I’ve long believed that when the weight of evidence in favor of some degree of genetic determinism affecting human behavior was so overwhelming that blank slate liberals could no longer ignore it without seeming foolish, they would move to Ego-Salving Plan B and claim to have believed in it all along. Well, Kevin Drum leads the pack in Mother Jones:
I’ve never been either a hardcore blank slater or a hardcore biological determinist, but there’s no question that I have a pretty healthy belief in the power of genes and biology. [Ed: News to his readers, I’m sure.] As Karl says, this belief tends to be associated with conservatives more than liberals, but that’s really very odd. After all, it’s pretty easy to fool ourselves into dismissing the benefits of being raised in a rich, stable culture and assuming that everything we’ve accomplished has actually been the result of hard work and personal rectitude. But what if you believe, say, that (a) IQ has a strong biological component and (b) high IQ is really important for getting ahead in the world? If you believe this and also happen to be blessed with a high IQ, how can you possibly convince yourself that this is anything other than the blind luck of the genetic lottery?
What we have here is a liberal seeing the light and coming to grips with the dawning fact that Great Society-like government largesse is futile in the face of intractable genetic predispositions. But instead of admitting he and his ilk are wrong in their blank slate ideology, he claims to have believed in genetic influence all along. As the science — and daily observation thrown into stark relief by mass third world immigration — continues to flatten cherished liberal shibboleths like a massive, merciless steamroller of galling truth, expect to see more of this backpedaling by liberals intent on remaining relevant in the political discourse.
Well, I suppose people can convince themselves of just about anything. [Ed: You bet!] And certainly a smart person who works hard is likely to do better than a smart person who sits on the couch all day playing videogames. Still, to the extent that you really do believe that cognitive abilities are (a) important, and (b) strongly biologically determined, shouldn’t you also believe that the poor are more unlucky than anything else, and haven’t done anything to deserve hunger, lousy housing, poor medical care, or crappy educations? If genetic luck plays a big role in making us who we are, then support for income redistribution from the rich to the poor is almost a logical necessity for anyone with a moral sense more highly developed than a five-year-old’s.
Long story short, belief in biological determinism should make you into a liberal. And yet, here in the real world it mostly does just the opposite. Go figure.
Also expect to see, among those reluctant liberals coming over to the biological determinism camp, a framing of the issue as one of “blind, genetic luck”. This is how the liberal will make the gene pill go down easy — by couching it in terms of unfairness, a vice the liberal suckles on with hungry fervor to give his life spent posturing about all the unfairness in the world some semblance of meaning. The problem with genetic unfairness is that there is no obvious oppressor one can point to as the cause of the unfairness. How exactly are straight white men going to be blamed for the genetic dumb luck of the poor and indigent? By accusing them of racism for not marrying and reproducing with non-white women? Don’t laugh, it could go in that direction.
Drum deserves credit for at least broaching the subject of genetic predilection, which still gives the majority of liberals the high holy hives. Try dropping a “genes n’ IQ” bomb on a Jon Stewart audience member and you will witness a shrill sanctimony unmatched by the most religious fundamentalists. Drum is right about one thing: plain and simple, genetic dumb luck accounts for a lot of who we are and how successful our lives are. And it goes beyond just IQ and nose shape, too. There is evidence that genes influence everything from political leanings to conscientiousness to ambition to impulsiveness.
So Drum has the diagnosis correct: life is unfair and that isn’t changing anytime soon. Where he fails is in his prescription for curing the unfairness of it all. Genetic luck does not make it a moral or logical necessity to redistribute income from the rich to the poor anymore than it makes it a logical necessity to redistribute happiness from the happy to the depressed (a trait that may also be genetically influenced). In both cases, actively punishing the rich and the happy for possessing mental characteristics beyond their control is just as immoral as punishing the poor for fecklessness and stupidity. The child of smart parents didn’t ask for his smarts anymore than the child of poor parents asked for his dullness.
My advice to liberals who are beginning to accept the truth about human nature and all it implies:
Deal with it.
And get off yer fuckin SWPL pulpit.
Surprised he writes about it. Usual reaction from libs upon realizing they’re wrong about something is silence or reframing the argument to something else.
LikeLike
When it comes to luck, both genetic and cultural, I DID win the lottery: born in the United States; male, white, and reasonably good looking, reared by intelligent parents who taught me the value of both education and hard work. And Southern. Let’s not forget Southern. By the odds I should be laboring in the fields or factories of India or China. 99% of the human race doesn’t have it as good as I do.
So why is it again that I can’t get laid?
LikeLike
“How exactly are straight white men going to be blamed for the genetic dumb luck of the poor and indigent? By accusing them of racism for not marrying and reproducing with non-white women?”
You take it as a given that straight white men are genetically superior and therefore not poor and indigent. You need to spend more time in the finer backwoods of the US Southeast and Midwest to have your Beltway SWPL worldview adjusted.
[Editor: The issue isn’t whether there are poor and stupid straight white men (there are). The issue is that liberals are gonna blame straight white men for the world’s unfairness — particularly the 3rd world’s unfairness — because that’s their go-to bogeyman. They’ve imbibed anti-racism equalism so fully that there can be no other oppressor but stragiht white men, no matter the facts.]
LikeLike
Off topic, I know. But what prompted the “Heartiste” profile name over the chateau?
LikeLike
Heartsie, ehard about SWPLers trying another route—blaming lead paint? It’s the latest liberal explanation du jour for blacks being violent, dumb criminals—if they’re not denying reality outright, a la Tim Wise.
LikeLike
By his logic, attractive young women should be forced to mate with beta males who were not fortunate enough to win the genetic lottery of alphadom. Redistribution of tail…everyone deserves a slice of the good life.
[Editor: Exactly. But for some reason I cannot fathom at the moment, the sexual market is off-limits to social engineering.
Now I wonder why that is…]
LikeLike
Genetic determinism has been gaining a lot of supporters lately, the only reason why I think Drum chose to all of the sudden recognize it. The thing is, he would ditch the idea if it was unfashionable tomorrow.
