RSS
It’s one thing to deplore eugenics on ideological, political, moral grounds. It’s quite another to conclude that it wouldn’t work in practice. Of course it would. It works for cows, horses, pigs, dogs & roses. Why on earth wouldn’t it work for humans? Facts ignore ideology.
— Richard Dawkins (@RichardDawkins) February 16, 2020
After much dragging on Twitter, poor Dr. Dawkins tweets that as penance for Badthink he is mortifying his brain cells by appreciatively listening to Angela Saini’s low brow Science Denialist Superior: The Return of Race Science:
https://twitter.com/RichardDawkins/status/1229362927515381762
I hope Dawkins gets to the part where Saini goes to interview Harvard geneticist David Reich, who methodically demolishes her book’s entire thesis and Saini is left with no response except to harrumph in shock:
They are words I never expected to hear from a respected mainstream geneticist.
There is a Great Cancellation which must come to us all, no matter how clearly we signal our virtue
— Pat Roberts (@PatrrRoberts) February 17, 2020
"But it was all right, everything was all right, the struggle was finished. He had won the victory over himself. @RichardDawkins loved Big Sister." https://t.co/Un1NPtzJbF
— Steve Sailer (@Steve_Sailer) February 18, 2020
Life after cancellation? Maybe in retail.
His Twitter bio says “good humored ridiculor of religions.” Not of the one that is most powerful today.
Star Trek?
2 Bear ye one another's burdens, and so fulfil the law of Christ.
3 For if a man think himself to be something, when he is nothing, he deceiveth himself.
4 But let every man prove his own work, and then shall he have rejoicing in himself alone, and not in another.
5 For every man shall bear his own burden.
6 Let him that is taught in the word communicate unto him that teacheth in all good things.
7 Be not deceived; God is not mocked: for whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap.
8 For he that soweth to his flesh shall of the flesh reap corruption; but he that soweth to the Spirit shall of the Spirit reap life everlasting.
9 And let us not be weary in well doing: for in due season we shall reap, if we faint not.
10 As we have therefore opportunity, let us do good unto all men, especially unto them who are of the household of faith.
No, he wrote "ridicule". Whatever else he is, he's not illiterate.Replies: @Anonymous, @Hail
As constraints on speech have tightened in recent years, older liberals have tried their best to internalize the new orthodoxy. However, after a certain age, it's sometimes difficult to learn something new, especially if you don't fully believe in it.
So there's a tendency for older liberals to sometimes commit a "faux pas" and say what they really think.
In contrast, younger liberals grew up in a highly PC society. So they've truly internalized it all. Younger liberals also come from a generation that's not much into mockery or ridicule. They're Generation "Safe Space" and seek to avoid anything confrontational.
Bill Maher is a good example of an older liberal who tries to conform to PC, but chafes at it too.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lvdLY1ugyCoReplies: @Desiderius
OT – is this Bloomberg? Background needed.
For a history of Richard Dawkins transparent illogic see this lacerating review of his 2004 book “The Devil’s Chaplain” by physicist Stephen Barr:
https://www.firstthings.com/article/2004/08/001-the-devils-chaplain
Barr writes from a Catholic Christian perspective, but his assessment of Dawkins’ obviously defective reasoning would be wickedly accurate from any perspective except that of Dawkins’ and his ilk.
10 ‘likes’ from MiniTrue received
Good riddance. I always found Dawkins extremely annoying. As militant atheists go, only Peter Singer and that P. J. Myers dude are more insufferable.
It’s idiocy that’s what it is.
Who doesn’t think “I will bang a decrepit partner with various genetic misfeatures, cigarette lungs and IQ 85 and make superbaby” every single day?
The only thing Twitter can breed up as counterargument is “muh poor dogs!!”.
Amusing how one commenter scolds Dr Dawkins that she’s never seen anyone argue the eugenics wouldn’t work, Followed by a twit-storm of people arguing just that.
“Life after cancellation?”
Star Trek?
From the Amazon page:
Superior: The Return of Race Science Hardcover – May 21, 2019
Editorial review #4
Is Bitch a feminist magazine or just a person?
Was waiting for you to get around to this. Dawkins deserves everything he gets, even if he doesn’t. He’s such a putz but then on the upside the left effing hates them.
Off topic: Interesting convo on bloggingheads between Glenn Loury, Peter Skerry and some conquistadz. or American on “race and immigration”. https://bloggingheads.tv/videos/58198?in=35:04
Is Dawkins a stranger to shame?
There is no need to hypothesize about eugenics. According to Wikipedia, “About 92% of pregnancies in Europe with a diagnosis of Down syndrome are terminated. As a result, there are almost no people with Down’s in Iceland and Denmark, where screening is commonplace. In the United States, the termination rate after diagnosis is around 75%, but varies from 61% to 93% depending on the population surveyed.”
The risk of having a Down syndrome child was 1 in 1,200 at age 25; most Down children were born to young mothers who had no reason to get an amnio. But now the new blood test reduces the risk to zero; that's why the Danes can virtually eliminate Down syndrome.
Thanks for posting; I couldn't figure out how they could do it. I had no idea there was a new test.
Dawkins was correct here…too bad he doesn’t have the balls to defend truth.
If you’re not cancelled, you’re not truly alive.
That said, Dawkins’s grovelling isn’t terribly attractive.
Steve Sailer Retweeted:
Nathan Cofnas @nathancofnasSteve Sailer @Steve_SailerVibeke Hovgaard @Vibeke_HovgaardTerence Patrick Murphy @TerencePatric12Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
https://twitter.com/eugenegu/status/1229085519163707392
https://twitter.com/eugenegu/status/1229087321712021505
https://www.artistshot.com/assets/images/admin/product_design/2008258/devo-duty-now-for-the-future-baby-bibs.jpgReplies: @Lot, @Hail
Thank you Gu!
I recommend this video debunking and explaining the history and people behind the Bell Curve which exists to justify scientific racism and social Darwinism in politics.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UBc7qBS1Ujo&feature=youtu.be
it’s just baffling and disappointing that Dawkins tweets these pedantic and inflammatory things like this as if a slightly incorrect understanding the arguments against eugenics is the most important battle we must fight today.
Steve Sailer Retweeted:
https://twitter.com/DorYeshorimNY/status/923201408085700608
https://twitter.com/eugenegu/status/1229053031842340864Replies: @ic1000, @MEH 0910, @J.Ross, @El Dato
Link to Dawkins’ tweet from earlier today.
Some amusing responses.
Nathan Cofnas @nathancofnas
Steve Sailer @Steve_Sailer
Vibeke Hovgaard @Vibeke_Hovgaard
Terence Patrick Murphy @TerencePatric12
6 Brethren, if a man be overtaken in a fault, ye which are spiritual, restore such an one in the spirit of meekness; considering thyself, lest thou also be tempted.
2 Bear ye one another’s burdens, and so fulfil the law of Christ.
3 For if a man think himself to be something, when he is nothing, he deceiveth himself.
4 But let every man prove his own work, and then shall he have rejoicing in himself alone, and not in another.
5 For every man shall bear his own burden.
6 Let him that is taught in the word communicate unto him that teacheth in all good things.
7 Be not deceived; God is not mocked: for whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap.
8 For he that soweth to his flesh shall of the flesh reap corruption; but he that soweth to the Spirit shall of the Spirit reap life everlasting.
9 And let us not be weary in well doing: for in due season we shall reap, if we faint not.
10 As we have therefore opportunity, let us do good unto all men, especially unto them who are of the household of faith.
He’s like a nerd who will say anything to be accepted by the “cool kids”.
It's more that he once was THE cool kid, every lefty atheist loved his attacks on religion (this was before 9/11) , lots of magazine profiles of the best-selling intellectual iconoclast and his pretty, aristocratic film-star wife.
Now, things have moved on, and what was accepted twenty or thirty years ago (e.g. that human eugenics could be effective) now means that you're a Nazi. Compare with a cool kid from an earlier generation, Germaine Greer. Her view that women are people with ovaries, vaginas, breasts, XX chromosomes now marks her, not as a provocative, iconoclastic feminist but as an eccentric, embarrassing bag-lady.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bfyabMQ1cLQReplies: @RichardTaylor
Steve Sailer Retweeted:
https://twitter.com/DorYeshorimNY/status/923201408085700608
https://twitter.com/eugenegu/status/1229053031842340864Replies: @ic1000, @MEH 0910, @J.Ross, @El Dato
2. It’s possible its advantage is protection again lung diseases, but there are competing theories. I don’t think it’s even the leading one.
3. There are better ways at controlling malaria and TB than having 1 in 1000 people die horrible deaths from Sickle Cell and CF and similar diseases.
4. Only 3-4% Europeans have the CF gene, black SCT rate is the same general range. So Gu’s premise that without these genes we’ll have a bunch more malaria and TB is wrong.
5. He’s further wrong in his premise that current efforts to prevent these diseases significantly changes the prevalence of the genes.
Conclusion: Eugene Gu is a retarded hack. He’s wrong and ill-informed on every aspect of his argument.
Non-Diversity is ____.
What is the political extension of the corollary?
Here’s a hypothetical: What would have happened if eugenicists had succeeded in eliminating (or dramatically reducing the number of) autistic “psychopaths” from the human race?
There are lots of people working in Silicon Valley who are somewhere on the spectrum (most would be high-functioning or have mildly autistic traits). Would this have had a detrimental effect on the tech revolution?
This is the problem. You just don’t know what kind of people your society might need in fifty years’ time.
Steve: Google “Andrew Sabisky”.
But be quick about it: he’ll be gone by sundown, unless Boris Johnson has more guts than I’ve up till now given him credit for.
Dawkins can signal all he likes.
Cowardice isn’t a virtue. He’s just dumping chum in the waters.
"In extreme cases, there can be little doubt of the superiority of one race to another. North America, Australia and New Zealand certainly contribute more to the civilisation of the world than they would do if they were still peopled by aborigines. It seems on the whole fair to regard Negroes as on the average inferior to white men, although for work in the tropics they are indispensable, so that their extermination (apart from the question of humanity) would be highly undesirable." - Marriage and Morals, 1929.
