February 5, 2006

Bushonomics in a nutshell

Edwin S. Rubenstein of VDARE.com continues to be the only person regularly covering what has to be the biggest economic story of the decade. On the VDARE blog he reports:

Hispanic employment rose 278,000, or by 1.46 percent in January, while non-Hispanic employment rose 17,000, or 0.01 percent....

Over the past five years - January 2001 through January 2006 – Hispanic employment rose by 3,226,000, or 20.0 percent, while non-Hispanic employment increased by 2,072,000, or 1.7 percent.

The government doesn't break out immigrants (much less illegal immigrants), so the Hispanic figure is the best proxy we have for the impact of immigration.


My published articles are archived at iSteve.com -- Steve Sailer

Malcolm Gladwell, Superstar

I just discovered that Gladwell responded at length to my uncomplimentary VDARE.com review of his humongous bestseller Blink: The Power of Thinking Without Thinking. It's a marvel of fatuity. (My favorite line of Gladwell's: "Sailer and Posner have a very low opinion of car salesmen." Now that's a killer comeback!) I'll have my answer up on VDARE late on Sunday evening.

Meanwhile, tomorrow's Sunday New York Times runs a 2,600 word tongue-bath entitled "The Gladwell Effect." There is, however, a barely perceptible degree of subversive snark in Rachel Donadio's profile that shows she Googled my review. For example, she lifts from my piece when she writes:

His message is that we should trust first impressions — except when we shouldn't. Gladwell, who is multiracial, said he became interested in first impressions when he grew his hair into an Afro and then was repeatedly pulled over for speeding, and stopped once by the police looking for a rapist with similar hair.

And there's a new parody book out called Blank: The Power of Not Actually Thinking at All by "Noah Tall" (Lewis Grossberger and Michael Solomon):

Stop! Don't think! You already know what this book is about. That is the power of BLANK: the power of not actually thinking at all. Using what scientific researchers call "Extra-Lean Deli Slicing" (or would if they actually bothered to research it), your brain has already decided whether you're going to like BLANK, whether its cover goes with your shirt, and whether it will make you look smart if somebody sees you reading it on the train.

Chances are you and your shirt are both liking it a lot, you're going to buy several copies, and you don't even know why! That's why you've absolutely got to read BLANK: to find out why your brain keeps doing these wacky things without your permission. In BLANK, a hilarious parody of the number-one bestseller it looks eerily like (and sort of rhymes with) and that your brain wisely advised you to just read a review or magazine excerpt about while avoiding the actual book itself, the brilliantly impulsive and slightly irresponsible Noah Tall explains how people as diverse as General Custer, Roy Rogers, a semi-famous rock star, and the entire New York City Police Department either won big or lost miserably as a result of their minds going completely Blank.

About the Author

Noah Tall is a longtime subscriber to The New Yorker and other magazines that people leave on their coffee tables when they want to look smart. He has also been a member of NAMES, the dyslexic branch of MENSA, since 1598. He is the author of the highly acclaimed national bestseller The Tippling Point, which has yet to be published.


My published articles are archived at iSteve.com -- Steve Sailer

In other diversity news

Popular Pittsburgh Steeler running back Jerome "The Bus" Bettis, a Detroit native, received the key to the city of Detroit last week. His predecessor recipients include Saddam Hussein in 1980 for his generous donations to an Iraqi Christian church in Detroit.


My published articles are archived at iSteve.com -- Steve Sailer

The Danish Cartoons, or Diversity v. Freedom of Speech, Part CMXLIV

I've been pointing out for years that diversity and freedom of the press are in natural conflict, but the press has been slow to catch on.

"Reporter" Craig S. Smith writes in the New York Times:

Adding Newsprint to the Fire

EUROPEANS hoisted the banner of press freedom last week in response to Muslim anger over a dozen Danish cartoons, some of them mocking the Prophet Muhammad. But something deeper and more complex was also at work: The fracas grew out of, and then fed, a war of polemics between Europe's anti-immigrant nationalists and the fundamentalist Muslims among its immigrants.

"One extreme triggers the other," said Jonas Gahr Store, Norway's foreign minister, arguing that both sides want to polarize the debate at the expense of the moderate majority. "These issues are dangerous because they give the extremes fertile ground."

But this did not take place in a political vacuum. Hostile feelings have been growing between Denmark's immigrants and a government supported by the right-wing Danish People's Party, which has pushed anti-immigrant policies....

Let me see if I have this straight: what the New York Times is implying is that one representative of "extremism" is the elected government of Denmark?

In the current climate, some experts on mass communications suggest, the exercise was no more benign than commissioning caricatures of African-Americans would have been during the 1960's civil rights struggle. "You have to ask what was the intent of these cartoons, bearing in mind the recent history of tension in Denmark with the Muslim community," said David Welch, head of the Center for the Study of Propaganda and War at the University of Kent in Britain. Nicholas Lemann, dean of the Columbia Journalism School, put it this way: "He knew what he was doing."