He just needs as many justifications for wealth redistribution as possible, call it diversification.
LikeLike
This is the same curveball I get in debates with the very few liberals who are capable of honest debate. After trotting out a lot of stats, studies, and facts, they can no longer squirm away from the general premise that blacks have lower IQs, and greater propensity to violence. Particularly effective in this argument are the studies that screen for environmental influence (the studies on black adopted children raised in SWPL households, for example).
When the SWPL liberal is finally defeated in his argument that everyone is of equal IQ potential, he sheepishly admits the possibility that there is genetic IQ determination. However, he then says that because of this, the smarter and more productive need to essentially pay “protection money” in the form of welfare and entitlements, to prevent this seething underclass from rising up against whites. In other words, the politics of a pathetic coward.
The argument that genetic winners owe something to those less fortunate is absurd. The liberal shakes his fist at the sky and rails against the gods for creating such an unfair world.
If their premise were acceptable, it would follow that highly attractive people would be considered genetically gifted. They demonstrably have better lives, higher paying jobs, more attractive mates and children, and better health. No fair! Extremely attractive women owe it to homely men to have indiscriminate sex with them, since these men are unfortunate victims of the genetic lottery. Where is the outrage?
LikeLike
Liberals will never admit to a genetic/IQ.
First off, in college, they study Social Work and Transgendered Oppression Studies…NOT Physiology.
Second, while not publicly admitting to such a link, they WILL exploit it in private to dupe their Affirmative Action/Anchor Baby lockstep voting blocs.
LikeLike
The most hypocritical thing about SWPL Liberals is that, without fail, every one of them I’ve known has moved increasingly further away from minorities the older they get. Every time they can afford an upgrade, they immediately head for a whiter town or neighborhood. The reason is that the more time they spend next door to minorities, the more their natural latent racism starts cropping up and this scares the crap out of them. They would instantly lose all SWPL status and cred if they leaked any non-PC thought. So, their reaction to their common sense race awareness is to move far away so they can maintain the SWPL fantasy that blacks and mexicans are unfairly discriminated against.
The SWPL Liberals are in fact the biggest discriminators, because they vote with their feet by seldom living anywhere near blacks, and by sending their kids to private schools where they continue the legacy of ostrich-politics.
LikeLike
Wake me up when the parade of cinematic magic negroes has passed by.
LikeLike
I would take it a step further than our worthy Editor. He seems to suggest that since its all blind luck anyway, neither the child born smart or the child born dull should be treated any differently. I think the child born smart is the child that deserves the bulk of our community resources. We do not live in a vacuum, and no matter how libertarian we were to become, the successes and advancements contributed by our brightest minds are going to be enjoyed by the dullest of our masses (picture inner city thug utilyzing cellular technology to make his next drug deal). Without any government intervention, redistribution of technology and efficient ideas happens as a matter of course.
The greatest outcome for the many is for our society to cater to the intellectual elite. Isn’t that what every socialist should aim for?
LikeLike
Can we get back to the reasons my girlfriend is rationing the pussy lately? Maybe discuss a man’s drive to bed hotter and hotter women despite the fact that all vaginas more or less feel the same.
Beam me up.
LikeLike
San Francisco is a great example. The city is rightfully known as one of the most “Progressive” in the nation, and yet it has gleefully embarked on one of the most remarkable gentrification projects in history, with full support of the swheepl. The decline in the black population is well documented in official sources.
Being that SF is surrounded by water, there is no ring of hills upon which the liberal elites can perch and gaze down upon their minority serfs. There is nowhere to run or hide. So, they have exercised an underhanded, but extremely effective, campaign of simply pricing everything out of the reach of NAMs, pushing them into surrounding ghettos that are not in SF proper.
LikeLike
America is miscegenating very fast, I’d say faster than Europe. Maybe in 15 years, you’d have the Blank Slate, or would it be a Brown Slate?
LikeLike
Another post about politics, another howling embarrassment to the editor of this blog.
The “I’m sure” in that editor’s note says quite a lot about the editor. Since Kevin Drum can be classified as a “liberal,” and the editor is sure that his stereotypes about liberals are always correct, he is “sure” that Kevin Drum has only recently become interested in the power of genes and biology.
[Editor: I didn’t say Drum had only recently become “interested” in genetic determinism; I said he only recently accepted the truth of it. There’s a big difference there, wiseguy. That 2005 article by Drum that you linked does nothing to dissuade me from the accurate view that Drum and his ilk have been, for most of the past two or three generations, absolutely loathe to consider the truth value of genes and their effect on human behavior and income inequalities.]
LikeLike
Human genetic engineering might be a way to solve the problem. The technology is about half a century off. Embryo selection to build a generation of high IQ superkids is more near term — the Chinese already have a project to do this:
http://nextbigfuture.com/2011/05/beijing-genomics-institute-working-to.html
LikeLike
Drum on genetics and IQ:
http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2005_08/006989.php
LikeLike
I’m pretty liberal and I’ve always believed in biological determinism to some degree. However, I don’t believe this blog’s view on the extent to which it effects other aspects of a person’s life outside of IQ. I mean does anyone that comments here work or do actual research within the field of psychology or neuroscience? I do. And I can tell you that there is VERY LITTLE debate over the fact that genes and environment influence a person’s life quite equally.
[Editor: Most liberals don’t (publicly) believe genes exert even a fraction of influence over things like smarts and economic success. Getting them to admit that genes account for half (and I’ve heard from computational geneticists that it is likely more than half) of life outcomes would be a huge victory for the avatars of truth, justice and the American way.]
And CR what’s so wrong about wanting to help the genetically unfortunate? Unless you are an extreme narcissist, that is exactly what you are doing with this blog. Liberals prefer leaving that responsibility to the government and not private individuals. If you disagree with that, fair enough.
[No one’s putting a gun to my head to dispense life-saving pickup advice.]
