March 30, 2010

"This is weirdly fascinating."

A friend comments:
This is weirdly fascinating. The proposition that individuals can differ by innate mental ability and that races can differ by the average of such abilities:

1) conflicts with no major Western religious tradition;

2) conflicts with no major Western philosophical tradition;

3) is consistent with everyday experience;

4) is probably believed by the majority of ordinary people of all races;

5) is consistent with the weight of evidence from the most exhaustive and sophisticated empirical studies;

6) is consistent with, indeed is an almost inevitable implication of, the most basic version of evolutionary theory, which theory all educated people are supposed to accept.

And yet the operative assumption of government policy and the protocols of almost all public journals are that this proposition cannot be true.

Here is another, perhaps related paradox. The overwhelming majority of black people I see who work in the private sector, whether in prestigious or decidedly un-prestigious occupations, are efficient and friendly and seem reasonably happy. Disgruntled and dissatisfied blacks are common, on the other hand, in 1) government, 2) education and 3) on street corners, begging.

In other words, we have actually constructed a society in which it is possible for almost everyone who practices a modicum of self-discipline, whatever their innate mental gifts, to earn a reasonably decent living doing not terribly onerous work.

So the question becomes, when will American government, media and educators stop hitting America over the head with a hammer about a problem that is not really a problem anymore?

My published articles are archived at iSteve.com -- Steve Sailer

144 comments:

Anonymous said...

So the question becomes, when will American government, media and educators stop hitting America over the head with a hammer about a problem that is not really a problem anymore?

Wrong problem is identified, they're just using whatever stick comes to hand. The "problem" they're attacking is non-leftist whites, that hasn't gone away yet.

rightsaidfred said...

Manufactured Dissent.

Peter A said...

"The proposition that individuals can differ by innate mental ability and that races can differ by the average of such abilities" does conflict with at least one major Western philosophical tradition - Socialism. That proposition undermines a class based view of history and implies we can never have full equality of result. I have also argued on this site before that this proposition complicates libertarian thought - in a market with no government intervention the less intelligent will always be at a disadvantage and often at the mercy of the less scrupulous intelligent people (think ponzi schemes, lotteries, etc.) During the second half of the 20th century liberals of the left (socialists) and liberals of the right (free marketeers) made common cause against the "paleo" "reactionary" notion that there are inherent differences between people and groups of people. It would be very embarassing for them to admit their mistake.

Anonymous said...

"In other words, we have actually constructed a society in which it is possible for almost everyone who practices a modicum of self-discipline, whatever their innate mental gifts, to earn a reasonably decent living doing not terribly onerous work."
--Steve's friend

"Anyone who is willing to work and is serious about it will certainly find a job. Only you must not go to the man who tells you this, for he has no job to offer and doesn’t know anyone who knows of a vacancy. This is exactly the reason why he gives you such generous advice, out of brotherly love, and to demonstrate how little he knows the world."
--The Treasure of Sierra Madre

Anonymous said...

If your friend really thinks that a theory based on evolution "conflicts with no major Western religious tradition", he has a lot of explaining to do about the last 150 years, doesn't he.

That's not even getting into philosophic traditions based on "all men are created equal.", like, oh, I don't know, THE ENTIRE POLITICAL HISTORY OF THE WEST since the French Revolution?

Seriously, whoever wrote this to you is an illiterate, and it speaks poorly of you that you would post it without shooting it full of holes.

The Anti-Gnostic said...

The overwhelming majority of black people I see who work in the private sector, whether in prestigious or decidedly un-prestigious occupations, are efficient and friendly and seem reasonably happy. Disgruntled and dissatisfied blacks are common, on the other hand, in 1) government, 2) education and 3) on street corners, begging.

Here's something else you can observe. Go to a professional-service firm and look at the minority ranks from firm professionals through support staff. About 10-15% of the professionals will be NAMs, and their percentages will increase as you go down through the ranks of support staff. Comparing this with the IQ distribution in the population generally, this is what you'd expect to find. And, to underscore what your friend says, most of them are content where they are rather than trying to punch above their weight.

Organic society is hierarchical and benevolent, as it enables everyone--even those of us who can't be Arthur Blank, or even just a partner at a law firm--to be big fish in our respective small ponds.

Social democracies with their 'civil rights' and redistributive justice are inorganic, anti-nature, and anti-human. They are gnostic and perforce totalitarian, endlessly engaged, as they must be, with deconstructing reality.

Anonymous said...

"The overwhelming majority of black people I see who work in the private sector, whether in prestigious or decidedly un-prestigious occupations, are efficient and friendly and seem reasonably happy. "

The private sector selects for such people. It also selects for people with triple digit IQs. The truth is, the overwhelming majority of blacks (I'm guessing 85%) are not suited to the private sector because they cannot behave as if the customer is always right. The prevailing black attitude in service positions, government or otherwise, is "either I'm right or you better be real gentle telling me I'm wrong, giving me a way to blame my mistake on somebody else. Try to hold me responsible, and I'll kick your ass you honky mother-effer."

RandyB said...

I've wondered for a long time where the supposed evidence of racism is, except the continued non-success of blacks.

Someone once hung a noose outside a school in Louisiana that almost no one saw? The Confederate Army is attacking!!!!!!

Anonymous said...

Would-be parents seeking egg donors believe mental abilities differ and are genetic:

http://www.thehastingscenter.org/Publications/HCR/Detail.aspx?id=4549

Mercer said...

"almost everyone who practices a modicum of self-discipline, whatever their innate mental gifts, to earn a reasonably decent living doing not terribly onerous work."

Does someone who lives in their car or a shelter live decently? I think there are many places where low skilled people have difficulty earning enough to rent an apartment. I agree with everything else in the comment.

Fred said...

Blame Hitler. Group differences were accepted by the mainstream by the early 20th century. Eugenics was considered a common sense policy. Then Hitler came along and killed the brand.

Aside from Steve Sailer himself, who comes across like a well adjusted, well meaning guy, most HBD bloggers aren't doing a lot to help revive the brand. They don't just point out group differences, they revel in them. They like it too much. It's unseemly, and it turns people off.

Steve once wrote of Democrats that they exude a "faint whiff of personal failure". There is a little of that too with most non-Steve HBD bloggers.

Really? said...

You know black people in the private sector? I thought they all worked for Uncle Sam

Anonymous said...

Christianity and Islam, at least in theory, beleive in 'equality' and makes it harder for hbd

Anonymous said...

The proposition that races do not differ is key to modern race politics. Without it, the more creative theories of civil rights law (e.g. Disparate Impact theory, which puts the burden on the hapless Defendant to prove that he did not discriminate) would revealed as the politically motivated shams that they are.By the way, I do not think that most black people accept that whites are on the average more intelligent. There are just some things that are too harsh for people to accept.

Henry Canaday said...

Peter: I thought socialism meant 'from each according to his ablilities, to each according to his needs.' Isn't that a recognition of different abilities? Not to mention the fact that many of the leading socialists obviously thought themselves quite above average in their gifts.

Anonymous: I am not an authority on Islam but I never heard equal gifts preached in Catholic schools. Rather the opposite.

Nora Helmer said...

The proposition that individuals can differ by innate mental ability and that races can differ by the average of such abilities.... And yet the operative assumption of government policy and the protocols of almost all public journals are that this proposition cannot be true.

This (what I'm about to relate) doesn't have to do with the U.S. but rather Norway, but this seems like an appropriate enough thread in which to mention it.

There seems to be something of a paradigm shift happening in Norway (Scandinavia?) with regard to HBD -- at least the very beginnings of a shift seem to be in the air.

For the last few weeks there's been a multi-part (there will be 7 in all) documentary programme on Norway's national television channel (of all places!), NRK (our equivalent of the BBC), called "Brainwash" ("Hjernevask"). The program is being hosted by one of Norway's most well-known and well-loved comedians (yeah, we DO have comedians ... sort of), a guy named Harald Eia. Eia studied sociology at university (but his father was a chemist).

Anyway ... he put together this show called "Brainwash" in which he shows how out-of-touch Norwegian researchers (especially ones that have had an enormous influence on public policy) are when it comes to the latest research on, for instance, gender differences in mental abilities that are biologically based.

The format of the show has been that he starts off with a question: "Why are there so few Norwegian women engineers even though we have a society that promotes equal opportunities so much?" for instance. Then he goes and talks to "gender researchers" here in Norway, who are of course hopelessly lost on the question. Then he goes to scientists abroad (and some here in Norway, too) such as Simon Baron-Cohen in the UK or Stephen Pinker to find out what they have found. Then he returns to Norway and confronts the Norwegian researchers with the latest knowledge. The results are typically embarassing with the Norwegian researchers unable to offer up any studies for why they think all the differences are due to nuture rather than nature. Many of them wind up getting defensive and hostile towards the end.

Oh, he also does some "man-on-the-street" interviews in each episode which reveal that ordinary folks know more about the truth of HBD than most Norwegian researchers.

The show has been, so far, really wonderful. Eia has so far addressed: biological differences in thinking between the genders; IQ, i.e. that some people are just born smarter than others (and that personality types have a biological basis, too); the biological basis of homosexuality; and, why are men more violent than women.

Sadly, he dropped the ball on the violence show (the last episode) and argued that different levels of violence in different human populations is related to culture, not biology.

There has been some upset in the press about the show -- some of the guest researchers interviewed (the Norwegian ones) say they feel duped and that they have been unfairly made fun of. But no one has so far taken on the debate that Eia is wrong. I can only guess that most people (researchers) are in a wait-and-see mode -- waiting to see which way the herd will turn and afraid to speak out now against all this politically incorrectness lest they be trampled under foot by the shifting herd. ;-)

I look forward to episode 6 which will look at race. Eia may not pull out all the big guns on the topic, but hopefully he will make the point that, yes, race does indeed exist!

Hopefully the momentum generated by this programme will not be lost and political correctness will be shown more and more for the nonsense that it is.

Anonymous said...

Sec of Education, Arne Duncan, in an editorial in USA Today writes "[schools] could lose flexibility and formula funding if they fail to close achievement gaps." This little gem is buried in his plan for improving NCLB.

This doesn't make a great deal of sense. An all black school in Chicago, for instance, if it fails to close the racial gap (which, of course, is inevitable) with a suburban white school will lose funding? Sounds like disparate impact.

Or is it when blacks in predominately white schools fail to close the gap? Then we punish the white school because those damn white students insist on being on the right side of the curve.

http://blogs.usatoday.com/oped/2010/03/opposing-view-were-flexible-but-tough.html#more

Anonymous said...

" in a market with no government intervention the less intelligent will always be at a disadvantage and often at the mercy of the less scrupulous intelligent people (think ponzi schemes, lotteries, etc.)"

ponzi schemes are illegal, if you want to prohibit lotteries you may do so, but to prohibit them to the poor and allow them for the rich who can go to vegas or maco is pretty scummy.

I see no evidence that under free exchange and private property the poor or stupid do worse than under any other system. To the contrary, under all forms of statism no middle class emerges. Under capitalism a large and prosperous middle class emerges. In North Korea, Cuba etc, the vast majority struggle. Europe is the beneficiary of hugh subsidies from America (free defense, free medical innovation), when they have to pay their own bills we will see if there is any middle class under a central command economy.

Anonymous said...

"So the question becomes, when will American government, media and educators stop hitting America over the head with a hammer about a problem that is not really a problem anymore?"

Are you kidding? When those in the government, those in the media, and those in education no longer receive job promotions that result from their using that hammer.

