tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post227502097607464221..comments2024-03-27T18:24:19.683-07:00Comments on Steve Sailer: iSteve: Reviewing the reviews of Coming ApartUnknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger72125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-75982744752627778072012-03-01T11:20:42.988-08:002012-03-01T11:20:42.988-08:00thanks for the link steve.
anon feminist:
"I...thanks for the link steve.<br /><br />anon feminist:<br />"I'm not so sure that lower class white males are failing due to lack of well-paying jobs. Nor do I believe that women necessarily look down on men who don't make more money."<br /><br />they don't, at least not consciously, if those men compensate for their lower income with a powerful alpha attitude. but that's not usually the case. furthermore, the marriage market is a different beast than the sex/dating market. a cool jerk jobless dude a woman has a fling with would have no incentive, thanks to the woman's choices, to increase his beta provider qualities.<br /><br />"It's natural for men and women to want the company of one another."<br /><br />sure, but the reproductive goals of men and women are at odds. this creates a sexual marketplace where the natural urge to get together is fraught with drama, backwards progress and trickery. it's the stuff romance novels -- aka female porn -- are made of.<br /><br />"Most women will happily settle with another guy even if he makes less money."<br /><br />incorrect. most women are incredibly loathe to settle, much more averse to the idea than men are at any rate. this is because the risk of getting pregnant by beta or omega seed has much more profound consequences for a woman than the risk of having bad sex with an unattractive woman has for a man.<br /><br />"Even among the upper classes, there are many cases of men married to women who make more."<br /><br />usually those men in the upper classes have high social status jobs and real power which would compensate for the friction that would result from a wife having higher income.<br /><br />"The problem is less with women than with men."<br /><br />not really. although men are not a blameless sex, women are the final arbiters of who is having sex with whom. thus, men respond to the choices that women make. if women --who are, after all, the hypergamous sex -- are choosing to forego marriage, long gestational dating periods, or the idea of only having children within marriage, then men will give women exactly what they want. men are the ultimate sexual adaptability machines; they will do what it takes to get laid.<br /><br />"Some men may not want to marry or be with a woman who makes more out of hurt pride."<br /><br />true. but men like that suffer from attitude problems that are the real turn-off to women. a man who makes less can keep a woman in thrall with a don't-give-a-shit attitude.<br /><br />"In BLUE VALENTINE, the real problem was not so much that the guy made lousy money but he was a jerk who still acted like some teenager or young dude in his early 20s."<br /><br />that wasn't his problem. his problem was that he became beta and clingy, which gave his wife the willies and caused her to find him less attractive. when they first started dating, he was a charming cad.heartistehttp://heartiste.wordpress.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-45238709615941577392012-02-29T09:09:36.052-08:002012-02-29T09:09:36.052-08:00Did Murray fail to have a hit book because of BELL...Did Murray fail to have a hit book because of BELL CURVE? I dunno. Pat Buchanan's books have been far more controversial, but he's had a string of best-sellers, even with the pretty shocking UNNECESSARY WAR, which was widely discussed in the media. Buchanan was interviewed in MSM about the book, and it was reviewed even in the New York Review of Books. <br />Ann Coulter has also been strident and insulting, but she's had a whole bunch of hit books. <br /><br />The problem with Murray is he's a conservative who seeks intellectual approval and appreciation from liberals and neocons. Also, his style is more analytic than polemical. He's too 'intellectual' for most conservatives who want redmeat stuff and too 'prejudiced' for liberals with their cult of politically correct 'rationalism'. Liberal rationalism is really about 'be reasonable' than 'use reason', 'reasonable' meaning 'if you want our support and approval, be reasonable and don't break taboos because if you do, we'll break your legs.' <br /><br />So, Murray's been caught in a no man's land between the right and left. His values/views lean to the right but his style/approach leans to the left, i.e. he speaks the language of academese that the liberal side is more familiar with, but he uses it to batter than buttress the walls of liberalism. Liberals may seem as a kind of Trojan Horse. A man who looks, talks, and writes like one of them but may be slipping in taboo ideas 'discredited' and rejected by all 'good decent rational people'. <br /> <br />Liberal political culture is head-ish while conservative political culture is heart-ish. Murray is neither a liberal egghead nor conservative of the heart. He's more like an eggheart.