tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post7842337937527627290..comments2024-03-19T02:31:02.140-07:00Comments on Steve Sailer: iSteve: A thought on the cause of growing inequalityUnknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger47125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-45641108791552904002013-12-06T23:44:42.370-08:002013-12-06T23:44:42.370-08:00Steve Sailer said...
A lot of South Korean na... Steve Sailer said...<br /><br /> A lot of South Korean nationalist pugnaciousness is resenting the American military occupation. For example, the nicest part of Seoul is the giant American military base right in the middle of this crowded city, with its parks and golf courses.<br /><br /><<< This is no longer true. The base in Yongsan is being moved out.<br /><br />Korean anti-Americanism has waned more generally because:<br /><br />1. the job market has become more competitive, and college students no longer have time to play around with Molotov coctails. The big riots are a thing of the past.<br /><br />2. Recent NK provocations like the submarine sinking and the shelling of a Korean island were a shock for South Koreans, and reminded them why the Americans were there.<br /><br />3. Korea is caught between an unpalatable Japan and a sinister China, whose pollution increasingly clouds Seoul's skies. The only possible ally is America. <br /><br /><br />Jerrynoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-28262068626253045172013-12-06T15:49:53.528-08:002013-12-06T15:49:53.528-08:00"Mass non-white immigration not only means mo..."Mass non-white immigration not only means more poverty, which would increase inequality by itself, but it also means wage and salary equilibrium depression which makes the ultra-rich even ultra-richer, which hastens wealth inequality even more."<br /><br />Yes. It's quite simple really. Mass immigration increases total output (GDP) while at the same time depressing wages so where does all that extra GDP go?<br /><br />It goes in the pockets of the rich and has been doing so since 1965 hence why they bribe politicians to keep the borders open. It's simply a minority of the population robbing the rest.<br /><br />However this logic is always true and has played out the same way in some times and places before e.g. the Roman elite betraying their citizens with the slavery version of mass immigration, so the question is why does it happen in some times and places but not others?<br /><br />I think a lot of it is the level of relatedness of the elite vis a vis the rest of the population. This doesn't just include obvious tribal differences as even in a homogenous population if the population is large enough the elite might only be very distantly related to the majority.<br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-67160539879391933572013-12-05T21:48:07.526-08:002013-12-05T21:48:07.526-08:00Also possible is the less closely related to you b...<b>Also possible is the less closely related to you by blood your ruling elite are the more likely they are to betray you.</b><br /><br />I don't know. The "elites" in Utah enjoy fucking the people over, and they're all British/German/Scandinavian Mormons, like everyone else in this state.<br /><br />White non-Jewish "elites" don't generally look at the world in ethnic terms. They see the world as them vs. everyone else.<br /><br />Jewish and Asian elites <i>may</i> be more ethnocentric, but white non-Jewish elites sure as hell aren't.Matthewnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-88013120273817349242013-12-05T15:22:02.413-08:002013-12-05T15:22:02.413-08:00"There is a whopping 118 score gap between As..."There is a whopping 118 score gap between Asian and white in Massachusetts."<br /><br />Misleading as only elite Asians tend to live in Mass(attracted by colleges and tech industry) whereas MASS whites include all whites, even 'white trash' elements. Similarly, if only smart elite whites settled in some Chinese province, they would outscore Chinese(including ignorant peasants) by a mile. <br /><br />But if we were to compare white elite scores with Asian elite scores in Mass, whites(especially Jews) would be equal or even better. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-91956130797330476282013-12-05T14:29:58.663-08:002013-12-05T14:29:58.663-08:00I think you're overthinking it, Sailer, which ...I think you're overthinking it, Sailer, which is something you rarely do.<br /><br />Mass non-white immigration not only means more poverty, which would increase inequality by itself, but it also means wage and salary equilibrium depression which makes the ultra-rich even ultra-richer, which hastens wealth inequality even more.countenancehttp://countenance.wordpress.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-54742745935817685972013-12-05T12:32:01.355-08:002013-12-05T12:32:01.355-08:00Maybe there's a need for soldiers to be smart ...Maybe there's a need for soldiers to be smart enough to control a sophisticated weapon but if so it is likely to be only for a little while longer. The smart weapons are all heading toward autonomous functioning.<br /><br />Right now there are little infantryman robots. I'm sure you've seen them on TV. They have tracks and TV. They evolved from bomb disposal robots. All it took was to add a rifle.