tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post7344801212390106135..comments2024-03-15T20:52:26.967-07:00Comments on Steve Sailer: iSteve: Words of WisdomUnknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger61125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-21010803508822542672011-04-25T05:21:33.064-07:002011-04-25T05:21:33.064-07:00Set a beggar on horseback and he'll ride to th...Set a beggar on horseback and he'll ride to the devil.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-45173513569244452542011-04-24T19:32:36.291-07:002011-04-24T19:32:36.291-07:00>1000 years from now, what else of you other th...>1000 years from now, what else of you other than your progeny will be of any significance?<<br /><br />Significance to whom? Nothing will be of any significance to me one second after I flatline.<br /><br />I might - while alive - get a small glow from daydreaming about making a mark 1000 years hence. But that is so abstract that it's like daydreaming about vacationing in the Alpha Centauri solar system. I won't ever do that; so I had better turn my attention to my earthly business.<br /><br />A realistic reason for choosing to have children is that one simply likes that kind of lifestyle and likes the richness and rewards of the challenge. This motivates humans.<br /><br />Greatly helping the perception that a parental lifestyle can be likeable and that the challenge of parenthood has worthwhile richness and rewards are: 1. the possibility of "affordable family formation" (an iSteve topic); and 2. the example of stable families within a stable culture. If that positive context is a given, then the question "Why should I have children?" will occur to a numerical minority only.<br /><br />The problem of declining birthrates lies in the absence, the destruction, of that context. That's what we should address. To the extent that parenthood is made to be a total self-sacrifice, people won't have children, no matter how much Kant is quoted at them. Certain leaders knew this and successfully stimulated population growth mainly by provision and the convincing promise of more of it to come.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-89673467195914065992011-04-22T13:54:51.160-07:002011-04-22T13:54:51.160-07:00"Explain to me please, with the pro women law..."Explain to me please, with the pro women laws on the books and the huge bias against men in the courts, point 1?"<br /><br /><br />What state do you live? Most divorced people I know have to split everything 50/50 and share custody. I know a couple women who had to sell their businesses because they made more than their ex-husbands and had to be pay the guys to divy things up equally.<br />It depends on who make more money usually, and most courts favor joint custody. I can't know your personal experiences, but this is not 1968 any more.dcitenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-12497358190045088322011-04-21T18:46:13.610-07:002011-04-21T18:46:13.610-07:00It is also interesting to know that Abraham, Moses...<i>It is also interesting to know that Abraham, Moses, Mohammed, Buddha, and Confucius had living descendants. Jesus did not, at least none known to history. Does that mean he also had "loser DNA?"<br /><br />And if you accept the theory of Immaculate Conception, it means that Mary and Joseph also had loser DNA</i><br /><br />People unecessarily generalize Catholic belief of Mary's virgin birth of Jesus to mean that Jesus didn't have any siblings or family. This is not necessarily true.<br /><br /><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Names_of_Jesus_and_his_family" rel="nofollow">Although Jesus' best-known brother is referred to in English as "James" out of tradition, in ancient Greek documents this brother of Jesus is always identified as ᾿Ιάκωβος, or Jacob (Antiquities 20.9.1, Galatians 1:19), which was also a fairly common name, after the Hebrew patriarch. According to Mark 6:3, the other brothers of Jesus are named Joses (Joseph), Judas (Judah), and Simon (Simeon); these are three of the twelve tribes or sons of Israel. In Hebrew, the names of the brothers are Yaakob, Yosef, Yehudah, and Shimeon.)</a><br /><br />Wiki has a <a rel="nofollow">good explaination</a> why there is confusion about Jesus' family:<br /><br /><i>Jesus had "brothers and sisters", as reported in Mark[23] 6:3[59] and Matthew 13:55-56.