November 22, 2012

Singapore most unemotional country, Philippines most emotional

From a Gallup Poll written up in the Guardian.


47 comments:

backfill said...

And here's a Bizarro-World update from September: "OK, we will begin taking in fewer foreigners but it'll cost you" (and I thought Lee had a stroke last year, amazing to still see him calling plays--but that tropical lifespan is a killer)

Podsnap said...

Funny. I suppose that's why Singapore brings in so many Filipinos to look after the kids.

Giving those poor little mites a kiss good night after tiger mummy has had them up till midnight practicing the violin.

slumber_j said...

It's funny that when Eighties megaband Journey needed a dude to channel the mawkish vocal stylings of their former lead singer Steve Perry, the job went to a Filipino.

Henry Canaday said...

Most sentimental people: Germans, after three beers. They'll sing along with anything.

Reg Cæsar said...

I can't bring myself to care about this. Therefore, I must be Singaporean.

Care to join me for a drink at Raffles?

Anonymous said...

The Fillipinos are mostly a Malay people - and represent an early emigration out of China before the 'hardening up' affects of Ice Ages and mass population dependent on agricultural vagaries had developed in mainland China.
Singapore is run by overseas Chinese, outwardly phenotypically similar to Fillipinos, but genotypically 'toughended and hardened' by the aforementioned Ice and agriculture.

Anonymous said...

http://www.city-journal.org/2012/bc1112mt.html

Reg Cæsar said...

On second thought, the possibility that what I posted above may have insulted my dear Philippine co-workers brings tears to my eyes, and I cannot begin to apologize profusely enough. So I must be one of them!

Bakla! Putanginamo!

Anonymous said...

http://www.halfsigma.com/2012/11/ny-times-must-be-reading-steve-sailer.html

Anonymous said...

http://espn.go.com/boxing/story/_/id/8662680/hector-macho-camacho-declared-brain-dead-shooting-puerto-rico

Anonymous said...

It seems to me that Singapore is run almost entirely along the policy lines that have been advocated here at Isteve --- Singapore invites the highest IQ and most productive people in the world to move to Singapore and become citizens, but forbids people with genetically below average IQ from becoming citizens.

Certainly that seems to me to be the ultimate citizenist policy

As a separate issue, Singapore allows low iq guest workers to work temporarily in Singapore but not become citizens. I have never heard much of a citizenist objection to a guest worker policy such as this so long as it is enforced,

Dr Van Nostrand said...

I dont know much about Phillipines but I am not surprised how Singapore was rated seeing how it is one of the most sterile,totalitarian and joyless places on earth.But then its a consumer shopping paradise.

Its as if the Soviets and the Dubai govt got together and brainstormed their ideal state and got the Chinese to rule and Indians to administer.

Anonymous said...

Some of these results are surprising.

Georgians are famous for being hyperemotional; the drama queens and kings of the old USSR. None of the Scandinavian countries even made the "most emotionless" list. Canada was on the "most emotional" list, but not Italy or Spain?

Anonymous said...

Steve, in many countries in Asia, the local population has a genetically lower IQ than the Chinese immigrants. As a result of the higher Chinese IQ, the Chinese wind up with much of the wealth and much of the prestige and power. I am not Asian and am not an expert at this, but my understanding is that Chinese have genetically higher IQ than the natives of , Vietnam, Indonesia, Malaysia,Thailand and a lot of other countries.

From the perspective of pride and emotion, I can understand why the natives of these countries are resentful of their racially chinese overlords. But is it generally the case that the standard of living of the natives is higher because the Chinese live in these countries?

Could I make the case that Cambodia is such a failure and the people in Cambodia so wretched because Cambodia has failed to invite a racially chinese ruling class while at the same time Malaysia is a pretty pleasant place for the native Malays because the Malays invited racially Chinese to move to Malaysia to rule them?

Carl the Elder said...

These liberal rags really have to go through all kinds of contortions to try to knock on the success of capitalism to indirectly support the failures of hard socialism and other liberal pipedreams like multiculti.

Singapore is a dream. High employment, High GDP, Low crime, Low pollution, even a nice climate year round. A clear success story.

Give me fellow citizens that AREN'T vibrant and emotional. Plenty of emotional displays in Palestinians, Africans, and packs of wild dogs.








Anonymous said...

Anyone who's dated a Filipina girl can attest to the latter...

Anonymous said...

Kazakhstan?

JI said...

Happy Thanksgiving, everyone! Unless, of course, you live in Singapore, in which case I say, Impassive Apathyday!

Anonymous said...

There's something wrong with the survey or its interpretation. Georgia (the country) is listed as second least emotional behind Singapore. In reality Georgia is like Sicily, only much more so.