And that can only happen when the Elites who placed them in those positions in the first place acknowledge the truth.

The problem is that Elites are the group least likely to acknowledge that people are limited by biological factors. Oh, of course they know it, but acknowledging it, publicly acknowledging it, talking about it, is another thing altogether.

It's a pretend game. They know it. We know it. But they don't want us to know they know it, to know they think it.

A liberal Elite sees himself as superior and is frightened that admitting some biological truths would reveal his feelings of superiority.

Sally Quinn and her ilk jump quickly to mind.

Such idiocy extends even to their inability to speak of things like deafness or autism or homosexuality as not "normal" or so they invent words which dance around such conditions because, after all, speaking of them as "conditions" suggests a pathology of sorts, they argue, and that wouldn't be nice, not nice at all.

Dennis Dale said...

The obvious answer is they will stop beating us when it stops yielding benefits.

Richard Hoste said...

During the second half of the 20th century liberals of the left (socialists) and liberals of the right (free marketeers) made common cause against the "paleo" "reactionary" notion that there are inherent differences between people and groups of people.

Which libertarians? Name names. Every prominent one that I've read-Milton Rand, Friedman, Mises, Rothbard, Hayek, Block-has either accepted HBD or been silent on it.

Anonymous said...

I don't know about Islam, but doesn't Christianity teach that folks are equal in the eyes of God? I.e., they deserve equal rites, not equal income, equal political power, whatnot. "What is Caesar's" and "what can be seen by God" aren't supposed to be the same, surely.

Certain extensions of Christianity into the secular sphere ... sure, they believe in concrete equality of result. This is why it makes no sense to take the God and souls out of a religion. Christianity extended equality into the unseen world, to defeat the hubris, coldness, and general dastardly behavior that rich/powerful/politically-connected people often display. The leftists took equality and tried to apply it to the material world.

That Christianity was imperfect in tempering dastardly behavior is beside the point. Take a religious doctrine that says Our souls are equal, then stop believing in the soul, and you get left-wing gobbledygook.

I don't blame the Christians.

Toadal said...

Peter A said ... in a market with no government intervention the less intelligent will always be at a disadvantage and often at the mercy of the less scrupulous intelligent people.

That is, unless, the less intelligent seize the reigns of power and demand payback. It is an interesting to ask how comfortable economically a country would be, if most of the top quartile were liquidated, fled, or became powerless because the remaining 3/4s viewed them as state enemies *or* they were left at the mercy of the less scrupulous intelligent?

Today, Cambodia is a parliamentary representative democracy with major sea ports with commercial facilities and with a GDP per capita of $823, while Laos is a land-locked, Communist single party state with a GDP per capita of $859.

We will never know how economically advanced Cambodia would be today had the Khmer Rouge not seized the country in 1975 and destroyed temples, libraries, and everything considered 'Western'. The Communist Pol Pot regime killed approximately one out of four of the population and especially targeted the intelligentsia and minorities. By 1984 it was estimated 85% of the countries ethnic Chinese had fled or had been killed and wearing eyeglasses in Phnom Penh in 1976 was as deadly has wearing the Jewish star in Hungary in 1943.

In South Africa today, government imposed affirmative action systematically prevents qualified whites from obtaining public and private employment and education contributing to large pockets of white poverty. Meanwhile, the African National Congress (ANC) majority party defends the continued singing of liberation struggle song, 'shoot the Boer' (white Afrikaner).

However, the SA 'Human Sciences Research Council' has estimated “If white South Africa were to be a country on its own, its per capita income would rank 24th in the world, next to Spain. But if black South Africa were to be a separate country, its per capita income would be 123rd globally , just above the Democratic Republic of the Congo”.

Anonymous said...

"By the way, I do not think that most black people accept that whites are on the average more intelligent. There are just some things that are too harsh for people to accept."


I often wonder what level of group intelligence /IQ/ realism is needed to accept that there are more intelligent groups than one's own?

kbkbmkfgigog said...

Here is another, perhaps related paradox. The overwhelming majority of black people I see who work in the private sector, whether in prestigious or decidedly un-prestigious occupations, are efficient and friendly and seem reasonably happy.

Then how come nearly all of them voted for Obama? How come all of them are for affirmative action--and may be beneficiaries of it?
There are plenty of blacks in the private sector who are just as ludicrous. Look at black athletes, movie and music stars, TV personalities, etc.
Also, even well-off blacks don't wanna admit it because it means they've 'sold out'. So, even they put on the 'rage of the black middle class' act.

There is no single WESTERN value system or ideology but many. Some have been hierarchical, some have been egalitarian, some have been rationalist, some have been spiritual, etc.

There is also the fact that some of the greatest crimes committed by the West was predicated on ideology or attitudes centered around racial differences. 50% of Congolese killed by Belgians. Black slavery and racial discrimination in America. Most terrifying of all, the Holocaust and Hitler's racial design to murder and/or enslave tens of millions of Slavs.

So, even though there is sound science behind theory of race, these theories were hijacked by radicals like the Nazis and other crude racial theorists for murderous or oppressive political objectives. Especially after WWII, it was a subject most people didn't want to touch.

And it just so happens that the most intelligent, most influential, and most powerful people in the US are Jews, the primary victims of radical racist ideology of the Nazis.

True racism must reject radicalism. True racism must simply mean race + ism = belief in races. But, idiots like Hitler ruined all that.

Also, the white right is very selective when they discuss racial differences. They'll say, OF COURSE, OF COURSE, OF COURSE, whites are smarter than blacks, but are SOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO loathe to admit blacks are physically stronger and faster--and better coordinated--than whites.

ffggtry said...

"The proposition that individuals can differ by innate mental ability and that races can differ by the average of such abilities" does conflict with at least one major Western philosophical tradition - Socialism.

Yes and no. Yes, in the sense that socialism seeks equality and eventually came to reject the concept of race. But initially, socialism didn't necessarily say people were innately equal. Many early socialists believed in individual and racial differences but believed that all people of a community should be more or less equal--socio-economically--for the collective good of all.

On the political and legal plane, Americans agree with this. Despite our knowledge of differences among individuals and races, we believe everyone should be equal before the law.

TGGP said...

I think Heckman, Coleman, Flynn or some others have concluded that while education can't do much about g, it can raise traits like conscientiousness. The other bit of evidence hopeful progressives use is that identical resumes with different racial signifiers get treated very differently (I think the same sort of thing has been found with gender, even with females doing the judging), and so they think getting rid of that prejudice will help things. But I think for the most part they aren't really thinking about evidence and consequences, just that racism and inequality are bad while trying to do something about it is good.

Melykin said...

I don't think there is anything in Christianity that says everyone has the same ability. In 1 Corintians 12 it says:

" 4There are different kinds of gifts, but the same Spirit. 5There are different kinds of service, but the same Lord. 6There are different kinds of working, but the same God works all of them in all men.

7Now to each one the manifestation of the Spirit is given for the common good. 8To one there is given through the Spirit the message of wisdom, to another the message of knowledge by means of the same Spirit, 9to another faith by the same Spirit, to another gifts of healing by that one Spirit, 10to another miraculous powers, to another prophecy, to another distinguishing between spirits, to another speaking in different kinds of tongues,[a] and to still another the interpretation of tongues.[b] 11All these are the work of one and the same Spirit, and he gives them to each one, just as he determines."

Eric said...

Anonymous: I am not an authority on Islam but I never heard equal gifts preached in Catholic schools. Rather the opposite.

The Catholics (and indeed most Christians) have always preached people are of inherently equal value because we all have a soul and we're all God's children. That doesn't mean we all have equal intelligence or talents.

I think the dissonance we're seeing comes from the campaign to remove all traces of religion from society. If you don't believe all that soul stuff then you can only believe all men are created equal through the use of self deception.

Personally I'm an atheist, but as a practical matter I think there's a great deal of benefit to living in a society based on Christianity.

Melykin said...

Fred wrote:
"Aside from Steve Sailer himself, who comes across like a well adjusted, well meaning guy, most HBD bloggers aren't doing a lot to help revive the brand. They don't just point out group differences, they revel in them. They like it too much. It's unseemly, and it turns people off. "
-----------------------

I've noticed this too. It has made me doubt that HDB will ever go mainstream. Instead of trying to get people to admit that HBD is true, it would be easier if the practice of collecting data about grades, employment, and so forth, by race, were to sort of fade away.

We should just stop keeping score (by race) and have everyone do their best.

Anonymous said...

Christianity and Islam, at least in theory, beleive in 'equality' and makes it harder for hbd

Christianity is 20 centuries old and Islam 14 centuries old. It's funny that the West is at the lowest point of Christian influence in at least 1200 years, and yet people are embracing compassion - and absolute racial equality, and open borders - as an inherent requirement of Christianity to a degree they never have before. Christians of the 19th Century certainly never embraced open borders.

The real problem is that, thanks to modern science, the only part of Christianity that isn't embarrassing to many people is the "compassion" stuff, so people who still want Christianity to mean something cling to "compassion" like a life raft.

AmericanGoy said...

"...a reasonably decent living doing not terribly onerous work."

Prithee, I disagree, sire.

The wages have not risen in a decade or more, the prices did, the jobs are gone and we went from 9-5 to 7-6.

I have never seen a more stressed out population about their jobs than Americans.

I have never seen less individualistic society than America either, but that is another topic.

Anonymous said...

HBD lets us be easier on ourselves. Too many people think they can be anything and then they are depressed when they don't reach it. I knew a guy in his 50's who was about 5'5" and was depressed because he thought he could have played in the NBA if he just practiced more. I can assure you this guy had ZERO chance of playing in the NBA. HBD says a lot of life is luck. Either you are born smart or not.It's true. People are also born with the determination to do things. So, whatever we are we don't get credit for it.
The Church teaches everyone has different gifts and the ones who are the luckiest must help those that are unfortunate.

Shannon Sharpe, the NFL player, said you wake up in the morning a great athlete.That's luck.

If we don't count the illegals, the people on the bottom aren't going anywhere, so we should want them to be as successful as possible. I agree we shouldn't make everyone pass algebra 2 to pass high school. Read Ivan Illich on what forced schooling does to people.
We punish people for not consuming a certain amount of schooling.Also, he says the Church created the first professional class by forcing people to go to confession in the 12th or 13th century. First, you needed priests to go to heaven, now you need teachers and schools to learn.

I think many Democrats are successful. They don't have a whiff of failure.People vote for many reasons. Maybe they want higher taxes on themselves to help others.

Levy Tax Fee said...

What has been going in America for many decades is Bolshevik Revolution 2.0

There is no time limit on the project

Trotsky preached permanent revolution

Mr. Anon said...

"Fred said...

Aside from Steve Sailer himself, who comes across like a well adjusted, well meaning guy, most HBD bloggers aren't doing a lot to help revive the brand. They don't just point out group differences, they revel in them. They like it too much. It's unseemly, and it turns people off."

There is indeed some truth to this. Like the guy at the party who tells everyone what he thinks about them, and claims that he's just "being honest". No, he's not being honest, he's being a jerk. Not everything that can be said (even if true) needs to be said.

On the other hand, some of what you perceive as gloating is just a local phenomenon, only seen at websites such as this one, where people are just exulting in the fact that they can say things that they are thinking, and that happen to be true, without being called names. So I don't think this problem is as big as you think it is.

Most HBDr's, I think, would prefer that all races had the same mean IQ. We take no pleasure in the world being the way it is. We merely recognize that we have to recognize that the world is as it is.