<br /><br />These things are controlled by a human soldier who has a radio control station on the battlefield. It's easy to see where this is going. <br /><br />The Nazis had remote controlled bombs in WWII. The 'Goliath' however was vulnerable to having its cable cut. So too is the new generation of robots. Radio can be jammed or hijacked. Human controllers can be located. You can shoot a steel robot with a rifle and not have much effect. It is better to reserve your small arms fire for the human operator. Soon someone will suggest you just make the little robots autonomous. <br /><br />I think we can take it as virtually certain that DARPA already has autonomous robot infantrymen. It's not that hard. Stick on some infrared sensors and some facial recognition software and set them loose. No human could live long on a robot infested battlefield.<br /><br />I think we could have done this already had we wanted too. The robots would be 'area denial' weapons like mines. Some anti-mine activist is in the news today warning about this very issue. Armies themselves may be a thing of the past quite soon.<br /><br />I think we'll see human soldiers doing something more like police work. People prefer to deal with people. But for classic invasions like Omaha Beach I think humans won't be wanted or needed.<br /><br />Albertosaurus Pat Boylehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13477950851915567863noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-39736876172732865112013-12-05T10:44:11.433-08:002013-12-05T10:44:11.433-08:00Every Marine is a rifleman.Every Marine is a rifleman.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-3612638105803719092013-12-05T08:03:26.604-08:002013-12-05T08:03:26.604-08:00If there is a break-down of Chinese American in Ma...If there is a break-down of Chinese American in Massachusetts, I am sure that they will beat Shanghai. There is a whopping 118 score gap between Asian and white in Massachusetts. All these tests including PISA, SAT, TIMSS, Stanford-Binet, Wechsler have huge genetic component there. Just like we will never see a Chinese long jump or 100 sprinter Olympic champion, we will not see US PISA score catching up with those of Japan or South Korea or Singapore because of demographic reason. We have hit a genetic ceiling here. Give it up, Steve. Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00377604793224266078noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-38391716212704160412013-12-05T06:44:19.676-08:002013-12-05T06:44:19.676-08:00Steve said, "A lot of South Korean nationalis...Steve said, "A lot of South Korean nationalist pugnaciousness is resenting the American military occupation. For example, the nicest part of Seoul is the giant American military base right in the middle of this crowded city, with its parks and golf courses."<br /><br />The resentment waxes and wanes. It makes good local politics every so often and serves as a steam release valve, particularly when an American serviceman goes berserk and rapes/kills. There’s nothing like coming off the Seoul subway up to the street level and find it deserted, only to see a line of Korean riot cops marching toward you (true story).<br /><br />True, we’d probably feel the same way if a foreign army had a huge base in Georgetown. But, DC isn’t in range of rocket artillery from the massive Mexican army artillery divisions along the border. Seoul is. If Kim Jung-Crazy picked up the phone and said go, the NORKs could be raining projectiles on downtown Seoul in 30 minutes. Kinda tends to focus the mind a little more, and put that whole occupying-foreign-army-resentment thing on the backburner. It’s an insurance policy, really. If the shells start falling some Yanks will inevitably get wounded/killed, thus necessitating some response/support from us. Even so, plan is in the works to turn the whole thing over and move all US Soldiers (including along the DMZ) down south 30 miles or so (to Camp Humphrey), by 2019.<br /><br />Personally, I’d wager a year’s salary that the ROK could mop the floor with the NORKs. The NORKs have the numbers, but how good is their decades-old Soviet/Chinese stuff? Could it stand up to sustained combat usage over weeks/months? The NORKs have NO ability to manufacture replacements at a sustained rate; I’d even question their ability to maintain/repair what they have consistently. Would the Chinese be willing to bankroll sustainment to any degree? And they have very few combat veterans, or any significant amount of military leaders who have experienced sustained operations (maybe some advisor vets from Soviet-era communist wars, i.e. Afghanistan). I think if Kim Jung-Crazy started to get really squirrelly in any serious way, the Chinese would find a way to quickly usher him out of the country in exile in some sort of bloodless coup.<br /><br />Meanwhile, the ROK has a huge manufacturing base that I bet could be switched over to wartime support rather quickly if needed. They operate and maintain modern equipment we’ve sold and trained them on, and a large part of their equipment base is domestically manufactured. They train regularly with us in combined ops (integrated air, sea and land ops) and are quite proficient. Plus, they have veterans who fought alongside us in units in Iraq and the Horn of Africa. So they have experienced leadership. Plus, a NORK invasion would be a defense of their home turf, and nothing quite focuses the mind like defending your town/village against the Hun.<br /><br />That’s why the NORKs are so keen to have nukes; it gives them a leverage they would need, because the Chinese will NOT come in to save them if they initiated an assault and started to get their tails handed to them by the South.Captain Trippshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02303143412847947308noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-58801122395749629202013-12-05T05:37:01.476-08:002013-12-05T05:37:01.476-08:00DPG said...