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-69973354465205218962012-02-29T08:59:17.877-08:002012-02-29T08:59:17.877-08:00Murray's book may be most useful in subverting...Murray's book may be most useful in subverting the notion of 'privileged white America'. Liberals would have us believe that whites are privileged, and they take pride in being so generous with stuff like AA. Since whites have so much, why shouldn't they share their bounty with struggling non-whites? <br /><br />Murray's book counters this silly notion of ONE WHITE AMERICA. There may be two or three white Americas, and many whites are hurting. If liberals believe it's wrong for rich to look down on the poor, then Murray's book suggests affluent liberal types who look down on poor whites as rubes, rednecks, and bigots are heartless bastards. <br /><br />But there's something for liberals too. Murray blames poor whites for being stupid, and this gives liberals an opportunity to slip in and accuse Murray himself of heartlessness. It's funny in a way. Murray accuses affluent liberal whites--even the 'conservative' ones are socially pretty liberal--of failing to lead the dumb white underclasses. But because Murray blames the white underclass for many of their problems, it gives the liberals a chance to step in and say, 'heartless Murray accuses white victims of economic downturn for their own misery.' If Murray's solution is moral sermons by the affluent, the liberal solution is... more big government and welfare?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-84865165134593742952012-02-29T08:14:36.026-08:002012-02-29T08:14:36.026-08:00"Please cite these programs, with program nam...<i>"Please cite these programs, with program name, link and explain how being an unwed mother helps."</i><br /><br />It helps because the woman is a single mother--an automatic "victim" in today's society. And I don't see why the commenter to whom you're replying should have to supply chapter and verse when all you have to offer for your baseless assumption is "what I have read".<br /><br /><i>"Maybe you are better versed in the social welfare system than I but from what I have read it gives most people just enough to keep from starving."</i><br /><br />Are you kidding no question mark. I won't even ask where you've been reading this tripe. It's bullsh!t.<br /><br />I won't bother looking up links but I will tell you from my first-hand observation over a period of years that single mothers are far from starving though I grant you that through their poor food choices and unwillingness to prepare nutritious meals, they may be malnourished. But they are not undernourished. You are aware of the obesity epidemic rampant in the black community, aren't you? Has it never occurred to you that that low-income African-Americans are considerably larger than no-income black Africans and it might be because only one group is "starving"? (Helpful hint: it's the latter, not the former.)<br /><br />Single black mothers are eligible for Section 8 housing, food stamps and Medicaid (In case you haven't noticed, this covers shelter, food and medical care). There is also a generous social safety net in the form of "community centers" which provide vouchers for everything from clothes to cab fare to school supplies. Single black mothers also get generous gift baskets at Thanksgiving and Christmas. <br /><br />Unlike you, I have been in the homes of black people living in the projects. I never saw one such home that didn't have a large color TV, cable and video games. The people who buy their food with food stamps buy more expensive food and more name brands than I do. Their homes are not lavishly furnished but aren't much worse than the "starter apartments" that recent college graduates used to make do with back in my day. They have sofas, beds, coffee tables, etc. And yes, pantries full of food. It is true that often their children don't get enough nutritious food--but that is totally due to their dysfunctional life-styles--not to lack of government assistance. When you go off on a drug binge or end up in jail for a few days or sell your food stamps on the black market for drugs, you usually don't bother to fix your children nourishing meals. But the lack is in your parenting skills, not in the generosity of the government.<br /><br />Next time you submit a comment, try having a modicum of knowledge to back it up and ditch the hyperbole.Kylienoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-80794908237094488662012-02-28T23:25:49.589-08:002012-02-28T23:25:49.589-08:00Blue model.<a href="http://blogs.the-american-interest.com/wrm/2012/02/28/beyond-blue-6-the-great-divorce/" rel="nofollow">Blue model.