Way to uphold freedom of the press, Nicholas! I always knew you had it in you, you duplicitous toad.

And there was agonizing over what it meant for both press freedom and tolerance. "The limit to freedom of expression is the point at which there is an intent to harm a person or a community," said William Bourdon, a French lawyer who has handled high-profile freedom of speech cases...

No, the limit to freedom of expression should be falsehood. "Intent to harm" is a disaster for free speech.

But Mustafa Hussain, a Pakistani-born Danish sociologist, said the cartoons showed how far to the right Europe's debate has swung. "Switch on the television and you have the impression that Muslims are all fanatics, that Muslims don't understand Western liberal values," he said.

Perhaps Muslims should stop acting like fanatics whenever a TV camera is pointed in there direction? As for whether or not Muslims understand Western liberal values, a more pertinent question is whether Westerners still understand Western liberal values? What this pathetic article suggests is that Muslims understand the new and improved Western liberal values perfectly: that the highest value in the contemporary West is to be considered an official minority, which then gives you that ultimate value of victim status.

Mr. Rose offered a distinction between respecting other people's faith, which he favors, and obeying someone else's religious taboos, which he said society has no obligation to do.

But whether his exercise had achieved his stated goal — of forcing citizens to think about their submission to someone else's taboos — it was clear that it had helped extremists on both sides who would keep Europe and the Muslim world from understanding each other.

Yeah, yeah, all us freedom of speech extremists.

Isn't this last sentence a perfect example of elite media BS? What's happening is that people in Europe are finally coming to understand the values of the Muslim world that the media has tried to keep from them.


My published articles are archived at iSteve.com -- Steve Sailer

The In-Your-Face to Feel-Your-Pain Gradient

The In-Your-Face to Feel-Your-Pain Gradient -- The Dane-Muslim cartoon controversy illuminates one of the less understood dynamics in the modern world, which I call the In-Your-Face to Feel-Your-Pain Gradient.

All over the world, peoples differ in terms of how in-your-face they tend to be. The ultra-polite Japanese, for example, who might be the most sensitive people on earth to other people's emotional discomfort, are deeply distressed by the kind of brusque assertiveness that's common in South China. Thus the Japanese developed elaborate forms of business entertaining, while the South Chinese businessmen love to bargain aggressively when stone sober.

But the particular gradient that's most relevant to us is the one that runs between the Middle East and Northwestern Europe. Northwestern Europe and its overseas offshoots are probably second only to Japan as being Feel-Your-Pain cultures where people don't like social friction and don't like to see others upset. In contrast, the Middle East is perhaps the most in-your-face place on Earth. Here's P.J. O'Rourke's memorable description in The Atlantic of a Red Cross attempt at food distribution during the 2003 Iraq Attaq:

I was outside Safwan [in Iraq] on March 28, on the roof of a Kuwait Red Crescent tractor-trailer full of food donations. Below, a couple of hundred shoving, shouldering, kneeing, kicking Iraqi men and boys were grabbing at boxes of food.

Red Crescent volunteers provided the boxes, gingerly, to the mob. Each white carton would be grasped by three or four or five belligerents and pulled in three or four or five directions—tug-of-Congolese-civil-war.

Every person in the mob seemed to be arguing with every other person. Giving in to impulses to push themselves forward and push others away, shouting Iraqis were propelled in circles. A short, plump, bald man sank in the roil. A small boy, red-faced and crying, was crushed between two bellowing fat men. An old man was trampled trying to join the fray.

The Iraqis were snatching the food as if they were starving, but they couldn't have been starving or they wouldn't have been able to snatch so well. Most looked fully fed. Some were too fit and active. Everyone behind the trailer was expending a lot of calories at noon on a 90° day.

Looking out, I saw irrigated patches in the desert, at about the same density as the patches on the uniform of a mildly diligent Boy Scout. The tomatoes were ripe. Nannies, billies, and kids browsed between garden plots. Goat bolognese was on offer, at least for some locals.

There was no reason for people to clobber one another. Even assuming that each man in the riot—and each boy—was the head of a family, and assuming the family was huge, there was enough food in the truck. Mohammed al-Kandari, a doctor from the Kuwait Red Crescent Society, had explained this to the Iraqis when the trailer arrived. Al-Kandari was a forceful explainer. He resembled a beneficent version of Bluto in the Popeye comics, or Bluto in Animal House.

Al-Kandari had persuaded the Iraqis to form ranks. They looked patient and grateful, the way we privately imagine the recipients of food donations looking when we're writing checks to charities. Then the trailer was opened, and everything went to hell.

Al-Kandari marched through the donnybrook and slammed the trailer doors shut. He harangued the Iraqis. They lined up again. The trailer was opened, and everything went to hell.

Al-Kandari waded in and closed the trailer doors again. He swung his large arms in parallel arcs at the Iraqis. "Line up!" he boomed; "Queue!" he thundered—the Arabic-speaking doctor speaking to Arabic-speakers in English, as if no Arabic word existed for the action.

