97. @Steve Sailer

    None of the above terms are really great. “Lobby and Vault” sounds like Capitol Hill shenanigan verbs. “Motte and Bailey” sounds like a luxury brand.

    Also, “Outpost and Heartland” is muddled because “heartland” can imply a rural hinterland relative to built-up motte-like cities. And what is in hinterlands? Outposts. Confusing.

    How about Keep and Curtain, as in castle keep and outer curtain wall ?

    1) It’s alliterative.
    2) It maintains the spatially tight two-stage battle (argument) metaphor.
    3) “Curtain” has a double meaning—a curtain can be used in an attempt to bluff/deceive, e.g. The Wizard of Oz.

    Tactic: Someone promoting/defending a false position attempts to bluff with a relatively weak curtain, which gets breached, so the defender attempts to change the subject by retreating to a factually stronger, but non sequitur, tangential keep of rhetoric.

    As to your question of “Which one do you really want to defend?” during an attack it’s the keep, because that’s usually where the well and stockpiles of food are, and where the enemy isn’t. The rest can be rebuilt/replanted if the enemy leaves, but if the keep is taken, it’s over.

  98. @guest

    I think this is correct – “jump the shark” was originally constrained to use in criticizing television shows, particularly long-running shows, which ran out of variations on the original successful plot and characters and therefore had to resort to grand spectacles or gimmicks to maintain viewership. Fonzie “jumping the shark” was a particularly fanciful example of gimmickry.

    At some point, the phrase made the leap from television criticism to life generally in order to describe situations in which something has grown stale or outlasted its initial purpose or reason for success. I think this is a feature of internet culture, which tends to “flatten” life and media and make these somewhat interchangeable.

  99. @guest

    This is why I’m a Jungian.

  100. “gaslighting” is the current year version of this.

    do people even know what it means.

    it’s already moved into the “could care less” vs “couldn’t care less” confusion zone. deployed incorrectly and now seen as correct. by now, it’s a mute point, herp derp.

    • Replies: @guest
  101. Anonymous[362] • Disclaimer says:

    Niall Ferguson speaks of Tower and Square. Tower towers over the square and can dictate terms and range of debate.

    The real source of power for the elites is the Electrojan Horse, esp the TV.
    Buying a TV gives you the impression that YOU own it. It is your property in your house. But the fact is you don’t own or control the programs that are made by a handful of globo-corporations. By turning on the TV, you allow the globo-raiders to enter your living room, your bedrooms, your minds, and colonize your imagination and knowledge… just like taking in the gift of the Wooden Horse allowed Greeks to enter the Trojan sanctum and conquer it.

    This is why YOUTUBE altered terms. Independent content creators were making their own programs and sharing them, sometimes beating the big guys in News and Entertainment. YOUTUBE became OURTUBE, that of globalists. The Tower took back power from the square.

    Obviously, we cannot NOT watch all TV shows, but everyone should be made conscious of the power behind the image, like the man behind the wizard in the Oz tale. Children fall for fairytales and myths because they just fall under the spell of the story. They don’t think to ask, WHO WROTE IT and WHY? And what kind of forces molded the mind of the author and who funds them? If one asks those questions, one will see things differently. One will see the strings on the puppet. Stop being like believing children and be like thinking adults. Always ask WHAT KIND OF PEOPLE control the media/entertainment and WHAT IS THEIR CORE AGENDA. Then the scales will fall off your eyes even as you watch propaganda.

    • Agree: Abe
  102. lanskrim says:
    @James N. Kennett

    Personally, I have no problem with the idea that Jews are over-represented in well-paid and prestigious jobs because they are brighter than Gentiles. It is a far more likely explanation than ethno-nepotism or other conspiracies.

    Ethnic nepotism is a far more likely explanation than intelligence.

    • Replies: @Kevin O'Keeffe
  103. J.Ross says:

    It recalls the witticism of Jhonen Vasquez, “What the hell — somebody very stealthily put pee in my pants!”


    Meanwhile, at the offices of Reason Magazine, Jake Sullum and Radley Balko cackle maniacally.
    Holy tentacles, newsman! Hentai enthusiast Kurt Eichenwald is in terrible danger! We must warn him! I’ll activate this flashing light signal.

  104. Michael S says:

    It’s interesting that your punchline puts you at odds with prominent alt-right figures, such as Vox Day, who are militant in their insistence that Ashkenazi IQ is wildly overstated, that the gap is actually very small and that differences in outcomes must therefore be due to… ahem, other characteristics.

    I don’t know who is right, but to my eyes, the difference between Jewish and Gentile outcomes sure looks a lot like the difference between white and black outcomes.

    • Replies: @Lot
    , @J.Ross
    , @Ian M.
  105. J.Ross says:

    In short: instead of defending a weak position (the “bailey”), the arguer retreats to a strong position (the “motte”), while acting as though the positions are equivalent. When the motte has been accepted (or found impenetrable) by an opponent, the arguer continues to believe (and perhaps promote) the bailey.

    Glenn Beck is as reliable an idiot as he is unreliable an employee, but there are several things he absolutely knocks out of the park which should be remembered, and one of them is ditching this CWC Oman stuff in favor of the nearly self-explanatory term “Overton Window.”

    >but this way we get to bring up medieval warfare

    Oh, trust me, I’m down like William falling on the beach, but in the verbal game, “Overton Window” sees your MAB’s serried Lucerne hammers and concentrates its arquebi.

    • LOL: kaganovitch
  106. slumber_j says:
    @Rob

    Right. I hadn’t recognized the anagram situation, but in any case: those two make sense, whereas “Slate Star Codex” doesn’t. Anyway, thanks to you at least I now know where it comes from.

  107. @guest

    “No reason why you can’t go from one place to the other, back and forth. Unless someone catches you and calls you on what is essentially a dishonest game.”

    That reminds me, is Corvinus still around?

  108. slumber_j says:
    @Neuday

    In this case it’s a sick burn, I guess? Because the stuff I indicated is so youth-oriented.

  109. @Achmed E. Newman

    You’re right, movies have sucked for the last 25 years, but Once Upon A Time in Hollywood really doesn’t suck. And you’re Achmed E. f***in’ Newman, don’t you forget that!