[60] However, whether the verse literally meant brother or another close family member is still debated to this day. Prior to the 4th century, the standard theory was that they were Jesus’ "brothers" who were sons of Joseph though not of Mary. According to this view, Joseph was a widower at the time he married Mary. He had children from his first marriage (who would be older than Jesus, explaining their attitude toward him). This is mentioned in a number of early Christian writings. One work, known as the Proto-evangelium of James (A.D. 125) records that Joseph was selected from a group of widowers to serve as the husband/protector of Mary, who was a virgin consecrated to God. When he was chosen, Joseph objected: "I have children, and I am an old man, and she is a young girl." Today, the most commonly accepted view among Catholics is that they were Jesus’ cousins.[61] According to Robert Funk of the Jesus Seminar, the Catholic doctrine of Mary's perpetual virginity has long obscured the recognition that Jesus had siblings.[62] After Jesus' death, James, "the Lord's brother",[63] was the head of the congregation in Jerusalem[23] and Jesus' relatives seem to have held positions of authority in the surrounding area.[64]</i>Nortius Maximusnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-35330623698457340292011-04-20T22:14:31.301-07:002011-04-20T22:14:31.301-07:00Rick Detorie's ONE BIG HAPPY used to be a pret...Rick Detorie's ONE BIG HAPPY used to be a pretty loving celebration of family life but became mediocre after a few yrs. <br />Even so, the compilation SHOULD I SPIT ON HIM? is a minor classic of its kind. <br /><br />http://www.amazon.com/One-Big-Happy-Should-Spit/dp/1561631728Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-32824769103139153762011-04-20T22:12:42.854-07:002011-04-20T22:12:42.854-07:00It must be said one of the turn-offs for having ba...It must be said one of the turn-offs for having babies is the rather unpleasant biological processes surrounding pregnancy. <br />Before visual media, sex education, and health classes, most women got to know about childbirth by what they heard from their mothers or what they saw in women with babies. They knew that the baby came out of 'there' but didn't think too much of it. They knew it would be painful but had no real idea how powerful. <br /><br />But then came movies like BRINK OF LIFE by Ingmar Bergman where a woman giving birth to a child screams for what seems like forever. And in sex education classes, health classes, and on PBS, kids were shown what really happens during childbirth. <br />I still remember seeing a 16 mm film in highschool about childbirth and it was like a horror movie. It was the most digusting thing I ever did see. Like a Cronenberg film in fact. It was gross enough to see the baby squeeze out of the hole, but did the baby have to all squishy and oozing with slime? Worse, after the baby came out, a bucketload of liquid burst out of the hole. I could swear it was worse than the EXORCIST. I'd rather see a girl vomit pee soup or oatmeal than see a monster baby squeeze out and spew goo all over the place. I always wondered if the subtext of EXORCIST was about the anxiety surrounding puberty on the formerly 'innocent' psyche of a 'pure' girl. This could be a bigger psychological problem in Catholicism, with its adoration of the Virgin Madonna as the ideal of spiritual and physical purity. If the purest ideal is to give birth to the Son of God without having had sex, then all sex with men must be kinda 'impure'. So, puberty could be more frightening to Catholics than to others. <br />Not suprisingly, some clever exploitation horror-director ran with this idea and made BEYOND THE DOOR where a woman is impregnated by the devil. <br /><br />Maybe they shouldn't show films showing actual childbirth. Guys don't wanna go to war after seeing actual photos of war wounded and fallen, with torn off limbs, scarred facial tissue, missing eyes. <br />And many people don't wanna eat meat after seeing what really happens in animal farms and slaughter houses. I certainly eat less meat as a result--just the bare minimum for protein requirement but never for mere pleasure. <br />If a society needs a lot of fighting men in a time of war, it makes little sense to show grisly images and footages of war wounded. It lowers morale. And if we want people to eat more meat, we wouldn't show slaughterhouse films to consumers. <br />So, if we want more women to have kids, we shouldn't show all that gooey-ooey films and videos about childbirth. They are really gross.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-40641313569469644242011-04-20T15:38:55.619-07:002011-04-20T15:38:55.619-07:00It is also interesting to know that Abraham, Moses...It is also interesting to know that Abraham, Moses, Mohammed, Buddha, and Confucius had living descendants. Jesus did not, at least none known to history. Does that mean he also had "loser DNA?"<br /><br />And if you accept the theory of Immaculate Conception, it means that Mary and Joseph also had loser DNA.