Al-Kandari took a pad of Post-it notes and a marker pen from his lab-coat pocket. "Numbers!" he said, still speaking English. "I will give you all numbers!" A couple of hundred shouldering, shoving Iraqi men and boys grabbed at the Post-it notes.

The doctor gave up and opened the trailer doors. I climbed the ladder behind the truck cab to get a better view.

Aid-seekers in England would queue automatically by needs, disabled war vets and nursing mothers first. Americans would bring lawn chairs and sleeping bags, camp out the night before, and sell their places to the highest bidders. Japanese would text-message one another, creating virtual formations, getting in line to get in line. Germans would await commands from a local official, such as the undersupervisor of the town clock. Even Italians know how to line up, albeit in an ebullient wedge. The happier parts of the world have capacities for self-organization so fundamental and obvious that they appear to be the pillars of civilization. But here—on the road to Ur, in the Tigris-Euphrates Valley, where civilization has obtained for 5,000 years longer than it has, for example, at a Libertarian Party confab in Phoenix—nothing was supporting the roof.

What I saw, however, wasn't anarchy... The Iraqis didn't try to climb into the tractor-trailer or break through its side doors. Red Crescent volunteers, coming and going from the back of the truck, were unmolested. Once an aid box was fully in an Iraqi's control and had been pulled free from the commotion, no one tried to take it. I saw four boxes being guarded by a young boy.

I watched a confident gray-haired man push toward the trailer gate. He had wire-rimmed glasses on the end of his nose and a cigarette in the corner of his mouth. He dove for a box, his glasses flying, cigarette embers burning various gutras and dishdashahs. He disappeared for the better part of a minute. Then he came out on the other side of the throng, box under one arm and glasses somehow back on his face (but minus the cigarette). The gray-haired man looked around and delivered an open-handed whack to someone who, I guess, had indulged in a late hit.

I stared at the rampage for an hour. Now and then I'd be noticed on the trailer roof. Whenever I caught someone's eye, I was greeted with a big, happy smile. The Iraqis were having fun.

Now, this is not solely the fault of Islam. Non-Muslims in the Middle East are also quite brusque. For example, I used to work at a marketing research firm where the most brilliant executive was a Lebanese Christian immigrant, who was constantly upsetting lesser employees by pointing out their mistakes in no uncertain terms. I had to counsel employees that you had to grade Magid on the curve -- that I'd known a half dozen Lebanese (all of them Christians, I believe) and he was the most considerate one of the six, so by the standards of his Levantine upbringing, he was practically David Niven for grace and good manners. Similarly, Israeli Jews are remarkably in-your-face, so Islam isn't totally to blame for why Middle Easterners are the way they are. (It may play a role, though -- the Hindus of Bali are said to be a lot nicer on average than the Muslims in the rest of Indonesia.)

In a culture like Iraq's where everyone is constantly asserting his and his family's rights at the top of his lungs, it's hard for anyone to have rights if anything is to get done. In a culture like England's where each individual is reticent about asserting his rights or the rights of his family or clan, it's much easier for everyone to have rights.

You can see the problem that then develops when people from the in-your-face end of the gradient immigrate to the feel-your-pain countries. When immigrants bring their Middle Eastern hostility and assertiveness, the natives in the northwest are reluctant to vocally protest right back at them, because, well, it's just not done. They just give them That Look that causes their fellow Northwest Europeans to feel guilty that they've caused their neighbors discomfort. But it doesn't work on the Middle Easterners. They just see the failure of the natives to do anything substantial as proof of their bland white bread inferiority.

But the truly catastrophic problem for the Northwesterners is that their empathy and politeness makes it very difficult for them to publicly discuss the problems that immigration of Middle Easterners causes for them. To say out loud, "Maybe we shouldn't let in more of these people," is seen as being rude toward the people we've already let in. The ones that are already there will get angry and cause a scene, which we just can't bear, so we'd better just not talk about immigration policy at all.

Of course, that means the problem just keeps getting worse.

Now, the Japanese get around this problem by not letting in immigrants at all, not even perfectly pleasant Filipinos. Instead, they build robots and program them to act like Japanese, which is a lot easier on the Japanese and their fragile emotions.

My published articles are archived at iSteve.com -- Steve Sailer

The Gladwell Beatdown

"Malcolm Gladwell Blinks Again:" In my new VDARE.com column, I consider Malcolm Gladwell's baffled and hurt response to my unkind review last year on VDARE.com of his humongous bestseller Blink: The Power of Thinking Without Thinking. Gladwell, the tribune multiculti capitalism, had claimed that the reason car salesmen had been found to offer prices to women and blacks was because the dealers were the victims of instantaneous unconscious prejudices. I had quoted Judge Richard A. Posner, the distinguished leader of the Law and Economics school of thought, in scoffing at this. We both argued that car dealers were simply exploiting the lesser tendencies of women and blacks to drive a hard bargain to extract more profit from them.