</a>Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-23375182247483725822012-02-28T20:10:01.416-08:002012-02-28T20:10:01.416-08:00"As I keep pointing out, the national data se..."As I keep pointing out, the national data seems to indicate that Hispanics of today have been advancing economically considerably *faster* than did the Irish and Italian immigrants of old"<br />I am surprised. Sailer has already explicitly discussed that comparison and its flaws, with particular reference to the long-standing hispanic population in New Mexico, as well as the book "Generations of Exclusion". I'd like to see that data. If you just link it here I may not be alerted, but if you go to my blog entitledtoanopinion.wordpress.com you can comment there or find my email address.TGGPhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11017651009634767649noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-47557388324553729692012-02-28T19:57:01.246-08:002012-02-28T19:57:01.246-08:00For related reasons, a truly remarkable fraction o...<i>For related reasons, a truly remarkable fraction of prominent GOP figures seem to be closeted gays, which otherwise seems a bit odd in a strongly anti-gay political party.</i><br /><br />No wonder the party is so psychotic over gays living together and saying they're married. When gays have somthin'-somthin' waiting at home, they might be less likely to hang out in public restrooms waiting for wide-stanced Congressmen.robnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-64745838468500333622012-02-28T17:00:21.402-08:002012-02-28T17:00:21.402-08:00DaveinHackensack: ...there is a significant differ...DaveinHackensack: <i>...there is a significant difference between Hispanic Americans, on average, and the Irish- and Italian-Americans of previous generations: Hispanic Americans aren't climbing the socioeconomic ladder like previous immigrant groups did. </i><br /><br />Yes, that's certainly correct. As I keep pointing out, the national data seems to indicate that Hispanics of today have been advancing economically considerably *faster* than did the Irish and Italian immigrants of old, partly because the economic structure of our society has changed. But who cares about actual data when people can just quote their assumptions back and forth to each other.<br /><br /><i>Considering that there are already 2 Indian-American GOP governors, the party has made some progress on that front.</i><br /><br />I see something *very* different in such datapoints. Basically, the support of the GOP is over 90% white and there's considerable concern in certain quarters that the party might therefore eventually evolve an actual white-oriented ideology. Therefore, the conservative media is heading this off by ensuring that a *hugely* disproportionate share of the top GOP leadership is non-white, regardless of whether these non-whites are even remotely qualified. A white party substantially led by non-whites isn't likely to develop a white consciousness.<br /><br />Hence those two South Asian GOP governors, Marco Rubio and those Hispanic GOP governors, Herman Cain, Michael Steele, and a very long list of others. For related reasons, a truly remarkable fraction of prominent GOP figures seem to be closeted gays, which otherwise seems a bit odd in a strongly anti-gay political party.RKUnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-65252157076655878212012-02-28T15:05:52.969-08:002012-02-28T15:05:52.969-08:00"Great review Steve. When did your comment se...<i>"Great review Steve. When did your comment section become such a disaster area? Its like all the smart people left."</i><br /><br /><i>Fishtowners took over.</i><br /><br />Good one.<br /><br />Seems to be a law that the quality of a blog commentariat declines over time. Some variant of Gresham's Law, maybe, or the smart people just get bored and go looking for something new.<br /><br />Guess I've found my level.Rohan Sweenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-90134880283787833092012-02-28T13:10:50.352-08:002012-02-28T13:10:50.352-08:00I enjoyed the your review of the reviews. It was ...I enjoyed the your review of the reviews. It was well done.Geoff Matthewshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07335872605196107867noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-23038765711467798062012-02-28T11:20:09.679-08:002012-02-28T11:20:09.679-08:00"Charles Murray proven wrong. Rich more immor..."Charles Murray proven wrong. Rich more immoral and likely to take candy from kid."<br /><br />This was based on how people drive, right? People with fancy cars violate more rules than people with normal cars. But which people are more likely to steal cars? Rich people or poor people? <br />I think auto-theft is a bigger problem than running lights when cops are not around. <br />Also, rich people might be breaking more rules on the road because they have busier schedules. <br /><br />Btw, what amazes me is how the this study looked at just one behavior and then came to such general conclusion. <br />Suppose we take a different approach: secretly video all the shoplifters at Walmart. I'll bet poor people--especially of certain races--are more prone to stuff things into their clothes. So, should we say poor people of race ____ are more prone to steal? <br />Or, would that be 'racist'?