"I never held Negroes to be inherently inferior. The statement in Marriage and Morals refers to environmental conditioning. I have had it withdrawn from subsequent editions because it is clearly ambiguous." – letter, March 17, 1964.Replies: @Reg Cæsar
https://twitter.com/RichardDawkins/status/1229362927515381762
Yo Dawkins, I hope she sees it, bro.
❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️
https://georgesjournal.files.wordpress.com/2013/02/lalla_ward_dressed_in_the_doctors_togs_destiny_of_the_daleks.jpg
http://thechristiangeek.net/wp/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/Romana.jpg
https://i.pinimg.com/736x/2b/e7/f9/2be7f9003483824cb21a5c74aa377230--movie-stars-lalla-ward.jpg
http://images2.fanpop.com/images/photos/4100000/Romana-pics-romana-ii-4104921-1024-768.jpgReplies: @Cloudbuster, @Joseph A., @Jim Don Bob
“ridiculor”?
No, he wrote “ridicule”. Whatever else he is, he’s not illiterate.
MOCKER One who ridicules
SATIRIST One who ridicules It Girl in Times
SCOFFER One ridicules small chestReplies: @Old Palo Altan, @Desiderius
OT – Anarcho-tyranny in Cambridge, UK – eco-loons block roads for a week, dig up Isaac Newton’s college lawn – police make no arrests and put diversions in place round the blocked roads.
https://www.cambridge-news.co.uk/news/cambridge-news/extinction-rebellion-trinity-lawn-arrests-17761864
Angela D Saini kind of sounds like “Angel the Saint”, which goes well with a holier-than-thou attitude.
No, he wrote "ridicule". Whatever else he is, he's not illiterate.Replies: @Anonymous, @Hail
He also slams the Muhammadans regularly. Its one thing to critique people and a religion who are reviled by most in the west, its another to question the whole premise of the global elites message.
Yo Dawkins, I hope she sees it, bro.
❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️
https://i.kinja-img.com/gawker-media/image/upload/c_fill,f_auto,fl_progressive,g_center,h_675,pg_1,q_80,w_1200/qkgwdgotgqkjvoppwwxz.jpg
https://media.npr.org/assets/img/2012/02/16/86279449-dawkins-antwerp_custom-baa1c0bed418b965c93befab11158a8caed0b270-s300-c85.jpg
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/3/3a/Angela_Saini_photo.jpeg/600px-Angela_Saini_photo.jpegReplies: @The Wild Geese Howard, @syonredux, @Reg Cæsar
“There’s Something About Angela”
“Of course it would. It works for cows, horses, pigs, dogs & roses. Why on earth wouldn’t it work for humans? Facts ignore ideology.”
And yet across the board dogs for example,
https://www.globalanimal.org/2016/04/13/10-reasons-mutts-rock/106535/
https://www.answers.com/Q/Do_pure_bred_dogs_or_mixed_breed_mutts_make_better_pets
There’s a reason why we discourage in breeding. Now that is generally clear that biological traits can be bred. But it’s a rigorous process of trial and error. Trying to make that work for cognition . . . is speculative because unlike biological markers — there are no clear markers for cognition. And that is where the variables of environment/circumstance play a major role in shaping ends. ave in extreme cases. Of course it will wok should have included,
“Once we know the markers that cause said desired coginitive goal. and the processes involved”
and even with that the consequences across the genetic schema would also have to be known lest the unforseen consequence.
If a wealthy female with high IQ and good conformation ( birthworthy) is either going to be a single mother not drawing on the public trough or a barren doe, at least encourage her to pick say an astronaut, a Navy SEAL, a successful surgeon, et al for a sire, and not a bag of shit with a big dick and a small brain.
OT:
https://catapult.co/stories/column-the-case-against-italicizing-foreign-words-khairani-barokka
Someone can’t bag a white guy!
Shattering the foundation
based on the HBD contention these types of relationships should not be possible.
Nathan Cofnas @nathancofnasSteve Sailer @Steve_SailerVibeke Hovgaard @Vibeke_HovgaardTerence Patrick Murphy @TerencePatric12Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
Haha at that last one!
You know you’re really canceled when you no longer are invited to Bilderberg Club’s meetings.
Courage.
– sincerely,
Dan Rather
Adam Rutherford is reminded to check his White privilege…..
https://twitter.com/AngelaDSaini/status/1229328769976012801
If the Tories really want to do some good, cleaning out the full-time leftist agitators and propagandists who “work” for the British government should be priority 2 behind stopping third world migration.Replies: @Mr. Anon
Steve Sailer Retweeted:
https://twitter.com/DorYeshorimNY/status/923201408085700608
https://twitter.com/eugenegu/status/1229053031842340864Replies: @ic1000, @MEH 0910, @J.Ross, @El Dato
Interesting, so just like the Believer thinks that the Holocaust was about baking people in ovens (as opposed to disposing of corpses there), that Trump mocked a disabled reporter for his (in the moment invisible) disability, that “conspiracy” is a logical shorthand for “conspiracy theory,” so too “eugenics” in their minds means “mass killing,” as opposed to, say, people getting married and having children with scientific help.
https://twitter.com/eugenegu/status/1229085519163707392
https://twitter.com/eugenegu/status/1229087321712021505
https://www.artistshot.com/assets/images/admin/product_design/2008258/devo-duty-now-for-the-future-baby-bibs.jpgReplies: @Lot, @Hail
1. CF trait is older than 1600
2. It’s possible its advantage is protection again lung diseases, but there are competing theories. I don’t think it’s even the leading one.
3. There are better ways at controlling malaria and TB than having 1 in 1000 people die horrible deaths from Sickle Cell and CF and similar diseases.
4. Only 3-4% Europeans have the CF gene, black SCT rate is the same general range. So Gu’s premise that without these genes we’ll have a bunch more malaria and TB is wrong.
5. He’s further wrong in his premise that current efforts to prevent these diseases significantly changes the prevalence of the genes.
Conclusion: Eugene Gu is a retarded hack. He’s wrong and ill-informed on every aspect of his argument.
You mean the one that replaces “God” with “Me?”
Imagine if BoJo fired Rutherford instead.
If the Tories really want to do some good, cleaning out the full-time leftist agitators and propagandists who “work” for the British government should be priority 2 behind stopping third world migration.
They won't because they don't (want to do some good).
Yo Dawkins, I hope she sees it, bro.
❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️
https://i.kinja-img.com/gawker-media/image/upload/c_fill,f_auto,fl_progressive,g_center,h_675,pg_1,q_80,w_1200/qkgwdgotgqkjvoppwwxz.jpg
https://media.npr.org/assets/img/2012/02/16/86279449-dawkins-antwerp_custom-baa1c0bed418b965c93befab11158a8caed0b270-s300-c85.jpg
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/3/3a/Angela_Saini_photo.jpeg/600px-Angela_Saini_photo.jpegReplies: @The Wild Geese Howard, @syonredux, @Reg Cæsar
It’s a step down from Lalla Ward….
Quite so. Dawkins has long been an arrogant critic of Christianity (that’s really the only religion he picks on). And yet it wasn’t Christians who sought to have him cancelled. It is the adherents of the new, woke “I f**king love science” kind of religion that want to make him an unperson.
If the Tories really want to do some good, cleaning out the full-time leftist agitators and propagandists who “work” for the British government should be priority 2 behind stopping third world migration.Replies: @Mr. Anon
.
They won’t because they don’t (want to do some good).
No, he wrote "ridicule". Whatever else he is, he's not illiterate.Replies: @Anonymous, @Hail
One thing impressive about the Unz Review to me is how quickly the google archive picks up anything published here. A comment with a novel phrase, “good humored ridiculor of religions,” gets a google-hit a few hours after that comment’s publication. This process can sometimes be impressively quick.
Meanwhile, the big comment-sponges of the Internet today, Youtube comments and Twitter, maybe Reddit, or the big comment systems like Disqus, are both much more ephemeral (comments often disappear for one reason or another) and have much less sticking power, googleability; often invisible. Hit or miss.
Also,
Why doesn’t the word “ridiculor” exist?
Crossword puzzle hints for “one who ridicules“:
MOCKER One who ridicules
SATIRIST One who ridicules It Girl in Times
SCOFFER One ridicules small chest
They are watching us very closely.
As for "ridiculor". It does exist when spelled properly: ridiculer. I can't help thinking though that it is an artificial construction, "mocker" and "scoffer" being very much more naturally and commonly used.Replies: @Hail, @San Fernando Curt, @Desiderius
You’re among neologists.
H eought to know. It’s been 40 years since some sort of cancellation trauma afflicted him after The Extended Phenotype.
https://twitter.com/eugenegu/status/1229085519163707392
https://twitter.com/eugenegu/status/1229087321712021505
https://www.artistshot.com/assets/images/admin/product_design/2008258/devo-duty-now-for-the-future-baby-bibs.jpgReplies: @Lot, @Hail
What is the corollary?
Non-Diversity is ____.
What is the political extension of the corollary?
There are very real kinds of eugenics going on right now. As noted above, genetic counselling in certain Hassid populations to steer essentially arranged marriages away from each other if both are carriers for Tay-Sachs and similar genetic counselling among groups with high burdens from inbreeding and whose arranged marriages make it emotionally easy to axe a marriage because of carrier status of both partners, such as gulf Arabs. It has massively reduced the incidence of Tay Sachs in some communities.
In broader populations, there is the dating website company partly funded by George Church which will allow people with serious rare diseases to try and avoid other partners who are also carriers.
All of these also have secondary consequences that may be undesirable but all of them are done or intended to be done at a scale that will have a ‘eugenic’ effect.
Not surprised. Dawkins is a shallow propagandist for a shallow version of atheism. All St. Darwin-influenced thinkers are, when it comes to the pinch – opportunists & conformists. This world-view somehow sustains & breeds defeatism.
Only world-views that possess, however muddled, something “higher” (whether religious or faux-religious like various ideologies) can plant a seed of individualism, stubborn character & dissent.
OT: Mike Bloomberg casually insults both farmers and machinists:
They should drop Bloomie on an island for a year and see how he does growing his own food.