Tom said...

Intellectual ability is a rough proxy for 'worth' in most individual's minds. Thus socially accepting difference in intellectual ability is tantamount to society accepting (and eventually making policy and law in accordance with) the idea that one race is innately superior and another inferior.

I suspect that most people find the idea of a society based on that principle repugnant. The concept has a corrosive effect on both those who consider themselves superior and those who consider themselves inferior.

Would commenters care to name a society that has embraced the idea of racial superiority/inferiority that the United States could look to as a role-model?

More Anon said...

This unity of counterfactual opinion is a mental monopoly requiring state action to be sustained.

Critics of the status quo should search for the specific laws and regulations which keep the monopoly going.

My money is on the Civil Rights Act & state equal rights legislation. Since these affect media businesses and academic organizations, this also explains their boring biases.

There have to be some good works by egalitarians who love the current system and have documented its gradual enactment with glee. What's that bibliography?

Fred said...

Anon,

"HBD says a lot of life is luck. Either you are born smart or not.It's true. People are also born with the determination to do things. So, whatever we are we don't get credit for it."

Calvinism built this country. You've just described the opposite of it, but I think it's an accurate representation of the world view of most HBD bloggers. They're all smart, but have no apparent determination to better themselves or build something. Maybe they were born to blog and blog alone.

Anonymous said...

The real problem is that, thanks to modern science, the only part of Christianity that isn't embarrassing to many people is the "compassion" stuff, so people who still want Christianity to mean something cling to "compassion" like a life raft.

You people who don't know what the New Testament has to say about the matter really ought to take an afternoon off from your busy schedules, sit down with the thing, and read it.

Harry Baldwin said...

Tom said... Would commenters care to name a society that has embraced the idea of racial superiority/inferiority that the United States could look to as a role-model?

Pretty much all Western societies until the 1950s or so. There were liberals who insisted blacks were being held down, but generally people understood that there were limits on what we expected from them, though it wasn't polite to make too explicit a point of it.

With the dismantling of segregation and then the passage of affirmative action laws, blacks experienced what Shelby Steele calls "integration shock," that is, the realization that they can't really compete with whites intellectually. A vast amount of our society's energy is now dedicated to suppressing this obvious truth.

Anonymous said...

I've noticed this too. It has made me doubt that HDB will ever go mainstream. Instead of trying to get people to admit that HBD is true, it would be easier if the practice of collecting data about grades, employment, and so forth, by race, were to sort of fade away.

We should just stop keeping score (by race) and have everyone do their best.


Far more disturbing to me than the "gloating" are the people who recognize the truth of HBD but are more worried about people having their feelings hurt by the truth than injustices and societal-inefficiency brought about by race-denial.

Is your value system that warped, or do you fear some personal harm may result from the acknowledgment of racial differences?


Maybe they want higher taxes on themselves to help others.


That wouldn't make much sense. It would be pretty easy for them to donate any excess income they had to charity. No, people vote for higher taxes because they want *other* people to pay for social programs.


Would commenters care to name a society that has embraced the idea of racial superiority/inferiority that the United States could look to as a role-model?


Care to name a successful multi-racial society that the United States could look to as a role-model?

The Wobbly Guy said...

Care to name a successful multi-racial society that the United States could look to as a role-model?

Singapore? But the context is quite different, and size does play a huge part. Furthermore, there ARE tensions, just that we ignore them.

Truth said...

"Intellectual ability is a rough proxy for 'worth' in most individual's minds."

What country do you live in? Money is in mine.

Steve, it is totally amazing to me that after 15 years of doing this you cannot understand what is so incredibly simple. Take one of your own "Smart whites vs. Dumb Whites" pages and you will be much more able to understand.

HBDers are like sharks to some degree, they swim around looking for easy prey in unison, yet the second one of them scratches a gill on a piece of corral...

Your internecine intellect arguments go something like this (there's one a couple of threads back if you want to do your own research):

Northern European white: Well, we invented the whole world, maintain it and keep it running, but you guys are really well, "vibrant and colorful down in Greece, Ireland and Russia.

Southern European Dumb White: Dude, what are you talking about were all white?!?!

NEW: Yeah, well, er, kind of, but you know if we didn't have to carry you clowns in the EU, the per capita in Germany would be like, a hundred grand.

SEDW: Hey NEW, the gap is only 3-6 points FOCUS ON THE BLACKS!!!!

NEW: Yo Jose, I've already done that, besides it's true isn't it? I'm only telling the truth why deny it. I mean, you're not as dumb as a lot of "races". you should be proud of that.

SEDW: WE'RE ALL EQUAL, WE'VE CONTRIBUTED A LOT TO AMERICA AND EUROPE!!

NEW: Like what?

SEDW: Like Greek civilization and the Renissance.

NEW: Hey Alesandro, give me something since the wheel was invented...

SEDW: Well, um, err, uh. WE HAVE GREAT WINE AND ALL YOU HAVE IS THAT RIESLING SHIT!

So you see, it really isn't that complicated, people do not like to be told that they are stupid, or have someone else laud supposed intellect and accomplishments over them.

Shocking huh?

Anonymous said...

'Care to name a successful multi-racial society that the United States could look to as a role-model?'

Singapore?

Anonymous said...

Jaime Escalante, R.I.P.

Anonymous said...

'Care to name a successful multi-racial society that the United States could look to as a role-model?'

I would guess that the minorities in Singapore... Malays, Tamils. Euros would rather be a minority in Singapore than in Malaysia, thanks to LKY.

Melykin said...

anonymous wrote:
"Is your value system that warped, or do you fear some personal harm may result from the acknowledgment of racial differences? "
-------------------------

If HBD is introduced in a harsh way, I fear that it would lead to a lot of violence, and maybe to a civil war. I don't know what race you are, but if you are white, then imagine if East Asians were the majority, and they were lording it over you and rubbing your nose in the fact that East Asians have a higher IQ than whites.

I think HBDers should always keep in mind that differences in averages of groups can't be applied willy nilly to _individuals_. Men on average are taller than women, but there are still tall women and short men.

Anonymous said...

Totally agree with FRED.

Eugenics was generally accepted by the elites, scientific community and much of society until the Nazis came along. Now it is a taboo subject.

Anonymous said...

Steve, related and topical - just saw that Jaime Escalante died and was wondering what your thoughts were about his ability to get so many Hispanic students to successfully pass the Calc AP exam. I searched for comments about him on your blog, but you only referenced him in passing.

Thanks,
David

Anonymous said...

"Steve once wrote of Democrats that they exude a "faint whiff of personal failure". There is a little of that too with most non-Steve HBD bloggers."

I agree. Half Sigma needs to go away.

Anonymous said...

"Sadly, he dropped the ball on the violence show (the last episode) and argued that different levels of violence in different human populations is related to culture, not biology."

Culture is huge in restraining violence in societies. Anyone who has traveled around black Africa knows that across African capitals there are huge differences in crime rates.

Fred said...

Truth,

"SEDW: Well, um, err, uh. WE HAVE GREAT WINE AND ALL YOU HAVE IS THAT RIESLING SHIT!"

LOL. You left out the part about how the NWEs will argue that the ancient Greeks were of NWE ethnic stock.

You make a good point about people not wanting to hear that they're not so smart. Another point inherent in your example is that once you start slicing and dicing people by group, the smart/good group starts to get smaller and smaller. Just as Euros split between Northwesterners and Southeasterners, there will be splits between Northwest Europeans themselves (smart West Germans versus lagging East Germans, etc.).

As the good group gets smaller, more whites find will find themselves outside of it. Then maybe the dynamic will flip and those on the outside will turn on the smaller group.

Anonymous said...

Care to name a successful multi-racial society that the United States could look to as a role-model?

When arguing with non-American liberals (this is usually online) I sooner or later point the problems in the US regarding race. They, in turn cite the US as an example of a successful multi-racial society. Often the same people will also say that the US is the most racist society on earth. Go figure.

Nora Helmer said...

Anonymous said: "Culture is huge in restraining violence in societies."

Sure. My point, though, was that on the programme, Eia left us thinking that all peoples everywhere have the same proclivitiy toward violence (men more than women, though) and that the ONLY difference behind the different levels of violence in different societies is culture. Clearly that is unlikely and there have even been some studies to suggest that is not the case. (Whether Eia was unaware of this, or personally didn't want to "go there", or was censored by the national television station is unknown.)

In other of the programmes he managed to point out that all these HBD differences are products of BOTH nature and nuture. Like how many women engineers we have in Norway: 60 years ago there were probably none or close to none for cultural reasons. Now that the cultural ban has been lifted, we have a few. Not an equal amount of women engineers as men -- just a few. Why? For biological reasons.

Same with violence. There are BOTH cultural AND biological reasons for the different levels of violence amongst different peoples.

Nora Helmer said...

Melykin said: "It has made me doubt that HDB will ever go mainstream....

"If HBD is introduced in a harsh way, I fear that it would lead to a lot of violence, and maybe to a civil war."


Well, I'll keep you posted on how it goes here in Norway. ;-) HBD is clearly being introduced here in a big way (see my earlier post), but not at all in a harsh way I think (although some of the researchers who got taken down a peg or two on the show might disagree).

The interesting thing on the programme has been the man-on-the-street interviews. It goes to show what we all know -- ordinary people understand HBD intuitively. They've seen in their everyday lives that different people are just different. And these are not evil people going around without compassion for others. On the contrary, THEY are the tolerant ones. They carry on in their everyday lives maybe treating Jens with a little extra care because he's not that bright or accepting that Helga is something of a tomboy. No big deal.

BTW, I meant to mention that the programme ("Brainwash") has been put on at a very awkward time -- 10:30 p.m. on a Monday night. Nevertheless, it has had a viewership on average of 800,000 -- there's only 4.8 million people in the country! Also, I've noticed that online (where the programme can also be watched, at least here in Norway) the programmes have been watched by ca. 75,000 viewers.

The folk are taking note. (So far, no rioting in the streets!)

Bruce Banned said...

By the way, I do not think that most black people accept that whites are on the average more intelligent.
That's only true of US Blacks TODAY (not in the past). And Africans (real Africans), in particular, are true HBD believers. Which goes to show they're smarter than we give them credit for.

David said...

> I often wonder what level of group intelligence /IQ/ realism is needed to accept that there are more intelligent groups than one's own? <

It's hard for me to imagine the touchy mentality that would deny this. Wouldn't such a mentality have to hold the premise that there are no (or few) individuals smarter than it is - since what leads one to speculate on smarter/dumber is meeting smarter people?

My IQ is high, but I've been fortunate enough to work closely with half a dozen individuals whose general intelligence was simply awesome. (Surgeons, Jewish without exception.) It's no slur on oneself to acknowledge the existence of brighter individuals; so why is it regarded as such to acknowledge average group differences?

We all have our strengths. Why is it so easy to accept this on the individual level, but not on the group level (speaking on average)?

Tis a puzzlement.

David said...

My best take on this:

1 - One tradition it could clash with is "free will," i.e., the idea that anyone can be anything if he tries hard enough. Innate anything tends to rub hard against the idea of volitional virtue.

2 - People don't like being told they have limits. They especially don't like being told this by other human beings. Human beings, notoriously, are not motivated by pure science alone. The setting up of classes ranging from "the elect" down to "the untouchables" is inevitably rife with political motives, and people get awfully angry when demoted to the political class of "the untouchables."