This gives the elites too much cr... DPG said...<br /><i><br /> This gives the elites too much credit. You think they have a coherent, explicit strategy of self-interest?<br /><br /> I'm more of a believer in Robin Hanson's "politics isn't about policy." The very well off who I know tend to think of themselves as "citizens of the world." It's cosmopolitan, high-status. </i><br /><br />Robin Hanson is an excellent data point for those who believe in a long run secular decline in Anglosphere IQ. That he is surrounded by "smart" people who find his transparently deus ex machina BS insightful is lots more such data points.<br /><br />Seriously, how can anyone fail to see that "people do X because X is high status" is not an explanation of anything? And, no, there is nothing more to this part of his schtick.Billnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-71802283955551173722013-12-05T03:17:47.410-08:002013-12-05T03:17:47.410-08:00Simon in London wrote:
"Smart weapons are no...Simon in London wrote:<br /><br />"Smart weapons are not a replacement for mass armies. Smart weapons don't even replace artillery in terms of being able to kill lots of people quickly. Smart weapons are for precision-killing. Fighting big wars needs mass armies. The decline of mass armies is because rulers see less need to be ready to fight big wars, in particular since the end of the Cold War. "<br /><br />We'll see. I'll grant what you are saying at the current time, though obviously some things like the drones are in play now (and a few other curiosities).<br /><br />But sitting here pecking away at the computer, my mind boggles at what I think is coming. The little toys I think it will be possible to build in a few years.<br /><br />I'm not going to google up numbers, but it is my impression that it took roughly $30,000 on average, to kill an enemy combatant in WWII, the war of iron bombs and other such.<br /><br />The price has only gone up since then.<br /><br />Part of us is that we are unwilling to think or wage war like a Victorian. You know, sacrifice accuracy and precision for body count. I'm sure lots of folks will quibble with that statement on right and left, but it really is true.<br /><br />The Victorians were like that old guy who is buck naked in the spa, drying his nuts with a blow dryer. They just did not give a damn.<br /><br />If you were willing to adopt a Mongol mindset, and stack bodies to the sky, my mind shudders at what you could do with current technology, let alone what is coming.<br /><br />Perhaps I'm wrong, but I really do think mass death is going to become "too cheap to meter."<br /><br />This disturbs me because my personal inclination is that of an isolationist or something more than anything else. I might not care to have a bunch of Pakistanis in this country, but I really have no interest whatsoever in killing them, or changing their worldview or anything of the sort.<br /><br />I really kind of think that there is a messianic mindset common to "elites" in America, inherited from New Englanders that causes America to be a really busybody nation.<br /><br />And you brits go along for the ride, because for whatever reason, you guys live for adventure. Plus you have a lot of the same cultural influences that make you want to save the world from itself, even if Christianity is no longer a deciding issue in your society.sunbeamhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16540822135478202229noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-60562715045936338072013-12-05T00:57:13.901-08:002013-12-05T00:57:13.901-08:00Smart weapons are not a replacement for mass armie...Smart weapons are not a replacement for mass armies. Smart weapons don't even replace artillery in terms of being able to kill lots of people quickly. Smart weapons are for precision-killing. Fighting big wars needs mass armies. The decline of mass armies is because rulers see less need to be ready to fight big wars, in particular since the end of the Cold War. Simon in Londonnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-82676220512688493612013-12-04T23:51:43.272-08:002013-12-04T23:51:43.272-08:00Interesting theory Steve.