LikeLike
A French guy living in CA:
America is miscegenating very fast, I’d say faster than Europe. Maybe in 15 years, you’d have the Blank Slate, or would it be a Brown Slate?
__
Hmm, not so sure about France however.
When I was in the Charles DeGaulle airport in Paris, judging from the complexions and phenotypes of a very large number of the “French” people working there, I mistankingly thought for a moment I was back in Brazil.
LikeLike
[Editor: Most liberals don’t believe genes exert even a fraction of influence over things like smarts and economic success. Getting them to admit that genes account for half (and I’ve heard from computational geneticists that it is likely more than half) of life outcomes would be a huge victory for the avatars of truth, justice and the American way.]
Fair enough, consider me a minority (heh).
LikeLike
At one time, scientists were in favor of eugenics, national socialism, and other evils. Lobotomies, the healthiness of margarine, and teetotalism too. Conveniently, there are always enough dissenters that mainstream science can claim to be in the right all along.
The cutthroat atmosphere in science is nothing short of horrifying. They will first try to attack your credibility, and your job prospects, before even looking at your data. Fucking economists have friendlier competition, and are more objective.
For a group 90% liberal or better, scientists have ridiculously low tolerance for any abstract, or alternative thinking. They’ve driven conservative nerds into engineering, the hostile environment is just too much.
LikeLike
Roissy, liberals will never accept that people are inherently different because it 100% conflicts with the foundation of there entire ideology which in a single word can be summarized as: equality.
There is a quote “liberals never let facts get in the way of there arguments” that is totally accurate. They don’t care about truth, facts, logic or reason. 1 liberal may stray from the farm of group think now and then but thats all.
LikeLike
“Embryo selection to build a generation of high IQ superkids is more near term — the Chinese already have a project to do this:
http://nextbigfuture.com/2011/05/beijing-genomics-institute-working-to.html”
LOL, the Chinese want to devolve even more into a race of IT dudes who can’t get laid?
LikeLike
there was time when the progressives believed in it but they really went overboard with it and have been distancing themselves ever since a certain socialist went nuts on it.
LikeLike
There is a book by Pinker, “The Blank Slate” that blows massive holes in the bulwark that keeps contemporary liberalism afloat ( or at least treading water ). Once the belief in the tabula rasa is gone, along with the myth of the noble savage and what he terms “the ghost in the machine” ( the belief that the human thought process is the only thing human not subject to deterministic processes ), it all falls apart.
When this finally penetrates the rotting corpse that is the academic establishment, the subjects covered in this blog will be subsumed by a new and revitalized science of human psychology, one that will cover stuff people actually give a shit about in their normal lives.
LikeLike
College Grad, you nonchallantly equate private or public help to the poor as virtually the same thing. The implications of using the State to collect (by threat of force) and then dispense such “compassionate” assistance are much greater than a private/public flip of the coin.
Whether its student loans, home loans, medicare, or social welfare programs: everywhere the government artificially inserts money, an unhealthy bubble arises. Prices artificially increase, market inefficiencies result. In the case of monetary policies, its easy to see the negative effects of these bubbles. But the worst “bubble” is what has resulted from the State propping up the dysfunctional classes and cultures in our country. The natural order has been turned upside down, and our own policies are furthering the propogation of dysfunctional, low IQ populations at the expense of the contributing classes of our country. The only aspect of government-supported social welfare programs that makes any sense is Planned Parenthood.
LikeLike
Who is Heartiste? I dont get all the author name changes
LikeLike
Anytime some snooty lib says that they have the smart, scientific worldview – just bring up IQ and genetics. Watch head ‘asplode.
LikeLike
No matter what the cause, as long as there is any disparity in any part of life, liberals will use it as an excuse to steal from the haves and give to the have-nots. The reason is irrelevant; racism or bad luck, sexism for genetics, it makes no difference to those who want to control the masses by taking everything they’ve worked for.
LikeLike
Roissy’s name changes are a giant shit test. You fuckers keep falling for it.
LikeLike
@Reality Check
Well, yes, you got a point! Let me tell you. About 400,000 Black people live in Paris Greater Area. And yes, they are French. They come from Martinique and Guadeloupe, two overseas islands we have in the Caribbean (they are, in fact, colonies, but we have to play PC). Anyway all the people from those islands (95% Black) are French citizens, they vote in every election and can get into European France, anytime they want, of course if they can pay for the tickets. Aside from Paris, Lyon or Marseille, France is still very White, also in the countryside. But, hey, nobody cares! Since our national Soccer Team is 90% Black and our biggest star is Algerian, France has won the ’98 World Cup, the 2000 European Cup and ran 2nd in the Germany 2006 World Cup! Do you think those White Lilly players we had in the past could’ve done the job?
LikeLike
…AND, the further away they migrate in MULTIPLE moves if necessary
reveals the most consistent feature of their hypocrisy:
The further away from NAMS – the more liberal their view.
such, bravery *sniff*
LikeLike
Not only is I.Q. heavily determined by genetics, so is athletics:
Blacks are faster at running, and whites are faster at swimming.
Of course, anyone with a shred of common sense and honesty is already saying “no duh”.
LikeLike
Even though you didn’t choose to be stupid and vicious, the fact is you still are stupid and vicious. Even if the emphasis goes from what you have chosen to what you are, you are still responsible for yourself.
LikeLike
Wait! Liberals have always believed IQ is biologically determined. (“From each according to his ability (i.e., IQ), to each according to his need.”) What they DON’T believe is that the different races have different IQs. So I don’t accept the whole basis for your blog post.
LikeLike
[No one’s putting a gun to my head to dispense life-saving pickup advice.]
A lot of guys who have a lot of potential with women do poorly because an understanding of women is not intuitive for them. They have a lot of potential to go out and get women for themselves and it costs Roissy very little to dispense his wisdom. He isn’t exactly inviting his readers over to share his harem.
What liberals do is more like kidnapping hot chicks and make them have sex with street bums.