<br /><br />But if indeed it's true that rich people are less moral, does it mean certain ethnic groups that happen to be richer are more crooked? Now, which group in the US is richest? So, can we say that members of that race/group are most likely to cheat? Vell?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-68321942670868283452012-02-28T10:53:35.010-08:002012-02-28T10:53:35.010-08:00"while that same French state passes laws to ..."while that same French state passes laws to protect its strategically vital yogurt manufacturers."<br /><br />Was it Norway that had butter shortage recently?<br /><br /><br />"Once young males felt no pressure to grow up, get married, and have kids, they dreamt of the fantasy female. "<br /><br />I don't think that it works that way. Consider these astute observations of Mencken from In Defence of Women.<br /><br />http://www.heretical.com/miscella/mhusbach.html<br /><br />Another excerpt from the same book lays waste to the Patriarchy theory by pointing out that the law was on the side of the wife, undermining authority of husband long before the "smash patriarchy" started doing the rounds.<br /><br />http://www.heretical.com/miscella/mmarrlaw.html<br /><br />By Patriarchy theory, I mean the subservience of women in marriage, and what I think the feminists meant. If we go by the definition of the word, then it might have achieved its objective, though being fatherless isn't quite the same as being with a father who lacks authority.<br /><br /><br />"Even among the upper classes, there are many cases of men married to women who make more."<br /><br />Which are more likely to end in divorce despite being more self-selected?<br /><br />Feminism brought choices to women from the upper classes. If you think of it as informal quota for women in male-dominated spheres, which class of women would have filled it first? Who gets to taste the power relinquished by men?<br /><br />The women of the lower classes had to work before feminism's 'victory' of right to work. Their choices or the lack of them, hasn't changed.<br /><br />Would the lower class male decimation would have been that easy if the fortunes of women weren't independent from their husbands?<br /><br />"The problem is less with women than with men. "<br /><br />Precisely, that's why women deserve more help. <br />Isn't that the way gender dialogue works?<br /><br /><br />"A better explanation is that it is easier for a working class woman to support kids than to support kids plus a chronically unemployable husband with an expensive strip club habit. "<br /><br />Or if we reverse the genders, it is easier for a working class man to support kids than to support kids plus a wife. (no need to include the expensive habits separately)<br /><br />But then, if men were that practical there wouldn't be all this talk.<br /><br /><br />"Most women are just as realistic about their place on the pecking order as men"<br /><br />They are not. Any guesses why not?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-51515374946028007002012-02-28T09:02:45.891-08:002012-02-28T09:02:45.891-08:00"Preview" seems to cut off the top of my..."Preview" seems to cut off the top of my post - test to see how this shows up.<br />test...................................<br /><br />Laban Tall: re "globalisation in one country". That's what came to my mind, too, when I read this in Steve's article:<br /><br /><i>I would add that Americans on the right half of the Bell Curve are going to have to subsidize their fellow citizens on the Left Half of the Bell Curve one way or another. The least corrupting way to do it is through a market system rigged slightly to bribing them into honest toil by not forcing their wages into a race to the bottom against everybody else on Earth.</i><br /><br />But why would the right-hand want to do that? I think by now it's apparent that "forcing a race to the bottom" was the point of the whole exercise, no?<br /><br />Most on the right-hand of the curve no more really care about the deteriorating conditions of the national left-hand than we care about the working conditions of Foxconn employees or "bringing global millions out of poverty". (That last one serves as a soothing counterpoint to any uneasiness elicited by the first two, because, unlike the first two, it works fine with "shareholder value".) We only start caring when the depredations of "globalisation in one country" start metastasizing into our own little precariously held slices of the no-longer-far-enough to the right bits of the bell curve.Rohan Sweenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-1064487532133071772012-02-28T08:08:30.204-08:002012-02-28T08:08:30.204-08:00Oh and, good article Sailer. As always I don't...Oh and, good article Sailer. As always I don't feel I'm getting BSed, unusually in political writing.Jacob Robersonnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-2342339841708263812012-02-28T07:57:35.895-08:002012-02-28T07:57:35.895-08:00Anonymous said...