Here's what Gladwell had to say on his website. I'll put Gladwell's remarks in italics:

"One of the most bizarre reactions that I received from reviewers of Blink is an absolute inability to accept the notion of unconscious prejudice. Here is an example from a fairly well known writer named Steve Sailer. Sailer, in turns, quotes from a very hostile review of Blink in The New Republic by Richard Posner." ...

Back in 2005, I explained what was really happening in the showrooms:

"Women dislike hurting other people's feelings more than men do, and car salesmen are very good at acting emotionally hurt when you try to lowball them. … Black men, for whatever complicated reasons, enjoy being seen as big spenders. And car salesmen are all too willing to help them spend big."

Malcolm, you could only sputter in shock and repeat yourself:

"It's hard to know just what to say in the face of arguments like this. … My interpretation is that the reason the car salesmen quote higher prices to otherwise identical black shoppers is because of unconscious discrimination. They don't realize what they are doing…"

That's naive to the point of hilarity. Some of these guys have been selling cars for as long as you have been alive. And, believe it or not, they pay close attention not just to what makes the most money for themselves but to what works for other salesmen as well.

Further, if the salesman's unconscious prejudice is costing the dealership money, his manager will make him highly conscious of it quickly, or the salesman will be out on the street.

You go on, working up an impressive display of righteous indignation:

"Sailer and Posner, by contrast, think that the discrimination is conscious and, what's more, that it's rational. The salesmen, in Posner's words, ‘ascribe the group's average characteristics to each member of the group, even though one knows that many members deviate from the average.’ And what is the ‘group's average characteristic’ in this case? That, as Sailer puts it, black men "enjoy being seen as big spenders." Am I wrong or is that an utterly ludicrous (not to mention offensive) statement? Where does this idea come from?"

Uh, from 10,000 rap videos? From the fact that the world's #1 market for cognac is Detroit, which is 80% black? The mouths of black stand-up comedians? Decades of marketing research? 100 years of car buying experience?

Malcolm, you go on:

"How is it possible that when it comes to buying things black men--magically--all take on the same personality?"

Uh, because they don't all take on the same personality. Go reread the line from Judge Posner that you yourself quoted above: we're talking about the "average"—a concept you may have heard of?

You say:

"… I refuse to believe that all of the car salesmen of Chicago are so stupid as to believe that by virtue of having a slightly darker skin color a human being becomes somehow predisposed towards higher prices."

But Malcolm, saying "I refuse to believe" when you have no evidence bespeaks desperation.

We're talking about an ethnic cultural trait. And the simple fact is that the urge to drive a hard bargain famously varies between ethnic groups. As Dave Barry notes in his new book Dave Barry's Money Secrets (Like: Why Is There a Giant Eyeball on the Dollar?):

"I'm the world's worst car buyer. I come from a long line of Presbyterians, who get their name from the Greek words pre, meaning 'people,' and sbyterian, meaning 'who always pay retail.' … My idea of an opening tactical salvo is to look at the car's sticker price and say to the salesperson, 'This looks like a good deal! Are you sure you're making enough profit on this?'"

As for your coup de grace"Sailer and Poser [sic] have a very low opinion of car salesmen”—you must be one of the few people in the country who claims not to have a low opinion of car salesmen. A 2005 Gallup poll asked 1002 adults nationwide to rate the honesty and ethical standards of 21 occupations. Nurses came in first, with 82% rating them high or very high. Last were telemarketers at 7%. Next to last were car salesmen at 8%.

[More, much more]


My published articles are archived at iSteve.com -- Steve Sailer

I was feeling sorry for the Seattle Seahawks,

who looked like the better team in their unlucky Super Bowl loss, until at the end of the game the TV showed their grieving owner Paul Allen. Mr. Allen is Bill Gates' old roommate and thus has more money than God. He bought Ticketmaster, which bought its only competitor Ticketron, and then started raising prices So now when my wife looked into buying a $20 concert ticket last month, the Ticketmaster service charge on top of that was $9.50, or a 47.5% surcharge. But I guess Allen had to raise prices so much, what with the ever rising cost of computing and communications.

When Pearl Jam objected in 1994 that their fans shouldn't have to pay Ticketmaster's absurd markups, Ticketmaster wouldn't cut their charges, daring the biggest band in America at the time to see if anyone would do business with them. Pearl Jam tried it, and tour turned out to be a fiasco, because all the good hockey rinks were terrified of the wrath of Ticketmaster. You'd think that some politician hoping to appeal to the youth vote would take on Ticketmaster's monopoly, but it hasn't happened.


My published articles are archived at iSteve.com -- Steve Sailer

February 3, 2006

Why are anti-American populists Hugo Chavez and Mahmoud Ahmadinejad in the news so much?

High oil prices. Populism is a winning political strategy when you have lots of windfall oil profits to spend on publicity stunts.