Modern farming is one of the most technologically diverse professions there is.Replies: @ben tillman
The only thing anyone needs to farm successfully is some green acres.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3iHl4eY7jigReplies: @ben tillman
I have no idea what the context or intention of this talk is but claiming that he's insulting anybody when he makes a claim that it's easier to teach people to work on a farm than at google is a claim, not an insult. If you think that's incorrect then say so. But to call this an insult is incredibly partisan and is indicative of political intent on your part.Replies: @Desiderius, @Mr. Anon
MOCKER One who ridicules
SATIRIST One who ridicules It Girl in Times
SCOFFER One ridicules small chestReplies: @Old Palo Altan, @Desiderius
Sinister don’t you think?
They are watching us very closely.
As for “ridiculor”. It does exist when spelled properly: ridiculer. I can’t help thinking though that it is an artificial construction, “mocker” and “scoffer” being very much more naturally and commonly used.
https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=ridiculer%2Cscoffer%2Cmocker&year_start=1900&year_end=2009&corpus=17&smoothing=1&share=&direct_url=t1%3B%2Cridiculer%3B%2Cc0%3B.t1%3B%2Cscoffer%3B%2Cc0%3B.t1%3B%2Cmocker%3B%2Cc0#t1%3B%2Cridiculer%3B%2Cc0%3B.t1%3B%2Cscoffer%3B%2Cc0%3B.t1%3B%2Cmocker%3B%2Cc0
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EQ_zIC3WsAUABbH.png
_______
Big NGRAM News:
They have released a set of "2012" corpuses (I choose to not Latinize this Latin word), which extends the data to 2009. The previous limit was 2006; the old corpuses (to 2006) are now labeled "2009."
"Ridiculer" has always been marginal at best. Ngram AmE-2012 thinks "scoffer" and "mocker" have significant upswings that begin in the mid-2000s. This seems right, at least poetically if not actually. (I still think Ngram data for years after 2000 should be viewed more skeptically than historical data because the data discontinuity of the rise of the Internet.)
And because I am sure all reading this are wondering, here is the new ngram for "Steve Sailer," in the new AmE-2012 corpus:
https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=Steve+Sailer&year_start=1989&year_end=2009&corpus=17&smoothing=0&share=&direct_url=t1%3B%2CSteve%20Sailer%3B%2Cc0
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EQ_zIC2XsAIVn9b.png
If this is to be believed, 1999 was the year of the Sailer Breakthrough.Replies: @res
Pronounced in a manner akin to Skeletor.
https://georgesjournal.files.wordpress.com/2013/02/lalla_ward_dressed_in_the_doctors_togs_destiny_of_the_daleks.jpg
http://thechristiangeek.net/wp/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/Romana.jpg
https://i.pinimg.com/736x/2b/e7/f9/2be7f9003483824cb21a5c74aa377230--movie-stars-lalla-ward.jpg
http://images2.fanpop.com/images/photos/4100000/Romana-pics-romana-ii-4104921-1024-768.jpgReplies: @Cloudbuster, @Joseph A., @Jim Don Bob
The Honourable Lalla Ward!
Steve Sailer Retweeted:
https://twitter.com/DorYeshorimNY/status/923201408085700608
https://twitter.com/eugenegu/status/1229053031842340864Replies: @ic1000, @MEH 0910, @J.Ross, @El Dato
“Eliminating disease and susceptibility to pandemics in a way that is linked to HITLER by approximately six degrees of logical inference is bad because it makes you susceptible to disease and pandemics.”
Thank you Gu!
Who the hell is “Subhadra”?
Holly shit, she just so full of herself.
They are watching us very closely.
As for "ridiculor". It does exist when spelled properly: ridiculer. I can't help thinking though that it is an artificial construction, "mocker" and "scoffer" being very much more naturally and commonly used.Replies: @Hail, @San Fernando Curt, @Desiderius
Ngram for ridiculer, scoffer, and mocker:
https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=ridiculer%2Cscoffer%2Cmocker&year_start=1900&year_end=2009&corpus=17&smoothing=1&share=&direct_url=t1%3B%2Cridiculer%3B%2Cc0%3B.t1%3B%2Cscoffer%3B%2Cc0%3B.t1%3B%2Cmocker%3B%2Cc0#t1%3B%2Cridiculer%3B%2Cc0%3B.t1%3B%2Cscoffer%3B%2Cc0%3B.t1%3B%2Cmocker%3B%2Cc0
_______
Big NGRAM News:
They have released a set of “2012” corpuses (I choose to not Latinize this Latin word), which extends the data to 2009. The previous limit was 2006; the old corpuses (to 2006) are now labeled “2009.”
“Ridiculer” has always been marginal at best. Ngram AmE-2012 thinks “scoffer” and “mocker” have significant upswings that begin in the mid-2000s. This seems right, at least poetically if not actually. (I still think Ngram data for years after 2000 should be viewed more skeptically than historical data because the data discontinuity of the rise of the Internet.)
And because I am sure all reading this are wondering, here is the new ngram for “Steve Sailer,” in the new AmE-2012 corpus:
https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=Steve+Sailer&year_start=1989&year_end=2009&corpus=17&smoothing=0&share=&direct_url=t1%3B%2CSteve%20Sailer%3B%2Cc0
If this is to be believed, 1999 was the year of the Sailer Breakthrough.
I was surprised to see that Google searches for Steve have been roughly flat over time (starting 2004).
https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?date=all&geo=US&q=steve%20sailerReplies: @J.Ross, @Hail, @moshe
Dawkins could have done some good if he had told these anti eugenics people that they believe in eugenics programs as long as they aren’t called eugenics programs.
-Encouraging low fertility among your own population while allowing populations with high fertility to mass migrate into your country is selecting for populations with high fertility rates.
-free healthcare for people who make poor lifestyle choices selects for people who make poor lifestyle choices.
– subsidising single mothers who have children they can’t afford is selecting for people who are irresponsible.
Eugenics isn’t just sterilizing undesirables it’s anything that increases the occurrence of desirable human traits so these eugenics programs would be more accurately described as dysgenic, at least by me, but the people who designed the programs might think differently.
You want to know why people choose not to have children? Because they can. Modern contraceptives allow people to do that. Modern contraceptives have made sex a recreational activity. You might deplore this but that's the way it is.
Nobody forces people to use contraceptives. They choose to do so. People in advanced western and westernised nations just don't particularly want to have children. If they don't have to, they don't.
Not everything is a conspiracy.Replies: @Futurethirdworlder
Dawkins and his assinine ‘the universe came in an explosion from nothing’ would be selected as one of the first to be purged and snipped.
OT. Since no one here reads Commentary I just want to point out a very interesting essay on novelist Michel Houellebecq by Christopher Caldwell https://www.commentarymagazine.com/articles/houellebecq-on-the-modern-age/
It’s interesting that Holocaust Gu doesn’t understand the meaning of the word “eugenics” given what his old name was.
But be quick about it: he'll be gone by sundown, unless Boris Johnson has more guts than I've up till now given him credit for.Replies: @MEH 0910
https://twitter.com/AngelaDSaini/status/1229442601952141312
https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=ridiculer%2Cscoffer%2Cmocker&year_start=1900&year_end=2009&corpus=17&smoothing=1&share=&direct_url=t1%3B%2Cridiculer%3B%2Cc0%3B.t1%3B%2Cscoffer%3B%2Cc0%3B.t1%3B%2Cmocker%3B%2Cc0#t1%3B%2Cridiculer%3B%2Cc0%3B.t1%3B%2Cscoffer%3B%2Cc0%3B.t1%3B%2Cmocker%3B%2Cc0
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EQ_zIC3WsAUABbH.png
_______
Big NGRAM News:
They have released a set of "2012" corpuses (I choose to not Latinize this Latin word), which extends the data to 2009. The previous limit was 2006; the old corpuses (to 2006) are now labeled "2009."
"Ridiculer" has always been marginal at best. Ngram AmE-2012 thinks "scoffer" and "mocker" have significant upswings that begin in the mid-2000s. This seems right, at least poetically if not actually. (I still think Ngram data for years after 2000 should be viewed more skeptically than historical data because the data discontinuity of the rise of the Internet.)
And because I am sure all reading this are wondering, here is the new ngram for "Steve Sailer," in the new AmE-2012 corpus:
https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=Steve+Sailer&year_start=1989&year_end=2009&corpus=17&smoothing=0&share=&direct_url=t1%3B%2CSteve%20Sailer%3B%2Cc0
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EQ_zIC2XsAIVn9b.png
If this is to be believed, 1999 was the year of the Sailer Breakthrough.Replies: @res
Those ngram values look small enough that I suspect 1990 was a single mention. Would probably need to look at the context a little more to see what they were. Not to mention that books tend to lag other media.
I was surprised to see that Google searches for Steve have been roughly flat over time (starting 2004).
https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?date=all&geo=US&q=steve%20sailer
Ron Unz
vs.
Steve Sailer
vs.
John Derbyshire
in an Unz Review Ngram AmE-2012-corpus faceoff:
https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=Ron+Unz%2CSteve+Sailer%2CJohn+Derbyshire&year_start=1989&year_end=2009&corpus=17&smoothing=0&share=&direct_url=t1%3B%2CRon%20Unz%3B%2Cc0%3B.t1%3B%2CSteve%20Sailer%3B%2Cc0%3B.t1%3B%2CJohn%20Derbyshire%3B%2Cc0#t1%3B%2CRon%20Unz%3B%2Cc0%3B.t1%3B%2CSteve%20Sailer%3B%2Cc0%3B.t1%3B%2CJohn%20Derbyshire%3B%2Cc0
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EQ__jafWsAAVwmt.png
Ngram thinks the following scores represent relative magnitude of appearances in published material as of 2002 (smoothing=0):
Ron Unz: 138
Steve Sailer: 20
The Derb: 24
Ron Unz @ 6-7x Sailer or Derbyshire individually; but then Ngram thinks there was convergence in published-material mentions by 2007, continuing to 2009, where the current corpus ends. Not definite evidence of anything, as Ngram is not perfect, but still interesting enough and worth comparing with other independent data or informed people's impressions.