  110. njguy73 says:
    @Rob

    Vice President Dan Quayle = cradled quite a penis envy

    • Replies: @Rob
  111. @Neuday

    You win the Internet for the day

    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar
  112. Happy Days in which Henry Winkler’s Fonzie, waterskiing in the ocean

    A squandered opportunity. Minnesota proudly claims the birthplace of water skiing, but it’s at Lake City on Lake Pepin, a thrombotic or aneurysmal bulb in the Mississippi, which it shares with the Fonz’s Wisconsin. They could have set the scene there. Perhaps “jumping the muskie” doesn’t have the same impact.

    There were sitcoms in the ’70s and ’80s set in Milwaukee, Minneapolis, Indianapolis, and Boston, all with characters with NYC accents, but with little real local flavor. (Chicago and Cincinnati were better served.) There was something fake about it all.

    …the gender of the word “moon” is female in French and male in German.

    Uh, no they’re not. The genders are feminine and masculine. The sexes are female and male. Big difference. Gender correlates with sex, but is something quite different. Indeed, in those African tongues with a dozen or more, they’re called “noun classes” rather than genders. Somebody threw in the towel.

    By the way, it’s the opposite with the sun, which is feminine in German and masculine in French. No wonder they’re always at war.

    There is a fascinating book of solar systemic speculation by a 19th-century British astronomer called Other Worlds Than Ours in which he used the pronoun he for the planets, with the exception of Venus and Earth, who get she. There was a time when even scientists could write with a touch of class.

    Sadly, the author went to Florida shortly after publication to view an eclipse, and caught something fatal there. Florida in the 19th century was like the NFL in the 1920s, nothing at all like the monster we know today.

    The Firefly Five Language Visual Dictionary tells me the Italian Venere (Venus, the planet) is masculine. I think that must be a misprint. Botticelli sure didn’t think so!

  113. @kimchilover

    You win the Internet for the day

    Second prize, for two days.

    Consolation prize, for a week.

    • LOL: Jim Don Bob
  114. Rob says:
    @njguy73

    That’s great. I will definitely use it. Thank you so much!

    • Replies: @njguy73
  115. @slumber_j

    Breaking Bad is one of the best television series ever. I know this because I hitchhiked through Albuquerque. Never did meth though.

    A Navajo family picked me up in their pickup truck. They were on their way to sell turquoise-and-silver jewelry they had made.

    • Replies: @slumber_j
  116. Lot says:
    @Michael S

    Vox Day: My IQ is much higher than Richard Feynman.

    https://voxday.blogspot.com/2014/08/the-definitive-iq-list.html

    Also: “more than a few PhDs at elite universities are more than two standard deviations below me in IQ terms” and “ the mean intelligence of the regulars here is higher than the Cambridge faculty.”

    https://voxday.blogspot.com/2015/05/the-excluded.html

    • Replies: @ScarletNumber
  117. @moshe

    Thanks, Moshe, for your comments and for the pointer to Ranbaxy:
    https://isteve.blogspot.com/2013/05/red-pill-indian-generic-drug-maker.html

    Steve, I don’t understand one sentence in your Ranbaxy article: “Ranbaxy got the U.S. legal monopoly on making the generic version of Lipitor, the world’s biggest drug.”

    Once a drug becomes generic, its patent has expired and nobody can have a legal monopoly on making it. Right?

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    , @J.Ross
    , @Lot
    , @Jack D
  118. anon[104] • Disclaimer says:
    @Achmed E. Newman

    are there any good new movie lines that people all know?

    Maybe. Fairly recent movie, fairly old man.

    “Get off my lawn!” — “Walt Kowalski”

    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
  119. fnn says:

    OT, but big HBD news. It looks like the celebrated Siberian Farm Fox Experiment may have included a bit of fakery:
    https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0169534719303027

    The ‘domestication syndrome’ has been a central focus of research into the biological processes underlying domestication. The Russian Farm-Fox Experiment was the first to test whether there is a causal relationship between selection for tameness and the domestication syndrome.

    Historical records and genetic analysis show that the foxes used in the Farm-Fox Experiment originated from fur farms in eastern Canada and that most traits attributed to the behavioral selection for tameness predated the experiment, undermining a central pillar of support for the domestication syndrome.

    The overall weight of evidence, including data from other species, does not unambiguously support the existence of the domestication syndrome in animals. Competing theories to explain domestication syndrome should be reconsidered after the traits themselves are more clearly connected to the early stages of domestication.

    Via:
    https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/dogs-best-friend/202001/farm-fox-theory-bites-the-dust

    • Thanks: MEH 0910
  120. J.Ross says:
    @Michael S

    I don’t know who is right, but to my eyes, the difference between Jewish and Gentile outcomes sure looks a lot like the difference between white and black outcomes.

    No. It’s both on a curve and there’s still a difference in size. This is like saying that the difference between a doctorate holder and a master’s holder is comparable to the difference between a doctorate holder and a guy who is still in high school but getting his life together and also he’s really good at sports.

    • Replies: @anon
  121. Anonymous[945] • Disclaimer says:
    @Hemid

    Is Hemid your real name? Than you have no right to complain about him memory-holing his work in order to avoid being cancelled.

    Also—and this is far more important—the dude is maximally, full-spectrum unfuckable.

    Not true, I’ve met him IRL, and even if it were, why should we care? You may be superior to him in skill at shtuping thots,* how is that relevant to anything else?

    You one o’ them sexless blob creeps, Steve?

    Didn’t we grow out of this guilt-by-association you-have-cooties-now crap in junior high?

    *You’d say so, and we just have to take your word for it, no reason why a man would lie about his sexual prowess on the internet…

  122. J.Ross says:
    @Mark Spahn (West Seneca, NY)

    Not only do almost all major drugs have a generic analog while copyrighted, but wasn’t part of the Obamacare discussions the requiring of generic availability (I don’t remember how that shook out)? When a drug patent expires, they don’t start a generic version, they find another use for the patented drug (think aspirin for heart disease) and re-patent it.

  123. TGGP says: • Website
    @Lot

    Like I said, I prefer general theories. The Bell Curve was extremely controversial when it was published, and remained so afterward. That the NYT has gotten worse and will tolerate even less science doesn’t change which extreme taboos still seem to constitute the “heartland”.

  124. B36 says:

    When Motte and Bailey jump the shark you get Mott the Hoople.

  125. @Art Deco

    Also,

    5. a) Lower class women’s child support economy is largely paid for the taxpayers.

    5. b) Middle class women’s child support economy is largely paid for by the fathers.