Speaking of publicity stunts, the People's Cube reports that the Iranian President is really just a spoof inspired by the success of Sacha Baron-Cohen's "Borat" character:


Looking back, we can only laugh at our unblinking acceptance of Ahmadinejad, an "Islamist hard-liner" dressed like a Turkish used car salesman, who called to wipe Israel off the map or move it to Alaska, demanded a manual recount of Holocaust victims, and banned all Western music. His retractions were even more bizarre: "CNN make lie! I send squeegees to help Israel, not 'Wipe off Israel!' Who translated, I kill him!"


My published articles are archived at iSteve.com -- Steve Sailer

Why are anti-American populists Hugo Chavez and Mahmoud Ahmadinejad in the news so much?

High oil prices. Populism is a winning political strategy when you have lots of windfall oil profits to spend on publicity stunts.

Speaking of publicity stunts, the People's Cube reports that the Iranian President is really just a spoof inspired by the success of Sacha Baron-Cohen's "Borat" character:

Looking back, we can only laugh at our unblinking acceptance of Ahmadinejad, an "Islamist hard-liner" dressed like a Turkish used car salesman, who called to wipe Israel off the map or move it to Alaska, demanded a manual recount of Holocaust victims, and banned all Western music. His retractions were even more bizarre: "CNN make lie! I send squeegees to help Israel, not 'Wipe off Israel!' Who translated, I kill him!"


My published articles are archived at iSteve.com -- Steve Sailer

Why are anti-American populists Hugo Chavez and Mahmoud Ahmadinejad in the news so much?

High oil prices. Populism is a winning political strategy when you have lots of windfall oil profits to spend on publicity stunts.

Speaking of publicity stunts, the People's Cube reports that the Iranian President is really just a spoof inspired by the success of Sacha Baron-Cohen's "Borat" character:

Looking back, we can only laugh at our unblinking acceptance of Ahmadinejad, an "Islamist hard-liner" dressed like a Turkish used car salesman, who called to wipe Israel off the map or move it to Alaska, demanded a manual recount of Holocaust victims, and banned all Western music. His retractions were even more bizarre: "CNN make lie! I send squeegees to help Israel, not 'Wipe off Israel!' Who translated, I kill him!"


My published articles are archived at iSteve.com -- Steve Sailer

Everybody's favorite month, February

As I asked in VDARE last year:

Who was the genius who chose February for Black History Month? First you have Kwanzaa, then the MLK Day frenzy in mid-January, and then two weeks later, boom, it starts all over again.

I bet that, by February 2nd, even Al Sharpton is sick of Black History Month. I can picture the Rev. Al easing into his Barcalounger and flipping on his plasma screen:

"Let's see if there's anything good on television … Oh boy, another Harriet Tubman documentary [CLICK] … Uh oh, a panel discussion on W.E.B. Dubois [CLICK] … Hey, it's that groundhog, Pungobungy Pete, or whatever they call him … and he can see his shadow! Now, that's great TV!"


My published articles are archived at iSteve.com -- Steve Sailer

February 2, 2006

A suggestion

Destiny Campbell, the 3-year-old girl in Delaware who was severely mauled by a relative's pit bull earlier this week, remains in critical but stable condition. One bit of good news: the dog, which was put down, has been determined to be non-rabid.

In this week's "Fact" article in The New Yorker, "Troublemakers: What pit bulls can teach us about profiling," Malcolm Gladwell mounts a deeply disingenuous 4,800 word attack on racial profiling by way of defending pit bulls from legal persecution. According to Mr. Gladwell, his contract with The New Yorker requires him to publish 40,000-50,000 words per year in that magazine. According to New York magazine, his salary is $250,000. (On top of this he makes about $750,000 annually from public speaking, as well as million-plus book advances, and the sale of Blink to the movies, where Leonardo DiCaprio is slated to play him.)

So, Mr. Gladwell was paid roughly $25,000 for his intentionally misleading article on pit bulls. What could be more appropriate than that he donate that $25,000 to a fund for the care of little Destiny?


My published articles are archived at iSteve.com -- Steve Sailer

The Intelligence of Dogs

Here are the Top Ten and Bottom Ten smartest dog breeds from Stanley Coren's book:

Ranks 1-10
Often working dogs, the brightest dogs who learn commands quickly, and respond to the first command 95 percent of the time:

1. Border Collie
2. Poodle
3. German Shepard
4. Golden Retriever
5. Doberman Pinscher
6. Shetland Sheepdog
7. Labrador Retriever
8. Papillon
9. Rottweiler
10. Australian Cattle Dog

Ranks 69-79
The most difficult to train, they need many training sessions and lots of repetition. They typically react to first command less than 25 percent of the time.