Is the peak of 7x plausible? Is the late-2000s converegence plausible? I don't know. I do know that as of the early 2010s, Ron had enough cachet to scoop up an invitation to the Intelligence Squared debate (2013;arguing against Open Borders), while Derbyshire had been purged from National Review in 2012 for racism and the Sailer Ban on Fox News remained in place.Replies: @snorlax
I wish Steve announced and implemented a comment regime like SSC has. Those of us who have something worth saying would say it more clearly and intelligently than we presently do after our first 2 week suspension and those without anything to say that is at least ⅔'s of Kind, True, Necessary would cease reading a comment thread that rhey coukd not understand.Replies: @Steve Sailer, @res
Anglos are total cucks to respectability. What a sniveling coward. No wonder they are such worthless cucks to Jews.
But is Murray really any better? He sucks most to Jews, the people who do most to slap him around.
He even caved to ‘gay marriage’ because it became so ‘respectable’ among elites.
Isn’t the diversity thing a kind of eugenics?
Global media say mixed-raced people are SUPERIOR in intelligence and beauty to non-mixed… which is why Mexicans are tops in IQ and attractiveness.
Also, all this jungle fever business is on the basis that white race will be improved by black genes that are more vibrant and virile.
Their whole understanding of “science” is Argument from Authority, thus, Saini’s smirking about a person being on one team or another, instead of being right. If Saini wasn’t an AfA globohomo cultist perhaps she would be curious (or skeptical) as to the speed with which Dawkins obtained, digested, and considered her book (not that he can’t rent a Bezos copy or has many pressing engagements).
I was surprised to see that Google searches for Steve have been roughly flat over time (starting 2004).
https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?date=all&geo=US&q=steve%20sailerReplies: @J.Ross, @Hail, @moshe
Would a curious newcomer search for Steve or go straight to his outlets? (Also, would Google tell the truth?)
I was surprised to see that Google searches for Steve have been roughly flat over time (starting 2004).
https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?date=all&geo=US&q=steve%20sailerReplies: @J.Ross, @Hail, @moshe
FWIW:
Ron Unz
vs.
Steve Sailer
vs.
John Derbyshire
in an Unz Review Ngram AmE-2012-corpus faceoff:
https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=Ron+Unz%2CSteve+Sailer%2CJohn+Derbyshire&year_start=1989&year_end=2009&corpus=17&smoothing=0&share=&direct_url=t1%3B%2CRon%20Unz%3B%2Cc0%3B.t1%3B%2CSteve%20Sailer%3B%2Cc0%3B.t1%3B%2CJohn%20Derbyshire%3B%2Cc0#t1%3B%2CRon%20Unz%3B%2Cc0%3B.t1%3B%2CSteve%20Sailer%3B%2Cc0%3B.t1%3B%2CJohn%20Derbyshire%3B%2Cc0
Ngram thinks the following scores represent relative magnitude of appearances in published material as of 2002 (smoothing=0):
Ron Unz: 138
Steve Sailer: 20
The Derb: 24
Ron Unz @ 6-7x Sailer or Derbyshire individually; but then Ngram thinks there was convergence in published-material mentions by 2007, continuing to 2009, where the current corpus ends. Not definite evidence of anything, as Ngram is not perfect, but still interesting enough and worth comparing with other independent data or informed people’s impressions.
Is the peak of 7x plausible? Is the late-2000s converegence plausible? I don’t know. I do know that as of the early 2010s, Ron had enough cachet to scoop up an invitation to the Intelligence Squared debate (2013;arguing against Open Borders), while Derbyshire had been purged from National Review in 2012 for racism and the Sailer Ban on Fox News remained in place.
Insanely off-topic,
Razib on Northern Eurasian gene flow:
https://www.gnxp.com/WordPress/2020/02/16/eurasia-became-a-melting-pot-during-the-holocene/
https://georgesjournal.files.wordpress.com/2013/02/lalla_ward_dressed_in_the_doctors_togs_destiny_of_the_daleks.jpg
http://thechristiangeek.net/wp/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/Romana.jpg
https://i.pinimg.com/736x/2b/e7/f9/2be7f9003483824cb21a5c74aa377230--movie-stars-lalla-ward.jpg
http://images2.fanpop.com/images/photos/4100000/Romana-pics-romana-ii-4104921-1024-768.jpgReplies: @Cloudbuster, @Joseph A., @Jim Don Bob
But how could such an egoist tolerate a superior Time Lady as a partner? Even the Fourth Doctor couldn’t keep her around for too long.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-JTVtOtKefUReplies: @Joseph A.
Cowardice isn't a virtue. He's just dumping chum in the waters.Replies: @Amerimutt Golems
His idol Bertrand Russell (Why I Am Not a Christian) was equally gutless.
“In extreme cases, there can be little doubt of the superiority of one race to another. North America, Australia and New Zealand certainly contribute more to the civilisation of the world than they would do if they were still peopled by aborigines. It seems on the whole fair to regard Negroes as on the average inferior to white men, although for work in the tropics they are indispensable, so that their extermination (apart from the question of humanity) would be highly undesirable.” – Marriage and Morals, 1929.
“I never held Negroes to be inherently inferior. The statement in Marriage and Morals refers to environmental conditioning. I have had it withdrawn from subsequent editions because it is clearly ambiguous.” – letter, March 17, 1964.
Ron Unz
vs.
Steve Sailer
vs.
John Derbyshire
in an Unz Review Ngram AmE-2012-corpus faceoff:
https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=Ron+Unz%2CSteve+Sailer%2CJohn+Derbyshire&year_start=1989&year_end=2009&corpus=17&smoothing=0&share=&direct_url=t1%3B%2CRon%20Unz%3B%2Cc0%3B.t1%3B%2CSteve%20Sailer%3B%2Cc0%3B.t1%3B%2CJohn%20Derbyshire%3B%2Cc0#t1%3B%2CRon%20Unz%3B%2Cc0%3B.t1%3B%2CSteve%20Sailer%3B%2Cc0%3B.t1%3B%2CJohn%20Derbyshire%3B%2Cc0
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EQ__jafWsAAVwmt.png
Ngram thinks the following scores represent relative magnitude of appearances in published material as of 2002 (smoothing=0):
Ron Unz: 138
Steve Sailer: 20
The Derb: 24
Ron Unz @ 6-7x Sailer or Derbyshire individually; but then Ngram thinks there was convergence in published-material mentions by 2007, continuing to 2009, where the current corpus ends. Not definite evidence of anything, as Ngram is not perfect, but still interesting enough and worth comparing with other independent data or informed people's impressions.
Is the peak of 7x plausible? Is the late-2000s converegence plausible? I don't know. I do know that as of the early 2010s, Ron had enough cachet to scoop up an invitation to the Intelligence Squared debate (2013;arguing against Open Borders), while Derbyshire had been purged from National Review in 2012 for racism and the Sailer Ban on Fox News remained in place.Replies: @snorlax
Yes, Unz was in the news because of his championing of English-language education ballot initiatives.
From the Unz Review masthead:July 1999:
https://www.unz.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/TNR-Unz.jpg
Ngram AmE-2012 scores for 1999 at smoothing=0:
Unz: 51
Sailer: 34
Derb: 14
Ngram AmE-2012 scores for 1999 at smoothing=1:
Unz: 62
Sailer: 18
Derb: 12
There is certainly some lag in Ngram data, as Res mentions above.
Derbyshire's Ngram score would rise solidly during his peak years at National Review, which seems about right.Replies: @snorlax
MOCKER One who ridicules
SATIRIST One who ridicules It Girl in Times
SCOFFER One ridicules small chestReplies: @Old Palo Altan, @Desiderius
It does now.
You’re among neologists.
They are watching us very closely.
As for "ridiculor". It does exist when spelled properly: ridiculer. I can't help thinking though that it is an artificial construction, "mocker" and "scoffer" being very much more naturally and commonly used.Replies: @Hail, @San Fernando Curt, @Desiderius
I prefer Ridiculor. Were he still alive, Vincent Price would play the most feared High Ridiculor.
Agreed, though that was in the 1990s.
From the Unz Review masthead:
July 1999:
Ngram AmE-2012 scores for 1999 at smoothing=0:
Unz: 51
Sailer: 34
Derb: 14
Ngram AmE-2012 scores for 1999 at smoothing=1:
Unz: 62
Sailer: 18
Derb: 12
There is certainly some lag in Ngram data, as Res mentions above.
Derbyshire’s Ngram score would rise solidly during his peak years at National Review, which seems about right.
https://ballotpedia.org/Colorado_English_Language_Education,_Initiative_31_(2002) (failed)
https://ballotpedia.org/Massachusetts_English_in_Public_Schools_Initiative,_Question_2_(2002)
https://ballotpedia.org/Oregon_Public_School_English_Immersion,_Measure_58_(2008) (failed)
Life after cancellation: farming.
Any idiot can be a farmer, as Bloomberg tells us.
I was off by two hours and a bit – gone as of 7:40 pm GMT.
A pity but not a surprise.
Yo Dawkins, I hope she sees it, bro.
❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️
https://i.kinja-img.com/gawker-media/image/upload/c_fill,f_auto,fl_progressive,g_center,h_675,pg_1,q_80,w_1200/qkgwdgotgqkjvoppwwxz.jpg
https://media.npr.org/assets/img/2012/02/16/86279449-dawkins-antwerp_custom-baa1c0bed418b965c93befab11158a8caed0b270-s300-c85.jpg
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/3/3a/Angela_Saini_photo.jpeg/600px-Angela_Saini_photo.jpegReplies: @The Wild Geese Howard, @syonredux, @Reg Cæsar
Dawkins is from an older generation of liberals, who grew up in the pre-PC era. A lot of these individuals take pride in being irreverent. They’re full of endless cynicism towards everything in life, and get a thrill out of mockery.
As constraints on speech have tightened in recent years, older liberals have tried their best to internalize the new orthodoxy. However, after a certain age, it’s sometimes difficult to learn something new, especially if you don’t fully believe in it.
So there’s a tendency for older liberals to sometimes commit a “faux pas” and say what they really think.