    • Replies: @Art Deco
  126. Jack D says:
    @Art Deco

    I know that you like to point to the decline in TANF but that is not the only form of welfare. There is food stamps, Section 8 housing, being housed in prison, etc. And a large % of blacks are employed in government jobs which are largely makework or even drags on the economy.

  127. @Art Deco

    Mothers divorcing fathers when the child is around 2 or 3 years old has been a thing in America for a while. This is anecdotal, but I remember dating freshly divorced MILFs with 3 year old kids back in the early 1990s.

    The young fathers were upper-middle class suckers paying “child support.” The mothers were sexy chicks living on that support. I was living an extended adolescence and having a great time.

  128. @Jack D

    And a large % of blacks are employed in government jobs which are largely makework or even drags on the economy.

    Not to mention private sector jobs, as a result of racial quotas. What quotas do is supercharge the Peter Principle for its beneficiaries such that a huge number of black people are doing jobs somewhat or significantly above what they’re qualified for. The result ranges from crappy service at the DMV to Barack Obama.

  129. anon[104] • Disclaimer says:
    @J.Ross

    . It’s both on a curve and there’s still a difference in size.

    Hang on, doesn’t this belong over in the “Andrew Sullivan Woke Penis” thread?

  130. @bjdubbs

    As a fellow Luttwak fan, that occurred to me too.

    Steve asks,

    “Why does Beijing bother to oppress the natives of its far-flung inland regions of Xinjiang and Tibet, when those cold and dry provinces are much less valuable than fertile eastern China?”

    But the question of the hour might be more like,

    Why does the world’s sole hyperpower bother to cross vast barrier oceans to oppress the natives of utterly remote and irrelevant Afghanistan, when those cold and dry provinces are much less valuable than any square mile of the US, which it is simultaneously seeding with hostile foreigners?

    George W. Bush lied to us, “We will fight them over there so we do not have to face them in the United States”, as he simultaneously imported just those invaders he was claiming we were fighting not to face.

    I don’t care so much if Bush “lied us into war”. I care much more that he lied a war into us.

    For China there is logic in putting the conflict frontiers onto bad real estate to protect the good real estate.

    It is the uniquely perverse genius of Western elites that they are sacrificing the good real estate to try (and fail!) to gain the bad real estate.

    Can’t anybody here play this game?

  131. Given that there is a difference in the US between Jewish and non-gentile intelligence, what happens when sub-groups of Gentiles are selected? For example, wouldn’t the IQ of the non-black population also be higher than the IQ of the general population also?

    You cannot say disproportionate Jewish accomplishment is based on greater intelligence (as opposed to possibly more insidious things) unless you compare that intelligence not to that of non-Jews as a whole; rather you would have to compare it to the intelligence of those groups with whom Jews have competed, which in America due to the racial persecution blacks have suffered (and possibly other causes related to blacks) and regional factors, is essentially certain elements of the white population in the Northeast and California.

  132. Art Deco says:
    @Almost Missouri

    Once more with feeling: the TANF rolls currently have about 4 million women and children on them, or 1.3% of the total population. SNAP enrolls about 13% of the population; it’s not limited to mothers with children; anyone below a certain income thresh-hold can enroll (though most people eligible do not apply); mean monthly benefit is around $380 per household; enrollment in Medicaid is a great deal more common and it’s a highly expensive program. It’s not limited to mothers with children and it’s very common among the wage-earning strata.

    • Replies: @J.Ross
  133. J.Ross says:
    @Art Deco

    I don’t think that this is wrong but how can this be the whole story when there are people on welfare their whole lives and beauty wholesaler coupons promising to accept food stamps as cash?

  134. Good, as I didn’t understand the whole motte-and-bailey thing. But who, other than a reader of this blog, could explain what Tragic Dirt™ is supposed to mean? Or the Most Important Chart in the World™, etc.?

  135. @guest

    No, not at all. Because you can always go back to the bailey once you get tired of sitting in your motte. There is usually no such thing as “do or die” in debate. One rarely sees Last Stands, outside of kids crossing their arms and stomping their feet.

    Good comment. I think your paragraph I’ve quoted above captures the real power of the motte-and-bailey tactic.

    Many people, including many mainstream conservatives, still retain a romantic conception of postmodern public discourse. They listen to Rush or watch Hannity or read an especially pungent tweet from our president, and think, ‘Wow, he really DESTROYED that leftist fallacy! The walls of that particular rhetorical Constantinople have finally been breached, and the sack is on! This changes EVERYTHING!’

    Many, many little battles for cultural baileys can be ‘lost’ — but the mottes remain intact, while the attackers grow weary, or find themselves recalled and recommissioned to play defense on countless other cultural front lines.

    And The Narrative that roams and dominates the cultural landscape is a great rough beast, well-armored, with a thick defensive hide that’s continually regenerated via mainstream media and pop culture reinforcement.

  136. @anon

    Well, old man, I can pin down the time line of Gran Torino without even checking. I just happened to be a certain place that I only went to once, when it was out in the theaters. That’s was about 11 years ago. Does it seem like 5? It does to me!

  137. Art Deco says:
    @Jack D

    1. About 2% of the population is enrolled in Section 8 (2 million households; https://section-8-housing.org/section-8-housing-factsheet-section-8-housing/)

    2. As for public employment, blacks account for about 13% of the state and local workforce (https://www.epi.org/publication/bp339-public-sector-jobs-crisis/) and about 18% of the federal workforce (https://www.fedweek.com/issue-briefs/demographics-of-federal-workforce-summarized/). About 80% of all public employees work for state and local government, so about 14% of all public employees are black. About 12% of the working population is black. There are subcategories of public employment where blacks are exceptionally common (the postal service, municipal transit, social work agencies), but over-all there is only a mild bias in favor of public employment among blacks. Keep in mind that public employment accounts for about 14% of the jobs in the economy, no more.

    3. I’ve addressed the question of SNAP / Food Stamps in another comment. It’s an income supplement program, not an income replacement program. You’re not living large on $380 a month in grocery subsidies.

    4. I don’t know anyone in meatspace who is enough of a blockhead to conceive of involuntary incarceration in a state prison as a ‘welfare program’.

    I’ve addressed these complaints in previous exchanges, not that you noticed. I cannot reason you out of a position you were never reasoned into.

    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar
    , @guest
  138. @Known Fact

    I used to be a bit sad that I would never be knighted and be known as Sir so and so, but now despite a generally happy life I’m much more disappointed that I’ll never have some Law or Effect named after me.