P.S. The Greek playwright Aristophanes had a play on the theme of sexual socialism all the way back in Classical Athens. See here Very funny and well worth looking into.
LikeLike
Christ, liberals sure are the consummate mental gymnasts, eh?
LikeLike
“That 2005 article by Drum that you linked does nothing to dissuade me from the accurate view that Drum and his ilk have been, for most of the past two or three generations, absolutely loathe to consider the truth value of genes and their effect on human behavior and income inequalities.”
What about the parts of my comments you cut out? Did those have any effect?
[Editor: Redundancy streamlining.]
And, really, what motivated you to censor my mention of liberal Robert Wright and his book The Moral Animal?
[Are you seriously going to argue that the great majority of liberals don’t publicly deny any gene/IQ/behavior links, and that these links show population group differences? Do you take me for an idiot?]
LikeLike
Don’t forget that Fischer at al (1996) really took Murray and Herrnstein’s Bell Curve argument apart largely on methodological defects in the original study. But Fischer still found that IQ had a significant effect on chances of being poor (though they questioned whether the measure used to capture IQ really captured the still contested definition of IQ). So I don’t think it’s really all just IQ and nothing about socioeconomic status.
But, I think Roissy is too hasty in tossing off the idea of income redistribution. If IQ really means that the poor are mostly dumber, then it is also less likely that they will be able to “help” themselves. This poses problems for the better off and for the nation as a whole.
1. Poor people commit crimes, deface cities, etc.
2. Poor people are a wasted resource. Maybe they can’t be “anything they want to be when they grow up” but they can be different than mere social detritus. If we help them by making them better off, they can do low end work, they can add productivity to the economy as opposed to subtracting from it.
The effectiveness of governmental welfare programs can be debated, but it isn’t simply a moral argument to say that income redistribution has positive effects. I know Roissy likes to breathe in the smoldering ashes of our civilization, but I don’t want to move to the suburbs just because we can’t fork over some money to get poor blacks ready to work at dry cleaners or as line cooks.
[Editor: Ok, but that’s not a moral reason to support the poor with redistributed wealth. That’s a pragmatic reason in hopes of soothing the savage beast. Not exactly morally exalting, is it? And yet liberals argue in precisely those morally preening terms all the time.]
LikeLike
I always thought the reason leftists dropped the progressive moniker and adopted the liberal one was because progressive had become too tainted and associated with eugenics. I may be wrong.
LikeLike
@editor : “The issue is that liberals are gonna blame straight white men for the world’s unfairness — particularly the 3rd world’s unfairness — because that’s their go-to bogeyman.”
Ohh ok, this explains why you felt the need to make this post. At first it just seemed like a random endorsement of a limiting belief system while at the same time smearing liberals. Now the smearing liberals part has a context. 🙂
LikeLike
Yeah, but will this result in real policy changes? The answer is no, since the liberals are just tools. So it doesn’t really matter if they think one thing or not…
LikeLike
Spoken like a true libertarian! LOL
LikeLike
“Long story short, belief in biological determinism should make you into a liberal. And yet, here in the real world it mostly does just the opposite. Go figure.”
Politics, like religion, is all belief. People rarely shift their political viewpoints unless it’s for some other end. American politics at this point is basically an attraction to be covered like a sporting event, but by CNN instead of ESPN, points scored by seeing increases in vote share as a result of a well-delivered speeches and kissed babies.
The politics of the second-to-last century were far more logical and based on reality of facts and laws of human nature. Now, votes are bought by attack ads which make you feel good or bad about a candidate instead of present you with facts and allow you to come up with your own opinion. The fact that nearly the entire population can be easily reached through various media, combined with the realization by politicians that people will take whatever bullshit you feed them as long as you do it the right way, has lead to this. I’d say suffrage had something to do with it as well, as women are easier to emotionally sway and lie to than men in general.
LikeLike
Do you think those White Lilly players we had in the past could’ve done the job?
All white Italy won in 2006, beating France in Germany. All white Spain won in 2010, beating mostly white Holland in South Africa
France’s team was much whiter in 1998, nowadays it is darker than Brazil. And they only won a Cup at home with a hugely favorable table
(you know Fifa favors a team through the WC’s table when that team only faces a significant challenge in the Quarterfinals)
LikeLike
The idea goes like this: since Brazil won 5 World Cups and always played with miscigenated squads, therefore only miscigenated squads can win. Since soccer is the coolest sport on Earth (and it is), a country can only be cool by flooding itself with blacks
Well, Germany and Italy won 7 World Cups always playing with all-white squads, just like Argentina.
And Brazil always won with white goalkeepers (the black ones seem to have a problem with penalty kicks) and coaches. Even in Brazil there is an unspoken truth that blacks aren’t fit to be goalkeepers. A generation ago people still said openly that Brazil lost in 1950 because of the black goalkeeper
LikeLike
Please, you give them too much credit. It has nothing to do with equality. Modern liberals hate white men. That’s it. That’s the foundation of their liberal religion.
LikeLike
Roissy, don’t be jealous you got shorted in the IQ dept compared to Drum. This is pretty simple stuff that I think even you can grasp.
Republicans represent the interests of the top 5% or so of Americans and their interests, which are entirely built on the principle of everyone for themselves. They don’t want universal health care, public education, welfare, food stamps, unemployment, social security, or pretty much any government programs because the upper 5% know that they’re going to have to pay higher taxes than the poor to pay for these services and, being very rich, they mostly don’t even need these services. And there’s nothing wrong with that! They’re just looking after their own interests. But this is a democracy and they don’t have anywhere near the votes to win elections without winning over the middle class. And they’ve done that mainly by portraying themselves as very hardworking and the poor as lazy and thus not deserving of any type of public safety net.
Drum is simply saying that if the poor just got a bad draw from the gene pool, then that completely undercuts the fairness of their whole free market, everyone-for-themselves, self-serving worldview. You’re the one trying to make this about race. And race is probably what the top few percent of earners would like you to be distracted by.