My idea of culture isn't po...<i>Anonymous said...<br /><br />My idea of culture isn't poring through indexes of Art Books and seeing who got cited more.</i><br /><br />To me, art critique is like those Magic Eye things which I can never see. "Is the author hiding behind me laughing?" Then again I don't understand art and Murray seemed to absolutely luuuv the subject so I'm sure he disagrees.Jacob Robersonnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-15577428221578873462012-02-28T07:52:29.761-08:002012-02-28T07:52:29.761-08:00whatever the political attitudes are of the new up...<i>whatever the political attitudes are of the new upper class, their attitudes and actions isolate them from mainstream America</i> <br /><br /><br />I'm not sure how "peoples political attitudes" and actions can be so easily separated from "their attitudes and actions".<br /><br />There's a lot of praise for Murray on the right, much of it seemly because the left says nasty thins about him. But if you just ignore the left and evaluate him on his own merits, his argument is not without its flaws.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-90239723812742098962012-02-28T07:30:15.464-08:002012-02-28T07:30:15.464-08:00"Santorum needs to be sent to a sanatorium.&q..."Santorum needs to be sent to a sanatorium."<br /><br />"He's not wrong though. The oil spike did cause the mortgage crisis and recession."<br /><br />No, oil spike didn't cause the crisis. It finally exposed it.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-77663103604870951752012-02-28T07:27:23.202-08:002012-02-28T07:27:23.202-08:00"Great review Steve. When did your comment se..."Great review Steve. When did your comment section become such a disaster area? Its like all the smart people left."<br /><br />Fishtowners took over.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-55099971724096861992012-02-28T06:44:39.716-08:002012-02-28T06:44:39.716-08:00Why, when talking about immigration, it's alwa...Why, when talking about immigration, it's always a minority issue? I worked in the trades in Chicago for many years. When the Soviet Union fell in the early 90's thousands of Poles, Czechs, Russians, and Ukrainians, poured in and took over the electrician, plumber, painter, and carpenter trades. To them $8 or $9 was great even though the union scale in Chicago was much higher. Apartment complexes and office buildings suddenly had their entire maintenence staffs comprised of mainly Eastern Europeans, amny of which were illegal. This is on top of the Mexicans, Indians, and even Irish (yes, there are many Irish illegal aliens in Chicago and even a few English) that were also competing for jobs. Because of this immigration, the work in my field got slow and I went back to school and finished my Computer Science degree just in time for all of the offshoring of programming jobs!Dahindanoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-75113060786573155102012-02-28T06:21:38.414-08:002012-02-28T06:21:38.414-08:00I haven't read the book yet, just scanned it a...I haven't read the book yet, just scanned it at Barnes & Noble, but I have a question. Murray claims that Fishtown's crime rates have gone up. Is this true? Of course, illegitimate births have gone up and all the other indicia of social decay, but I wasn't aware that white working class crime rates have gone up.diananoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-19656487607199432032012-02-28T06:18:59.006-08:002012-02-28T06:18:59.006-08:00A lot of guff has been passed about young white me...A lot of guff has been passed about young white men in general (not just working class men), failing to 'grow-up' and living like perpetual teenagers and eternal playboys - this 'phenomenom' apparently being fuelled by micro technology.The idea is that today's yoth and not so youth are hooked on the asperbery delights of pixellated, machine made mega byte blandishments. Whether being lost in the perpetual childhood of fighting imaginary beasts on TFL screens, or drowning, nay immersing themselves on all the 1001 fleshly pornographic variations San Fernando's Porn Valley can throw at them, the dea is that today's manhood has given up on real women, sociability and interactions in place of electroincally aided comfort blanket early childhood fantasy.