    When I was a young fellow back in the eighties, I was attending a wedding at which the late Paul Reichmann(then one of the world’s wealthiest men) was a guest. I was standing next to a Hungarian-Jewish ‘woman of a certain age’ when a passerby asked her if she was Mrs. Reichmann. She replied “No, but I still could be.” You may not have a law or a knighthood yet..

  139. When Motte and Bailey jump the shark you get Mott the Hoople…

    …all the way to Memphis.

  140. @Art Deco

    I don’t know anyone in meatspace who is enough of a blockhead to conceive of involuntary incarceration in a state prison as a ‘welfare program’.

    What is the difference to the taxpayer? Heck, Manzanar was as much a part of the New Deal as anything else. Consent is irrelevant.

    You’re not living large on $380 a month in grocery subsidies.

    Some are.



    • Replies: @Art Deco
  141. Whiskey says: • Website

    Steve — wrong here. Very wrong.

    First, XianXing has a lot of value: significant gold, oil, coal deposits. Plus supposedly uranium. So it is of strategic value to China which has sought to reduce its vulnerability to food and other imports from the West.

    Second as noted, marriage was on a decline among the White working and middle classes starting in the mid 1960s. And has gotten worse not better. Only the Managerial Class for whom “Summer” is a verb not a season and usually involves the Hamptons can keep it together. Everyone else is single mother palooza.

    Third, Jews being known for higher IQ would … INCREASE THEIR MATE VALUE.

    While it is true that marriage is in decline among the working class and middle class and is really just for rich White folks, in that class there is intense mate competition and Jews of both sexes lose out significantly.

    For White Jewish women like that Feministing gal, can’t recall her name, the pattern is usually sex with various bad boy himbos as teens, continuing well into college and post college, then visibly and resentfully settling for a less than optimal husband as fertility and looks rapidly fade. Recall that lady writes about screaming at her husband for leaving a coffee cup on the counter. The issue is not the cup, but her settling for a guy she really loathes.

    Now, if the selling point of a Jewish girl say 19, is “hey I’m plain but won’t cheat around much (compared to other girls) and will give you really smart kids who will be successful and not in and out of rehab screwing their brother’s widow and random strippers” … well that’s something. A whole lot better than what they get now.

    And for Jewish men, its even better. They work diligently as incels, “get lucky” and have some woman desperate enough to marry them just to avoid being alone but loathing their lack of masculine dominance all the while. Now if it was, “hey not the sexiest bad boy drug dealer / bike courier …. but our kids would be firmly upper class not living in abandoned sewer pipes or shipping containers eating bugs” … well that’s a different selling point.

    Jews would be ridiculously better off (save Orthodox for whom it would not matter) if everyone figured Jewish DNA = smart kids. They’d be the top of the heap in the mate market. Not the bargain basement.

    Nope, the reality is that Blacks have quickly become our ruling caste. Blacks have pushed most Jewish actors and many Jewish producers and writers out of Hollywood. Politically the future is all Black. Despite being a relatively declining population, the effect of mass Hispanic immavasion has been to empower Blacks. Since today’s environment shows up the fatal DNA flaw of White men: shyness and introversion.

    Contra Peter Frost, White men have huge DNA flaws that make them non-competitive in today’s environment. Shyness might have been good in the Stone Age to avoid getting a stone ax on one’s head, but in today’s environment it is a one way ticket to incel-ville. Whereas Big Man charisma, zero paternal investment, lots and lots of kids ala Wilt Chamberlain, is the wave of the future. Women don’t care about beta male provision outside of the Hamptons Summering. That’s the bare minimum required. And when they have their own resources to sustain that its all about sexy bad boys. Which Black men do very well.

    Look at how Blacks are successfully purging Jews out of the Northeast, with no Media pushback. Anyone who has been around women and seen their double standard for bad boys and beta boys knows the score.

    We will be stuck with a Black ruling caste unless or until we can generate scarcity, which makes beta male provisioning important again, the difference between starving and eating for a woman and kids. Greta Thunberg and the Greens threaten to do just that — make the West poor, miserable, and starving which means White beta males rule. Sexy bad boys only work during times of plenty. Not resource poor societies.

    TLDR version: it is tingles uber alles that makes female preference for sexy bad boy Big Men and Black big shots that drives no discussion of Black IQ and DNA driven behavior. Jews would benefit under scarcity at least of being known as smart, as it would drive up their mate price: smarter more attractive mates for both sexes to access high IQ DNA.

    Pray for St. Greta and the Greens to make us all poor, broke, and starving so we can avoid a mulatto driven leadership caste and get us back to beta male soldiers and various Great Kings.

  142. res says:
    @guest

    In the realm of race, for instance, the Vault Argument is that Race Doesn’t Exist. The Lobby Argument is genetics matter less than environment.

    Isn’t that backwards? My understanding is that the Motte and Bailey distinction breaks down as follows.

    Motte – highly defensible but of limited value to hold (Steve is right to critique that value assessment, perhaps better to think of it in terms of quantity of territory involved?)
    To my thinking that corresponds to “genetics matter less than environment” or Lewontin’s fallacy “there is more variation within races than between them.” Both statements are highly defensible, but mean less than might be apparent at first glance (the “fallacy” in Lewontin’s fallacy is the attempt to assert equivalence between the quoted motte and the bailey).

    Bailey – not very defensible but important (what someone really wants) to hold.
    To my thinking that corresponds to “Race does not exist.” Not defensible at all in reality, but very important to the people reciting it.

    Cost of construction is not really the right value metric. I think the better way to think about it is which would be built if there was no need to fight. The Bailey is what you need as core services for the area. The Motte is what is required to control the Bailey in the face of attacks. Its cost of construction is largely just a “cost of doing business.” Even if it costs more than the Bailey. (prestige issues make the reality more complicated, the motte is more prestigious which may be the ruler’s true priority)

    Alternatively, think of the bailey as a profit center with the motte being a necessary cost.

    Perhaps a better way of thinking about all of this is a lower rent alternative. The fort (perhaps just a stockade and a few soldiers) and the territory it controls.

    P.S. Perhaps the best response to a motte and bailey argument is to just point out the false equivalency involved. Is there ever not one present?