In contrast, younger liberals grew up in a highly PC society. So they’ve truly internalized it all. Younger liberals also come from a generation that’s not much into mockery or ridicule. They’re Generation “Safe Space” and seek to avoid anything confrontational.
Bill Maher is a good example of an older liberal who tries to conform to PC, but chafes at it too.
There are lots of people working in Silicon Valley who are somewhere on the spectrum (most would be high-functioning or have mildly autistic traits). Would this have had a detrimental effect on the tech revolution?
This is the problem. You just don't know what kind of people your society might need in fifty years' time.Replies: @Smithsonian, @Anonymous
Sure. On the other hand, every animal and crop that is farmed today is only the form that it is because of eugenics.
There are lots of people working in Silicon Valley who are somewhere on the spectrum (most would be high-functioning or have mildly autistic traits). Would this have had a detrimental effect on the tech revolution?
This is the problem. You just don't know what kind of people your society might need in fifty years' time.Replies: @Smithsonian, @Anonymous
Spergy people on the autism spectrum are not hood spraying gang bangers, serial killers or retards that can’t wipe their own ass. No one needs the last three. Chlorinate them from the gene pool.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cntvEDbagAw
“Ridiculor,” if under the pronunciation ri-DIC-u-lor, sounds to me like an extra-terrestrial sci-fi-comedy character.
OT
Yo and special for Steve and Talking Heads doing it special for LA
Talking Heads – Life During Wartime LIVE Los Angeles ’83
I lived in a college town that year and those two Talking Heads album could be heard everywhere as an ambient noise
And yet across the board dogs for example,
https://www.globalanimal.org/2016/04/13/10-reasons-mutts-rock/106535/
https://www.answers.com/Q/Do_pure_bred_dogs_or_mixed_breed_mutts_make_better_pets
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aCv10_WvGxo
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uua7RKUGZ2E
There's a reason why we discourage in breeding. Now that is generally clear that biological traits can be bred. But it's a rigorous process of trial and error. Trying to make that work for cognition . . . is speculative because unlike biological markers -- there are no clear markers for cognition. And that is where the variables of environment/circumstance play a major role in shaping ends. ave in extreme cases. Of course it will wok should have included,
"Once we know the markers that cause said desired coginitive goal. and the processes involved"
and even with that the consequences across the genetic schema would also have to be known lest the unforseen consequence.Replies: @Anonymous
Generally discouraging people under mid-90s IQ, people convicted of serious crimes that are making in se, and people with birth deformities from reproducing, hurts no one. It only does good.
If a wealthy female with high IQ and good conformation ( birthworthy) is either going to be a single mother not drawing on the public trough or a barren doe, at least encourage her to pick say an astronaut, a Navy SEAL, a successful surgeon, et al for a sire, and not a bag of shit with a big dick and a small brain.
Dawkins and Lalla had a decent run:
Those who allegedly expletive deleted love science for the most part don’t know real science if it hits them on the head.
"In extreme cases, there can be little doubt of the superiority of one race to another. North America, Australia and New Zealand certainly contribute more to the civilisation of the world than they would do if they were still peopled by aborigines. It seems on the whole fair to regard Negroes as on the average inferior to white men, although for work in the tropics they are indispensable, so that their extermination (apart from the question of humanity) would be highly undesirable." - Marriage and Morals, 1929.
"I never held Negroes to be inherently inferior. The statement in Marriage and Morals refers to environmental conditioning. I have had it withdrawn from subsequent editions because it is clearly ambiguous." – letter, March 17, 1964.Replies: @Reg Cæsar
Russell understood marriage. He said if it weren’t for the phenomenon of pregnancy, there would be no reason for a society to institute it at all.
Anthony Kennedy didn’t get the message.
Bertrand Russell, right-wing kook:
https://twitter.com/AnnaKellyWI/status/1229197979392847872Replies: @Hibernian, @The Wild Geese Howard, @Mr McKenna, @J.Ross, @anon, @nebulafox, @moshe
Generally you have to grow up on a farm to be a farmer. How a man smart enough to make all that money could make such a statement is beyond me, except that maybe it’s just his ego talking.
“He’s like a nerd who will say anything to be accepted by the “cool kids”.”
It’s more that he once was THE cool kid, every lefty atheist loved his attacks on religion (this was before 9/11) , lots of magazine profiles of the best-selling intellectual iconoclast and his pretty, aristocratic film-star wife.
Now, things have moved on, and what was accepted twenty or thirty years ago (e.g. that human eugenics could be effective) now means that you’re a Nazi. Compare with a cool kid from an earlier generation, Germaine Greer. Her view that women are people with ovaries, vaginas, breasts, XX chromosomes now marks her, not as a provocative, iconoclastic feminist but as an eccentric, embarrassing bag-lady.
Remember, feminists through ice water on EO Wilson back in the 70s as form of protest.Replies: @Anonymous
Dawkins doesn’t seem all that bright.
2017 was the high water mark for cancellation. Louis CK got cancelled (and he was far from blameless, unlike Dawkins, who merely repeated something that has been known by most literate people for more than a century). Then Louis CK came back in 2018 and hasn’t apologized since.
Anyone who performs public penance after 2018 is clueless.
They cancelled Gilligan’s Island, but look how long its cash flows lived on. Entertainment trumps science every time.
Put that in your pipe and smoke it, Professor Dawkins!
https://twitter.com/AnnaKellyWI/status/1229197979392847872Replies: @Hibernian, @The Wild Geese Howard, @Mr McKenna, @J.Ross, @anon, @nebulafox, @moshe
I bet Bloomie thinks they grow food in the package right there in the Manhattan bodegas.
They should drop Bloomie on an island for a year and see how he does growing his own food.
Modern farming is one of the most technologically diverse professions there is.
“…maybe it’s just his ego talking…” – The prejudice against farmers (peasants) is very Jewish.
Angela and Richard need to get a room.
https://www.firstthings.com/article/2004/08/001-the-devils-chaplain
Barr writes from a Catholic Christian perspective, but his assessment of Dawkins' obviously defective reasoning would be wickedly accurate from any perspective except that of Dawkins' and his ilk.Replies: @Bill, @Dan Hayes
Dick isn’t very bright. He is useful, though, in that thinking he is bright is an excellent signal of conformist stupidity in the thinker.
Note that a tweed sport coat and an OxBridge accent can take a bone fide Nitwit pretty far.
From the article:
That’s a lot of words to say, “Houellebecq may be even cooler than Hunter S. Thompson.”
Mr Dawkins’ genes aren’t very selfish, no matter what he writes. He’s a fine example of dysgenic reproduction.
Three wives, exactly one child. And Juliet Dawkins is about 36, so I hope she’s sprogging happily and inviting Dad to the christenings and confirmations.
It always struck me as a uniquely difficult job to get into from scratch.
Even in the modern era with tractors, combine, planters, etc, it is a high sustained physical work occupation, in this day and age almost uniquely so. If you did not grow up doing this in your key formative years, no matter how buff you are, taking it up later will kill you. A lot of people get the urge to farm and jump in, buying acreage and equipment with money from a business deal or whatever, and they can work like a farmer for a while but then the body gives out. Joints, sinews, everything and you wind up like a retired football player. In the old days if you worked in a factory or the mill or whatever you worked like that, but those guys don't work like that anymore and if they did they'd still never make enough money to buy a profitable amount of decent acreage.
That's the second problem, "buying your way in" to an economically profitable farm means a big chunk of cash. It gets bigger each year.
And third, you don't have to be extremely high IQ to be a farmer but you do have to know a lot, much of which you only learn by farming, and if you get it wrong you starve. The real reason there are very few black farmers is that they could do the work but without someone telling them what to do and making them do it every day they always seem to manage to not do it. They'll butcher the dairy cows and eat like a king, eat the seed corn, then starve. Exceptions exist but that is what they are, exceptions. Blacks do not have the inner sense of needing to prepare for the future. They live in the immediate present and have little innate sense of history or anticipation of the future. If they are upset over something in the distant past it's because ((someone)) is always "reminding" them.Replies: @Steve Sailer
https://twitter.com/AnnaKellyWI/status/1229197979392847872Replies: @Hibernian, @The Wild Geese Howard, @Mr McKenna, @J.Ross, @anon, @nebulafox, @moshe
That ain’t all he said.
Three reasons Bloomberg is immune to cancellation: 1) Democrat 2) Jewish 3) Billionaire. Three hundred reasons he may get cancelled anyway: Endless supply of ‘Truth Bombs’ from his past.
This is so much fun to watch. Couldn’t happen to a better guy.
http://gifrific.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/George-Costanza-Eating-Popcorn.gif
They are watching us very closely.
As for "ridiculor". It does exist when spelled properly: ridiculer. I can't help thinking though that it is an artificial construction, "mocker" and "scoffer" being very much more naturally and commonly used.Replies: @Hail, @San Fernando Curt, @Desiderius
Ridiculor is perfect for denoting a scoffer/mocker who is himself ridiculous and made more so thereby.
Pronounced in a manner akin to Skeletor.
Making money takes more cunning than smarts. Cunning operates on a strictly need-to-know basis.
https://twitter.com/AnnaKellyWI/status/1229197979392847872Replies: @Hibernian, @The Wild Geese Howard, @Mr McKenna, @J.Ross, @anon, @nebulafox, @moshe
The one stereotype I was not expecting to see Mike Bloomberg perfectly fill was Bolshevism (“How hard could farming possibly be?”).
As constraints on speech have tightened in recent years, older liberals have tried their best to internalize the new orthodoxy. However, after a certain age, it's sometimes difficult to learn something new, especially if you don't fully believe in it.
So there's a tendency for older liberals to sometimes commit a "faux pas" and say what they really think.
In contrast, younger liberals grew up in a highly PC society. So they've truly internalized it all. Younger liberals also come from a generation that's not much into mockery or ridicule. They're Generation "Safe Space" and seek to avoid anything confrontational.
Bill Maher is a good example of an older liberal who tries to conform to PC, but chafes at it too.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lvdLY1ugyCoReplies: @Desiderius
Younger liberals are spared the danger of saying what they really think by the simple expedient of not really thinking.