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-68859838092320125092011-04-20T13:18:38.712-07:002011-04-20T13:18:38.712-07:00It is easier to have children (or not have them) i...<i>It is easier to have children (or not have them) if other people behave likewise thus the interest in proselytizing. </i><br /><br />Read my previous comment about careful forethought and deliberation as a basis for making major life-changing decisions. The notion that mere proselytizing can substitute for such thought and deliberation is not worthy of comment.<br /><br /><i>Things will get bad for the baby-boomers, and will be even worse for gen-x, when these people become elderly and infirmed. </i><br /><br />The aging process is a matter of bio-engineering, nothing more. I prefer to deal with it directly (with biotechnology). <br /><br />To others, as I said before:<br /><br />My experience has been that those who wanted kids and had them were happy. Those that did not want kids and did not have them also are happy. The people who are unhappy are those that wanted kids, but for whatever reason, were not able to have them and those that did not want kids but ended up having them.<br /><br />This may not be true 100% of the time. But it is most certainly true at least 90% of the time.kurt9https://www.blogger.com/profile/02101147267959016924noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-2526700372760809152011-04-20T11:39:19.065-07:002011-04-20T11:39:19.065-07:00TGGP:
http://econlog.econlib.org/archives/2009/11...TGGP:<br /><br />http://econlog.econlib.org/archives/2009/11/the_effect_of_c.html<br /><br />ThursdayAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-4896808118549195462011-04-20T07:33:41.735-07:002011-04-20T07:33:41.735-07:00Our problem is that Aristotle and Plato and Socrat...<i>Our problem is that Aristotle and Plato and Socrates and Euclid and Archimedes and Cicero and Cato and Marc Antony and Caesars Julius & Augustus all had "loser DNA".</i><br /><br />Huh? Plato, Socrates & Augustus I'll give you, but Aristotle had a daughter, Cicero and Cato each had a son and a daughter, Antony had plenty of children (legitimate and otherwise), and we suspect Julius Caesar had some illegitimate spawn who lived to adulthood. We have no historical evidence one way or the other about Archimedes and Euclid, but there seems no reason to think they didn't marry and attempt families as was customary in their day and age.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-69528560036094356742011-04-19T23:14:02.269-07:002011-04-19T23:14:02.269-07:00The "elites" who rule the West are inten...<i>The "elites" who rule the West are intent on diluting the white race out of existence. This is beyond obvious. The best way to fight back against their extinctionist agenda is to breed. Soon, it will be the only way. </i><br /><br />In a couple generations all those pesky cynical smart people will die off and be replaced by Aryan baby-making automatons whose brains light up when they hear cooing noises.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-22328191136962875342011-04-19T22:51:31.975-07:002011-04-19T22:51:31.975-07:00Also,
http://boycottamericanwomen.blogspot.com/
...Also,<br /><br />http://boycottamericanwomen.blogspot.com/<br /><br />EnjoyAmericanGoyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00865892490752172185noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-10382540509941607072011-04-19T22:00:14.034-07:002011-04-19T22:00:14.034-07:00What is my selfish reason to
1) get married and
...What is my selfish reason to <br /><br />1) get married and<br />2) make babies?<br /><br />I work 8-10 hours per day, spend additional 2.5-3.5 hours in traffic.<br /><br />I am not getting a dog because I cannot spend enough time and I don't want to be cruel to an animal...<br /><br />Explain to me please, with the pro women laws on the books and the huge bias against men in the courts, point 1?<br /><br />Explain please, to a single guy living in the city, with the life wasted in a cubicle and in the car, point 2?AmericanGoyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00865892490752172185noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-50205003428156356372011-04-19T21:52:34.413-07:002011-04-19T21:52:34.413-07:00Thursday, I don't remember seeing such claims ...Thursday, I don't remember seeing such claims at EconLog. I thought the analysis was always restricted to married couples.TGGPhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11017651009634767649noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-90235305193876210392011-04-19T20:42:20.350-07:002011-04-19T20:42:20.350-07:00"Researchers find that"....