LikeLike
Here’s something you might be interested in at the Chateau:
http://www.ctv.ca/CTVNews/TopStories/20110526/genderless-baby-storm-110526/
Assume most people have seen it already, but would make a great post!
[Editor: I saw it. I really don’t think there’s anything I could add. It parodies itself. I do feel sorry for the kid though. She (and I bet it’s a she) is going to suffer psychological problems because of her fucked up fruitcup parents.]
LikeLike
No, the foundation of modern liberals and the church of liberalism is their hatred of white men. It has nothing to do with equality.
These people are not liberal and don’t deserve the word. Stifling free speech in universities, media, and general society, huge government, social engineering to force equality of outcome, hatred of white men… what does that have to do with being liberal? Zilch.
LikeLike
This is exactly it.
Drum is still wholly off the mark when he writes this:
He ignores that income redistribution loses its cache at any meaningful level. It’s literally like a native Appalachian winning the Power Ball. So we redistribute income (and have been for years) and the high IQ rich create jobs that otherwise wouldn’t exist and we’re told that the poor aren’t getting enough? If you give them more they don’t have the genetic capital to put their new resources to use.
But liberals won’t rest until egalitarianism and that vague term “social justice” become the rule.
What we should strive for in this country (and which we’re closer to achieving than any other nation at any other point in history) is the ability for people with higher IQ to fulfill the potential that said high IQ would allow. The Bell Curve points out that this is presently occurring.
LikeLike
[Editor: Ok, but that’s not a moral reason to support the poor with redistributed wealth. That’s a pragmatic reason in hopes of soothing the savage beast. Not exactly morally exalting, is it? And yet liberals argue in precisely those morally preening terms all the time.]
I agree that liberals preen and deny evidence. But I think conservatives who think dismantling social safety nets will only have upsides are wrong. There is only so much insulation you can get from urban descent. When your daughter goes off to college and is living in Hyde Park, you (metaphorically) are going to wish someone had spent some dollars on fixing up the disreputable deposited on every corner.
Re Drum’s moral argument. I think most people would agree that humans are inherently owed some level of dignity, and that if we know some are headed for shitty destinies, we might have a moral obligation to act if action is possible.
As for me, I’m not really interested in whether people deserve dignity or not, just that they leave me alone. I don’t think my callousness is that common (cf., the world of betatude).
LikeLike
Republicans represent the interests of the top 5% or so of Americans and their interests
The Republican party is the only one in the Western World defending the interests of net taxpayers. Which are far more than 5% of the US population. Also, the top 1% are mostly people with wealth relatively larger than income, thus able to support punitive taxation on income. Ergo, democratic voters and contributors
Net taxpayers are usually the only people in the Western World able to produce beautiful daughters. The tax system is, thus, centered on indirectly taxing female beauty
LikeLike
@Jay Jay, Republicans are every bit as socialist as the Democrats these days. Neither party represents anyone but the 5% at the top. Anything that appears otherwise is just for show. Social welfare, corporate welfare, nation building, public education, universal healthcare, strong defense….whatever. It’s all just a shell game to keep some people in control and other people under control. The Big O’ doesn’t give a rat’s ass about the poor or anyone else unless he and the people who control him can see a way to use them for their own benefit.
LikeLike
The worst part of the liberal method is that it is entirely open-ended. What are the goals? When will they be satisfied with social justice? Surely we’ve achieved a lot and there are diminishing marginal returns to redistribution.
LikeLike
Drum writes:
Long story short, belief in biological determinism should make you into a liberal. And yet, here in the real world it mostly does just the opposite. Go figure.
There’s not much to figure out. Contemporary liberalism believes that men are perfectible. It insists that any difference between groups or even individuals can be wholly explained by socio-economic factors. Biological determinism denies that.
Pinker and others have long argued for that view to change, and they’ve caught hell for it, but until it does, bio determinism will remain the province of the right.
One ideology it does completely debunk is pure libertarianism, which insists that our success is determined almost solely by our efforts. Other forms of conservatism, traditionalism, et. al., that recognize a role for the state and even the need for a safety net fit in very well with biological determinism.
LikeLike
Gregor’s point is well-taken. Social engineering (in theory) isn’t just about appeasing the lower classes. It’s also about focusing and utilizing their energies towards socially-beneficial endeavors. A society with an elite 1% firmly entrenched in power with the remaining 99% as a focused, yet lower IQ worker class, could arguably run circles around a nation made up of highly independent, high IQ people.
The problem I have with is not the theory, its the practice. Its not the recipients so much as the entire welfare apparatus. These bureaucracies become wasteful, ever-expanding lobbies for additional revenue, and they condition their recipients to vote as a block in favor of more and more spending.
And from personal experience, these social service programs start to become dependent on these voting blocks, and they start to cater to these groups dysfunctional tendencies. A perfect example are these recent social service organizations reaching out to alternative parenting arrangments. At first, they sought to soften the blow for single moms and other types of parents in unfortunate circumstances. But now, they are going so far as to suggest that multiple children out of wedlock, by different men, is a “lifestyle choice” and greater society needs to “expand their definition of the family.” These dysfunctional behaviors start to wag the dog, and we now how have hard working, sexually responsible families paying for their own extinction by numbers. It’s unreal.
LikeLike
But I think conservatives who think dismantling social safety nets will only have upsides are wrong.
I don’t think there are any serious conservatives who want to get rid of safety nets for the truly needy. They do want to prune down who qualifies for said nets, and the most serious want to address middle-class welfare programs, like Medicare, that threaten to explode costs in the coming years.
LikeLike
I stumbled upon this site many months ago. I do think, since then, that I’ve read every posting. While a great many things have caused me to throw up in my mouth a little–few raise my hackles like the broad generalizations concerning people of color.
As a young biracial woman, raised in the South–I’ve experienced the best racism has to offer. But I assure you, no burning cross can cut deeper than the bigoted credoes which the “educated” swaddle themselves in like comfy quilts.
My gripe is not with genetic determinism–let me be clear. Certainly our genes have an impact upon factors like our IQ.