Ask not for whom the Woke moan…
Interesting point bringing hood-spraying gangbangers together with the Specials: as in all things the Believers invert reality, viewing the Specials as potential “school shooters” because of media hype and lying about a phenomenon that almost does not happen (as well as aggressive and unapologetic media stereotyping), and gangbangers as misunderstood kids because their ghetto spraying is memory holed or apologized for.
From the Unz Review masthead:July 1999:
https://www.unz.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/TNR-Unz.jpg
Ngram AmE-2012 scores for 1999 at smoothing=0:
Unz: 51
Sailer: 34
Derb: 14
Ngram AmE-2012 scores for 1999 at smoothing=1:
Unz: 62
Sailer: 18
Derb: 12
There is certainly some lag in Ngram data, as Res mentions above.
Derbyshire's Ngram score would rise solidly during his peak years at National Review, which seems about right.Replies: @snorlax
https://ballotpedia.org/Arizona_English_Language_Education_for_Children_in_Public_Schools,_Proposition_203_(2000)
https://ballotpedia.org/Colorado_English_Language_Education,_Initiative_31_(2002) (failed)
https://ballotpedia.org/Massachusetts_English_in_Public_Schools_Initiative,_Question_2_(2002)
https://ballotpedia.org/Oregon_Public_School_English_Immersion,_Measure_58_(2008) (failed)
https://twitter.com/AnnaKellyWI/status/1229197979392847872Replies: @Hibernian, @The Wild Geese Howard, @Mr McKenna, @J.Ross, @anon, @nebulafox, @moshe
Bloomberg’s a very smart fellow, he must be correct.
The only thing anyone needs to farm successfully is some green acres.
This must be the result of the new test that uses a sample of the mother’s blood. The old way (when my wife and I had children) was amniocentesis, which generally wasn’t performed unless the mother was over 35. The reasoning was that amnio itself had a 1 in 100 risk of inducing a spontaneous abortion, and so it didn’t make sense to have one unless the risk of birth defects was correspondingly high.
The risk of having a Down syndrome child was 1 in 1,200 at age 25; most Down children were born to young mothers who had no reason to get an amnio. But now the new blood test reduces the risk to zero; that’s why the Danes can virtually eliminate Down syndrome.
Thanks for posting; I couldn’t figure out how they could do it. I had no idea there was a new test.
This is so much fun to watch. Couldn’t happen to a better guy.
Room 101.
https://twitter.com/AnnaKellyWI/status/1229197979392847872Replies: @Hibernian, @The Wild Geese Howard, @Mr McKenna, @J.Ross, @anon, @nebulafox, @moshe
So four more years of President Trump it is, then, eh Democrats?
I get it: he has money and the gushing of just about everything “mainstream” in American politics. Which is exactly why he’ll be radioactive among average voters. Especially if Sanders is shanked again. Talk about giving Trump his attack lines…
It's more that he once was THE cool kid, every lefty atheist loved his attacks on religion (this was before 9/11) , lots of magazine profiles of the best-selling intellectual iconoclast and his pretty, aristocratic film-star wife.
Now, things have moved on, and what was accepted twenty or thirty years ago (e.g. that human eugenics could be effective) now means that you're a Nazi. Compare with a cool kid from an earlier generation, Germaine Greer. Her view that women are people with ovaries, vaginas, breasts, XX chromosomes now marks her, not as a provocative, iconoclastic feminist but as an eccentric, embarrassing bag-lady.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bfyabMQ1cLQReplies: @RichardTaylor
Yeah, truth in that. But it’s interesting, I don’t think they liked him that much in the 70s when he was talking selfish gene, etc. Then, as he attacked religion, they found him useful (but never accepted the actual science he had written about).
Remember, feminists through ice water on EO Wilson back in the 70s as form of protest.
Hahaha it worked! Richard you sly dog, you. 😉
As God’s not your witness, you gotta close the deal. Love Connection will be happy to pay for the date if you both come back on Twitter and tell us how it went.
Other religions are not as safe to criticize. Islam gets you killed. Judaism gets you depersoned. And no white people takes Hinduism seriously enough to bother, which along with Jews are all that matter to him despite his protestations.
Is ole PJ still a thing. Haha Haha. I think it was Vox Day who used to play Trump to his Jen Rubin.
Agree, thanks.
Note that a tweed sport coat and an OxBridge accent can take a bone fide Nitwit pretty far.
https://georgesjournal.files.wordpress.com/2013/02/lalla_ward_dressed_in_the_doctors_togs_destiny_of_the_daleks.jpg
http://thechristiangeek.net/wp/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/Romana.jpg
https://i.pinimg.com/736x/2b/e7/f9/2be7f9003483824cb21a5c74aa377230--movie-stars-lalla-ward.jpg
http://images2.fanpop.com/images/photos/4100000/Romana-pics-romana-ii-4104921-1024-768.jpgReplies: @Cloudbuster, @Joseph A., @Jim Don Bob
A solid 7.
Savage.
For several reasons, yes.
Even in the modern era with tractors, combine, planters, etc, it is a high sustained physical work occupation, in this day and age almost uniquely so. If you did not grow up doing this in your key formative years, no matter how buff you are, taking it up later will kill you. A lot of people get the urge to farm and jump in, buying acreage and equipment with money from a business deal or whatever, and they can work like a farmer for a while but then the body gives out. Joints, sinews, everything and you wind up like a retired football player. In the old days if you worked in a factory or the mill or whatever you worked like that, but those guys don’t work like that anymore and if they did they’d still never make enough money to buy a profitable amount of decent acreage.
That’s the second problem, “buying your way in” to an economically profitable farm means a big chunk of cash. It gets bigger each year.
And third, you don’t have to be extremely high IQ to be a farmer but you do have to know a lot, much of which you only learn by farming, and if you get it wrong you starve. The real reason there are very few black farmers is that they could do the work but without someone telling them what to do and making them do it every day they always seem to manage to not do it. They’ll butcher the dairy cows and eat like a king, eat the seed corn, then starve. Exceptions exist but that is what they are, exceptions. Blacks do not have the inner sense of needing to prepare for the future. They live in the immediate present and have little innate sense of history or anticipation of the future. If they are upset over something in the distant past it’s because ((someone)) is always “reminding” them.
“There is no God, and Dawkins is his prophet.”
Has Titania McGrath taken over their Twitter account?
https://twitter.com/royalsociety/status/1229303930213060609
https://twitter.com/GilesPalaeoLab/status/1229336880711380992
Even in the modern era with tractors, combine, planters, etc, it is a high sustained physical work occupation, in this day and age almost uniquely so. If you did not grow up doing this in your key formative years, no matter how buff you are, taking it up later will kill you. A lot of people get the urge to farm and jump in, buying acreage and equipment with money from a business deal or whatever, and they can work like a farmer for a while but then the body gives out. Joints, sinews, everything and you wind up like a retired football player. In the old days if you worked in a factory or the mill or whatever you worked like that, but those guys don't work like that anymore and if they did they'd still never make enough money to buy a profitable amount of decent acreage.
That's the second problem, "buying your way in" to an economically profitable farm means a big chunk of cash. It gets bigger each year.
And third, you don't have to be extremely high IQ to be a farmer but you do have to know a lot, much of which you only learn by farming, and if you get it wrong you starve. The real reason there are very few black farmers is that they could do the work but without someone telling them what to do and making them do it every day they always seem to manage to not do it. They'll butcher the dairy cows and eat like a king, eat the seed corn, then starve. Exceptions exist but that is what they are, exceptions. Blacks do not have the inner sense of needing to prepare for the future. They live in the immediate present and have little innate sense of history or anticipation of the future. If they are upset over something in the distant past it's because ((someone)) is always "reminding" them.Replies: @Steve Sailer
When I read what the daily working life of a Midwestern farm owner-operator is like these days, the skills seem pretty similar to what is needed for an MBA level job in a big corporation.
Keep in mind that most owner-operators in the Midwest are descended from the most of farming oriented and adept of a number of a brothers for several generations as the number of individuals needed per 640 acres continues to decline. The guys who inherited the family farm today are descended from a long line of guys who liked farming and were good at it.
https://modernag.org/modern-agriculture/technology-and-farming/
Yesterday:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-JTVtOtKefUReplies: @Joseph A.
Adams — as in Douglas Adams? He wrote some serials for Doctor Who, including the “City of Death” — a charming story set in Paris, featuring Ward cum Romana. Baker, Dawkins . . . she knows how to pick interesting fellows.
https://twitter.com/AnnaKellyWI/status/1229197979392847872Replies: @Hibernian, @The Wild Geese Howard, @Mr McKenna, @J.Ross, @anon, @nebulafox, @moshe
Are you some sort of sjw?
I have no idea what the context or intention of this talk is but claiming that he’s insulting anybody when he makes a claim that it’s easier to teach people to work on a farm than at google is a claim, not an insult. If you think that’s incorrect then say so. But to call this an insult is incredibly partisan and is indicative of political intent on your part.
He was vice signaling. Are you?
Big Sister
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Out_of_Our_Idiot
I was surprised to see that Google searches for Steve have been roughly flat over time (starting 2004).
https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?date=all&geo=US&q=steve%20sailerReplies: @J.Ross, @Hail, @moshe
I don’t know what the star next to this dude’s name means. Steve, if it’s from you for some reason please let us know what it means. If it’s the dude giving himself a gold star please let him know that it’s obnoxious marketing and may work well at his day job selling expensive widgets to poor midgets but has no place in a comment thread.
I wish Steve announced and implemented a comment regime like SSC has. Those of us who have something worth saying would say it more clearly and intelligently than we presently do after our first 2 week suspension and those without anything to say that is at least ⅔’s of Kind, True, Necessary would cease reading a comment thread that rhey coukd not understand.