Anonymous said...

I once went to Singapore. Deeply sane clean rich no-nonsense place dedicated to calm-living and making money. They don't worry much about FoS, democracy, human rights or whatever.

I hate them slurping soup over the place though and they all love eating some foul-smelling "Durian"-fruit. I also saw more variety of East Asians down there than in the West. Not as big variety as among Westerners, but more than we're accustomed to.

Anonymous said...

Inscrutable Chinese, excitable Filipinos.

Anonymous said...

"The Fillipinos are mostly a Malay people - and represent an early emigration out of China before the 'hardening up' affects of Ice Ages and mass population dependent on agricultural vagaries had developed in mainland China."

I can think of another theory: the Malays could be a mixture of Mongoloids and Australoids, while the Chinese are purely Mongoloid. The Australoid contribution could be just a few percent. I don't know which of these two views is favored by genetics.

ATBOTL said...

"Could I make the case that Cambodia is such a failure and the people in Cambodia so wretched because Cambodia has failed to invite a racially chinese ruling class while at the same time Malaysia is a pretty pleasant place for the native Malays because the Malays invited racially Chinese to move to Malaysia to rule them?"

Did the Maoists count as a Chinese ruling class?

Kiwiguy said...

***It seems to me that Singapore is run almost entirely along the policy lines that have been advocated here at Isteve --- Singapore invites the highest IQ and most productive people in the world to move to Singapore and become citizens, but forbids people with genetically below average IQ from becoming citizens. ***

I'm reading "Conversations with Lee Kuan Yew". He quite matter-of-factly observes that different groups have different capabilities due to their different histories. He is quite skeptical about the long term competitiveness of the US for this reason.

So it's no surprise Singapore has a sensible approach in this respect.

Anonymous said...

FAO Carl the elder,

Singapore DOES NOT have nice climate year round.

You sweat like a dog and the humidity is oppressive.

I'd rather live in HK anyday than Singapore.

Anonymous said...

Could I make the case that Cambodia is such a failure and the people in Cambodia so wretched because Cambodia has failed to invite a racially chinese ruling class

Isn't the issue with Cambodia not so much that they failed to invite ethnic Chinese and other intellectual superiors, but that they exterminated their own?

Robot said...

The Chinese had waves of conquest by northern peoples- Mongolians, Manchurians, etc. spreading their Ice people genes into the population (well, into their daughters and wives, anyway), which happened after the ancestors of the Filipinos had already left the mainland.

The Wobbly Guy said...

I'm Singaporean. Not surprised by the result. We're usually quite stoic - being emotional doesn't get the job done and the paycheck in.

It's partly hardwired into our genes, and partly due to environmental factors which stress the importance of pragmatism.

On the flip side, we tend to be more cynical and suspicious, as well as having a "what-have-you-done-for-me-lately' attitude, which makes us poor guests and customers.

We want all things to be good, cheap, and fast, and if we don't get it, we complain. Complaining and whining are unfortunately our most common forms of emotional expression. You realise I'm whining now about our whining, lol.

It's also a very selfish mindset, which ironically makes Singaporeans prone to jumping ship to another country because of the better quality of life available once their income bracket breaches a certain level.

Anonymous said...

Give me fellow citizens that AREN'T vibrant and emotional. Plenty of emotional displays in Palestinians, Africans, and packs of wild dogs.

OTOH, ants are constructive and have little emotional capacity; but would you rather have a dog or an ant as a pet?

Hunsdon said...

Anonydroid at 9:24 a.m. said: Certainly that seems to me to be the ultimate citizenist policy (re: Singapore).

Hunsdon replied: Sir, or ma'am, you seem to have no reading comprehension at all. "Citizenism" is not about importing a better class of citizen, or a smarter class of citizen.

Read more, post less.

Anonymous said...

Singapore invites the highest IQ and most productive people in the world to move to Singapore and become citizens, but forbids people with genetically below average IQ from becoming citizens.

But the Chinese remain in charge and they arent about to change that.

elvisd said...

Could I make the case that Cambodia is such a failure and the people in Cambodia so wretched because Cambodia has failed to invite a racially chinese ruling class while at the same time Malaysia is a pretty pleasant place for the native Malays because the Malays invited racially Chinese to move to Malaysia to rule them?
Not exactly. There were quite a few ethnically Chinese people in Cambodia. Not suprisingly, they were well-off landowners and amongst the first to be targeted by the Khmer Rouge. Another Amy Chua "market driven minority" example.

Anonymous said...

In reality Georgia is like Sicily, only much more so.