69. Shih Tzu
70. Basset Hound
71. Mastiff
72. Beagle
73. Pekingese
74. Bloodhound
75. Borzoi
76. Chow Chow
77. Bulldog
78. Basenji
79. Afghan Hound


Of course, this is just one particular definition of intelligence, one created by humans trying to get productive work out of dogs. From a dog's point of view, a workaholic breed like the Border Collie might seem pretty stupid. Why work as hard as a Border Collie does when you can get people to feed you anyway just by being lovable? A cat would think a Border Collie is a complete moron.

Still, in my limited experience, any conceivable measure of intelligence would have to rank Afghans as dumb as a box of rocks. I was at a picnic once where I was given a huge steak. I finished half of it, and didn't know what to do with the other half, when an Afghan gamboled up, begging food. I held up the steak to him, which riveted his attention. Then I decided to put it behind my back to tease him momentarily. Within two seconds of my hiding the steak behind my back, he forgot all about it and ran off.

By the way, Collies, which, as I recall from my childhood, used to devise brilliant mechanisms for rescuing Timmy from the quicksand every Sunday evening at 7pm, have been getting dumber and dumber, according to animal science professor (and famous autistic) Temple Grandin. Breeders have been narrowing down the skulls of collies for aesthetic effect, which doesn't leave much room for brains.

And thanks for all the hypoallergenic dog tips, but my son's asthma has gotten better so, when somebody offered us a Fila Brasileiro pup, we took him up on it.


My published articles are archived at iSteve.com -- Steve Sailer

"Match Point"

A brief excerpt from my review in the upcoming Feb. 27th issue of The American Conservative:

None of Woody Allen's three dozen movies has made much over 40 million dollars at the box office, and the last one to do that well was "Hannah and Her Sisters" two decades ago.

Yet Woody's reputation among film critics and Academy Award voters remains curiously exalted. His screenplay nomination for his new film "Match Point" gives him 20 directing and screenwriting Oscar nods, putting him one past Billy Wilder ("Some Like It Hot," "Sunset Blvd.," "Double Indemnity" and other movies more memorable than anything Woody has done) to make him, theoretically, best auteur ever.

In reality, Woody is more like the Pete Rose of the movies -- not quite gifted enough to swing for the fences, but, due to a prodigious work ethic ("Eighty percent of success is showing up," he claims), has still amassed a remarkable number of singles and the occasional double.

Lately, though, Woody has generated mostly strikeouts like last spring's "Melinda and Melinda," in which the only entertainment derived from the self-parody of casting big Will Ferrell as the Woody Allen Character.


The analogy of Peter Rose to Woody Allen is actually fairly close in terms of the shape of their careers over time, as measured in hitting performance and box office performance. (Their personalities seem completely different, but that's only when you compare Pete Rose to the "Woody Allen" you know in the movies.) Comparing a writer-director to a baseball player may seem very odd, but Woody's habit of pounding out one movie per year makes his box office statistics surprisingly comparable to a baseball player's annual statistics.

Pete came up to the majors in 1963 at the age of 22 and was at his offensive peak from roughly his 6th through 14th seasons (1968-1976) and then entered a long decline phase that ran out through his 24th season in 1986. His best hitting seasons were his sixth and seventh (1968 and 1969)

Rose took longer to become an outstanding hitter than almost all the other superstars in baseball history, not surpassing 150% of the league's average until he was 27. But he stayed a first rate hitter for an extraordinarily long time, not dropping below 115% of the league average until he was 39.

Woody directed his first movie ("What's Up Tiger Lilly?") in 1966 and then reached his commercial peak with his 7th film, "Annie Hall," which made $38 million (probably about $100 million at today's ticket prices). He reached $40 million with his 9th film, "Manhattan," in 1979, and then began a very long decline phase. Beginning with "Annie Hall," he's written and directed slightly more than one movie per year for three decades, which is an almost unheard of page these days. For example, Steven Spielberg, who is extremely efficient, has directed about one film every year and a half over the same time period, and he doesn't write scripts.

If the movie business was as objectively measured as is baseball, Wood probably would have had to retire from the auteur role about a decade ago because his recent film's financial returns have generally, as far as I can estimate, been consistently negative. My guess is that he's been carried by rich investors who want to be able to boast that they financed a Woody Allen movie. In return, Woody is very careful not to go over budget, so his investors know their loss will be limited. He's also very disciplined about sticking to his pre-ordained shooting schedule, which allows him to recruit Hollywood superstars who have a couple of weeks open on their schedule.

However, "Match Point," which marks a stylistic departure from the increasingly indistinguishable Woody Allen films of yore, will be his biggest box office product since 2000, and maybe, when it's through, since 1989 (but not in inflation adjusted terms).

Both Pete and Woody suffered from notorious scandals about 15 years ago, although baseball's standards are stricter than the movie industry's for punishing scandals.


My published articles are archived at iSteve.com -- Steve Sailer

Jason Malloy's mega-review of Richard Lynn's new book Race Differences in Intelligence

is now up at GNXP. Lynn, the co-author of 2002's IQ and the Wealth of Nations, is back with a new tome summarizing the results of additional research. He now has summarized 620 different IQ studies from around the world, about four times the number reported in IQ and the Wealth of Nations [Here's the table I constructed of the 168 IQ studies cited in his 2002 book.]. The studies in the new book cover 813,778 tested individuals.