P.S. This comment is true and arguably necessary. Obviously not kind though. Though as a response to your comment I consider that a feature not a bug.Replies: @moshe, @Desiderius
please chose a handle so i can block you
I wish Steve announced and implemented a comment regime like SSC has. Those of us who have something worth saying would say it more clearly and intelligently than we presently do after our first 2 week suspension and those without anything to say that is at least ⅔'s of Kind, True, Necessary would cease reading a comment thread that rhey coukd not understand.Replies: @Steve Sailer, @res
I believe Ron awarded commenter res a star because he does a lot of original research for his comments. I too appreciate res’s hard work.
https://www.firstthings.com/article/2004/08/001-the-devils-chaplain
Barr writes from a Catholic Christian perspective, but his assessment of Dawkins' obviously defective reasoning would be wickedly accurate from any perspective except that of Dawkins' and his ilk.Replies: @Bill, @Dan Hayes
Of interest is the fact that physicist Stephen Barr is the biological brother of Attorney General Bill Barr whose mother is the Irish American Catholic wife of his Jewish convert father.
Remember, feminists through ice water on EO Wilson back in the 70s as form of protest.Replies: @Anonymous
Yes, this has been forgotten. Dawkins was a figure of hate for leftists in the 1980s, when a simplistic reading of his books was used to justify Thatcherism.
How about the handle “Palestinian”? You fellas sure love to block and destroy the people of Palestine.
I liked this short article that gives an overview of the technology involved in running a modern farm:
https://modernag.org/modern-agriculture/technology-and-farming/
The only thing anyone needs to farm successfully is some green acres.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3iHl4eY7jigReplies: @ben tillman
What if Oliver had been played by Bob Newhart? Funnier or less funny?
I dunno. Eva Gabor or Suzanne Pleshette, tough call.Replies: @ben tillman
They should drop Bloomie on an island for a year and see how he does growing his own food.
Modern farming is one of the most technologically diverse professions there is.Replies: @ben tillman
The point to me isn’t that it’s technologically complex; it’s that it’s a business, and you’re not just germinating a seed. You have to do it PROFITABLY.
What if Oliver had been played by Bob Newhart? Funnier or less funny?
I dunno. Eva Gabor or Suzanne Pleshette, tough call.
I wonder if there isn’t a personal component to Saini’s disdain for the field of cognitive science. One of her first published books was entitled Geek Nation: How Indian Science is Taking Over the World; my understanding is that Saini has Indian heritage. The book cover includes a crowd of Indians below the triumphal title. Her next book, Superior: The Return of Race Science, prominently features a European statue on the cover (merged with an African); I believe Saini resides in Britain. Lastly, her most recent book, Inferior: How Science Got Women Wrong – And the New Research That’s Rewriting the Story, has yet another European on the cover – this time the split image of an attractive white female. Both books deal with the subject of a group Saini associates with supposedly being disadvantaged by certain HBD results.
One might think Saini’s life work revolves around assuaging her own bruised ego. India’s reported mean IQ is far below the average white Briton’s. Additionally, as a female science writer in an area dominated by men, one might guess Saini feels doubly insecure: most of the 2019 Nobel Prize winners were male, disproportionately white; I believe one was British; the only Indian (male) on the list won for economics.
If you’re an identitarian who gushes about your tribe “taking over the world”, it must hurt to be continually reminded that your tribe isn’t really all that after all. Thus, the continual excuse making for a rival tribe besting her own. You can’t miss the blatantly Euro-centric attacks in her works. In the description for her latest book alleging a vast conspiracy by science to keep womankind down, Charles Darwin – white guy — is denounced as a sexist before Saini confidently announces she’s going to correct the record. In Superior, the description shamelessly mentions Charles Murray and Richard Herrnstein in the same breath as the Nazis (also white Europeans) while concomitantly misconstruing their book’s focus as being the promotion of white intellectual superiority.
One wonders whether Angela Saini will ever write a book about India’s horribly racist treatment of their untouchable class, something that has a basis in the same kinds of myths she supposedly seeks to debunk. But then again, that would make Indians look bad.
Notice a pattern in these covers?
Geek Nation: How Indian Science is Taking Over the World:
Superior: The Return of Race Science:
Inferior: How Science Got Women Wrong – And the New Research That’s Rewriting the Story
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Angela_Saini#BooksReplies: @Divine Right
It would appear so.
One might think Saini’s life work revolves around assuaging her own bruised ego. India’s reported mean IQ is far below the average white Briton’s. Additionally, as a female science writer in an area dominated by men, one might guess Saini feels doubly insecure: most of the 2019 Nobel Prize winners were male, disproportionately white; I believe one was British; the only Indian (male) on the list won for economics.
If you’re an identitarian who gushes about your tribe “taking over the world”, it must hurt to be continually reminded that your tribe isn’t really all that after all. Thus, the continual excuse making for a rival tribe besting her own. You can’t miss the blatantly Euro-centric attacks in her works. In the description for her latest book alleging a vast conspiracy by science to keep womankind down, Charles Darwin – white guy -- is denounced as a sexist before Saini confidently announces she’s going to correct the record. In Superior, the description shamelessly mentions Charles Murray and Richard Herrnstein in the same breath as the Nazis (also white Europeans) while concomitantly misconstruing their book’s focus as being the promotion of white intellectual superiority.
One wonders whether Angela Saini will ever write a book about India’s horribly racist treatment of their untouchable class, something that has a basis in the same kinds of myths she supposedly seeks to debunk. But then again, that would make Indians look bad.
Notice a pattern in these covers?
Geek Nation: How Indian Science is Taking Over the World:
http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51McMhSsNHL._SY291_BO1,204,203,200_QL40_.jpg
Superior: The Return of Race Science:
https://www.bitchmedia.org/sites/default/files/styles/article_one-third_width/public/Superior-%20The%20Return%20of%20Race%20Science%20by%20Angela%20Saini.jpg?itok=qXyHthq1
Inferior: How Science Got Women Wrong – And the New Research That’s Rewriting the Story
https://i5.walmartimages.com/asr/dd2b0bdc-2db6-407c-9683-d5374da83f83_1.c7dc52f1315d343594c1d510d3b409d6.jpeg?odnHeight=450&odnWidth=450&odnBg=ffffffReplies: @MEH 0910
You have the book order reversed, Inferior came out the year before Superior.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Angela_Saini#Books
Prejudice against farmers? Never !
Marx, The Communist Manifesto, Ch 1
“The idiocy of rural life” is a bit of a mistranslation. Marx was writing something more like “the isolation of rural life.” But this is an example of Colby Cosh’s rule that famous wrong quotations often get at something in the personality of the person to whom it is attributed: e.g., Marx really did despise French peasants, as he makes clear in his fun book on Louis Napoleon.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Angela_Saini#BooksReplies: @Divine Right
Doesn’t matter. The point stands.
I have no idea what the context or intention of this talk is but claiming that he's insulting anybody when he makes a claim that it's easier to teach people to work on a farm than at google is a claim, not an insult. If you think that's incorrect then say so. But to call this an insult is incredibly partisan and is indicative of political intent on your part.Replies: @Desiderius, @Mr. Anon
It was an insult, as is your comment to our intelligence.
He was vice signaling. Are you?
https://twitter.com/BarstoolNewsN/status/1229129489721913344Replies: @Thirdeye
Damn, it looks like he might get elected after all.
Eugenics is not the same thing as racial science. Eugenics is a big part of normal sexual attraction. Like Tommy Sotomayor says, “Guys, you’ve got to stop dumpster diving with your dicks!”
I wish Steve announced and implemented a comment regime like SSC has. Those of us who have something worth saying would say it more clearly and intelligently than we presently do after our first 2 week suspension and those without anything to say that is at least ⅔'s of Kind, True, Necessary would cease reading a comment thread that rhey coukd not understand.Replies: @Steve Sailer, @res
You might consider applying that standard to your comment(s). You seem to have trouble reaching a 1/3 standard. Comments 128 and 129 do a great job of demonstrating that you are a hypocrite.
P.S. This comment is true and arguably necessary. Obviously not kind though. Though as a response to your comment I consider that a feature not a bug.
In a swamp you've got to be a swamp thing. I have never taken my commenting here seriously and have often mentioned that fact.
I assume that none of us who comment here are the same people IRL as we come across here.
I know that Steve isn't.
As a long time writer, Steve may not realize how he comes across to normal people. As a genius, yes. And as many many other positive things as well (I've listed them more than once in the past), but also as scary AF.
He does not come across as nice guy. (The small print qualifications and explanations would be too tedious and also useless, as I expect to be understood uncharitably anyway.)
But the truth is that Steve, the man, actually IS a very nice guy.
But any drive-by readers without a chip on their shoulders would not get that impression.
And even the nicest of the commenters here, say Lot for example, come across as nasty pieces of work who are willing to mock and degrade strangers based on misquotes in the press or a 130 character tweet. Not to mention, anything to do with "blacks".
And the comments that were written by the guy with the same fingerprints I have now? (whether under this nom or some other or anonymous or whatever.)
A mixed bag, coming from different moods, different intentions, differently accentuated parts of the identity that guy had - ranging from everything to informative and written seriously with kind and/or scholarly intent to straight out trolling.
I don't know what "Necessary" means so I won't comment on that.
I imagine that most are more or less "True" within the context of the cesspool of many if these threads. Mist of the comments I responded to negatively I believe were deserving of my responses. Though I undoubtedly missed the mark one or two hundred times. IOW, insults lobbied at the authors of comments I was responding to were probably mostly deserved and accurate within the context of the comment thread but almost (if ever) an accurate reflection of what any version if me at any time actually thought of the commenter as an actual person when away from his computer screen.
As for "Kind", what the hell does kind even mean within the context of a human vs human culture war? Almost nothing outside of slatestarcodex fits the bill and even there only a certain percentage does. Besides, most of what was written was absolutely intended to be unkind. An accidental lack of empathy was besides the point, in this red-in-tooth-and-claw internet culture war business, particularly on unz, purposefully unkind responses were generally my intent.
I can't f'n imagjne how someone could have missed that point.
Especially in my responses to antisems. No quarter asked and no quarter given. If InternationalJew and Dissident and the others want to treat people who use triple parenthesis with respect that's to their own shame, not mine. In fact it disgusts me when they do that and smacks of a shameful lack of self respect. People who dislike me for my nose or name aren't people whose feelings or lives I care about anyway.
Happily almost none of these actually exist in America - or anywhere else for that matter.