3 - Without an autocratic government and insane egalitarian propagandists, there would be no conundrum. People would naturally accept who they are, embrace their strengths, and find their own level in the division of labor in a free economy. Additionally, again absent those two pernicious factors, nationalism would prevail (contra libertarian theory) because "birds of a feather flock together" and so there would be less group conflict simply because the groups would be mostly in different areas. (It's de facto separation of this kind that keeps the racial peace now.)

It's not hard to get on with other peoples, within limits. What creates today's problem is that peoples are being deliberately set against one another; or rather, their natural differences and enmities are being exacerbated, artificially. One way to pit group against group is to mix them artificially by law, for example by mass immigration and racial quotas.

David said...

> most HBD bloggers. They're all smart, but have no apparent determination to better themselves or build something. Maybe they were born to blog and blog alone. <

Ignorant ad hominem.

Max said...


Care to name a successful multi-racial society that the United States could look to as a role-model?


Singapore

Peter A said...

"By the way, I do not think that most black people accept that whites are on the average more intelligent. There are just some things that are too harsh for people to accept"

I disagree. I think black people actually tend to exaggerate in their own minds the extent to which whites are on average more intelligent. Gentile whites also tend to exaggerate in their own minds the extent to which East Asians and Jews are more intelligent on average.

Max said...

if you are white, then imagine if East Asians were the majority, and they were lording it over you and rubbing your nose in the fact that East Asians have a higher IQ than whites.


On average maybe. I doubt though
There is interesting question why east asians are not a lot more successful than whites on a global scale.

Any meaningful progress is made by individuals over 3-5 std deviations above normal (over 145+ IQ) , that is vanishigly small percentage of population.

Whether you are 100 or 105 IQ doesnt matter - you still useless

Only thing in play is how many people of genius level intelligence your race produces and enables them to reach their potential (very important part).

East asians are conformists which generally does not go well along with creativity and there are some research pointing that they are closer grouped around the mean ( on average asians are smarter, but have fewer genius level people - just like with females )

having smarter average helps with more stable society but can be detrimental to real progress. Singapore for example imports a lot of brain power in form of immigrants -despite having one of the best average IQ in the world and excellent education system and .

Anonymous said...

Fred and Truth's comments rehearse a familiar theme in the media--that all those who acknowledge racial differences do so because it gives a boost to their self esteem. (I may be a pathetic loser with a low IQ and poor personal hygiene, but I belong to a superior race!) That may be true of some of the commentators here, but not the majority. It has never bothered me in the slightest that Jews and East Asians have on average higher IQ's than whites, because I know that I have an IQ a couple of standard deviations higher than the average for any racial or ethnic group. As to whether Nordics have IQ's a couple of points higher than Southern Europeans, I have no idea and no interest in finding out.

I would prefer that there were no differences in intelligence between races, and if I could abolish them I would, but believing something that is not true and setting public policy on the basis of those false beliefs has real and sometimes disastrous consequences. Liberalism has destroyed the public schools in my lifetime. Open borders will destroy the whole country socially and economically within the lifetime of my grandchildren. There is no possible solution to our problems but reality based thinking--softened by a little hypocrisy.

Ian said...

Re. some comments about socialism and equality of talents among individuals:

"In spite of this advance, this equal right is still constantly stigmatized by a bourgeois limitation. The right of the producers is proportional to the labor they supply; the equality consists in the fact that measurement is made with an equal standard, labor.

But one man is superior to another physically, or mentally, and supplies more labor in the same time, or can labor for a longer time; and labor, to serve as a measure, must be defined by its duration or intensity, otherwise it ceases to be a standard of measurement."

- Karl Marx, Critique of the Gotha Program.

Luke Lea said...

The source of the problem is that our educated elites see "getting ahead" (rising to the top) as the primary measure of success. They therefore conclude an equitable society is one in which everyone -- especially ethnic minorities -- have an equal opportunity of getting ahead. They cannot imagine people can lead happy, fulfilling lives anywhere except at the top. Unfortunately they are making a society in which this is increasingly true.

John D said...

Aside from Steve Sailer himself, who comes across like a well adjusted, well meaning guy, most HBD bloggers aren't doing a lot to help revive the brand. They don't just point out group differences, they revel in them. They like it too much. It's unseemly, and it turns people off."

There is indeed some truth to this. Like the guy at the party who tells everyone what he thinks about them, and claims that he's just "being honest". No, he's not being honest, he's being a jerk. Not everything that can be said (even if true) needs to be said.


When NAM relative lack of success, or outright failure, and social pathologies are blamed on whites as the accepted reason for said failure, repeated ad nauseum, taught in schools, broadcast on networks, and regulated via laws as though it were true, then yes, HBD as the reason for said failure *does* need to be repeated, loudly and repeatedly until white people are no longer blamed for NAM failure. It really is about competing narratives about the reason for NAM failure. You either passively accept blame for things about which you are blameless, or you offer up what you believe to be the real cause.

HBD is the Occam's Razor theory, and yet it is it, and not the White Racism theory, which seems to require extraordinary evidence (if it's even mentionable at all).

I usually end up putting HBD deniers (and those who blame whites for NAM failure) on the defensive by saying how unfair and offensive it is to blame us and call us racist for things like disparate impact and "white privilege" when the only laws on the books that are discriminatory at all, discriminate against whites, and that NAMs, always and everywhere, (as a group) perform less ably than Whites and Asians on aptitude tests, etc, etc.

Unseemly though it may be to keep repeating HBD truisms, it is that necessary, because the blame falsely heaped upon us for NAM failure is relentless. We have to be equally relentless in offering up the real reason in order to hopefully get people to finally think clearly on this issue.

Paul Mendez said...

"By the way, I do not think that most black people accept that whites are on the average more intelligent. There are just some things that are too harsh for people to accept."

While I can't say that "most" black people believe whites are smarter, I can say that "many" do. They will sometimes even admit it out loud when white people are present, but mostly it is implicit in how they frame their arguments for the need for affirmative action, quotas, social services and the like. Blacks always ASSUME that such programs are specifically for them.

Concerned Netizen said...

"1) conflicts with no major Western religious tradition;"

Yes it does. Christianity teaches that there is neither male nor female, Jew nor Greek in the eyes of God.

"conflicts with no major Western philosophical tradition;"

Yes it does. Blank slatism is a major Western philosophical tradition. Maybe it's wrong, but still, you can't deny its existence.

"Here is another, perhaps related paradox. The overwhelming majority of black people I see who work in the private sector, whether in prestigious or decidedly un-prestigious occupations, are efficient and friendly and seem reasonably happy."

Not my experience at all. I don't know where this friend gets this conclusion. The vast majority of black people that I've encountered are a standard deviation below whites in every occupation I've seen them.

In banks, most of the blacks I've encountered are quite simply incompetent.

C. Van Carter said...

"conflicts with no major Western philosophical tradition"

Modern 'classical' liberals erroneously believe the prevailing notion of universal equality is a deviation from classical liberal principles, when in actuality it is a consequence inevitably following from them.

Melykin said...

I think it could turn out badly to be among a minority population that has a higher IQ than the majority. It is unlikely the lower IQ majority will say "Gosh, we are so happy you guys are smarter than us and are running all the businesses and getting all the good jobs!"

Look what happened to the Jews in Europe and the East Indians in Uganda. Things aren't looking good for non-blacks in South Africa either.

I guess multiculturalism just doesn't work very well at all--especially when there are biological difference in behaviour and ability between groups. The US had blacks left over from slavery, and Mexicans coming over the border. However, Canada and Europe deliberately set about to import people of different races. *sigh* This HBD stuff is depressing.

Just because you don't want to live next to people of different races doesn't mean you are a racist. Most people wouldn't want to live next to their mother-in-law, either. It doesn't mean they hate her, just that some relationships work better at a distance.

Anonymous said...

There is no guarantee that the times you live in will be rational. Had you been born in the High Middle Ages you would have reacted to charge of being a witch much the way today you might react to being called a racist. Neither of these charges can be adequately defended. Both accusations have power because they assume a hidden evil essence. You couldn't tell the Inquisitor that you were just a non-believer, an agnostic. No matter what you said or did he would conclude that you were the spawn of the devil. Similarly today there is no point in protesting that you are merely being true to the science of human differences. Al Sharpton knows that in your secret heart you are an evil racist who hates black people.

So what would you have done back then if your reason led you into unpopular beliefs. The sensible thing for an individual to do would be to keep your head down and wait for the bad ideas to go away. In the case of witchcraft and heresy that was a bit more than a thousand years. Our silly but popular race equality ideas may not endure that long but they will surely be around throughout the lifetimes of every one now on earth.

I'm sorry if that's not a message of hope, but that's the way it is. All your life you have to be careful about what you say if you have kept up with Jensen or Rushton or even Sailer.

Cheer up though, you may feel a little sorry for yourself because you don't really have free speech. But imagine living with unpopular ideas a millennium ago. Tens of thousands of men and women were burned to death in Europe and Europe was then probably the best and freest place on Earth. Remember that in the early thirteenth century (The Golden Century) torture was introduced - as a reform!

Life is good today, just not perfect.

Anonymous said...

in a market with no government intervention the less intelligent will always be at a disadvantage and often at the mercy of the less scrupulous intelligent people (think ponzi schemes, lotteries, etc.)

Except that without government intervention, those people would still be protected by customary and traditional social forms. It takes government intervention to empower a stupid person enough to be worth taking advantage of.

Anonymous said...

I would mention that Singapore is ONE SINGLE city on ONE SMALL island. Hardly a valid example.

Sam said...

The main reason HBDs like to point out group differences seems to be sexual envy.

Black guys can attract white women. Therefore, the HBDs have to come up with reasons ( usually IQ) as to why blacks are "inferior."

Anonymous said...

I dunno, Truth, I'm Irish-American and I grew up in an increasingly Chinese-dominated society. It really doesn't bother me that I am not as smart as Chinese people and that they mostly think I am a pretty funny monkey who can do some useful tricks and maybe get housetrained. When I look at the IQ of Nations and I see that the average IQ of my old country is 90, I just nod and think that sure explains a lot. Honestly. I think African-Americans and Meds are touchy about group differences in a special way. Other groups don't care. I've had SE Asians in particular come right out and say to me that white children are smarter than their children, without rancor. Intelligence isn't as important to everyone as it is to Westerners and NE Asians, and other people are just mellower, too.

steve burton said...

Troof, it is totally amazing to me that after [insert correct number here] years of doing whatever it is that you think you're doing here you cannot understand what is so incredibly simple.

Steve Sailer is not, like you, one to ground all his stuff in anecdote. He is, as John Derbyshire puts it, a "data-naut."

I expect that if you could come up with some reliable statistics about the prevalence of "NEW" supremacism among HBD'ers, he might take an interest.

But why should he care about some dopey exchange in his comments section, to which you can't be bothered to link, and which you parody instead of quoting?

John D said...

Melykin said:
If HBD is introduced in a harsh way, I fear that it would lead to a lot of violence, and maybe to a civil war. I don't know what race you are, but if you are white, then imagine if East Asians were the majority, and they were lording it over you and rubbing your nose in the fact that East Asians have a higher IQ than whites.


See, I don't think very many people have any interest at all in lording it over others, or rubbing peoples noses in details like group higher IQ. Personally, for me it is a defense against my own group being vilified for other groups' failure. That's it. Have other groups stop blaming us for their failure and we can stop pointing out the more rational and likely cause, group difference in IQ. But again, absolutely no in interest lording it over others, nor rubbing their noses in IQ facts.