While his last book was organized by country, this one is organized by race. Lynn's new book validates my conclusion about his last one:

Ultimately, though, it is hard to avoid concluding that intellectual and income differences between nations stem to some extent from genetic differences. The results simply cluster too much by race.

This does not mean all differences are caused by genes. For example, I wrote in 2002:

A clear example of how a bad environment can hurt IQ can be seen in the IQ scores for sub-Saharan African countries. They average only around 70. In contrast, African-Americans average about 85. It appears unlikely that African-Americans’ white admixture can account for most of this 15-point gap because they are only around 17%-18% white on average, according to the latest genetic research.

Lynn echoes this, pointing to nutritional shortfalls suffered by Africans as a sizable contributor to their low IQ scores.

Malloy's 13,000 word review is extraordinary. It critically reviews each chapter in the book, evaluates Lynn's arguments, explains where he gets off track (Lynn is 76 years old and far from infallible), and suggests additional data and ideas.


My published articles are archived at iSteve.com -- Steve Sailer

February 1, 2006

Junkyard dogs

The Hoover Hog writes:

Until University of Chicago economist John Lott (notwithstanding his questionable scruples) dramatically re-framed the gun control debate with his econometric analyses arguing that liberalized gun laws correlate with criminal deterrence, it remained an article of faith among most social scientists that private gun possession was a net liability for society, at least in terms of risk analysis. By failing to consider effects of gun ownership within a two-tailed research paradigm, sociologists had overlooked the protective and deterrent value that was, to whatever arguable degree, always part of reality.

Given that the incidence of fatality associated with ostensibly vicious dog breeds (132 total deaths over a two decade period attributed to "pit-bull type breeds," pure-bred Rottweilers, and German Shepards combined) is profoundly smaller than that associated with firearms (or cigarette lighters, bathtubs, automobiles, etc), it wouldn't take much of a crime-deterring counter-effect to offset the headline-grabbing horror stories.

There is no question that many people choose to keep notorious dog breeds precisely because of the protective benefits they imagine such dogs will provide.

Another reader, however, writes:

Having been a fan of German cars for many years and having kept a wide and somewhat disreputable-looking bunch of 911s, 914s, 944, and VWs of all sorts alive and running, I spend a lot of time in junkyards...

On these trips underneath and inside of 40 years of West German iron, I've encountered a lot of junkyard dogs. Very few were pit bulls or even pit mixes. Almost all were shepherd crosses of some kind and the occasional rott mix.

Pit bulls make lousy guard dogs -- they seem unclear on the concept. They can be dangerous, but they don't "guard" very well unless it is a person they are fond of. When you see a "pit attack" they either have a pit mix, the pit has been trained to attack, or they have been so poorly socialized that attacking seems like the thing to do at the time. Properly socialized pits, owned by retired Exxon executives or commercial builders (to name two examples down my street) tend to gain weight and yawn a lot and that's about it.

Just as when you have a German Shepherd bite incident you should look at the family situation (if there is a lot of conflict in a family, dogs will be uncertain of the pack structure and that really wears on German Shepherds), a pit bite incident should fall right back on the family situation.

Okay, but there are a lot of things, such as, say, rocket-propelled grenade launchers, that would be perfectly safe in the hands of "retired Exxon executives," but which aren't legal because not everybody is a retired Exxon executive. Indeed, the correlation between the kind of people who could own extremely dangerous things at no risk to the public safety and the kind of people who really want to own the dangerous stuff tends to be sharply negative.

My vague impression from watching people walk dogs is that the German shepherd is the most popular breed among urban blacks. Whereas suburban whites choose lovey-dovey wouldn't-hurt-a-fly retrievers to minimize the damage their dogs do to other people, urban blacks tend to choose, quite rationally, a smart, normally well-adjusted breed that offers excellent protection against intruders while not being terribly dangerous to friends and family.

Judging by the ads for pit bulls, however, a lot of people who buy pit bulls aren't looking for protection for their family. Instead, they are looking for either cannon fodder for organized dog fights, dogs that will intimidate their neighbors and neighbors' dogs, four-legged symbols of their own machismo, or insanely terrifying dogs (such as, beside pit bulls, the Presa Canario or the Detroit Rock Dog) to guard their drug dealing businesses. As evidence for this, notice how, now that I've mentioned golden retrievers in this bl-g, I've gotten a much more benign sort of dog ad showing up to the right (e.g., "Golden Retriever Puppies: gentle, loving, beautiful") than when I was talking about pit bulls (e.g., "Monster California Pits: Big Butthead size blue pit bull pups. Puppies will be huge in body & head"). The pit bull ads appear to be aimed at flaming jerks.