Much more so indeed. Vendetta is still very much a fact of life in Caucasus. Georgians' famous short fuse can only be compared to blacks. And, there is something peculiar of the IQ distribution there. Seems to be slightly bimodal. An average seems to be rather low (and in agreement with "IQ and the wealth of nations") but it has a clear small bump on its right side - as evidenced by generally high culture and high success of the Georgian elite in Russian and Soviet empires.

Anonymous said...

Much more so indeed. Vendetta is still very much a fact of life in Caucasus. Georgians' famous short fuse can only be compared to blacks. And, there is something peculiar of the IQ distribution there. Seems to be slightly bimodal. An average seems to be rather low (and in agreement with "IQ and the wealth of nations") but it has a clear small bump on its right side - as evidenced by generally high culture and high success of the Georgian elite in Russian and Soviet empires.

It is as if there are two Georgian populations in the same Georgia, (the one in the Eastern hemisphere.) That was true in the early years of communism. Communism was unpopular in Georgia itself, so "Elite" Georgian emigres such as Stalin and Beria were active in Russia instead. Perhaps, these emigres were unpopular and atypical too (without saying the N-word).

Anonymous said...

Ok, so we all agree that people with genetically low iq are usually better iff ruled by a high iq race. For exapmple, as africa is colonized by chinese i expect african living standards to rise

Carl the Elder said...

" Anonymous said...

FAO Carl the elder,

Singapore DOES NOT have nice climate year round.

You sweat like a dog and the humidity is oppressive.

I'd rather live in HK anyday than Singapore."



FAO Anonymous-

Try spending some winters in Buffalo, NY then let me know whether sweating a little outside is "oppressive".

Jerry in Hong Kong said...



"Could I make the case that Cambodia is such a failure and the people in Cambodia so wretched because Cambodia has failed to invite a racially chinese ruling class while at the same time Malaysia is a pretty pleasant place for the native Malays because the Malays invited racially Chinese to move to Malaysia to rule them?"

--No. Other variables, such as a different strain of colonial experience, and a different reaction to it, are more important. Furthermore, Cambodia and Vietnam did have a substantial Chinese minority, which controlled the economy of these countries, until 1975. The Communist insurgency in Vietnam and the Pol Pot regime in Cambodia were not only anti-colonial, but anti-Chinese, under the guise of being anti-middle class and anti-city. "Before Kampuchea" is a good, readable and authoritative book on this from an academic who was in Phnom Penh in the early 1970's.

And one does not "invite" the Chinese... they find the openings, the weaknesses, themselves. They have now re-established themselves in Cambodia and Vietnam, they are returning to Africa, from where they had been kicked out during the independence movements in the 1970's, they are making beachheads in the soft underbelly of Europe such as Italy and Spain. However, the Chinese are so closely integrated into the societies of Thailand and Malaysia after having lived there for generations that often there is no point in distinguishing them from the "locals." The Chinese do not have much national patriotism, they certainly do not identify with their government. And because it is such a large country, China has never developed the sense of arrogant and separate racial identity that is so pungent in Korea and Japan, for example. China has always expected to dissolve its minorities within its endless sea of people, and the converse is true among the Chinese abroad, they tend to dissolve away. In a way, the limits of Chinese culture, its preoccupation with family and money above all, also limit the Chinese abroad in important ways. You could say the Chinese are like the Jews--but without the schul, without the tribal loyalties beyond family, without Judaism.

Ah, Singapore, the money launderer and logistics and industrial provider (six refineries!) to Indonesia and Malaysia (which was very poorly governed until recently) all under the protection of the US Sixth Fleet. American conservatives are always dependable in touting its crony capitalism and one-party regime, and always dependably naive, in the American way, about the hypocrisy of Lee Kwan Yew and others. I like Lee, he reminds me of Vaclav Klaus, but Singapore hardly has any lessons for America. Except perhaps one--if you want a racially diverse AND harmonious society, better forget about free speech. Racial insult is a broad category in Singapore, under the heading of "incitement," and people regularly go to jail there for making the kinds of comments that we here enjoy every day of the week. The government in Singapore knows that HBD is true, and it also knows that harmony is more important than truth.

A good book about the crony capitalism in "free market" Singapore and Hong Kong is "Asian Godfathers."

There are some big subjects here that we could have a lively discussion about, if Mr. Sailer ever allows real-time commenting for approved users...

john marzan said...

which place is better, HK or Singapore?

The Wobbly Guy said...

Jerry in Hong Kong is right.

The religious bodies in Singapore are also heavily infiltrated and controlled by the government and the ruling party PAP. Officials from PAP are inserted at all levels of society and business.

I guess it's a good thing, but it can also feel stifling to those who favor more overt displays of free speech.