    • Replies: @guest
  143. res says:
    @Known Fact

    This one deserves special emphasis as a meta law: Stigler’s law of eponymy
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stigler%27s_law_of_eponymy

    Stigler’s law of eponymy, proposed by University of Chicago statistics professor Stephen Stigler in his 1980 publication “Stigler’s law of eponymy”,[1] states that no scientific discovery is named after its original discoverer. Examples include Hubble’s law which was derived by Georges Lemaître two years before Edwin Hubble, the Pythagorean theorem although it was known to Babylonian mathematicians before Pythagoras, and Halley’s comet which was observed by astronomers since at least 240 BC. Stigler himself named the sociologist Robert K. Merton as the discoverer of “Stigler’s law” to show that it follows its own decree, though the phenomenon had previously been noted by others.[2]

    • Replies: @Known Fact
  144. njguy73 says:
    @Rob

    Spy magazine used to do celebrity anagrams.

  145. anon[118] • Disclaimer says:

    Motte not to be confused with Motti, by the way.

    http://winterwar.com/Tactics/mottis.htm

  146. slumber_j says:
    @Buzz Mohawk

    Well, New Mexico certainly is gorgeous.

    And actually I don’t doubt the excellence of Breaking Bad. It’s just that I found its title off-putting. And I find any excuse not to embark on watching a zillion hours of television very welcome…because I’ll totally do it.

  147. @MEH 0910

    Thanks for linking that. Very funny!

  148. SFG says:
    @Almost Missouri

    I had never heard of this highway funds-divorce thing. Do you have a source? there’s quite a bit of history I missed being born too late.

    • Replies: @Almost Missouri
  149. @Rob

    Close, as the name of the blog has an extra S.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  150. @Lot

    For some reason Vox Day has a ridiculousness about him that it makes it difficult to take him seriously. I don’t know if it is his appearance or his fake name or what.

  151. @Jack D

    And a large % of blacks are employed in government jobs which are largely makework or even drags on the economy.

    This is the largest form of welfare there is because not only are you paying a salary, but also benefits, pension, &c. And because they are nominally working for their money, they are immune from criticism.

    • Replies: @Art Deco
  152. Drake says:

    Steve, another phrase for this concept:

    Building fences around fences.

  153. Anonymous[404] • Disclaimer says:

    For example, as a term for when something passes its peak, “jump the shark” has become an instant cliché in the 21st century.

    “Jump the Shark” doesn’t mean passing the peak. It means having the rug pulled out from underneath. If something is past-peak, we can still admire the peak. Just because Alexander Karelin became past peak and failed to win the gold in his last Olympics doesn’t mean that he didn’t have a great record in Greco-Roman wrestler. Just because Ali was past peak in his fights with Spinks(and esp Holmes) doesn’t take away his peak yrs.

    In contrast, jumping the shark means the total evisceration of the illusion. Fonzi’s myth was his badass invincibility. It was make-believe, but the audience was willing to suspend disbelief as long as it was within the Happy Days universe. But the shark-jumping thing was such an outlandish self-parody that not only was it mocked but it destroyed the very illusion of the Fonzi myth.. It was like seeing the man behind the Wizard in Oz. It was like Milli Vanilli outed as fake act. It brought down the ‘peak’ itself.

    To me, the duel with the Frenchman was the limit of the Fonzie mystique. Ridiculous but just believable enough in the sitcom universe. And funny as hell. But the shark thing wasn’t even funny.

    For example, is gay marriage working? Has the decline in straight marriages been related to the promotion of gay marriages?

    The only solution is to let the homos have marriage and come up with a new concept and new term that defines marriage as being between man and woman. And don’t let the state have control over it. Let it be a cultural and moral covenant among decent people.

  154. Anonymous[232] • Disclaimer says:
    @guest

    As a schoolkid in Britain in the 1980s I can confirm that we were taught about (and made to draw) motte and bailey castles. I also remember a school trip to Abergavenny Castle in Wales, which like most stone castles in Britain started out as a wooden motte and bailey fort.

  155. Bumpkin says:
    @H I

    Most likely BS. The overriding concern was probably that they had ongoing gender discrimination lawsuits that have only multiplied since, as most of the high-paid coders are men, white or Asian at that. Damore was perfectly right, but the fact that he was making that case publicly within the company would complicate their legal efforts, though in reality he was supportive of female outreach, just done differently than quotas or heavily tilting the hiring scale. They likely simply fired him to cover their ass on that legal front, more than anything else.

    Feel sorry for the guy, as he simply stepped into a minefield with scientific data and common sense, but he was collateral damage in the affirmative action wars.

  156. guest says:
    @prime noticer

    It shouldn’t be too hard to get. There was a popular movie on the subject.

    Most people act as though “gaslighting” means simple lying or any psychological manipulation whatsoever.

    I blame the proliferation of Pop-psychopathology and “abusive relationship” stories which teach people to see every little sign of dishonesty or manipulation as part of some giant scheme to steal peoples’ brains.

    • Replies: @anon
  157. guest says:
    @res

    Why on earth would the motte be of little value to hold? If nothing else, it has the high ground over the bailey, which makes it the dominant structure.

    You must look past apparent reality towards what is important to the arguers. Race Doesn’t Exist is a Hard Premise. You can’t wriggle your way out of it, and your opposition knows it can’t accept it without being steamrolled on the issue.

    Therefore, you build up defenses around it. You argue every inch of ground in the strictest, stickiest manner possible. They’ll need to shed blood to get to you. That’s your motte.

    Other premises don’t require much to convince people. They don’t mean as much to you, either, so a pallisade made out of sticks will do. That’s your bailey.

    • Replies: @res
  158. Pericles says:
    @Known Fact

    I can’t even hear “motte and bailey” without immediately thinking of Slate Star Codex, or is it Star Slate Codex?

    RationalWiki (eek) assigns the term to one Nicholas Shackel, philosophy professor. And for the readers unclear on the meaning:

    Someone will argue the easy-to-defend position (motte) temporarily, to ward off critics, while the less-defensible position (bailey) remains the desired belief, yet is never actually defended.

    In short: instead of defending a weak position (the “bailey”), the arguer retreats to a strong position (the “motte”), while acting as though the positions are equivalent. When the motte has been accepted (or found impenetrable) by an opponent, the arguer continues to believe (and perhaps promote) the bailey.

    https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Motte_and_bailey

    https://realityandrationality.blogspot.com/2016/12/motte-and-bailey-doctrines.html

  159. Pericles says:
    @Cordell

    I hope Steve Sailer isn’t getting “the Jew thing” (aka “seeing Jews in your sandwich”).