<br /> Perhaps.But the general derogation of white men as the ultimate victims of protected minority spoils systems, biased divorce laws and subsequent destruction of wealth etc, didn't help.<br /> All we are seeing is the backlash and the revnge of the boy's toys.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-50939847662575462742012-02-28T06:07:09.043-08:002012-02-28T06:07:09.043-08:00Vintage Steve.
Steve has found his old form again...Vintage Steve.<br /><br />Steve has found his old form again, writing long, involved and argumentative pieces back at his natural home Vdare.<br /> Some of us thought that our weekly Steve Vdare pieces were a thing of the past.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-71826439017434104852012-02-28T05:57:08.491-08:002012-02-28T05:57:08.491-08:00A lonely woman in her late 30s making 50,000 a yr ...<i>A lonely woman in her late 30s making 50,000 a yr will gladly marry some guy making 30,000 a year if he's decent and nice.</i><br /><br />Why should any man do that? Woman gets to punch above her weight with numerous bad boys then when she's old and barren offer sloppy seconds to the dependable schlep? Then yammer him into his grave because he's not like the cash-rich arseholes she dated in her 20's? He can probably cook and clean better there her, he's got his videogames, his beer, his buds, snag some younger tail every now and again if he cares to exert himself for it.<br /><br />Women who want to marry aren't bringing anything to the table.The Anti-Gnostichttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04386593803225823789noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-90156392774406232562012-02-28T05:51:06.149-08:002012-02-28T05:51:06.149-08:00Matko,
"He loves to mention the alleged high...Matko,<br /><br /><i>"He loves to mention the alleged higher education of white liberals, while glossing over the education levels of non-white minorities that are supposed to help build up a permanent Democrat majority."</i><br /><br />A corollary of that is that the GOP reaching out to Hispanics isn't a "no brainer", because there is a significant difference between Hispanic Americans, on average, and the Irish- and Italian-Americans of previous generations: Hispanic Americans aren't climbing the socioeconomic ladder like previous immigrant groups did. Because of that, it's in their economic interests to be perennial constituents of the Democratic Party. <br /><br />At the moment, the only racial minorities the GOP can successfully court without tossing aside any remaining economic policy differences between the major parties are Indians and East Asians. Considering that there are already 2 Indian-American GOP governors, the party has made some progress on that front. Less so, perhaps with East Asians, but, in any case, the numbers of these groups probably aren't large enough to change the optics of the GOP convention materially.DaveinHackensackhttp://www.thehackensack.blogspot.com/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-33166197947924474052012-02-28T04:13:02.274-08:002012-02-28T04:13:02.274-08:00@alsdkfjalsdkfj
thanks, however the Mc Donald arti...@alsdkfjalsdkfj<br />thanks, however the Mc Donald article doesn't discuss the white working classes problems. It's all about how the poor Latino capabilities are crushing California.<br /><br />Also, while very good, City Journal isn't what I would call MSM. What is needed is something like the Washington Post or New York Times.<br /><br />Robert HumeAnonymousnoreply@blogger.com