We'd be pretty stupid to have that as motivation seeing as we're third in the group pecking order (if you count Ashkinazim as a distinct group). No, we must point to HBD to counter the spurious charges of white racism being to blame for NAM lack of success.

Whiskey said...

Eugenics is terrible. No true HBD advocate would propose sterilization or such stuff ... because genetic diversity means you NEVER KNOW what sort of genes just might be critical to human survival!

That's different from a public policy of importing lots of lower IQ, poor people.

Take for example, Germans vs. Greeks. The Greeks came out of the first Dark Ages with basically nothing, and Greece around 600 BC was really, nothing at all. By 400 BC the astonishing Acropolis was up! An explosion never seen since that laid the foundation for Western Civilization. At the time, Germans were a bunch of savages. Who remained so some time after Charlemagne slaughtered the Saxons, basically about another 1300 years of unbroken savagery and low IQ.

Look at European History (before say, 1500), and you can see nations arising from nothing, really, to astonishing heights, very, very rapidly. Scotland for example was feuding clans similar to Iraq or Mexico, and yet only a few years after Culloden, it was fair to speak of the Scottish Enlightenment. Today its a gloomy, depressed failure.

IMHO this suggests that culture can move sexual/natural selection very rapidly, and at a minimum push higher IQ people much farther even if there are not many of them if the culture is aligned right: generally stability, relatively fair rule of law, individual property rights, and so on.

HBD does not imply "the prison of destiny" because Europe alone suggests that losers can change rapidly to winners, and vice-versa.

AnotherDad said...

Would commenters care to name a society that has embraced the idea of racial superiority/inferiority that the United States could look to as a role-model?

Yes -- the United States pre...1965. Certainly pre-WWII. I agree with the Hitler thing, this is "Hitler's revenge". Though it wasn't Hitler himself, but the running room that left for the Franz Boas, blank slate types in the aftermath.