Still, I'm here, aren't I? Shooting the breeze and making politically incorrect remarks, the same as most people here.

There's actually one more lesson Singapore can teach the US - even a so-called enlightened immigration policy that accepts the best and brightest can be hated by citizens, and may still be detrimental to natives and the collective whole known as a 'nation'.

Simply put, S'pore only has an indigenous population of 3 million. Countries like India and China have many times that. All they need is to send over the top 0.1% of their population, and we'll be overwhelmed anyway, leaving no trace of our customs, our social mores, our rituals that we have developed over long years of shared work and sacrifice by our forefathers.

Sure, the newcomers may be smart and successful, but they'll probably not be very loyal, and more likely than not Davos-type people. They're certainly not going to help protect Singapore when things go sour, nor send their heirs and sons to serve in our military conscription program!

As trends go, some here fear that if the current trend of immigration levels continue, the natives will have mostly left for greener pastures or bred out, leaving a mostly foreign-born population that lacks loyalty and national pride, and an emasculated military that has nice toys but not enough personnel to operate them.

The ultimate expression of Singapore Inc.

Don't let that happen to you.

The Wobbly Guy said...

@John Marzan,

It depends. Are you interested in becoming a citizen, or just as a place to stay?

If the former, Hong Kong is the better bet. If the latter, either is fine. Hong Kong is freer and more chaotic, lively. S'pore is staid, efficient, and well-run. Depends on what sort of person you are. Introverts would find Singapore more comfortable, and extroverts for Hong Kong.

Hong Kong has one huge advantage over Singapore - it doesn't need to operate a military. That alone enables more social spending / less and more competitive taxation. And of course, no wasting of their young people to serve in the military for any period of time.

There is also a slight downside, of course: the overbearing PRC government. But hey, compared to Singapore's ruling party, it's hardly any different. In fact, wags have considered HK to be still very much freer than Sg, and most S'poreans and Honkies concur.

Anonymous said...

I dont know much about Phillipines but I am not surprised how Singapore was rated seeing how it is one of the most sterile,totalitarian and joyless places on earth.But then its a consumer shopping paradise.

I'm gonna have agree with you on the word sterile. Even the slums are spotless and crime-free. In that respect, it's a lot like pre-1960's America right down to the 4 year interval between homicide report to perp execution.

Londoner said...

I sense Yan Shen's (anonymous) presence on this thread. Singapore is Shenbait in much the same way as female hypergamy and alpha males are bait to a certain other poster round these parts...

Hunsdson said...

The Wobbly Guy said: even a so-called enlightened immigration policy that accepts the best and brightest can be hated by citizens, and may still be detrimental to natives and the collective whole known as a 'nation'.

Hunsdon said: Thank you, sir. A nation is more than an aggregate of Randian high IQ supermen.

Anonydroid at 11:33 pm said: I'm gonna have agree with you on the word sterile.

Hunsdon replied: There was nothing, good sir, sterile about the pre-1960s United States. America was plenty vibrant, albeit not in our modern, PC-ridden sensse of the word.

Anonymous said...

There is also a slight downside, of course: the overbearing PRC government. But hey, compared to Singapore's ruling party, it's hardly any different. In fact, wags have considered HK to be still very much freer than Sg, and most S'poreans and Honkies concur.

What do you mean by Honkies? Hong Kongers, or white people?

Magic OJ said...

" Anonymous Anonymous said...

There is also a slight downside, of course: the overbearing PRC government. But hey, compared to Singapore's ruling party, it's hardly any different. In fact, wags have considered HK to be still very much freer than Sg, and most S'poreans and Honkies concur.

What do you mean by Honkies? Hong Kongers, or white people?"


-'Honkies' is a slang term among Chinese for people from Hong Kong; it doesn't have anything to do with white people.

I had to tell my Chinese gf she probably shouldn't go around using that term here in the states, people will probably take it to mean something quite different. She wasn't aware of the other meaning....

Anonymous said...

It's very strange as a Korean to see Sinophilic American HBDers invested in the idea that Han Chinese are NORTH East Asians, "Ice People", etc. From our perspective the Chinese are just the most numerous of those disorderly dark southern peoples with everted mouths and concave noses. Maybe it was different at the beginnings of Chinese civilization, but now the center of Chinese gravity and the core of racial Chineseness is in the lands of the former Yue. They are subtropicals, easily at home in Indonesia and now in Africa. People take the borders of the current PRC at face value without realizing how recent substantial Han presence in most of the Dongbei is.

john marzan said...

battle of the most and least emotional country on dec 8.

http://www.visayandailystar.com/2012/December/03/sportnews2.htm