tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post5370047722005640003..comments2024-03-28T16:22:14.888-07:00Comments on Steve Sailer: iSteve: Everybody Hates Amy, Part IUnknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger96125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-84615433592381667402014-01-11T00:53:34.180-08:002014-01-11T00:53:34.180-08:00That list is further evidence that mormons are not...That list is further evidence that mormons are not really white. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-59929412283059650222014-01-08T16:34:59.697-08:002014-01-08T16:34:59.697-08:00Disciplined Anglos held in their energies and let ...Disciplined Anglos held in their energies and let them out in little spurts, which meant they didn't run out of energy. But it also meant they were never totally free and exuberant, which is why David Lean films, for all their epic scope, seem a bit anal. <br />But what happens when the energies are just allowed to run free like in EASY RIDER? Fonda says, 'we blew it'. Though killed by 'conservative' rednecks, rednecks too were too 'easy' and loose. Their laid back southern style meant lack of mental discipline, and indeed, there is no sense of structure or urgency to much of the white South. Some folks are nice and all, but they seem to take things as they come, which is why Chua says white Appachalian folks are missing something. It's like them fellas in COUNTRY BOYS documentary are okay guys but without drive. They are too self-satisfied. <br /><br />The Gary King guy in WORLD'S END is like a British Jack Nicholson; he's the life of the party--very American-ish--, but he blew his wad in his youth. He's so spent that his idea of the Holy Grail is to relive the old days as if he's still a young dude drinking all those beer. His friends have sobered up and have the balance of control and freedom--a bit more control than freedom. <br /><br />Though the cultural narrative would have us believe that upright and repressive Brits were inspired and saved by American culture in the late 50s and 60s, the great British achievements in music actually owe a lot to the fact that guys like Jagger and Lennon grew up in a society that still stressed mental and social discipline. Had Jagger and Lennon grown up as slackers in America, their minds might not have been disciplined and programmed--academically or socially--into faculties that could take a simple song and make it better, something more sophisticated and complex, more intelligent. <br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-21646477046464115142014-01-08T16:34:24.811-08:002014-01-08T16:34:24.811-08:00Even so, the Anglo formula prolly favored control ...Even so, the Anglo formula prolly favored control a bit more over freedom. So, while Anglos became more known for their proper-ness and precision than for being free and liberated. Even in a nutty British comedy like THE LAVENDER HILL MOB, there's control running throughout the entire movie--even when things fall apart. Maybe the British mental discipline developed from the way the language was spoken. Maybe it has the effect of making them more aware of doing things right and properly. David Lean was a formidably precise film-maker and even lesser British directors were first-rate professionals. But something was lacking: a sense of looseness and freedom. This came to UK via American culture, and Brits became less uptight and more free-flowing. And yet, the special quality of British rock owed to this combination of mental discipline/meticulousness and freewheeling exuberance. A song like "Satisfaction" is amazing for its 'anarchic' energies(taken from American rock and blues) but also its brilliant/subtle rearrangement of them. It was as if Jagger/Richards took the energy and the basic raw structure of American music and re-engineered with insight, wit, and discipline lacking in the American mind. <br />British culture instilled lots of mental discipline in the use of language and manners, but order wasn't enough for full-blown creativity. Maybe some British writers loved to drink cuz it had a lubricating effect of loosening inhibitions to let their mental energies run freer if not totally free. A mind that is trained and disciplined may be repressed by propriety. Thus, a few drinks might help and allow one to play looser with wit. And in the case of British music lovers, the soul-loosening libation of American music had a way of releasing their energies. The idea of discipline is paradoxical. On the one hand, you are disciplining the students so that they will work and train hard to be better at something and work better on their own. But once they'v mastered the stuff, the habit of discipline instilled into them may hold them back from being creative and free. Discipline can train the talent but also hold back the talent. And there was something a bit too control-ish about British culture prior to the 60s. David Lean was a great filmmaker but never seemed natural. But consider something like THE WORLD'S END that exhibits all the British mastery of technique yet has all the spunk and brashness of Jack-Nicholson-ism in America. <br /><br />In a way, America was a great success story because all the pent-up Anglo energies were let loose on vast virgin land. Anglos had the mental discipline and control to do lots of stuff, and they got the opportunity with America. Americanism, like Anglo-ism, is about control and freedom, but with bit more freedom than control. The danger of Americanism, however, is the 'blow your wad' syndrome. If freedom overwhelms control, it leads to idiocratic 'big ass taco' mania. And this version of Americanism seems to have affected parts of UK too. Some yob-ish youths are about freedom but no control, even doing worse in school than negroes. What use is freedom if the mind is not disciplined or trained in certain ways? Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-3593131954165209202014-01-08T16:34:00.990-08:002014-01-08T16:34:00.990-08:00How did Anglos create this new order? What was the...How did Anglos create this new order? What was the secret? Maybe we should start with the balance of control and freedom. This balance exists in every society as all societies have some degree of freedom and some degree of control. Societies where people run wild and have little control become like Africa(or Detroit), or yob-mob ruled parts of current UK. <br />Too much freedom is bad. But societies where there's too much control tend to be historically constipated; they are afraid to move forward. Like Tsarist Russia, Tokugawa Japan, Ottoman Turkey, Byzantine empire, old China. <br />It seems like the Brits found the right balance of control and freedom. If you allow excess freedom, energies are wasted on tomfoolery and thuggery and chaos. If you enforce too much control, human energies never go anywhere and grow stale. It's like the phrase 'blow your wad'. If some guy's blowing it all the time, he's sapped of energy. If he's not allowed to blow it at all, his wad grows stale and his mind becomes funny like that of Catholic priests. Thus, the thing is to give the time for the balls to replenish the jism and then blow it when the time is right. Control and freedom; hold and release. Let the steam build and then release it when necessary. That's how steam engine works. It holds the energy within a solid body and channels it toward some goal. <br />Also, Brits developed one of the finest kinds of controls. There is the crude control of making people obey by simply beating them up and intimidating them. Such controls tend to stunt than develop individual souls. But British control--while harsh at times with whip and stick--tended to focus on verbal dexterity, wit, and pride of intelligence. Thus, British form of control gradually helped individuals grow into thinking rational beings with a sense of self governed by logic. In Asia and Muslim world, control often meant being told to shut up. Teachers in Iranian movies are among the most repugnant, just beating submission into the kids. Brits, in contrast, made people follow the rules and accept the system but also negotiate with it through the mastery of manners and verbal skills. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-84536425820681005602014-01-08T16:33:19.876-08:002014-01-08T16:33:19.876-08:00"Chua ranks these groups in a hierarchy of su...<br /><br />"Chua ranks these groups in a hierarchy of superior/inferior, but all of these groups exist in a culture that is not their own. The superiority and inferiority she refers to parasite off of the existing culture. These people are thieves of the existing cultural capital."<br /><br />You have a point, but you're also missing the point. If success for non-whites only amounts to leeching off whites, then all non-whites should be doing just as well in America. And yet, those who leech off whites less do better than those who leech off more. Blacks, Mexers, African immigrants(especially Somalis), and Puerto Ricans are among the biggest leeches in American, using lots of welfare and even crime. But they are on the bottom. Jews and Asians are among the most law-abiding yet they own a lot more. To be sure, there are crooked Jews in Wall Street who robbed us big time, and there are Chinatown swindlers and Asian illegal immigrants. Even so, most Jews are not Wall Street crooks and most Chinese are not Triad bosses. Lots of Jews have built technology and science that hadn't existed before and expanded the economy in new ways. So, to just call it parasitism is knee-jerk David-Duke-ism. <br /><br />That said, though I haven't read Chua's book, I get a feeling that she should have discussed the role of Anglos in the success of others. After all, there is a difference between more successful and super-successful. Chinese were always more successful in Southeast Asia, but their super success came via adopting Anglo ways in Hong Kong and Singapore and other SE nations(where Chinese speak good English and even went to American schools there or over here or in UK). <br />Similarly, Jews were more successful all over the world--Middle East, North Africa, Latin America, and etc--, but they were super-successful in the Anglo/American world. Had Anglos and Anglo-Americans not created the new order, other groups would have been more successful but not super successful. To be sure, Anglos also learned to be better businessmen and governors from the practice of ruling over so many different kinds of folks. (One wonders why the Portuguese and Spanish failed to develop the same skills though they came to own much of Latin America. And it seems like the only lesson the Italians learned from dealing with so many different kinds of people since Roman times is to lie and cheat.) <br /><br />So, there was something about the Anglo way that ensured the development of what Ferguson calls the killer apps: competition, freedom, medicine, consumerism, property rights, and work ethic. <br /><br />When non-whites come to the Anglo-world, they can be more sure of their property rights being protected by law; they can be more sure of being provided with freedom; they know their work ethic will be rewarded; they know there is a vast consumer market(even Arab businessmen can become middle class by selling to inner city Negroes), etc. <br />Those things exist in other parts of the world too, but with less consistency and stability. Who knows what will happen to Argentina or Russia in the next 5 yrs? Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-82357818201114614602014-01-08T14:40:58.703-08:002014-01-08T14:40:58.703-08:00"White males make the best firefighters. She ..."White males make the best firefighters. She seems to have overlooked them."<br /><br />But negroes make the best fire starters. Gotta give credit where it's due. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-16706155765991666222014-01-08T14:39:55.481-08:002014-01-08T14:39:55.481-08:00"Someone should ask her how well a typical &q..."Someone should ask her how well a typical "Tiger Mom" does in China, since most Chinese don;t seem to live very well. Tiger momism, in other words, seems to offer much lower returns in China than it does here. Why is that?"<br /><br />Tiger momism offers greater return in China. <br />In America, you can be a slob and still have a good life. <br />Not so in China. There are so many people and it's so competitive that you have to be tiger-momish and steer your kid toward success. <br /><br />A tiger mom will surely do better in the US than in China, but the thing is you don't have to be a tiger mom here. You have to be one there. <br />And considering the changes in China in the last 30 yrs, it seems to be working.. but I think it has limits cuz if China wants to be innovative, it needs monkey mom who inspires individuality and creativity than just hard work. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-77568144717785160502014-01-08T11:46:53.606-08:002014-01-08T11:46:53.606-08:00Oh, I forgot to mention a jarring sight one sees o...Oh, I forgot to mention a jarring sight one sees occasionally. A black Mennonite, either male or female. They do exist. Plain folk don't discriminate. But becoming one is voluntary. I'm not attracted to their lifestyle.Gospacehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04570281939230746682noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-79665127615390033022014-01-08T11:42:30.718-08:002014-01-08T11:42:30.718-08:00"I was surprised to see driving through Amish..."I was surprised to see driving through Amish country last summer that the Amish aren't anywhere near as poor as I expected."<br /><br />That's because you don't actually know any or live near or amongst them. And people who think Amish are losers don't understand them- they live the way do voluntarily.<br /><br />My HS graduating class in NJ was at least 25% Jewish. 9 of the top 10 graduates (of 400) was Jewish. One Jewish kid that I know of was in the bottom 50%. He was it. He was a little slow... No "plain folk" anywhere in the area.<br /><br />Where I live now, where 4 of 5 of my kids have (or will) graduate HS, my daughter was friends with one girl who is Jewish. The only one in a class of 90. There are lots of Amish and Mennonite around here. Had a discussion recently with another parent of a public school student in which she was lamenting the fact that there were fewer children in the area, and local school districts were consolidating and closing schools. I informed her she was wrong, there just as many if not more kids in town then in the previous 20 years. They're not in the public schools. Drive by the local private Amish/Mennonite schools and they're packed with kids.<br /><br />At five children and ages 58/56, my wife and I have a huge family for white people our age. We're statistically non-existent. Of my HS friends and acquaintances on Facebook, the next largest number of kids (from one marriage) is 3. Most have 1 or 2. The only Mennonite families I've seen with only 2 kids are the ones where the oldest is 3- IOW, just starting out. Our neighbors, with 5 kids and another bun in the oven, has 2 when they moved in 5 years ago. We talk, we trade cookies at Christmas, but that's the extent of our interaction. Their family gatherings at holidays and on Sunday's when it is their turn to host- are huge.<br /><br />Yep, it's a definite misunderstanding to think that Amish and other plain folk are losers. Or poor. They are mostly debt free. Which by equity, makes them richer then most. And by numbers, they are increasing. Which makes them winners.<br /><br />What is true is that I think that most of them don't understand that they can live freely the way they want to because of people like me, with 20 years in the Navy, and my eldest, a Capt in the Army with multiple combat tours. The bad guys aren't knocking at their doors telling them to convert or die because others are keeping them away... Gospacehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04570281939230746682noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-3887163375594302412014-01-08T07:12:04.127-08:002014-01-08T07:12:04.127-08:00"Anonymous said...