    Oh, I thought that was “seeing anti-semites in your bagel”.

  160. @ScarletNumber

    As opposed to the geniuses in this comment section, who are so very easy to take seriously?

    • Replies: @ScarletNumber
  161. HoekomSA says:

    The elite Jewish strategy has not been Mott and Bailey. Rather they have been using blacks as icebreakers to control socities. Suyorov talks about Stalin intending to use Hitler as an icebreaker so that he can dominate western europe. That is is an icebreaker breaks through thick ice which then allows other less robust ships to pass through to the other side. In the documentary film Hollywoodism the Jewish elite of the 30’s and 40’s used the blacks to show anglo hypocrisy so that they may be fully accepted in Anglo society. The subsequent generations has consistently used black inadequacy to manipulate Anglo guilt , destroy Anglo solidarity so that they may gain dominance within american society. As some correspondants above say Black inadequacy and an environmental primacy must defended as it allows Jewish and other elites to feel good about themselves and keep the white peasants in check.

    This will be increasing difficult to maintain as Indian and Chinese elites start to compete with the Anglo Jewish elites.

  162. @res

    That’s a good one! Does Stigler’s Law suggest that someone else actually discovered Sailor’s First Law of Journalism?

    • Replies: @res
  163. res says:
    @guest

    Why on earth would the motte be of little value to hold? If nothing else, it has the high ground over the bailey, which makes it the dominant structure.

    I thought the rest of my comment helped explain what I was trying to say. Let’s try another way.

    The bailey is of great economic (moral) value.

    The motte is of great defensive value but little economic (moral) value. It gains its economic (moral) value through its ability to defend the bailey. And in the real world analogy, its ability to preserve the lives of its inhabitants.

    Race Doesn’t Exist is a Hard Premise. You can’t wriggle your way out of it, and your opposition knows it can’t accept it without being steamrolled on the issue.

    Therefore, you build up defenses around it. You argue every inch of ground in the strictest, stickiest manner possible. They’ll need to shed blood to get to you. That’s your motte.

    That’s not the way it really works though. People assert that race does not exist (the moral premise they care about) but when called on it their defense typically uses a false equivalence with various mottes (e.g. the two I mentioned, genetics matter less than environment or Lewontin’s fallacy). They defend “race does not exist” to the death, but the way they do it is by resorting to a variety of false equivalencies. (Or just pointing and sputtering, but that’s another topic)

    The issue is not how hard they argue. It is the actual content of the arguments and how those relate to the point they consider important.

    The analogy is imprecise, but I thought it captured an important aspect of the argument dynamics in a memorable fashion (retreat to the motte!). Now that I see how confusing it is to people I think I will focus on the false equivalencies involved instead.

  164. Art Deco says:
    @Reg Cæsar

    What is the difference to the taxpayer?

    By that standard, every activity of the state is a ‘welfare program’.

    The difference is the purpose and function of the activity. This isn’t that challenging.

    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar
  165. Art Deco says:
    @ScarletNumber

    It’s his aggressive and unwarranted self-confidence.

    • Replies: @ScarletNumber
  166. Art Deco says:
    @ScarletNumber

    This is the largest form of welfare there is because not only are you paying a salary, but also benefits, pension, &c. And because they are nominally working for their money, they are immune from criticism.

    Why not in your own mind draw up a list of public agencies you’d like to shut down and public agencies you fancy are overstaffed.

    • Replies: @Jack D
  167. anon[613] • Disclaimer says:
    @guest

    Most people act as though “gaslighting” means simple lying or any psychological manipulation whatsoever.

    Yeah, most people don’t know much.

  168. Anonymous[946] • Disclaimer says:

    don’t know who is right, but to my eyes, the difference between Jewish and Gentile outcomes sure looks a lot like the difference between white and black outcomes.

    There are different kinds of IQ and there’s no evidence of Jewish verbal IQ advantage. Sorry.

    Steve has made lists of “public intellectuals” in the past and the list is usually filled with Jews who never actually made any legit innovative useful idea stick in their entire careers …but they sure did work the echo chamber.

    A great example of this was Fox News “heavyweight” commentator Charles Krauthammer. There’s no there there. Sorry.

    • Replies: @Art Deco
  169. Anonymous[204] • Disclaimer says:
    @ScarletNumber

    Close, as the name of the blog has an extra S.

    And is missing an “n”.

  170. Ian M. says:
    @IHTG

    Agree.

    I think Sailer’s take on this is wrong: the liberal denial of inherited IQ differences is simply a consequence of their commitment to the liberal principle of equality.

    My own experience with educated liberals (and I’m surrounded by them) is that it is much, much easier to criticize Jews than it is to criticize blacks in their presence.

  171. Ian M. says:
    @Peter Akuleyev

    Let’s add easy access to effective contraception as one of the causes.

    Separating sex and marriage from family was the fundamental mistake.

  172. Dube says:
    @slumber_j

    Aversion to incomprehensible titles: try “Smart & Final Iris Co.” Before the internet, it took years of tightening my grip on the steering wheel while driving LA to escape being triggered by that locution. I’ll perversely withhold the liberating answer so that all can savor the excruciation. Perhaps I should have written for help to the Playboy Advisor.

  173. @Achmed E. Newman

    “Cut ’em off at the pass.”

    “They went thataway.”

    ‘Ve have vays of making you talk.”

    ‘Vere are your papers!”

  174. Ian M. says:
    @slumber_j

    …my ongoing inability to remember anything about Freudianism.

    Would we all were so lucky.

  175. danand says:

    The Motte may be survive, but the Baileys got no chance, at least in California; the weeds will overtake it:

  176. Lot says:
    @Mark Spahn (West Seneca, NY)

    For the major name brand drugs, once the patent expires a bunch of generic makers jump in and the price falls 90% or more.

    Big Pharma, in preparation for this, will have variations on the drug, like extended release versions, that get their own patent period and push doctors to get their patients onto the newer drug before the old one goes generic.

    For specialty drugs with small markets…. it is really complicated.

  177. guest says:
    @Art Deco

    I don’t want anyone to say meatspace ever.

  178. guest says:
    @ScarletNumber

    No. None of those things.

    His appearance is perfectly normal, and the name is like the 37 billionth least ridiculous pseudonym online.

  179. Jack D says:
    @Mark Spahn (West Seneca, NY)

    FDA rules are incredibly convoluted. One rule is that the 1st generic to be approved gets its own 180 day exclusivity under certain circumstances.