In summary, you'll have more problems with bad dogs where you have more bad people. Sometimes you find bad people in nice neighborhoods, like that incredibly vile San Francisco lawyer couple who were breeding Presa Canarios to sell to Mexican meth labs when two of the beasts ripped to shreds the lady lacrosse coach next door.

But, in general, you'll find more bad people, and thus more bad dogs, in bad neighborhoods. What can we do about the bad person -- bad dog nexus? Well, maybe not all that much. But one obvious reform to ameliorate this social problem in the long term, as well as so many other problems, is: Don't make it worse by letting more bad people into the country.

A taste for dog fighting, which appears to be the largest driving force behind the dog mauling problem, is specific to certain cultures and certain social classes within those cultures. With a whole world of potential immigrants to choose among, why let in lots of people who come from backgrounds where dog fighting is popular?


My published articles are archived at iSteve.com -- Steve Sailer

Good timing, Malcolm

The day after I wrote about Malcolm Gladwell's disingenuous article in the New Yorker claiming that profiling pit bulls is as wrong as profiling young black males standing on street corners or young Arab men getting on airliners, we see this story from the Philadelphia area:

Pit Bull Euthanized After Attack On DE 3-Year-Old

New Castle County Police said a three-year-old girl was critically injured after reportedly being attacked by a Pit Bull Monday. The dog was euthanized Tuesday morning.

Paramedics responded to reports of an attack on a small child by the family dog on the 100 block of Oakmont Drive just after 10:30 a.m. officials said.

When they arrived on the scene, authorities said they discovered three-year-old Destiny Campbell suffering from massive head injuries. She was transported to Christiana Hospital in critical condition.

Police said a four-year-old Pit Bull named ‘Diamond,’ allegedly mauled the child while she was with her mother at her grandmother’s house.

Destiny and her mother, Alycia Campbell, were picking up the child’s grandmother when the dog, belonging to an older cousin, Turquoise Robinson, attacked the three-year-old for no apparent reason.

“I tried everything to get her (Diamond) off my child, you know, I couldn’t do anything. I tried beating her with a cane, I tried everything, she swung her side to side like a ragdoll,” said Alycia Campbell.

After several attempts to free Campbell, her mother and grandmother screamed for help. Residents in the area responded, striking the dog with sticks and broom handles until it released the child.

“The dog had grabbed her by the crown and pulled off her scalp and bit off her right ear. She was in a state of shock,” said neighbor Toney Jackson.

A reader comments:


In my experience, the vast majority of not just aggressive, but *dangerous* dogs are owned by a certain type of black male. They identify with the aggressive attitudes of dogs in the way they identify with the aggressive attitude of gangsta rap artists. The dogs become an affectation intended to reflect the toughness of the owner.


He points to a new breed I hadn't heard of, the American Mastiff (a.k.a., "Panja" or "Detroit rock dog"). DogBreedInfo.com explains:


The American Mastiff (Panja) has a dark origin. Originally they were used (and unfortunately some still are) to guard drug dealer's houses, property, and yes their drugs. They had to be intimidating and not too "friendly" with strangers, but allow traffic. They have a tendency to be aloof with new people, but allow entrance. The American Mastiffs were trained to allow under no circumstances access to property; they were set to guard. The breed first appeared in the Detroit Metro area as a cross breed of several dogs. Pitbulls and Rottweilers are known influences of this breed. Before being registered with the DRA in 1996, they were simply known as "rock dogs". However, since the DRA has recognized them, a good number of these dogs are not drug-guarding dogs, but loving pets.


My published articles are archived at iSteve.com -- Steve Sailer

What does a Chinese language movie have to do to get some Oscar recognition?

Back in the day, the Oscars gave at least some nods to European talent. For example, Federico Fellini earned a dozen Oscar nominations (four for Directing, eight in the two screenwriting categories). These days, cinematically, the Europeans are in decline, but the Chinese are ascendant. Yet, In 2004, the stunning "Hero" received no nominations, and this year Wong Kar-Wai's exquisite "2046" was shut out. Most unjustly, the Australian lensman Christopher Doyle, who shot both Chinese films and is usually considered the greatest cinematographer in the world, has yet to receive even a single Oscar nomination in his career. By way of contrast, "Memoirs of a Geisha," which is in style a sort of wan tribute to the new Chinese cinema, received six nominations in the technical categories.

"Hero" was ineligible last year, even though it earned a strong $57 million in the North American market after being released in August of 2004 because it had previously been nominated as Best Foreign Film in 2002 and lost to some Holocaust-related film. This year, "2046" may have been ineligible because an earlier version was screened at Cannes in 2004. The point is that the Academy should rethink its rules to stop excluding the best foreign films. (Of course, from the Academy's perspective, their reply might be, "If they want to get nominated, let them move to Hollywood like Ang Lee.")

Okay, I know that Zhang Yimou's lame follow-up to "Hero," "House of the Flying Daggers," got a cinematography nomination last year.


My published articles are archived at iSteve.com -- Steve Sailer