But in the silly, yet ugly, dungeons and dragons game of splashing blood and throwing feces online these people DO exist. And I very much enjoy splatting them underfoot, or at least playing the gane if doing so because of course I expect few people to read the comment and almost no one to care or to think they were splattered.
And if nothing I wrote here makes sense I'm cool with that too.
After all, it isn't really "me" writing any of this anyway.
Like all Jews I wish for a better, happier, community of Man, but until then I have no intention of playing the suffering saint. Happily, almost none of that is ever called for offline, in the happy world of real people, but in this sohere, yes it is. And the Yids and Yid-adjacents who swallow it by allowing it to go unchallenged or by responding to it with "to a point, Lord Anonymous eho believes that Jews drink Christian blood" are doing just that. It's gross to watch. If someone flings poo at me, you can be sure I'll be glad to toss it back.
My suggestion was for Steve to RADICALLY change what this blog is, at least what the comment thread looks like. In that instance we'd all either play nice or be in a time out. Our better natures would then play chess instead of the mud wrestling or, worse, poker, that is currently plated out everywhere on unz. Even here, one if the few spots on unz where it's possible that gentlemanly intelligent discussion could actually exist --- from the very same commenters, yours truly very much included, who triple parentheses or misread others intent badly or, or...any of the nonsense that currently prevails.
I mean, for the love of yoshkele, has ANY ideological diversity been given any honest and respectful consideration in these threads? No. As soon as any genuine one appears it receives the Troll tag, mockery, assumptions of bad faith.... and either gets in line or goes away.
Enough. Real life beckons.
tl;dr? As I've said manymany times, I would love to meet any of the commenters here irl and expect with a very high degree of confidence that we'd get along like gangbusters.
And either rein the devil or throw him out
With wondrous potency. Once more, good night,
And when you are desirous to be blessed,
I’ll blessing beg of you.
For this same lord,
I do repent. But heaven hath pleased it so,
To punish me with this and this with me,
That I must be their scourge and minister.
I will bestow him and will answer well
The death I gave him. So, again, good night.
I must be cruel only to be kind.
Thus bad begins and worse remains behind.
Look, the role of the likes of Dawkins or Pinker or Dennett is teaching a narrative that ultimately legitimatizes liberal ordered society (alienation, atomization, Tranny Bathroom) as all either framed as returning to some ancient past of “liberated” “free” ubermenschhood or escaping from the chains that were imposed by the state/church/patriarchy. Their ilk have long been willing agents of Globohomo (see drunken filth Chris Hitchens’ Neoconery).
You’d that think between Achmed descending upon the Anglo Isles and the business he got at the hands of Rebecca Watson with the other Nu-Atheists ole Dicky Dawkins would have learned his lesson by now realizing the connection between his work and the state of his society but naw. He’s in the same place John Cleese is. That is, he notices something OFF about his society after decades of deriding traditions and/or mocking adherents but either can’t see or or won’t admit that his work for much of his life played a notable role in its current state.
This article tells some quick info on “New Atheism” (while glancing over details namely Chrissy Hitch’s Neoconnery and Troktsky adoring past and his Jewishness among New Atheism’s ties to Jews and Anglos):
https://arcdigital.media/new-atheism-an-autopsy-7a1c1c767a99
P.S. This comment is true and arguably necessary. Obviously not kind though. Though as a response to your comment I consider that a feature not a bug.Replies: @moshe, @Desiderius
I was Absolutely clear on the fact that it applies to me as well, no?
In a swamp you’ve got to be a swamp thing. I have never taken my commenting here seriously and have often mentioned that fact.
I assume that none of us who comment here are the same people IRL as we come across here.
I know that Steve isn’t.
As a long time writer, Steve may not realize how he comes across to normal people. As a genius, yes. And as many many other positive things as well (I’ve listed them more than once in the past), but also as scary AF.
He does not come across as nice guy. (The small print qualifications and explanations would be too tedious and also useless, as I expect to be understood uncharitably anyway.)
But the truth is that Steve, the man, actually IS a very nice guy.
But any drive-by readers without a chip on their shoulders would not get that impression.
And even the nicest of the commenters here, say Lot for example, come across as nasty pieces of work who are willing to mock and degrade strangers based on misquotes in the press or a 130 character tweet. Not to mention, anything to do with “blacks”.
And the comments that were written by the guy with the same fingerprints I have now? (whether under this nom or some other or anonymous or whatever.)
A mixed bag, coming from different moods, different intentions, differently accentuated parts of the identity that guy had – ranging from everything to informative and written seriously with kind and/or scholarly intent to straight out trolling.
I don’t know what “Necessary” means so I won’t comment on that.
I imagine that most are more or less “True” within the context of the cesspool of many if these threads. Mist of the comments I responded to negatively I believe were deserving of my responses. Though I undoubtedly missed the mark one or two hundred times. IOW, insults lobbied at the authors of comments I was responding to were probably mostly deserved and accurate within the context of the comment thread but almost (if ever) an accurate reflection of what any version if me at any time actually thought of the commenter as an actual person when away from his computer screen.
As for “Kind”, what the hell does kind even mean within the context of a human vs human culture war? Almost nothing outside of slatestarcodex fits the bill and even there only a certain percentage does. Besides, most of what was written was absolutely intended to be unkind. An accidental lack of empathy was besides the point, in this red-in-tooth-and-claw internet culture war business, particularly on unz, purposefully unkind responses were generally my intent.
I can’t f’n imagjne how someone could have missed that point.
Especially in my responses to antisems. No quarter asked and no quarter given. If InternationalJew and Dissident and the others want to treat people who use triple parenthesis with respect that’s to their own shame, not mine. In fact it disgusts me when they do that and smacks of a shameful lack of self respect. People who dislike me for my nose or name aren’t people whose feelings or lives I care about anyway.
Happily almost none of these actually exist in America – or anywhere else for that matter.
But in the silly, yet ugly, dungeons and dragons game of splashing blood and throwing feces online these people DO exist. And I very much enjoy splatting them underfoot, or at least playing the gane if doing so because of course I expect few people to read the comment and almost no one to care or to think they were splattered.
And if nothing I wrote here makes sense I’m cool with that too.
After all, it isn’t really “me” writing any of this anyway.
Like all Jews I wish for a better, happier, community of Man, but until then I have no intention of playing the suffering saint. Happily, almost none of that is ever called for offline, in the happy world of real people, but in this sohere, yes it is. And the Yids and Yid-adjacents who swallow it by allowing it to go unchallenged or by responding to it with “to a point, Lord Anonymous eho believes that Jews drink Christian blood” are doing just that. It’s gross to watch. If someone flings poo at me, you can be sure I’ll be glad to toss it back.
My suggestion was for Steve to RADICALLY change what this blog is, at least what the comment thread looks like. In that instance we’d all either play nice or be in a time out. Our better natures would then play chess instead of the mud wrestling or, worse, poker, that is currently plated out everywhere on unz. Even here, one if the few spots on unz where it’s possible that gentlemanly intelligent discussion could actually exist — from the very same commenters, yours truly very much included, who triple parentheses or misread others intent badly or, or…any of the nonsense that currently prevails.
I mean, for the love of yoshkele, has ANY ideological diversity been given any honest and respectful consideration in these threads? No. As soon as any genuine one appears it receives the Troll tag, mockery, assumptions of bad faith…. and either gets in line or goes away.
Enough. Real life beckons.
tl;dr? As I’ve said manymany times, I would love to meet any of the commenters here irl and expect with a very high degree of confidence that we’d get along like gangbusters.
P.S. This comment is true and arguably necessary. Obviously not kind though. Though as a response to your comment I consider that a feature not a bug.Replies: @moshe, @Desiderius
For use almost can change the stamp of nature,
And either rein the devil or throw him out
With wondrous potency. Once more, good night,
And when you are desirous to be blessed,
I’ll blessing beg of you.
For this same lord,
I do repent. But heaven hath pleased it so,
To punish me with this and this with me,
That I must be their scourge and minister.
I will bestow him and will answer well
The death I gave him. So, again, good night.
I must be cruel only to be kind.
Thus bad begins and worse remains behind.
I dunno. Eva Gabor or Suzanne Pleshette, tough call.Replies: @ben tillman
I asked because I watched a cartoon movie recently (The Rescuers) in which a mouse couple were voiced by Bob Newhart and Eva Gabor. And I thought, hmm, Newhart might have been pretty funny in that role.
I have no idea what the context or intention of this talk is but claiming that he's insulting anybody when he makes a claim that it's easier to teach people to work on a farm than at google is a claim, not an insult. If you think that's incorrect then say so. But to call this an insult is incredibly partisan and is indicative of political intent on your part.Replies: @Desiderius, @Mr. Anon
It’s an insult. It isn’t my problem if you’re too stupid to recognize it as such.
And to think that this very same chap delivered a talk on Courage in Science at CSIcon
(a convention of skeptics) in Las Vegas last year. Need for intellectual integrity and persistence
in the face of unreasoning opposition; truth will prevail, etc. etc.
https://csiconference.org/
Uncle Jack
No-one is actually doing that. People are simply choosing not to have children. It’s not a conspiracy. It’s just collective selfishness.
You want to know why people choose not to have children? Because they can. Modern contraceptives allow people to do that. Modern contraceptives have made sex a recreational activity. You might deplore this but that’s the way it is.
Nobody forces people to use contraceptives. They choose to do so. People in advanced western and westernised nations just don’t particularly want to have children. If they don’t have to, they don’t.
Not everything is a conspiracy.
Everything is a conspiracy.
You want to know why people choose not to have children? Because they can. Modern contraceptives allow people to do that. Modern contraceptives have made sex a recreational activity. You might deplore this but that's the way it is.
Nobody forces people to use contraceptives. They choose to do so. People in advanced western and westernised nations just don't particularly want to have children. If they don't have to, they don't.
Not everything is a conspiracy.Replies: @Futurethirdworlder
Encouraging women to go to college, stoking fear of global warming, antinatalism promoted in media, disenfranchising white males, increasing the cost of housing, promoting the use of contraception.
Everything is a conspiracy.