  180. Jack D says:
    @Art Deco

    Sure start with the Department of Education, which doesn’t educate anyone. And the DOE workforce is 40% black – in Washington even higher.

    • Replies: @Art Deco
  181. @Art Deco

    That’s a great way of putting it. He pulls out the IQ card whenever someone disagrees with him, and he calls people Gammas much too quickly. It’s very No True Scotsman.

    Add that to the general human propensity to dislike those who are smarter than they are.

    The one thing I have taken from Vox Day is his dislike of John Scalzi. I don’t read science fiction so I never heard of the guy, but judging from his blog and Twitter feed he is a douche bag. But me hating John Scalzi hasn’t really improved my life per se.

  182. Art Deco says:
    @Anonymous

    Krauthammer was a lapsed psychiatrist. His biography is quite something.

    His problem was that 750 word topical commentary was not his strong suit. His strong suit was the long-form essay and the subjects at which he was most impressive concerned the intersection of psychology and culture. He wrote some engaging stuff during the years running from 1979 to 1985. Not a whole lot after that. His father was perplexed that he had abandoned the practice of medicine.

  183. Art Deco says:
    @Jack D

    The U.S. Department of Education has fewer than 4,000 employees.

    Again, you and ‘Colin Wright’ and whomever else fancy you’re making a point of social significance. A lousy federal agency is a lousy federal agency. When it employs < 0.01% of the black working population, 0.1% of the federal workforce, and 0.02% of the public sector workforce, it really doesn't say much about the worklife of American blacks or the worklife of public employees.

  184. @lanskrim

    Ethnic nepotism is a far more likely explanation than intelligence.

    It’s not one, and it’s not the other.

    It’s both.

  185. res says:
    @Known Fact

    It suggests that, but no idea if that is the case. Every rule needs an exception to prove it. ; )

    I did like that Stigler’s Law was self referential.

  186. @Art Deco

    By that standard, every activity of the state is a ‘welfare program’.

    No, in many cases, those green checks are paychecks, for doing a job we want done. Wasting away in prison is effectively being on the dole.

    • Replies: @Art Deco
  187. @IHTG

    Banning scientific discussion of black-white IQ differences is largely an “outpost defense” of what they really care about, which is preventing awareness of gentile-Jewish IQ differences.

    I really don’t think this is true. Just the opposite, the outrage over Bret Stephens’ article seems to me like an “outpost defense” for the heartland of the black-white IQ differences.

    Agree. This is, i’d say, a rare miss by Steve.

    It’s denial black-white IQ gap–and all sorts of other gaps, in conscientiousness, cooperation, time preference, propensity for violence–that is really what is being defended.

    And the reason is simple: Blaming black dysfunction on evil white gentiles is the very heart and soul of the justification for minoritarianism.

    American Jews love to whine about their terrible struggles with “anti-Semitism!” in America. But–at least the sharper ones–realize, that no matter how deeply felt, it is chicken shit that no one else can get excited about–the golfocaust, Harvard quotas, white shoe law firms, WASPs hiring WASPs instead of Jews. Basically it’s WASPs doing–a much milder version of–the sort of social and business ethnic networking and discrimination …. that’s been the hallmark of Jews down through the ages. Of course, to Jews it is “anti-Semitic”. But that’s a low bar. “Anti-Semitic” means any gentile not treating Jews according to the open, one-people, non-tribal gentile norms … which Jews specifically rejected in favor of their own tribalism for the past 2000 years!

    Jews are pretty good yappers, so they can con a fair number of not-very-bright, not-very-confident gentiles into getting embarassed by this. (Mostly because being non-tribal–all my neighbors are kin–is precisely the essence of gentile de-tribalization. Rejecting Jewish style tribalism in favor of “everyone is kin” nationalism is the social component of the rise of the West.)

    But given any thought, Jewish whining that the American WASPs didn’t immediately–the Jews had to wait two generations–grab their ankles … just isn’t very compelling. (Heck, Jews still have their own country clubs. Jews still have their business networks and do ethnic networking. Heck Jews run the Ivies and are quotaing the shit out of Asians. Hmm? How terrible can this stuff actually be?)

    But with blacks, the Jews actually have some real minority victim meat–slavery, Jim Crow, lynchings!, poverty, dysfunction, etc.–to justify minoritarianism, and the attack on the right of white American majority to run their nation as they wish.

    But to make is stick … and to package it up and sell it, extend (colonialism!) and export it to other nations, in media, academia, political ideology … they really, really need black problems to be caused by white gentiles. Slavery bad, doesn’t justify squat–much less the destruction of majoritary rule, republicanism, our constitution, our nation–if black problems today are essentially just the result of nature.

    That’s the deal: If black dysfunction is not the result of evil white gentiles … suddenly the goyische kopfs are popping up. “Ok, then why exactly are you beating me? Why must all our culture and traditions–of the people who built this nation!–be tossed aside? Why aren’t we allowed to govern ourselves? Why are we being stripped of our nation?” “You know i’ve got a better idea …. “

    • Agree: Mishima Zaibatsu
  188. Dissident says:
    @Altai

    The Israeli youths who gang raped a 19 year old English girl in Cyprus

    You know that they did, in fact, do that? How?

  189. Anonymous[425] • Disclaimer says:

    “Tied or pulled the Noose” the new “jumped the shark”?

    In the case of Smollet, Magarians done it.

    In the case of Epstein, he himself done it.

    Hmm.

    • Replies: @anon
  190. Anonymous[292] • Disclaimer says:
    @James N. Kennett

    What they really don’t want is us doing the exact same thing they did, which is to breed ourselves smarter. Smart whites going queer or incel, miscegenating, or breeding with stupid whites is okay. Us taking out our own trash and encouraging smart men to breed with smart, attractive, birthworthy women is not okay. It must be stopped.

  191. Anonymous[232] • Disclaimer says:
    @Altai

    Cypriots don’t like Brits for all the usual colonial reasons and Israelis are angry about Corbyn.

  192. Art Deco says:
    @Reg Cæsar

    Wasting away in prison is effectively being on the dole.

    No it isn’t. They’re in prison because they are a public order problem. We do that for our benefit. They get fed because the larger society is made up of normal people who are willing to spring for meals and medical care for the people they’ve confined. You’re not getting it because you’re not a normal person, you’re an Unz comment box denizen.