Of course, these things...Interesting theory Steve.<br /><br />Of course, these things are always cyclical. The French Revolution is the classic example of what happens when the elites push it too far. So far nothing like that has happened in the modern era, in fact, the last mass movement of 'people power' was the 'proletariat' throwing out marxists in order to re-establish capitalism!. Therefore after that little triumph of neoconnery, the elitists have just got more and more arrogant and gotten away with more and more, dare I say it they are in danger of over-playing their hand.<br /> Of course, the French Revolution only happened in a homogenous nation bound by ties of language and blood. Don't you think that the jolly wheeze of the elitists in promoting 'free immigration' is the best possible device for not only massacring wages, (and thus creaming off all of the pie), but of balkanizing and dividing the peasants and setting against each other instead of their ruthless exploiters?<br /><br />The irony is that the left is the biggest supporter of open borders after the elitists.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-17566006293206713192013-12-04T21:22:45.068-08:002013-12-04T21:22:45.068-08:00I think Steve has identified an important reason w...I think Steve has identified an important reason why elites no longer care about the cannon fodder classes.<br /><br />Here is another reason. Years ago the elites got most of the money needed to fund their wars and their other awesome projects through taxation. In order to get a lot of money from taxation,they needed a healthy tax base.<br /><br />Since the U.S. abandoned the gold standard in 1971, top elites get now more and more of their money from money printing. Each year they want to print a lot of money, spend it, and not cause price inflation. <br /><br />From the elite's point of view, the most important thing the masses can do today is not get wage increases and not cause commodity price inflation. The more the U.S. economy trends toward a deflationary slump, the more they can print and spend.<br /><br />The question you must ask about the controlling elites is, "How do they get their money?" If you understand that, their behavior becomes much more understandable.Jeff W.noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-49069828522074312192013-12-04T18:38:00.745-08:002013-12-04T18:38:00.745-08:00"If Koreans are lemmings, then Americans must..."If Koreans are lemmings, then Americans must be super-lemmings, since Koreans have remained relatively nationalistic and conservative and haven't "switched overnight" the way the US has in recent decades."<br /><br />No, Americans are LEADING than FOLLOWING IN the way of self-destruction. Americans have been not only pioneers in winning the power but in losing it. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-54170296812084593522013-12-04T17:06:14.459-08:002013-12-04T17:06:14.459-08:00Besides, Koreans are a monkey-see, monkey-do peopl...<i>Besides, Koreans are a monkey-see, monkey-do people. As one American general said, they are a race of lemmings, so while they may be culturally conservative at one time, they can switch overnight to being culturally liberal. (Koreans may be lacking in guilt conscious, but they are shameless baiters of collective guilt--almost on par with Jews and negroes--, going on and on about Japanese colonialism when it's ancient history--and when Japan actually did much good for Korea by dragging it into modernity. But it's possible that childish Koreans could be suckered into feeling guilt for its treatment of homos, mixed-race kids, and the horrible dogocaust.) </i><br /><br />If Koreans are lemmings, then Americans must be super-lemmings, since Koreans have remained relatively nationalistic and conservative and haven't "switched overnight" the way the US has in recent decades.<br /><br />Regarding Japanese colonialism, it's not ancient history in East Asia, and not just Korea, but other East Asian countries such as China have a problem with postwar Japan's relations with other East Asian countries regarding Japan's colonialism. You're a movie reviewer who just watches movies and anime and doesn't know anything, so you don't know anything about this issue either. Japan has not made amends or been very apologetic about its colonial and wartime history, unlike Germany's postwar relations with France, the UK, and the US, and its good faith efforts to mend relationships. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-49714734214520542722013-12-04T17:03:44.859-08:002013-12-04T17:03:44.859-08:00"A lot of South Korean nationalist pugnacious..."A lot of South Korean nationalist pugnaciousness is resenting the American military occupation."<br /><br />I think that used to be the case, at least among Korean leftists. But, if we trust the NY Times and Western sources of news, most of Korean nationalism seems to be directed at the Japanese. Maybe the rise of China--and even the admittance on the left that communism has been one massive failure--has made Koreans more accepting of American presence in Korea. <br /><br />Or maybe Koreans really do feel a lot of resentment against Americans--not only due to 'ugly American-ness' but the humiliation of having to rely on a foreign country for protection--, but since America is its closest ally, the full extent of the hostility cannot be expressed and is channeled at the Japanese, who are a much easier target. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-86408578997156187802013-12-04T16:54:59.841-08:002013-12-04T16:54:59.841-08:00A lot of South Korean nationalist pugnaciousness i...A lot of South Korean nationalist pugnaciousness is resenting the American military occupation. For example, the nicest part of Seoul is the giant American military base right in the middle of this crowded city, with its parks and golf courses.Steve Sailerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11920109042402850214noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-1483429264302198702013-12-04T16:50:12.974-08:002013-12-04T16:50:12.974-08:00But South Koreans are basically fascistic in their...<i>But South Koreans are basically fascistic in their nationalism, and have some of the highest levels of xenophobia in the world. Take a look -- they're right down there with Egypt and Iran in their intolerance (though more hospitable than India, for what little that's worth). Japanese and Chinese, in marked contrast, really don't have a problem with foreigners, even if they may not like them much. </i><br /><br />Not wanting neighbors of another race is "fascistic nationalism"? This would imply that all those white liberals who engage in white flight are "fascistic nationalists."<br /><br />I don't think the Koreans are much different from Chinese and Japanese in their attitudes regarding foreign neighbors. Nothing about this survey suggests that the Chinese and Japanese "really don't have a problem with foreigners" in marked contrast to Koreans. If anything, it just suggests that the Koreans are more honest.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-16099559632275934542013-12-04T16:41:55.487-08:002013-12-04T16:41:55.487-08:00Unlike North Korea that is wholly nationalist, Sou...<i>Unlike North Korea that is wholly nationalist, South Korea tries to serve its nationalism by working with internationalism.</i><br /><br />It's not even clear what something like "wholly nationalist" even means, but North Korea is internationalist as well. It's rejected by the US though, and the US has great influence over which countries are pariahs and have less access to internationalist relations.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-26587197431294976232013-12-04T16:34:28.265-08:002013-12-04T16:34:28.265-08:00>That's wrong. The ancients needed mass arm...>That's wrong. The ancients needed mass armies and there was no middle class. Two classes - very rich/powerful and underclass - near subsistence.<<br /><br />They let the soldiers share in the loot. That's worth a lot to a starving soldier, kind of a GI Bill minus the university and the education. Seriously, it was a head-swimming chance at upward mobility in a static world.<br /><br />In "Henry IV" (different era, but still), Shakespeare has someone ask a military commander before a big battle whether he intends to clothe his men, who are in rags. No, is the answer - "They'll find linen enough on every hedge!"Davidhttp://david-passingparade2.blogspot.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-23856437370774143902013-12-04T15:36:17.751-08:002013-12-04T15:36:17.751-08:00That's wrong. The ancients needed mass armies...That's wrong. The ancients needed mass armies and there was no middle class. Two classes - very rich/powerful and underclass - near subsistence.douglashttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10269205712944353490noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-69530091435885831602013-12-04T15:33:08.290-08:002013-12-04T15:33:08.290-08:00The end of the former Soviet Union, nasty as it wa...The end of the former Soviet Union, nasty as it was, also has something to do with it. <br /><br />"If you don't like it, why don't you go and live in .... where?"Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-5232106429087815402013-12-04T15:26:38.773-08:002013-12-04T15:26:38.773-08:00Technology in general has two countervailing effec...Technology in general has two countervailing effects on labor. Greater productivity makes a worker's output more extensive but at the same time threatens to make some labor redundant. Whether the net result is job-creating or job-replacing depends on the situation.<br /><br />I think military technology is similarly ambiguous in its effects. The advent of, say, the repeating rifle or the machine gun probably made the common man more important rather than less important. When John Q Public has only a pike he may be irrelevant, but when he can fire hundreds of rounds per minute you want him doing that <i>for</i> you and not against you.<br /><br />On the other hand, as Steve says, some military tech may indeed render certain functions obsolete and thus encourage indifference toward the people who would have previously performed them.<br /><br />Of course, there have been a lot of other things going on in the world during the last couple centuries that affect social mobility and equality, so it's impossible to say what, if any, role military technology has played in social arrangements.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-90015779462237875662013-12-04T15:06:17.937-08:002013-12-04T15:06:17.937-08:00Another 1, 2, or 5 million men on the ground in Ir...<i>Another 1, 2, or 5 million men on the ground in Iraq/Afgh is peanuts.</i><br /><br />No, that many Americans on the ground in the twenty-first century is not peanuts. Had they attempted to assemble that many, there would have been major blowback like the protests of Vietnam. That is why Rumsfeld and company were so eager to invade Iraq with less than 100K troops. <br /><br />High tech weaponry gives them the ability to perform operations without losing a lot of men, which would no longer be tolerated in a nation where families are small. But to occupy and control a nation, you still need a lot of men. And what you consider peanuts in terms of WW2 standards, are not peanuts in today's world.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com