Unless the ..."Researchers find that"....<br /><br />Unless the finding is something that is obviously and empirically verifiable, and especially if it about a social issue, whatever follows this phrase is just whatever opinion is currently fashionable in the academic hive-mind. That is, its probably pernicious nonsense.<br /><br />On this particular subject, if you think you are a "contented adult" and don't have any kids, you're either not contented or not an adult.<br /><br />And you probably believe there's truth to be found in newspaper articles that begin "Recent studies have shown..."Isaac Bickerstaffnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-50301248527384372932011-04-19T20:29:39.061-07:002011-04-19T20:29:39.061-07:00Loser dna dies out and winner dna keeps on truckin...<i>Loser dna dies out and winner dna keeps on trucking. Mother Nature ain't no leftist. She's a radical right wing bitch.</i> <br /><br />Our problem is that Aristotle and Plato and Socrates and Euclid and Archimedes and Cicero and Cato and Marc Antony and Caesars Julius & Augustus all had "loser DNA".<br /><br />I.e. when the fish starts rotting at the head, the rot very quickly spreads to the entire civilization [which can then take upwards of a millenium to reconstruct].<br /><br />The West hasn't seen such a nihilism-induced collapse in population [the likes of which we are now experiencing] since the mid-fifth century, when Rome fell, after which we got about 600 years of Dark Ages as a replacement.<br /><br />Which gets back to my original point - those of us who are intent on surviving need to be putting some serious thought into the kind of hellish world our progeny will be asked to inhabit - and what we can do [in the here and now] to try to ameliorate some of that future hellishness for them.Lucius Vorenusnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-46611688343152391152011-04-19T19:03:25.968-07:002011-04-19T19:03:25.968-07:00Agree with top comment from lucius.
Nature simpl...Agree with top comment from lucius. <br /><br />Nature simply sheds the genetic lines of the faulty homo sapien units which choose not to reproduce. <br /><br />That's right: faulty. As in defective. As in loser.<br /><br />Loser dna dies out and winner dna keeps on trucking. Mother Nature ain't no leftist. She's a radical right wing bitch.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-63568427584696327122011-04-19T18:44:22.953-07:002011-04-19T18:44:22.953-07:00Steve and gang,
My two cents are over at my new b...Steve and gang,<br /><br />My two cents are over at my new blog. I basically agree with Last and you (and all the commenters who agree with us) that individual "happiness" is not the best measure when it comes to figuring out what to do with our lives. I'm with the religous anonymous -- first serve God and everything else (including joy) will follow.Fake Herzoghttp://www.imnotherzog.wordpress.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-5647228147281592812011-04-19T17:10:02.138-07:002011-04-19T17:10:02.138-07:00I think part of the problem is our standards have ...I think part of the problem is our standards have gone up. It's not that people don't wanna have kids but that they wanna have kids with the best kind of people. What woman wouldn't want to have kids with a smart rich guy who looks like Sean Connery? What man wouldn't want to have kids with a smart supportive woman who looks like Monica Bellucci. The problem is lots of guys are dorks or schmorks or thugs or schmugs, while lots of women are uglyass hos, fatass hos, or bitchass hos.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-70530018084838696472011-04-19T17:07:12.827-07:002011-04-19T17:07:12.827-07:00"This is a good point. Having kids is roughly..."This is a good point. Having kids is roughly a 20 year commitment."<br /><br />It aint no commitment. It's a drama and circus. And a riot too.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-54103930465004029012011-04-19T17:06:20.388-07:002011-04-19T17:06:20.388-07:00"Whining that whites don't have enough ch..."Whining that whites don't have enough children is blaming the victims. The problem isn't the number of children they have, the problem is that their elites are running policies of racist colonialism against them, with an eye toward erasing them from history."<br /><br />What? Spanish elites oppressed indigenous Mexicans for centuries, but the latter still had lots of kids.