    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar
  193. Ian M. says:
    @Lot

    If AJs, who are about 1.5% of the world’s white population but 20-50% of certain very g-loaded accomplishments, have an IQ of 100, that could either imply the highly flattering “scholarly and hard working culture” as Stephens likes, or International Jew conspiracies.

    Although to pull off International Jew conspiracies of the sorts favored by the proponents of that theory would require a much higher IQ than 100 (indeed, it would require super-human IQ’s), so that brings us back to the IQ hypothesis again.

  194. Ian M. says:
    @Michael S

    Vox Day is only interesting for his peculiar mix of arrogance and stupidity.

    Why anyone takes him seriously, I have no idea.

  195. Anonymous[425] • Disclaimer says:

    Banning scientific discussion of black-white IQ differences is largely an “outpost defense” of what they really care about, which is preventing awareness of gentile-Jewish IQ differences.

    There is the Waldo-World Factor.

    Suppose Waldo is doing bad. If you blame Waldo, that is terrible. But if you blame the world around him, that is acceptable. So, don’t ask ‘where is waldo?’ or ‘what is waldo doing?’ Whatever Waldo does, blame the world around him, and that’s okay.

    Same with Jew-White Factor. Actually, ‘antisemitism’ is okay AS LONG AS you blame whites. You can have all the ‘antisemitism’ in your heart AS LONG AS you blame the larger white world in which Jews reside. So, Jews aren’t so much anti-anti-semitic as anti-name-the-semite. It’s okay to have issues with Jews AS LONG AS you blame the world around them than them. You have problem with Hollywood? Blame whites, and it’s okay. You have problem with Wall Street? Blame whites, and it’s okay. You have problem with Wars in the Middle East? Just blame the white Vice(Cheney) than the Jewish Neocons, and it’s okay. As long as you turn ‘antisemitism’ into a more generic anti-white-ism, all is fine. You can get away with even nazi-level hatred of Jews as long as you blame the whites than (Se)mites.

    So, if you hate the role of Jews in communism but if you blame Russians than Jews, that’s okay. Blame the world around Waldo but never Waldo… even if that world is victimized by Waldo.

    Still, there are exceptions. When the Hindu guy attacked ‘white capital’ in South Africa, it got too close to naming the Jew. It’s hard to hide Jewish Privilege in Whiteness in a nation where whites are less than 8%.

  196. @Art Deco

    No it isn’t. They’re in prison because they are a public order problem.

    Poverty has always been treated as a public order problem as well, not to punish crimes but to prevent them. We don’t want a repeat of the angry veterans’ marches of the Depression era. Even the Romans had bread and circuses.

    The French adage is that once the gates of the treasury have been opened, they can only be closed with gunpowder. That’s why it’s called “social” security*, not personal or individual.

    *Sic. It’s the generic term for the welfare state in other countries. But even our own Social Security “insurance” programs are welfare– the Supreme Court said so in 1962, and it’s right on their site:
    https://www.ssa.gov/history/nestor.html

    You’re not getting it…

    That feminist trope is well beyond its sell-by date.

    …because you’re not a normal person, you’re an Unz comment box denizen.

    It takes one to know one!

    • Replies: @Almost Missouri
  197. anon[369] • Disclaimer says:
    @Anonymous

    One thing is for sure: Epstein didn’t delete the video.

  198. @SFG

    I first came across it a couple decades ago in the writing of a law professor in the Southeast. (Kentucky? N. Carolina?) This was before I kept notes on interesting information I found, so I haven’t been able to recover the exact source again, but I’ve seen the general process confirmed elsewhere. Basically, every year special interests get clauses inserted into the Federal Highways Appropriations Act that says that any state receiving Federal highway funds (i.e., all states) have to do X, Y and Z. This little trick allows anyone with access to Congress’s Appropriations committee to compel all the states to obey their will without the hassle of getting the Constitution amended or even getting a real Federal law passed (i.e., a bill publicized, debated and passed on its own merits). In the 1970s or 1980s, feminist pressure groups have used this trick to compel all the states to throw out their traditional marital law and amend it such that “child support” (in quotes because the vast majority of it is not used to support children), which is the main financial component of most divorces, must be paid irrespective of marital fault, thereby instantly turning all states into de facto “no fault” divorce states irrespective of their de jure name. “No fault” is a warm and fuzzy way of saying “divorce at will”. It is not to say “no harm, no foul”. Penalties will still be assessed, but instead of applying based on marital fault, they are based on losing custody of your children. So to put it another way, in the old system(s), the incentive was to avoid being at fault for the dissolution of your marriage, indeed to avoid the dissolution of your marriage altogether, if possible. In the new system, the incentive is to big up your spouse’s financial picture as much as possible and then take sole custody of the children by any means necessary (traditional notions of honor and marital wrongs no longer legally apply). Or, as I put it above, rewarding you for breaking your marital contract. The social consequences of this legal sea change implemented by stealth are everywhere to see.

  199. @Reg Cæsar

    The French adage is that once the gates of the treasury have been opened, they can only be closed with gunpowder. That’s why it’s called “social” security*, not personal or individual.

    *Sic. It’s the generic term for the welfare state in other countries. But even our own Social Security “insurance” programs are welfare– the Supreme Court said so in 1962, and it’s right on their site

    And I suppose it has been working that way, more or less: buying domestic peace and tranquility by mainlining a geometrically expanding financial burden. But given that “Social” Security is already technically insolvent, I wonder how long it will be before the books will have to be rebalanced with gunpowder?

    It may turn out that Social Security and the welfare state wasn’t so “social” after all: that instead of buttressing peace, it subsidized society’s worst tendencies until they swelled beyond what the all-pervasive state could contain. The final result may be far worse than what would have come from no welfare state at all.

  200. MEH 0910 says:

    https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/WebVideo/RedLetterMedia

    “Oh no! Half in the Bag has jumped the shark! It’s never been the same since episode four!”

  201. Dave3 says:

    There’s really no conflict, as the two strategies work in different contexts. In a genuine debate, motte-and-baily is a useful tactic, even if used inadvertently. I defend what I can, then assert a broader claim when my debater has left the room.

    Outpost/heartland is not for logical debate, it’s for speaking power to truth. I’ll make the most ridiculous assertions, and you’ll agree to every one of them or I’ll have you doxxed, fired, demonetized, and permanently unemployed.

Current Commenter
says:

Leave a Reply - Comments are moderated by iSteve, at whim.


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