""I can guarant..."Anonymous said...<br /><br />""I can guarantee you every prog supports polygamy.""<br /><br />I never heard any liberal support for polygamy or 'same family marriage'."<br /><br />They do. They just don't know it yet. Just as liberals thirty years ago didn't known that they would eventually be asked to be completely supportive of gay marriage. That is the logic of liberal orthodoxy. Once you outsource your moral judgement to others, you no longer have a say in what you will and will not be against.Mr. Anonnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-60068754188696881202014-01-08T01:13:06.304-08:002014-01-08T01:13:06.304-08:00White males make the best firefighters. She seems ...White males make the best firefighters. She seems to have overlooked them.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-19942202129349451402014-01-08T01:00:22.036-08:002014-01-08T01:00:22.036-08:00One more thing.
Chua ranks these groups in a hier...One more thing.<br /><br />Chua ranks these groups in a hierarchy of superior/inferior, but all of these groups exist in a culture that is not their own. The superiority and inferiority she refers to parasite off of the existing culture.<br /><br />These people are thieves of the existing cultural capital.mapnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-86121754570275867072014-01-08T00:28:41.160-08:002014-01-08T00:28:41.160-08:00Whiskey,
You wrote:
"What Chua ignores is t...Whiskey,<br /><br />You wrote:<br /><br />"What Chua ignores is that the ability of minorities to extract great gains from the majority nearly always results in pogroms and riots and seizures absent a great power protector like China now with SE Asia. Market dominant minorities end up getting it in the neck by a military embracing the Master Sgt. Samuel K. Doe or Flight Lt. Jerry Rawlings strategy"<br /><br />Didn't Amy Chua write a book called "World on Fire" which addressed this?<br /><br />This just goes to show you why Chua and the rest of her ilk are just a bunch of clever sillies.<br /><br />Someone should ask her how well a typical "Tiger Mom" does in China, since most Chinese don;t seem to live very well.<br /><br />Tiger momism, in other words, seems to offer much lower returns in China than it does here. Why is that? Is it because people like Chua are parasitic upon the social system that allows that achieve here what they could not in their home countries? If so, then what is the point of allowing this displacement?mapnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-47205576368592045922014-01-07T23:55:47.068-08:002014-01-07T23:55:47.068-08:00According to the Department of Commerce, Jews, Ind...According to the Department of Commerce, Jews, Indians, Asians, and most of these groups qualify for minority disadvantaged business loans.<br /><br />Their "model minority" status is entirely funded by the US taxpayer.mapnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-11582691533160615372014-01-07T14:23:46.183-08:002014-01-07T14:23:46.183-08:00"I can guarantee you every prog supports poly..."I can guarantee you every prog supports polygamy."<br /><br />I never heard any liberal support for polygamy or 'same family marriage'. If anything, I've seen libs argue that polygamy should be banned cuz history showed it is harmful to society. Libs say we shouldn't be judgmental toward homos, but they love to be judgmental toward polys. <br /><br />Of course, we can interpret history and say homos did a lot of damage too through the spreading of decadence. <br /><br />What lesson for today? I think America today is kinda like Roman Empire on the decline in this sense: combo of soft moralism and soft decadence. <br /><br />Soft moralism is passive/guilty morality. It is unlike tough moralism that is aggressive. Soft moralism makes one more sensitive to faults on one's own side. <br />Soft moralism would rather apologize than fight. It would rather be judged than judge others. US used to have hard moralism of white folks who thought they should be lecturing to other peoples. Today, whites have soft moralism that doesn't judge others but is judged by others. <br /><br />Of course, there were tough and aggressive Roman Christians before the fall, and Constantine was no pushover. He turned Rome into a Christian empire but also fought wars. Nevertheless, I think Christianity had a way of