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-83599281056515103152011-04-19T17:05:02.329-07:002011-04-19T17:05:02.329-07:00"My experience has been that those who wanted..."My experience has been that those who wanted kids and had them were happy."<br /><br />Not always. Some kids turn out rotten and/or marriages can break up. <br /><br />"Those that did not want kids and did not have them also are happy."<br /><br />When they're young. But when they're older, their parents are dead, their friends are living their own lives or dead, they're too old to hang out and have fun like young people, etc.<br /><br />"The people who are unhappy are those that wanted kids, but for whatever reason, were not able to have them and those that did not want kids but ended up having them."<br /><br />Too many variables. It's like cats and dogs. Suppose you don't want one but you see a stray, feel pity, and bring it home. It grows on you.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-73359492595257417392011-04-19T16:41:10.352-07:002011-04-19T16:41:10.352-07:00Here's the bottom line: if we don't have ...Here's the bottom line: if we don't have our own kids, no-one else will have them for us and we will disappear. Therefore, it is a duty.<br /><br />Anyone in the US who thinks this is hysterical should travel a bit in Europe.<br /><br />For those who can't, or simply won't have kids, you owe the rest of us, who do have kids, money. A lot of money. Whether you like it or not, you are going to depend on our kids to hold the line. So you must pay for it, one way or the other.<br /><br />In other words, use the tax system; it is a powerful carrot and stick. The governments know this but refuse to use it, for one very cogent reason: they are against us.<br /><br />The "elites" who rule the West are intent on diluting the white race out of existence. This is beyond obvious. The best way to fight back against their extinctionist agenda is to breed. Soon, it will be the only way. <br /><br />If you want to donate to charity, and are able, find a way to give it to your own people, especially to promote families. There is enough money in the rest of the world for them to look after themselves. Especially if they are so wonderful as the MSM keeps reminding us. <br /><br />It's time for the white race to go Galt. No hate, no aggression, just turn inwards, circle the wagons, and repair ourselves.<br /><br />Anon.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-38158684442461080622011-04-19T16:39:24.129-07:002011-04-19T16:39:24.129-07:00Maybe going back to the social perception that hav...<i>Maybe going back to the social perception that having kids is a duty would help?</i><br /><br />It sure helped Ceausescu.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-82086942991379481132011-04-19T15:58:49.850-07:002011-04-19T15:58:49.850-07:00Kurt9,
It is easier to have children (or not have...Kurt9,<br /><br />It is easier to have children (or not have them) if other people behave likewise thus the interest in proselytizing. <br /><br />As a parent of more than five in a world where the average white woman has fewer than two, the biggest thing I deal with on a daily basis is economic inflation: my counterparts push up the prices of everything from a house to a can opener because they have more discretionary income. My children observe this reality, so I have to inculcate values in them that will offset the reality that fewer children is more fun and materially better at least in the short term. <br />And then there is the cultural landscape: I can tell you that for now, parents such as myself have to bend and deal with the world as is. For example, those "adult" billboards and businesses aren't going anywhere anytime soon and my children will have to just keep averting their eyes. And averting when the t.v. is on, radio, etc. <br />And then there's what politicians prioritize, taxes, etc. <br /><br />Things will get bad for the baby-boomers, and will be even worse for gen-x, when these people become elderly and infirmed. I don't see how any savings can purchase the kind of care that children and grandchildren provide. And I think much of this savings will be inflated away making the problem even worse. The baby-boomers with few children have their siblings to at least provide companionship, but their counterparts in generation x will have even less support.Dahlianoreply@blogger.com