I am floored that human beings who have all pulled on a pair of sneakers, ironed your clothes, put away groceries in a refrigerator, swept crumbs into a dustpan, used a mop, sharpened a pencil, signed your name with a fountain pen, mowed your lawn, driven an automatic vehicle, stopped at a traffic light, cooled your house with an air conditioner, or warmed it with a furnace, rode an elevator, dropped a letter in a mailbox, or donated blood—(ALL innovations by African-Americans, mind you) could dream that high doses of melanin renders other humans inferior, ignorant and violent.
I wonder how loudly you’d screech if I ventured to say, “A lack thereof seemingly renders human males more desperately in need of “GAME” when simple, genetic dumb luck offers them no other boons of physical good fortune.”
Namely, dick.
LikeLike
Drum’s position isn’t that surprising – it’s very similar to what liberals have been doing for years with race. Everybody agrees that, e.g., having black skin is genetically determined. So liberals have always said that being born black is like “losing the genetic lottery” because of alleged societal discrimination, and then argue that society has the obligation to “even things up” by, e.g., affirmative action. Note that liberals generally aren’t content (as most conservatives would be) with simply ending the societal discrimination. No, they always want to ensure equality of result rather than equality of opportunity – even though there is no logical connection between the alleged “bad luck” and the alleged remedy (mandating equal outcomes).
Given liberals’ history of using biology to (bizarrely) demand equality of outcome rather than equality of opportunity, it’s a fairly short walk for them to accept some level of biological component to intelligence, and then demand equality of outcome as the “remedy.” Again, there’s no logical connection, but it’s not that far from what they do with obvious biological markers (like dark skin) now.
LikeLike
(ALL innovations by African-Americans, mind you)
Like the Pyramids. African-americans built them, but whites re-wrote history to hide that.
LikeLike
The horrifying scenario is when libs accept the entirety of HBD… and go forward with full-on genetic communism, which includes forced miscegenation.
Two reasons why its unlikely to happen. One, elites succeed each other generationally, and men always rebel slightly against their fathers. Boys at at Harvard are not starry eyed about the sixties, civil rights, and whatnot, regardless of what their dinosaur hippie profs say.
Two, self-interest rules, in the end. At one point, the ruling class will realize that it dies not wish for a workforce without the beauty of white women and cameraderie of white men. They will stop shutting up their own habitat.
LikeLike
Autocorrect. “workforce” was supposed to say “world.” And a few other such errors.
LikeLike
“I am floored that human beings who have all pulled on a pair of sneakers, ironed your clothes, put away groceries in a refrigerator, swept crumbs into a dustpan, used a mop, sharpened a pencil, signed your name with a fountain pen, mowed your lawn, driven an automatic vehicle, stopped at a traffic light, cooled your house with an air conditioner, or warmed it with a furnace, rode an elevator, dropped a letter in a mailbox, or donated blood—(ALL innovations by African-Americans, mind you) could dream that high doses of melanin renders other humans inferior, ignorant and violent.”
I call B.S. on every single one of those claims.
LikeLike
O. Omerasu
Troll or deluded liberal?
What’s that internet law about not being able to tell the difference between a true believer and someone mocking them?
You’re not biracial, honey; you’re black. The black genes swallow up most physical features and most intelligence.
Enjoy your welfare job, whether it’s working the mailroom or your affirmative action post at the university they gave you, because you were too unqualified to earn it.
LikeLike
O,
Are you seriously going to cite the invention of the dust pan as evidence that blacks are even close to whites in terms of innovation and invention?
You remind me of another O I know.
LikeLike
Roissy, I’d love to hear what political blogs you are reading man. I love your sociological/political posts, as I have similar views to you.
LikeLike
Self correcting problem. Eliminated welfare for healthy (i.e., not disabled) will force them to work and have fewer children. The problem is welfare states subsidize low IQ people to breed. In the UK and the US, this is apparent and undeniable.
Keep sending checks, keep on getting fat welfare queens with low IQs and we’ll keep on getting more of them.
Same thing happens with low IQ lottery winners. Google it. They don’t have the intelligence and experience that successful people possess to handle that kind of money. They don’t understand that successful people surround them selves with other successful and intelligent people.
It is like a story about a CEO or Pro Athlete that makes millions a year and wants a bigger contract; some retard will say “I’ll do that job for half that!”. No you can’t, or you’d be doing it already.
The Unites States has it backwards. We should be subsidizing the intelligent, hard working and healthy by paying those families to breed. Yes, paying with public money for the most intelligent to breed. But we focus too many resources on the stupid worthless inner city dregs and trailer hillbilly trash while jacking up taxes on the net producers…
Do I even need to go on?
LikeLike
Why blacks can only think of the gas chambers whenever someones criticizes wealth transfer from the middle to the lower classes?
LikeLike
“You take it as a given that straight white men are genetically superior and therefore not poor and indigent. You need to spend more time in the finer backwoods of the US Southeast and Midwest to have your Beltway SWPL worldview adjusted.”
The big difference is that stupid, lazy Congoids are the rule, while stupid, lazy whites are the exception. Hence European civilization and African mudhuts.
“The greatest outcome for the many is for our society to cater to the intellectual elite. Isn’t that what every socialist should aim for?”
No, because that would be–gasp–national socialism! Can’t have that! Judeo-Marxists are out there implementing every form of liberal lunacy in order to annihilate their competition. Every tax dollar wasted on the spawn of 70-IQ Congoids, is one less tax dollar invested in a white child. Judeo-Marxists couldn’t give a fuck about women, the poor, the disabled, the “minorities” (how I hate that word), etc. etc. Their only goal is to destroy the white middle class wherever it happens to exist.
If they succeed in doing that, you can rest assured that the gravy train for everyone else will end, because there will be no more white men breaking their backs and paying taxes.
LikeLike
But I assure you, no burning cross can cut deeper
Why am I somewhat doubtful that you ever came accross a burning cross?