weakening Roman military prowess and resolve. Christian guilt and passivity spread feminine virtues in the empire. <br />On top of that, the spread of decadence corrupted the Romans. And Christianity as the new official religion probably also had a way of demoralizing Romans who didn't want to accept the new order and wanted to cling to the old gods. <br />Soft moralism and the softening effect of decadence prolly made the Romans gradually more and more defenseless. <br /><br />Same in America. Whites now have soft moralism where they just wait to be judged by others while never standing their own ground. Even American conservatives take moral lectures from homos of all people. <br />On top of that, there is bread and circus decadence where it's deemed okay for white girls to 'twerk' atop ghetto blacks. And no one has any guts to denounce this out of fear of being called 'racist'. <br /><br />Hard moralism can overcome decadence by denouncing, shaming, and attacking it.<br />But soft moralism has no guts. It is defenseless against decadence and against attack from the outside. Soft moralism may be critical of decadence but lacks the guts to go to war against it. <br /><br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-28554635020630879052014-01-07T12:39:03.401-08:002014-01-07T12:39:03.401-08:00In the Mormon state, polygamy has been banned, and...<b>In the Mormon state, polygamy has been banned, and Mormons were forced to comply. And progs have no problem with that. But it must have 'gay marriage'.</b><br /><br />You're kidding, right? I can guarantee you every prog supports polygamy. It's simple: they support whatever conservatives are against, whatever conservatives aren't.Matthewnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-73827027194912387242014-01-07T12:35:07.252-08:002014-01-07T12:35:07.252-08:00So Chinese-forwardcastes-AshJew cultural alliance ...So Chinese-forwardcastes-AshJew cultural alliance forging with a few tokens?<br /><br />And come on - these aren't "cultures" they're talking about. They're selected "elite" migrants, even the Chinese (although more in scatter than the mean). <br /><br /><i>the Superiority Complex . . . is antithetical to mainstream liberal thinking</i><br /><br />Er... Shall you tell her or shall I?<br /><br /><i>insecurity</i><br /><br />Aka, why neurotic, unforgiving Jews and Chinese with neurotic, unforgiving parents are more successful than their IQ scores predict compared to calm, tolerant European types. Except they kind of aren't, and if they are it sure doesn't make the nation they're a part of any stronger.<br /><br /><i>the ability to delay instant gratification in the service of a greater goal</i><br /><br />Sometimes being gratified gives you an incentive. Not that poor quality "stick" parents would have any real understanding of that.<br /><br />Also, to the anon who said <i>"The word siesta, is Spanish for a reason. That concept hardly exists in China, Japan, Korea, etc."</i><br /><br />I associate the Chinese with opium dens and gambling addictions, personally.<br /><br />It's really peculiar to me why Jews, Chinese, etc. seem to want to insist that there is something worthwhile or special about their cultures, where the reality is obviously that their cultures are horrible (compared to any Euro offshoot, probably even many African offshoots) but they are rather intelligent. They don't seem to understand their only utility is as a "brain on a stick".<br /><br /><i>"I wanna see the numbers on Nigerians."Steve - 419</i><br />lmaoAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-64767537934650121352014-01-07T10:28:38.217-08:002014-01-07T10:28:38.217-08:00Potentially you could change a phenotype without c...<i>Potentially you could change a phenotype without changing the majority of the genotype.</i> <br /><br /><br />Potentially you could. But you only have to look at Jews to notice that they have changed a majority of the genotype. They look nothing like Middle-Easterners. In fact they don't look look much like each other. Jews from Russia look remarkably Russian, Jews from Hungary look Hungarian, Jews from Germany look German, and so on. Jews are about as physically distinctive a type as Catholics or Protestants.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-18403817727548530112014-01-07T07:41:33.150-08:002014-01-07T07:41:33.150-08:00"Anonymous said...