The little data point i'd allude to is MLK's "I have a dream" speech. If you remember what he said in the key passage, "... will be judged by the content of their character ...". The passage, explicitly accepts *judgment* of blacks – i.e. which whites being the majority culture, means by white standards – but asks for a fair shake. It’s the whole “fair shake” thing that’s the appeal. But the point is he did not say anything like "blacks and whites" are equal, or deserve equality. That would have been a joke, at the time. And whites are not asked to accept it. Only give the fair shake. It is later, once this ball got rolling … with the left’s “long march through the institutions” that we got where we are.

~~~~

HBD bloggers … all true. But they are geeks. And when one keeps hearing crap that makes absolutely *no* sense – spoken seriously, treated seriously – then one gets fixated.

And it’s just a fact, a lot of problems, including massive waste – educational stupidity, government spending, legal mau-mauing and rent seeking, this massive housing bubble that’s dragged us into recession and, of course, the immigration disaster … all revolve around this one very simple issue, that people *used* to free speak, and that pretty much everyone still *knows* … but which can’t be uttered in public: People are not the same.

Svigor said...

Blame Hitler. Group differences were accepted by the mainstream by the early 20th century. Eugenics was considered a common sense policy. Then Hitler came along and killed the brand.

Blame Stalin. Anti-racism, radical equalitarianism, and race-denial were accepted by the mainstream in the 20th century. Then Stalin came along and killed the brand.

Oh, wait...

Fred, this doesn't withstand scrutiny. Hitler's tree was heard 'round the world, and Stalin's tree didn't make a sound, even though the latter was more than three times as big as the former.

Who, whom?

Svigor said...

I suspect that most people find the idea of a society based on that principle repugnant. The concept has a corrosive effect on both those who consider themselves superior and those who consider themselves inferior.

If most people find the idea repugnant, why does our elite work so hard to stamp it out? Seems like a lot of work for something that naturally takes care of itself.

Svigor said...

Contrast homosexuality, which most people naturally do find repugnant, yet our elite does everything it can to change that natural opinion...

Svigor said...

If HBD is introduced in a harsh way, I fear that it would lead to a lot of violence, and maybe to a civil war.

Compared to what? The myth of racial equality is a very new idea, historically speaking. How did we cope before the glorious revolution of the sixties?

if you are white, then imagine if East Asians were the majority, and they were lording it over you and rubbing your nose in the fact that East Asians have a higher IQ than whites.

You left out a few bits - the part where the yellows are being screwed over under the myth of racial equality, and the fact that whites create advanced civilizations just fine on their own, for examples.

Blacks are "broken," and that's being blamed on whites, all under the religious imperative that blacks are cognitively identical to whites (and therefore, minority failure is down to majority malfeasance).

And people who question the religious imperative are the bad guys?

Svigor said...

You make a good point about people not wanting to hear that they're not so smart. Another point inherent in your example is that once you start slicing and dicing people by group, the smart/good group starts to get smaller and smaller. Just as Euros split between Northwesterners and Southeasterners, there will be splits between Northwest Europeans themselves (smart West Germans versus lagging East Germans, etc.).

As the good group gets smaller, more whites find will find themselves outside of it. Then maybe the dynamic will flip and those on the outside will turn on the smaller group.


The upshot being that self-determination and free association make good universal values; all those groups can agree they don't want anyone forcing them together.

Svigor said...

Yes -- the United States pre...1965. Certainly pre-WWII. I agree with the Hitler thing, this is "Hitler's revenge". Though it wasn't Hitler himself, but the running room that left for the Franz Boas, blank slate types in the aftermath.

THANK YOU. Well, I'd add the mass media (all hands on deck!), inter alia, but at least we're heading in the right direction.

Svigor said...

Bob has a broken leg. He blames it on Joe. They go to court and Joe produces documents proving Bob's leg was broken before the two ever met.

The judge rules Joe's evidence "unseemly" and rules in Bob's favor.

Anyone who doesn't think "WTF?" at this point has no business at all using the word "unseemly." Anyone who lets this slide, much less defends Bob and the judge, has no business pointing the finger of justice at anyone.

Svigor said...

I posted this already but either Steve didn't like it, or it got eaten, so I'll reformulate:

If HBD is introduced in a harsh way, I fear that it would lead to a lot of violence, and maybe to a civil war.

A lot of violence, relative to what? Anti-HBD has only reigned for a half-century, tops. How did we get along before?

I don't know what race you are, but if you are white, then imagine if East Asians were the majority, and they were lording it over you and rubbing your nose in the fact that East Asians have a higher IQ than whites.

1. Europeans blazed the trail of advanced civilization for east Asians; we'd get along just fine without their help.

2. If east Asians were just "lording it over" Europeans, that'd be one thing; if they were trying to prove Europeans already had "a broken leg" to disprove Europeans' claim that Asians "broke their leg," that'd be something entirely different.

John D said...

@Svigor, who wrote:
Bob has a broken leg. He blames it on Joe. They go to court and Joe produces documents proving Bob's leg was broken before the two ever met.

The judge rules Joe's evidence "unseemly" and rules in Bob's favor.

Anyone who doesn't think "WTF?" at this point has no business at all using the word "unseemly."


Just in case I was misconstrued, when I used the word "unseemly", it was to represent how the brainwashed masses think of any mention of HBD.

Concerned Netizen said...

Further to my above comment, I've read on this blog many times that the more successful the black person, the angrier they are.

Svigor said...

Just in case I was misconstrued

Nah. I just wanted to add the fact that pointing out the judge's malfeasance is a moral duty, pretty much the opposite of "unseemly" or "repugnant."

You see this a lot, the complete inversion of reality, justice, and morality, ultimately tracing back to radical leftists.

Svigor said...

East asians are conformists which generally does not go well along with creativity and there are some research pointing that they are closer grouped around the mean ( on average asians are smarter, but have fewer genius level people - just like with females )

If I had to guess, I'd blame conformism (proxy for "different behavioral genetics" IMO) more than a narrower curve. Just my hunch. Also, I've yet to see anything definitive on the narrower Asian curve.

On a side note, I'd like to know how the Ashkenazi curve's geometry compares to that of Europeans; seems like such a tightly-knit group should have a narrower curve, no?

Truth said...

"Bob has a broken leg. He blames it on Joe. They go to court and Joe produces documents proving Bob's leg was broken before the two ever met."

Well, let's just say, totally hypothetically, that Bob originally fractured his leg, oh, back where he was from, and it was worsened by having to stand on it for three months shackled on a ship from his hometown to Charleston...

Fred said...

"Blame Stalin."

Sorry Svigor,

Not following you. If your argument is that Stalin -- and not Hitler -- gave eugenics/racialism/HBD a bad name, feel free to explain your reasoning.

Luke Lea said...

If we lived in a world in which people on the left three-quarters of the bell curve could lead lives as good, if not better, than the strivers at the top, then most of the racial tension in our society would evaporate. It does not require income redistribution:

http://facingzionwards.blogspot.com/

Anonymous said...

Could it be it be as simple as that denying HBD is a successful strategy of one group against another? Who is getting money transfers? Who is accumulating wealth? Who is controlling information distribution? Who is growing demographically and who is shrinking? Who has the freedom to move to another group's territory and who doesn't? Who is the 'wave' of the future? Who is presented as young and dynamic and who as old and outdated?

If you were certain groups living in certain areas would YOU not want to think that HBD is evil and full of illusion? IF it benefits you of course??? It makes perfect sense to me. All this HBD talk stuff pro or con is mostly rhetoric and human delusion.

We really are evil little creatures. ALL of us. Why we do good sometime is the real mystery. Total war will finish us off anyway, unless we get off this planet fast.

-Pessimist

P.S. Singapore is not a racial paradise. It's a Chinese dominated enclave that BARELY tolerates the other minorities. It's in a constant state of tension over race. And think - they only have three segregated races to worry about. Now I see 'local' disillusioned blond whites walking around central Singapore as if it's some sort of a safe haven for them. LOL

Babyface Nelson said...

Well, let's just say, totally hypothetically, that Bob originally fractured his leg, oh, back where he was from, and it was worsened by having to stand on it for three months shackled on a ship from his hometown to Charleston...

Then, well, let's say Joe produces documents proving that Bob's never been anywhere near Charleston, but in fact has spent his entire life in Addis Ababa. Then Joe produces other documents proving that practically every single person in Addis Ababa, Nairobi, Lagos, and a whole lot of other cities uhhh, nearby, just happen to have broken legs, too - and appear to have been born with them.

I'm with the earlier commenter here who mentioned that racial differences in intelligence are discussed not because HBDers "revel in them" but as a defense against charges that whites are responsible for the poor performance of blacks and hispanics, and, supplementarily, in regards to immigration.

Quit blaming me for black poverty and quit flooding our nation with millions of Third Worlders and in short order I will pretty much stop talking about, and even stop thinking about, the IQ disparity between races. Really, I have better and more satisfying things to do with my time.

Anonymous said...

Black guys can attract white women. Therefore, the HBDs have to come up with reasons ( usually IQ) as to why blacks are "inferior."

Liberals love this one! Lauding the freemarket in sex.

Only connect.

Fine, so lets extend that to every area of human activity. Where does that leave your beloved NAMs then?

Anonymous said...

if you are white, then imagine if East Asians were the majority, and they were lording it over you and rubbing your nose in the fact that East Asians have a higher IQ than whites.

Dont have to imagine too hard. East Asian states have more people than the US. In fact don't East Asian states have more people than the all white countries put together? Not far off it anyway.

Svigor said...

Not following you. If your argument is that Stalin -- and not Hitler -- gave eugenics/racialism/HBD a bad name, feel free to explain your reasoning.

Fred, I'm casting doubt on National Socialism as the actual source of race-realism's bad name. Nazis killed 10 mil, so race-realism (inter alia) gets a bad name. Commies killed 30+ mil, so why are Commie values (anti-race-realism, inter alia) embraced?

Coverage, maybe? Hundreds (if it hasn't clicked over into four digits by now) of Holocaust flicks, and zero Holodomor flicks. If there's a Gulag flick out there it's news to me, too. If a tree falls in the forest and no one's around to hear it, no, it doesn't make a sound.

Haven't we had this conversation a couple times already?

Svigor said...

Hollywood and Madison Avenue are the reasons (Nazi) race-realism is vilified, and (Commie) anti-race-realism is enforced, even though the Red Terror was way worse than the Third Reich (it also began before and ended after). They also explain why Commies aren't really on the villain radar (it's "cute" to wear shirts bearing portraits of Commie leaders).

Not some imaginary, spontaneous mass consensus based on 10 minutes of high school history.

Svigor said...

"Bob has a broken leg. He blames it on Joe. They go to court and Joe produces documents proving Bob's leg was broken before the two ever met."

Well, let's just say, totally hypothetically, that Bob originally fractured his leg, oh, back where he was from, and it was worsened by having to stand on it for three months shackled on a ship from his hometown to Charleston...

1) Are we talking about Joe and Bob, or their great grandfathers? Sounds like two different cases to me.

2) There's always the issue of whether Bob's leg is actually broken, what with it being stronger than any of Bob's brothers' (or cousins', or countrymen's), back in Africa.

3) Sounds like a case for societal divorce. Concomitant restitution (adjusted for prior payments & benefits) for partial injury might be reasonable, given divorce.

4) Each of our positions is (race-realist) heresy.

(P.S., I think the ships usually went up to Boston before they came down to Charleston)

Anonymous said...

Max, what you say has the ring of truth.

Real, quantum-type progress does involve the outer limits of the Bell curve; probably in the remote past that was an IQ of 90-100 and these people likely invented the crucial stone-age innovations like the spear-thrower, needle and thread,rock-painting and really sharp and well balanced 'hand-axes' (actually a frisbee-like killing machine). These things are only obvious in retrospect and from the vantage point of a triple-digit IQ.

Two things about this all: firstly, for innovations to become entrenched, you need a cast of supporting actors; those who can practise the innovation, see its potential, maybe extend its use, refine its manufacture, and most importantly, value the real innovators. Here the East Asians excel, and our society has also been quite good at this.

The second point is that in the past, given the very obvious fact of human IQ increase from the ancestral/simian ~45 to the present Euro/Jewish/Asian 100-115,it can only be concluded that the brighter people expanded at the expense of the less bright. This is intuitively and also logically obvious; point is that today, and probably for the first time ever,this trend is being reversed in the west at least, with lower IQ people being prioritized over the higher, in many subtle and not so subtle ways. Much of this is self-inflicted low fecundity on the part of our own high IQ elite, many of whom seem curiously indifferent to our society's impending implosion.

Singapore, of all places, seems to be the one Asian place where Asians are also afflicted by this problem. The government is frantically trying to encourage high-IQ reproduction, and not very successfully.

Solutions, anyone? I say use the tax system in a very determined kind of manner.

Anon.

Truth said...

"But why should he care about some dopey exchange in his comments section, to which you can't be bothered to link, and which you parody instead of quoting?"

Ask, Sport, and
Ye shall receive.

Truth said...

"I dunno, Truth, I'm Irish-American and I grew up in an increasingly Chinese-dominated society. It really doesn't bother me that I am not as smart as Chinese people and that they mostly think I am a pretty funny monkey who can do some useful tricks and maybe get housetrained."


You're a better man than I, Gunga-Din.

Truth said...

"Contrast homosexuality, which most people naturally do find repugnant, yet our elite does everything it can to change that natural opinion..."

"natural" must be defined. The elites of ancient Rome and Greece did not find it repugnant, quite the opposite, they found it natural and even preferable, for uses outside of procreation.

A lot of what we consider "natural" is merely "timely."

Truth said...

"Then, well, let's say Joe produces documents proving that Bob's never been anywhere near Charleston..."

"1) Are we talking about Joe and Bob, or their great grandfathers? Sounds like two different cases to me...."

I'm not sure to what you guys are referring, I was making a hypothetical.

Truth said...

Bah-hawwwwwwwwwwwwwwww!

LMAO!

Oh my god, Svigor and babyface just put a fist through their screens.

You guys have to admit, I'm one funny bastard.

Anyway;

"Then, well, let's say Joe produces documents proving that Bob's never been anywhere near Charleston, but in fact has spent his entire life in Addis Ababa. Then Joe produces other documents proving that practically every single person in Addis Ababa, Nairobi, Lagos, and a whole lot of other cities..."

If you set a fire in someone's house, does, "well, it wasn't conducted up to fire codes" get you off charges?