LikeLike
I don’t understand why you keep prattling on how liberals are all a bunch of blank slaters etc. You do realize that the vast majority of the social science research that you cite to back up your belief system is coming from liberal institutions. Not to mention that the vast majority of the scientists involved in the fields of evolutionary biology and evolutionary psychology are liberals or liberal minded persons.
LikeLike
Vaguely on the topic of biological determinism:
Article: Parents decide not to reveal gender of child to world, allow child to decide
“When Storm was born, the couple sent an email to friends and family: “We’ve decided not to share Storm’s sex for now — a tribute to freedom and choice in place of limitation, a stand up to what the world could become in Storm’s lifetime (a more progressive place? …).””
http://www.parentcentral.ca/parent/babiespregnancy/babies/article/995112–parents-keep-child-s-gender-a-secret
Totally off-topic:
The Man Song, by No Motivation:
“I want a hot skank with a big fat ass. I don’t give a fuck if she has no class. All i’m trying to do is get you out them panties, get you butt naked and hit it with a wammy! ”
“do not talk to me when the game is on dammit. Know your place and make me a SAMMICH IM A MAN!”
“Now what you tell a woman with 2 black eyes? Nothin mother fucker you done told her twice. Gotta get her in the bed and open up her thighs gonna stick it in the wrong hole again SURPRISE,”
LikeLike
It’s like “Harrison Bergeron” by Kurt Vonnegut. Soon we’ll have Constitutional amendments mandating total equality.
“…in America no one is more intelligent than anyone else, no one is better looking or more athletic than anyone else. In order to stop any sort of competition in society these measures are enforced by the United States Handicapper General. The current Handicapper General, Diana Moon Glampers, and her team of agents have developed several forms of “handicaps.” Beautiful people are forced to wear masks, athletic people have to carry weights, and intelligent people have to wear radios in their ears that interrupt thoughts with loud noises.”
Quite a good story.
LikeLike
Is it just me or are most liberals just neurotically emotional fucks that give in to empathy circle jerks because they have nothing better to bitch about
i wish my life was so damn comfortable and easy that i had the time to sit there like a little bitch and get my sensitive little heart all pissy over perceived injustices.
LikeLike
I think everyone here is overestimating the impact of inherited genes, and ignoring inherited attitudes, habits and ideas. There are also some nasty ideas about racial superiority bubbling underneath as usual too.
You don’t just inherit genes from your parents – you inherit their environment, mindset and attitudes to life as well. These can be far more damaging to your prospects than being born a bit slow. How many dumb white kids do you know that did ok in life because their parents had the time or money to try and educate them properly?
I have a friend whose parents are both thick as shit, his mum works in a supermarket. They’re good people though and brought him up well – He had to choose between scholarships at oxford and cambridge when he went to uni.
To escape being seriously poor and/or having seriously bad parents you need a tremendous amount of luck.
I love that americans are still completely convinced they live in a meritocracy despite all the evidence to the contrary.
LikeLike
Liberalism and fascism are two sides of the same twisted coin.
LikeLike
%1 of the worlds population owns the %90 of wealth
and %99 of the world fights about whom will keep that last %10 percent
Oh btw , i’m sure all that top %1 have the best genetic qualities you’ll ever see
LikeLike
Re: the welfare state.
@Polichinello, for the sake of argument, say that conservatives only want to prune down the safety net, not dismantle it. If biological determinism means that people at the low end of the economic spectrum are also more likely to be at the low end of the intelligence spectrum, then pruning down only shifts these people into poorer conditions, and if determinism is right, then they are *less* able to take care of themselves. This means more problems associated with more poverty for the rest of us. Not simply that they will work harder if we take away the net. They’ll become more homeless, more criminal, more of a burden on our emergency rooms.
They are poor due to 1) bad parental SES, 2) low IQ, 3) because they weren’t above average in some other way that enabled them to escape 1 and 2. Making them poorer will not change these problems. It may cause more problems for other parts of society.
Cost/benefit. I don’t really care whether it’s moral or not to give the poor resources they don’t “deserve.” I care about whether we can effectively keep people out of poverty, thereby reducing the kinds of problems associated with poverty.
@Sidewinder. Your caution about the failure of bureaucracies and the perverse incentives is right. Part of this is that we deeply undervalue public service, paywise, and as a result attract people barely above the dismal poor in terms of talent to staff our government. The people at my post office or the DMV are indistinguishable in ability from your typical chicago southsider.
These welfare queen, etc arguments are just moral postures that distract from how best to deal with our detritus. Drum is the flipside of the same argument.
LikeLike
You’ve talked time and again about the threat of a massive army of disenfranchised beta males. Your solution?
To my knowledge you’ve never offered one, but you call it an untenable position.
No what do we do with the disenfranchised poor folk?
You have to be playing dumb here if you don’t think the average liberal politician isn’t coming from the angle: how do we keep these fuckups from killing us all? Is there a way to find a cheaper and less totalitarian scheme than simply imprisoning them once their circumstances send them somewhere society can’t risk tolerating?
LikeLike
Based on the overwhelming preference of black men for lighter skinned women (Rare it is to see a black male with a darker women.), some people put a lot of stock in genetics as reflected in skin color.
Is it racist to comment on this behavior, but not racist to actually carry out this behavior?
LikeLike
“[No one’s putting a gun to my head to dispense life-saving pickup advice.]”
-Roissy
It’s coming though. We will, to a smaller extent, as we force doctor’s to accept medicare/medicaid patients they don’t want to as reimbursement rates slide way below private market rates. There is no gun to anyone’s head, but if you take a person/hospital that has spent years/millions of dollars to perform a specialized task and them tell them you must do X or you can’t practice medicine, people will do it. It won’t be a gun, but it will be as good as a gun.
“If genetic luck plays a big role in making us who we are, then support for income redistribution from the rich to the poor is almost a logical necessity”
-Kevin Drum
What is so ultimately scary here is that Kevin has outlined the case that any aspect of your birth can be a reason to punish you. Too tall, too smart, too athletic, too attractive. Time to pay up. In the liberal world, the state owns every aspect of your being and you must pay a tithe to simply exist. I can’t wait for them to start taxing us in the womb on the basis of genetic scans that show we are “too lucky”.