Jews have been mating wit..."Anonymous said...<br /><br />Jews have been mating with non-Jews for thousands of years. The impressive thing is the way they maintain a strong separate identity in spite of that."<br /><br />That's because they have a farm-team: orthodoxy. The orthodox have high fertility and a very strong sense of ethnic identity. As people outmarry out of jewish ethnic identity, there's always new people comining up from the minors, i.e., orthodox Jews giving up thier orthodoxy, but still identifying strongly as Jews.Mr. Anonnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-20090140569072657932014-01-07T07:35:45.459-08:002014-01-07T07:35:45.459-08:00"The Israeli quasi-Apartheid state, and Ameri..."The Israeli quasi-Apartheid state, and American Jew's BFF relationship to it, puts the lie to all of that. Jews are faux-leftists."<br /><br />Liberalism for everyone else. Right wing nativism for themselves. The only consistency is love of $$$, which they justify regardless of whatever ideology they're pitching. <br /><br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-82127976271577137302014-01-07T07:31:58.592-08:002014-01-07T07:31:58.592-08:00"Why should I, a member of ethnic group X be ..."Why should I, a member of ethnic group X be so excited by the prospect of being outcompeted people from ethnic group Y in [insert name of industry] at some point in the future? I mean really, whats in it for me?"<br /><br />That's one way to look at it, esp when it comes to professions. But at the tail ends of creativity, we all benefit from excellence and creativity wherever it comes from. <br /><br />Maybe the rise of German opera did threaten the dominance of Italian opera, but everyone could enjoy and learn from German opera. <br /><br />Cuaron may have out-competed native born American directors, but everyone can learn from and be inspired by GRAVITY. <br /><br />Most film crew jobs are just jobs, a matter of professional competition. <br /><br />But high-end creativity has universal value. Ford influenced Kurosawa, Kurosawa influenced Peckinpah, and etc. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-9160743877678003832014-01-07T07:25:42.475-08:002014-01-07T07:25:42.475-08:00"The 4.8 million Hispanics in Los Angeles Cou..."The 4.8 million Hispanics in Los Angeles County can't even muscle their way into jobs as gaffers, key grips, and best boys. Do you really think they'll suddenly be running the media by 2042?"<br /><br />White hispanics seem to be making some inroads. <br />Cuaron and Del Toro are big players.<br /><br />Guillermo Navarro is an excellent cinematographer. <br />So is Rodrigo Prieto.<br /><br />Actually, white hipanics are creatively better represented in Hollywood than conservative whites.<br /><br /><br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-48929297770198936212014-01-07T07:03:56.358-08:002014-01-07T07:03:56.358-08:00http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-court-gay-marr...http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-court-gay-marriage-20140107,0,1829277.story#axzz2piopLnkQ<br /><br /><br />http://nyti.ms/1gBTQ0N<br /><br />It being Utah, shouldn't polygamy rights be prioritized over 'gay marriage'? It's a Mormon state. <br /><br />Talk about cogdis or cognitive dissonance. <br />In the Mormon state, polygamy has been banned, and Mormons were forced to comply. <br />And progs have no problem with that.<br />But it must have 'gay marriage'. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-71040819058452675382014-01-07T04:55:11.163-08:002014-01-07T04:55:11.163-08:00@Whiskey, 1/5/14 11:00 PM --
"What Chua igno...@Whiskey, 1/5/14 11:00 PM --<br /><br />"What Chua ignores is that the ability of minorities to extract great gains from the majority nearly always results in pogroms and riots and seizures absent a great power protector like China now with SE Asia."<br /><br />Replace "ignores" with "knows all too well."<br /><br />As alluded to anonymous (1/6/14, 12:59 PM), Chua came to prominence in 2004 by writing <a href="http://www.amazon.com/World-Fire-Exporting-Democracy-Instability/dp/0385721862" rel="nofollow">World on Fire: How Exporting Free Market Democracy Breeds Ethnic Hatred and Global Instability</a>. Well worth reading.AMachttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08872008617279528583noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-70171063019120437282014-01-06T22:37:20.882-08:002014-01-06T22:37:20.882-08:00"It's amazing how HBDers can be bemused a..."It's amazing how HBDers can be bemused about the utter destruction of their own people. They are able to analyze it with a detached distance that is frankly inhuman."<br /><br />The motivations behind an interest in HBD are very varied imo.<br /><br />.<br /><br />"I wanna see the numbers on Nigerians."<br /><br />Send me your credit card details and i'll mail them to you ;)<br /><br />.<br /><br />"People of superior cultures succeed - people of inferior cultures fail...If you are honest, you may not agree with the exact list as presented, but must agree<br />with the overwhelming truth of the message."<br /><br />Accepting that point leads to an interesting question. What happened to the previously successful culture?<br /><br />Especially as those segments of the White population which retain the most of that original culture are the most relatively successful.<br /><br />It's the destruction of that successful culture that has allowed the situation described in the book to arise.<br /><br />.<br /><br />"Jews have been mating with non-Jews for thousands of years. The impressive thing is the way they maintain a strong separate identity in spite of that."<br /><br />If one half of a population always marries in then the other half can alternate marrying out and then back in again thus retaining majority ethnicity over time.<br /><br />A marries A to produce AA children.<br /><br />A marries B to produce AB children.<br /><br />AB children marry back in with AA children giving AAAB grand-children.<br /><br />Potentially you could change a phenotype without changing the majority of the genotype.<br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com