"in short order I will pretty much stop talking about, and even stop thinking about, the IQ disparity between races. Really, I have better and more satisfying things to do with my time."

Apparently, you don't. Lance Armstrong has something better and more satisfying to do with his time than thinking about the IQ disparity between races...riding bikes, therefore that's what he does.

Jim Bowery said...

"when will American government, media and educators stop hitting America over the head with a hammer about a problem that is not really a problem anymore?"

Wrong question. The right question is why do these folks work so persistently with the apparent goal of starting a race war?

Truth said...

"1) Are we talking about Joe and Bob, or their great grandfathers? Sounds like two different cases to me."

We're talking about Bob and Joe's grandfathers, but folks around the way say that Bob's grandfather taught Bob's father how to walk, run, ride a bicycle and do everything that involves locomotion the only way he knew how...with a limp. Correspondingly Bob's father taught the same lessons to Bob, and now Bob, like Tim Tebow, has to learn how to do it all the right way as an adult.

"2) There's always the issue of whether Bob's leg is actually broken, what with it being stronger than any of Bob's brothers' (or cousins', or countrymen's), back in Africa."

Of course there's also the issue of, has Bob working in Joe's factory for so many years caused Joe's sales to be much higher than any of Joe's brohers' (or cousins, or countrymen's) back in France.

"3) Sounds like a case for societal divorce. Concomitant restitution (adjusted for prior payments & benefits) for partial injury might be reasonable, given divorce."

You are aware that in terms of divorce, the less powerful party generally gets to stay in the house, right?

"4) Each of our positions is (race-realist) heresy."

Why?

"(P.S., I think the ships usually went up to Boston before they came down to Charleston)"

Yeah, but they didn't break Bob's leg in Boston, they just severely sprained his ankle.

Lesacre said...

"all men are created equal."

The statement should be that the Hereditarian Hypothesis conflicts (present tense) with no current Western religious or philosophical tradition, baring cultural Liberalism.

For those philosophically challenged, Let's remind ourselves what we are talking about.

To quote me:

"According to the Hereditarian Hypothesis, some interpopulation (race in the sense of 2a) intellectual performance differences in the US and abroad have a partial genetic etiology. A crude interpretation of this would be that there are more smart people in some given populations, than in another. Naturally, we are not talking about some populations being smarter across the board; we are talking about average propensities. Individual genotypes are not directly communicable across populations, as individuals do not infer qualities to groups and back down to other members. My being born did not make my family or others of my specific and our general population less smart or less stupid. What I say or what I communicate might, since culture, or memotype, is directly communicable, but genes are not."

Here, I discuss the metaphysical gymnastics you need to jump through to deduce 'inferiority.'

http://lesacred.wordpress.com/2010/03/10/the-hereditarian-hypothesis-and-the-banal-charge-of-racism/

In Aristotelian or Thomist terms we would say all men are substantially equal, but accidentally different.

In modern terms we could say all men and women are equally human, yet not identical.

steve burton said...

Troof: there is no exchange at the link you provide that even remotely resembles your parody.

alexander said...

I have been underwhelmed at the quality of theology going on in the comments. There has been proof-texting ("neither jew nor greek"). There has been oversimplification and conflation. I will not speak of the various Protestant traditions, but neither proposition conflicts with Catholic tradition, which has always had a reverence for intellectual achievement. A previous commentor made a good distinction as to our equal value but differing gifts. It is no contradiction to say that, while we may differ in intelligence, we are equally valuable, because our value as humans doesn't derive from our intelligence.
I would, however, agree with a previous critic of point 2. Some philosophers would deny the existence of innate mental abilities, such as Locke. Also, existentialists believe that there is no set human nature, but we continually define and redefine ourselves with every choice we make.

Anonymous said...

"4) is probably believed by the majority of ordinary people of all races;"

I think we can modify that to

"4) is probably believed by the majority of people of all races and political leanings;"

The problem for liberals is that they believe in heritable IQ and difference in racial averages in their hearts, but they have such fear of that belief being true that they don't want to look at it closely. As a result, their hearts contain only their gut feelings, which may well be even more hereditarian and race-differenced than reality. Cf taht liberal commentor who said of Obama, "I forgot he was black for an hour!"

Max said...


Singapore, of all places, seems to be the one Asian place where Asians are also afflicted by this problem. The government is frantically trying to encourage high-IQ reproduction, and not very successfully.

Solutions, anyone? I say use the tax system in a very determined kind of manner.


My solution is eugenics. I dont see fecundity race between high and low IQ as solution. (Which is what "lets encourage high IQ birth rates" policy is)

We have more than enough people already, including the high end of bell curve. We can reduce population to 30-50 million of 150+ IQ people and have much better society .We dont need population of several billions of average IQ, its just a waste of resources

Of course my point of view is a very fringe one . And I dont believe current society will ever adopt it . But I don't believe current society has any future anyway, what comes after it might very well maximize utility function . Utility function defined in this case as maximization of efficient control over environment trough science and technology

Svigor said...

Bob vs. Joe, part 2

"2) There's always the issue of whether Bob's leg is actually broken, what with it being stronger than any of Bob's brothers' (or cousins', or countrymen's), back in Africa."

Of course there's also the issue of, has Bob working in Joe's factory for so many years caused Joe's sales to be much higher than any of Joe's brohers' (or cousins, or countrymen's) back in France.

Objection your honor! The plaintiff is changing the subject, which is, "is Bob's leg actually broken?" Bob's leg, and his father's leg, and his grandfather's leg, are/were all stronger than the legs of anyone back home in Bob's native land. These folks just have weak legs, it seems, made stronger, not weaker, by being near Joe's family. I move for dismissal.

And for the record, Bob received all the compensation he was due for his labor when he cashed the paychecks Joe wrote him, irrespective of how well Joe's business has fared relative to that of his kin back in the Old Country. And on a side note, I submit that I welcome the chance to, should there be a separate case, discuss the laughable notion that Joe's success relative to his countrymen back in the Old Country is down to gimpy Bob and his gimpy ancestors; sans the handouts Joe's given Bob, Joe would be even further ahead of his kin back in the Old Country.

"3) Sounds like a case for societal divorce. Concomitant restitution (adjusted for prior payments & benefits) for partial injury might be reasonable, given divorce."

You are aware that in terms of divorce, the less powerful party generally gets to stay in the house, right?

Nah, this is cultural divorce, totally different. In a cultural divorce, Bob and Joe simply agree to go their separate ways and all disputes and claims are null and void (you know, each has to make his way in the world on his own, like a man?); each party knows he's not due consideration for employment, handouts, compensation, or anything else.

"4) Each of our positions is (race-realist) heresy."

Why?


Lol. Never mind.

Yeah, but they didn't break Bob's leg in Boston, they just severely sprained his ankle.

We've already dealt with the fact that Bob, his dad, and his grandad all have stronger legs than any of their countrymen back in Africa. His leg was broken (congenital defect, like all of his countrymen) back in Africa before he boarded the ship.

Cheer up though - I think Bob may have a case against his cousin, Tom, the guy (with a broken leg) back in Africa who bopped him on the head and put him on a ship to the New World.

Svigor said...

Bob vs. Joe part 1:

"1) Are we talking about Joe and Bob, or their great grandfathers? Sounds like two different cases to me."

We're talking about Bob and Joe's grandfathers, but folks around the way say that Bob's grandfather taught Bob's father how to walk, run, ride a bicycle and do everything that involves locomotion the only way he knew how...with a limp. Correspondingly Bob's father taught the same lessons to Bob, and now Bob, like Tim Tebow, has to learn how to do it all the right way as an adult.

Wow, you really have no respect for Bob's family, do you?

Sounds like Bob, his father, and his grandfather were spectacularly incompetent. Or maybe con artists? Barring spectacular incompetence, who else but a con artist cultivates a limp for 3 generations? Think about all the pity parties at Bob's house; "yeah, the world was our oyster till Joe's great-grandfather made our great-grandpa's broken leg worse..."

Your solution is that great grandpa Joe's descendants should pay to support great grandpa Bob's descendants, because Bob's whole family is incompetent, or con artists? Yeah, let's go in front of the judge with that one. Bob had better hope for a corrupt judge (maybe he's afraid of what Bob will do if he comes to the "wrong" decision, or maybe Bob has powerful friends), and a corrupt appeals judge, and so on... In fact, Bob better hope for a corrupt legal system, and hope it stays that way...

alfonzo portfolio said...

In describing blacks who are employed, in either sector, as "content," Steve's friend is missing a very salient part of the picture. The reason that such blacks workers are not particularly disgruntled is that they are almost universally left alone to produce whatever level of performance the feel like giving. I see no evidence whatsoever of anyone ever telling a black worker that they're not up to speed. As others here have noted before, AA permeates all relations. The most content blacks of all are urban bus drivers. This is because the combination of the public sector and the nature of the job means that they're captain of their own ship and are free to indulge their primadonna natures. The reason you seldom see a black trial lawyer is because an essential aspect of that work is kissing the judge's ass (I did it for 20 years).

Fred said...

"Fred, I'm casting doubt on National Socialism as the actual source of race-realism's bad name. Nazis killed 10 mil, so race-realism (inter alia) gets a bad name. Commies killed 30+ mil, so why are Commie values (anti-race-realism, inter alia) embraced?"

Svigor,

I don't think commies in Russia, China, etc. were known for "anti-race-realism"; they were just more focused on class than race. So it's understandable that "anti-race-realism" didn't get tainted by their murders. Communism certainly did though, as you may have noticed.

"Coverage, maybe? Hundreds (if it hasn't clicked over into four digits by now) of Holocaust flicks, and zero Holodomor flicks. If there's a Gulag flick out there it's news to me, too. If a tree falls in the forest and no one's around to hear it, no, it doesn't make a sound."

If it will cheer you up at all, I googled "Stalin is evil" and got almost 2 million hits. So the world is aware that he was evil.

And there isn't just a shortage of gulag flicks, there is a shortage of flicks about the Eastern Front in World War II (I can think of one, "Enemy at the Gates"). That's because such a focus would both diminish and tarnish our national mythology about the "Greatest Generation". We'd have to remember that in WWII we were allied with one of history's worst mass murderers and that his troops and his people were more responsible for defeating Nazi Germany than we were.

Also, remember, re Nazi concentration camps versus Soviet gulags: American generals toured liberated concentration camps, and filmed the piles of emaciated corpses. They didn't tour and film any Siberian gulags, for obvious reasons.

Back to the topic at hand though, if you don't think the footage of those piles of emaciated corpses, left behind by a genocidal regime that was driven by an ideology of scientific racism, sullied the brand of HBD/eugenics/race-realism? What do you think did?

Anonymous said...

If our present well-fed and well-informed society cannot manage to impart the necessity of "breeding up", so to speak, to the challenges we are going to face in the future, what does that say about the crucial difference IQ made in out species history? Maybe we are overvaluing IQ. Women today all want and all preferentially desire tall men and women, and the business culture actively discriminates against short men and women. So, if we tested them would we find a high correlation between height and IQ? of for that matter for "handsomeness" and "beauty" vs. IQ?
Sexual attractiveness in and of itself outweighs IQ in predicting success in mating, I think.

For Svigor said...

Svigor:

The movie you seem to be lookin for is: "As Far as My Feet Can Carry Me". At least, I think that that is the name of it.

It involves a German WWII soldier who becomes a prisoner in a Soviet mining camp in a Siberian location so cold and remote that the Russians don't even bother to put a fence around the camp.

It is in German, with subtitles.

Anonymous said...

"That's because such a focus would both diminish and tarnish our national mythology about the "Greatest Generation". We'd have to remember that in WWII we were allied with one of history's worst mass murderers and that his troops and his people were more responsible for defeating Nazi Germany than we were."

That is an overstatement. We didn't know the truth about Stalin. You are correct about who did more to defeat Hitler, but the 'Greatest Generation' did its part, and they were most responsible for beating Japan.

Anonymous said...

Truth, you're right, that garbage is endless. At some point -- and it occurs very early on -- it moves way beyond understanding reality and becomes none too subtle ethnic one-upmanship .

Take that uppity Canadian snot who bought a car off the Lebanese dealer. He sounds like a loser who has once been burned and is now determined to 'stand his ground' (like a good Anglo-Saxon!), so rather than answer the Lebanese's question, eg "On Friday you told me it'd be ready by Monday" and then see what the Lebanese had to throw at him, and put the Lebanese on the back foot, he stood his ground and got hung up on. Whatever 'point' he think he proved, he was still without car and now without explanation too. In short, an idiot.

All that might be 'g' but what the IQ fetishists neglect is that there's a lot more to life than 'g', lawl.

David said...

The spoils of war come from the vanquished, not from allies. The amount of money made out of the Holocaust is whopping. No one cares about 30 million dead in Russia because there was no money to be made out it.

More lucrative to sue the defeated parties silly. Heck, Jews even got their own nation out of it, though not many of them actually live there.

Human rights abuses are probably more numerous in China than they were in Hussein's Iraq. But since the former is our financier and the latter was our "enemy," you will forever hear more about (non-existent) wood-chipper executions than you will hear about Asian slave labor. (And more about non-existent weapons of mass destruction than about Chinese nukes.)

Mr. Anon said...

"John D said...

When NAM relative lack of success, or outright failure, and social pathologies are blamed on whites as the accepted reason for said failure, repeated ad nauseum, taught in schools, broadcast on networks, and regulated via laws as though it were true, then yes, HBD as the reason for said failure *does* need to be repeated, loudly and repeatedly until white people are no longer blamed for NAM failure."

I quite agree. The current situation dictates that some people need to be offended.

Svigor said...

Bob vs. Joe, part 1

"1) Are we talking about Joe and Bob, or their great grandfathers? Sounds like two different cases to me."

We're talking about Bob and Joe's grandfathers, but folks around the way say that Bob's grandfather taught Bob's father how to walk, run, ride a bicycle and do everything that involves locomotion the only way he knew how...with a limp. Correspondingly Bob's father taught the same lessons to Bob, and now Bob, like Tim Tebow, has to learn how to do it all the right way as an adult.

Wow, you really have no respect for Bob's family, do you?

Sounds like Bob, his father, and his grandfather were spectacularly dysfunctional. Or maybe con artists? Barring spectacular dysfunction, who else but a con artist cultivates a limp for 3 generations? Think about all the pity parties at Bob's house; "yeah, the world was our oyster till Joe's great-grandfather made our great-grandpa's broken leg worse..."

Your solution is that great grandpa Joe's descendants should pay to support great grandpa Bob's descendants, because Bob's whole family is dysfunctional, or con artists? Yeah, let's go in front of the judge with that one. Bob had better hope for a corrupt judge (maybe he's afraid of what Bob will do if he comes to the "wrong" decision, or maybe Bob has powerful friends), and a corrupt appeals judge, and so on... In fact, Bob better hope for a corrupt legal system, and hope it stays that way...

Svigor said...

Bob vs. Joe, part 2

"2) There's always the issue of whether Bob's leg is actually broken, what with it being stronger than any of Bob's brothers' (or cousins', or countrymen's), back in Africa."

Of course there's also the issue of, has Bob working in Joe's factory for so many years caused Joe's sales to be much higher than any of Joe's brohers' (or cousins, or countrymen's) back in France.

Objection your honor! The plaintiff is changing the subject, which is, "is Bob's leg actually broken?" Bob's leg, and his father's leg, and his grandfather's leg, are/were all stronger than the legs of anyone back home in Bob's native land. These folks just have weak legs, it seems, made stronger, not weaker, by being near Joe's family. I move for dismissal.

And for the record, Bob received all the compensation he was due for his labor when he cashed the paychecks Joe wrote him, irrespective of how well Joe's business has fared relative to that of his kin back in the Old Country. And on a side note, I submit that I welcome the chance to, should there be a separate case, discuss the laughable notion that Joe's success relative to his countrymen back in the Old Country is down to gimpy Bob and his gimpy ancestors; sans the handouts Joe's given Bob, Joe would be even further ahead of his kin back in the Old Country.

"3) Sounds like a case for societal divorce. Concomitant restitution (adjusted for prior payments & benefits) for partial injury might be reasonable, given divorce."

You are aware that in terms of divorce, the less powerful party generally gets to stay in the house, right?

Nah, this is cultural divorce, totally different. In a cultural divorce, Bob and Joe simply agree to go their separate ways and all disputes and claims are null and void (you know, each has to make his way in the world on his own, like a man?); each party knows he's not due consideration for employment, handouts, compensation, or anything else.

"4) Each of our positions is (race-realist) heresy."

Why?


Lol. Never mind.

Yeah, but they didn't break Bob's leg in Boston, they just severely sprained his ankle.

We've already dealt with the fact that Bob, his dad, and his grandad all have stronger legs than any of their countrymen back in Africa. His leg was broken (congenital defect, like all of his countrymen) back in Africa before he boarded the ship.

Cheer up though - I think Bob may have a case against his cousin, Tom, the guy (with a broken leg) back in Africa who bopped him on the head and put him on a ship to the New World.

Svigor said...

I don't think commies in Russia, China, etc. were known for "anti-race-realism"

The Soviet Union officially opposed racism, discrimination, chauvinism, anti-Semitism, etc. Anti-Semitism was outlawed. What they were "known for" just goes back to who's got the bullhorn; the US and the Soviet Union called one another racist during the Cold War, trying to one-up one another in the anti-racist status game.

And there isn't just a shortage of gulag flicks, there is a shortage of flicks about the Eastern Front in World War II (I can think of one, "Enemy at the Gates"). That's because such a focus would both diminish and tarnish our national mythology about the "Greatest Generation". We'd have to remember that in WWII we were allied with one of history's worst mass murderers and that his troops and his people were more responsible for defeating Nazi Germany than we were.

I see. The media undermines western traditions, values, and confidence at every turn, but when it comes to WWII, they're all waving the flag? Maybe "which flag?" is a good question.

But, after WWII, Germany became one of our biggest allies, and the Soviet Union our main adversary. So, what were the patriotic filmmakers doing undermining our ally and ignoring, downplaying, or whitewashing our greatest enemy?

Can you explain why the Pacific theater practically never happened as far as Hollywood is concerned, relative to the European?

Also, remember, re Nazi concentration camps versus Soviet gulags: American generals toured liberated concentration camps, and filmed the piles of emaciated corpses. They didn't tour and film any Siberian gulags, for obvious reasons.

So? American military personnel probably got a good look at Dresden, too. If the American military produced a significant number of the films in question, this might be persuasive. Star Trek did its part in the "fight against racism and xenophobia," despite the fact no one's ever set foot on Alpha Centauri.

Back to the topic at hand though, if you don't think the footage of those piles of emaciated corpses, left behind by a genocidal regime that was driven by an ideology of scientific racism, sullied the brand of HBD/eugenics/race-realism? What do you think did?

And we're back to whether a tree makes a sound if it falls in the forest and no one's around to hear it. The Soviet regime was driven by an ideology of scientific anti-racism, the infinite plasticity and interchangeability of man, etc., and left behind more than three times as many corpses as the Nazi regime.

Do you really think Soviet anti-racism and modern American anti-racism are significantly different? They obviously come from the same source.

If it will cheer you up at all, I googled "Stalin is evil" and got almost 2 million hits. So the world is aware that he was evil.

Yeah sure. But compare the thrust of politics in the west, and anti-communism doesn't even compare to anti-Nazism; compare the "guilt by association" games vis-a-vis Nazi values vs. Commie values. Call people Nazis and they blanch. Call people Commies and they laugh. Call people racists and they blanch; call them anti-racists and they preen.

Anonymous said...

Back to the topic at hand though, if you don't think the footage of those piles of emaciated corpses, left behind by a genocidal regime that was driven by an ideology of scientific racism, sullied the brand of HBD/eugenics/race-realism? What do you think did?

Svigor is a major critic of Jews. What he's saying is that, of the extensive menu of mass-murdering 20th Century socialists, Jews have narrowed the focus towards hating only the ones who killed Jews. Mao, Pol Pot, Ceaucescu, etc. get a pass.

I don't consider Jews' roles in all of this to be surprising or offensive, but the "forget Stalin! hate Hitler!" meme may well be a testament to Jewish influence. I am not so sure myself, because it could also be attributed to sheepishness about criticizing GreatestGen attitudes and actions. We tend to remember our allies, even if they didn't by any stretch of the imagine deserve to be our allies. By recognizing the enormity of the USSR of the early 1940s, we make ourselves look like fireside-brainwashed, New Deal-worshipping UN puppets.

Which we are, more or less.

Anonymous said...

Sexual attractiveness in and of itself outweighs IQ in predicting success in mating, I think.

Probably true, but that would be hard to measure. IQ is negatively related to drug addiction, short time horizons, getting into fights all the time ... things that reduce sexual attractiveness. Put another way, dim attractive people may beat smart plain people, but both pools are drowned by the huge quantity of dim ugly people.

Svigor said...

Komment Kontrol.

Truth said...

"Troof: there is no exchange at the link you provide that even remotely resembles your parody."

Taken directly from the post:

"What's up with all the bashing of Near Eastern origin caucasians, anyway? Lebanese, Persians, and Armenians may be a bit on the clannish side (at least for the first generation or so) but are plenty sharp and their kids seem to do fine in school.

Ah, here we go again, another post going on about how Protestant Germanics are so superior to all those Southern Europeans and Irish/Polish Catholic sorts. Bull.

I agree with you. I guess the bashing derives from the fact that no small majority of the commentators on here are obsessed with extolling their WASP/Germanic roots, as if no other group of Caucasians (or Asians for that matter) has ever contributed anything to society.

------ Dubious. If the touted northern European heritage is so important why does a NON Northern European white people like Jews consistently post better educational performances and higher IQ that the supposedly pace-setting "Nordic" whites?

Oh please. Multiculti America is all about extolling the contributions of everybody BUT the WASP/Germanic populations that founded this country.

Now Steve, if it resembled it any more closely, it wouldn't be a parody, it would be a copy.

Truth said...

"Or maybe con artists? Barring spectacular incompetence, who else but a con artist cultivates a limp for 3 generations?"

Naturally brilliant, God-touched, blessed people in West Virginia and Kentucky have lived in shacks for 10 generations now, primarily because their ancestors passed that way of life down the line.

"Objection your honor! The plaintiff is changing the subject, which is, "is Bob's leg actually broken?" Bob's leg, and his father's leg, and his grandfather's leg, are/were all stronger than the legs of anyone back home in Bob's native land."

Yes, and Joe, his father and his grandfather all have wider waistlines than their relatives in Europe, because Bob and his line worked very hard in their factories, and did not earn what they should have. It's called symbiosis, my boy.

"And on a side note, I submit that I welcome the chance to, should there be a separate case, discuss the laughable notion that Joe's success relative to his countrymen back in the Old Country is down to gimpy Bob and his gimpy ancestors"

Why not, same white folks, and skin color is destiny, right?

Truth said...

"In a cultural divorce, Bob and Joe simply agree to go their separate ways and all disputes and claims are null and void..."

The problem is that Joe runs the court systems, the legislatures, the and the business ventures, Joe ran the cruise ships that brought Bob here, Joe functions as the landlord, the policeman, and the clergy, and guess what, Joe asked Bob to marry him, Joe spiced up the marriage when it started to flag, and when Bob wanted to go back home and live with his parents, Joe owned of the vehicles but did not one to loan one to Bob, because, well, he loves Bob, always has, always will, and to death do them part.

Truth said...

As per the Russia-Germany thing; it is an Anglo world, we play by Anglo rules, and the Anglo rulebook states as such:

A king may murder as many people as he wants within his own borders, once he crosses one of those imaginary lines and starts murdering someone who speaks a different language, he is labeled a monster. It has worked that way roughly since the Magna Carta.

Fred said...

"Can you explain why the Pacific theater practically never happened as far as Hollywood is concerned"

What are you smoking, Svigor? You don't think Hollywood made movies set in the Pacific during WWII? Seriously? Do you get TCM? You should watch it sometime.

"So? American military personnel probably got a good look at Dresden, too. If the American military produced a significant number of the films in question, this might be persuasive."

And they got a good look at Tokyo too, which was similarly fire-bombed (not to mention Hiroshima and Nagasaki, of course). Dwelling on those horrors would tarnish the Greatest Generation mythos though, as I already pointed out. But, Americans did at least see footage of Dresden, Tokyo, Hiroshima, and Nagasaki, because Americans were there to take that footage. The same wasn't true of Stalinist gulags.

"Call people Nazis and they blanch."

Sorry you are troubled that people think Nazism was a bad thing.

Svigor said...

By recognizing the enormity of the USSR of the early 1940s, we make ourselves look like fireside-brainwashed, New Deal-worshipping UN puppets.

By recognizing the enormity of Americas sins (Colonization, Slavery, Vietnam, Segregation, Discrimination, bla bla bla), we make ourselves look like, well, what exactly? Nice guys?

Svigor said...

The spoils of war come from the vanquished, not from allies.

Have you heard? The Soviet Union is gone. Still waiting for those lawsuits...

Svigor said...

Bob vs. Joe, part 3

"Or maybe con artists? Barring spectacular incompetence, who else but a con artist cultivates a limp for 3 generations?"

[people in WV]


Objection! This has nothing to do with Bob's claim that Joe owes him a living via handout.

[waistlines in Europe]

Objection your honor! The plaintiff is changing the subject, which is, "is Bob's leg actually broken?" Bob's leg, and his father's leg, and his grandfather's leg, are/were all stronger than the legs of anyone back home in Bob's native land.

"In a cultural divorce, Bob and Joe simply agree to go their separate ways and all disputes and claims are null and void..."

[Plaintiff claims Joe mistreated Bob, and that Bob & friends conspired to prevent Bob from returning to the motherland]


The plaintiff's argument that Joe cannot culturally divorce Bob because of all the supposed mistreatment Bob has received at Joe's hands is not just absurd on its face, it's self-defeating. The plaintiff's argument that Joe cannot culturally divorce Bob because the whole world was conspiring against Bob is even more absurd.

Joe doesn't run the court system, the legislatures, and the business ventures; Bob's friends do. Joe never ran any cruise ships. The police favor Bob, and Joe certainly never asked Bob for a cultural marriage.

And the idea that Bob wanted to go back to the mother land is ludicrous, as he's had his entire life to buy tickets if that's what he wanted; he spent the money on rims, drugs, stereo equipment - enough to buy passage back to the homeland a thousand times over. The fact is, people offered to pay for his passage and set him up in the homeland (well they used to, but now they call that "racism"), but Bob knows perfectly well where the gravy train is. He figures his best chance is to sponge off of Joe forever. He knows all the legs back in the homeland are far more broken than his. He also knows that practically everyone back in the homeland is itching to be where he is.

Bob simply has no claim on the sweat of Joe's brow. It's insulting to everyone (Joe, Bob, Joe's attorney, Bob's attorney) to claim otherwise, and a rank injustice toward Joe. I've shown, clearly, that Bob's claims are spurious.

What's worse is that the plaintiff proposes that Joe's children should support Bob's children, and Joe's grandchildren should support Bob's grandchildren, and so on, and so forth, in perpetuity. I submit to the court that this intended malfeasance is evidence that the plaintiff is a malicious criminal and con artist, not a genuinely aggrieved party.

Svigor said...

I also have the instructive case of Klaus vs. Bob.

Klaus is a Polish immigrant. Bob has accused Klaus of breaking his leg, too. Bob thinks Klaus should support him via handout, too, and has brought a case against him.

Klaus never had any ancestors in America, not in the courts, not in the legislature, not in the police, not in business (cruise ships or otherwise). Klaus never employed Bob or his ancestors, in fact, Klaus has never met Bob or his ancestors, at least not before Bob brought suit. The same is true for Klaus' ancestors.

Yet, a court has ordered Klaus to pay Bob a living via handout. This clearly illustrates what Bob (and his powerful friends) are really up to.

Svigor said...

"Can you explain why the Pacific theater practically never happened as far as Hollywood is concerned"

What are you smoking, Svigor? You don't think Hollywood made movies set in the Pacific during WWII? Seriously? Do you get TCM? You should watch it sometime.


Compared to the European theater, it didn't. Pacific theater movies died out a long time ago.

"Call people Nazis and they blanch."

Sorry you are troubled that people think Nazism was a bad thing.


Now there's a comment free of disingenuousness! Ask for proportionality and you're the bad guy. Funny how that comment is precisely in line with the sort of thing I'm objecting to...

Svigor said...

What are you smoking, Svigor?

Loved the hostile edit, too, where you trimmed off the rest of the sentence.

Svigor said...

I'm preparing a suit against the Mongols and the Saracens. If it weren't for the damage these groups did to Europe, we'd be on Mars by now.

Clearly, modern Mongols and Saracens owe me a living via handout.

Anonymous said...

By recognizing the enormity of Americas sins (Colonization, Slavery, Vietnam, Segregation, Discrimination, bla bla bla), we make ourselves look like, well, what exactly? Nice guys?

It doesn't make sense to me either.

Svigor, have you ever made some big anti-Nazi statement to try to satisfy Fred and those guys? Just a thought.

Truth said...

"I've shown, clearly, that Bob's claims are spurious."

Clearly.