LikeLike
Wake up white man.
Amen.
LikeLike
By virtue of the fact that you were born does not entitle you to anything at all.
LikeLike
“Oh btw , i’m sure all that top %1 have the best genetic qualities you’ll ever see”
no way. not if you’re talking inherited money.
their problems and screw-ups are far worse than later generations regressing to the mean, the founder of the family money being an absolutely extraordinary person, the descendents being average, ordinary.
the 3rd-/4th-/5th-generation rich folks i encounter at work would be living in cardboard boxes under a bridge if they didn’t have their trust funds.
every social dysfunction — booze, drugs, illegitimacy, crime — that applies to poor people who lack memory of a family member ever working for a living applies in spades to rich people.
weird how the top and bottom of the economic/social spectrum converge.
LikeLike
@Gregor
Same arguments were made in the late 90’s when the Republican house passed Welfare Reform. Clinton signing it was the best thing he ever did besides blowing a load on the fat intern. People thought folks were going to starve and crime would explode. It didn’t.
People who will be criminals will always choose that lifestyle. Borderline poor folks will resort to crime in dire circumstances, but not as often as you’d think. I agree it is cultural that some bad habits are passed down. Monkey see monkey do. But biological factors play here too.
Hormones. Lack of important minerals in the water we drink. Our brains need some lithium to control abnormal behavior. There are even scientists that are trying to get it into our water supply because we mostly drink filtered water devoid of healthy trace minerals. And truth be told, areas with higher levels of lithium have lower suicide and homicide rates.
So much of men is animal in nature. The very purpose of this blog.
Now why do many immigrant groups do well here in the “Melting Pot”? Did these group’s biological factors lead to their cultural advantages, or did culture lead to it straight away – nature be damed?
I’ve already proven that there are provable physiological differences in certain races. Blacks are often faster in sprinting, superior long distance runners – while the white frame leads to better swimming. Our brains are are no different. Exceptions there may be; every time you watch the Olympics, racial difference stare right through you.
As for welfare queens, they exist in a big, big way in every welfare state that doesn’t cap payments. The Black community has been thoroughly damaged because of the state’s role as provider beta. Most of the black families were lead by a mother and father that lived together before the “Great Society” scam Johnson and the bleeding hearts in D.C. enacted.
But we can’t remove the welfare state, or even seriously reduce it, unless some things happen first:
– We remove the minimum wage laws and use tariffs against nations with slum labor.
– We create a simple tax system that doesn’t punish job creation (I said simple tax system, not super low).
– End all subsides.
– Allow individual states to create any education and healthcare system they want without interference from D.C.
– We stop the flood of low skill, low IQ and high crime illegal rats from sneaking in.
– We promote healthy, successful families to procreate by paying married mothers (must have a working husband, a stable income history, house payments up to date).
Of course none of this will happen because the two parties in the United States are full of shit.
LikeLike
“People rarely shift their political viewpoints unless it’s for some other end.”
My political viewpoints shifted in a radical 180 due to this blog and others like it in <1 year. It was a shocking outcome, I was only searching for the path to hotter, tighter poon.
I no longer suffer from cognitive dissonance but recognize it immediately in others still under the spell of PC.
LikeLike
There’s an interesting narrative which suggests that when the Great Plagues opened up some Malthusian headroom in the 14th century it created a period where competing approaches to life had an opportunity to show their mettle.
The net result is that the combination that we commonly think of as “Protestant Work Ethic” i.e. work hard, save your money, treat your neighbor well, don’t commit crime had an opportunity to flourish. Over time this cohort expanded not only to fill the population gap left by the Black Death but squeezed out other cohorts. That these traits are heritable is evidenced by the fact that there is more genetic diversity in the mitochondrial DNA of preserved 13th century corpses than there is in the population of England today.
What happened, in effect, is that the tiny slice at the top of Western European society passed on their genes and their mores to a vastly disproportionate percentage of the population as time went on. This is the ultimate reason that tiny little England, not South American, not China, not India ultimately came to rule the world… they got the formula right and were genetically predisposed to implement it.
America has the reverse problem with it’s Black population. If take a moment to consider the mechanics of how many Black’s ancestors got here… let’s just say that the slave traders didn’t catch the smart ones (statistically speaking, anyway).
LikeLike
Facetroll:
You prove that Drum has been interested in genetics and biological determinism by linking to a post in which he basically casts off The Bell Curve on the grounds that it is racist when The Bell Curve has only one chapter dealing directly with race.
Drum wrote that blogger Andrew Sullivan should be ashamed of himself for writing that TBC “still holds up” – a testament to his disbelief in biological determinism.
If anything, Drum’s point in the link provided by Roissy is 180 degrees different than what he wrote in the link you provided. So what’s your point?
And for those who wrote that characterizing the liberal viewpoint as anti-biological determinism is a strawman argument, Drum’s old post linked to liberals Brad DeLong and little Matty Yglesias banging the same old drum about The Bell Curve. DeLong (who is even more socially awkward than Tyler Cowen, wow) wrote in his post on the topic that IQ is barely heritable and that this has little impact on future income. Yeah right.
http://delong.typepad.com/sdj/2005/08/the_cognitive_e.html
LikeLike
If genetics plays a role (and it does) in the success of individuals, shouldn’t the position of “anyone with a moral sense more highly developed than a five-year-old’s” be to ensure that the next generation has better genetics than the last?
Instead, liberals want to subsidize the breeding of the low-bred underclass at the expense of the dwindling high-bred genetic winners. Shouldn’t it be the other way around?
LikeLike
I suppose the irony isn’t lost on any of you that the two figures whose work has done the most to overturn the blank slate paradigm (viz. Chomsky and Pinker) are an anarchist and a liberal, respectively.
LikeLike
I am floored that human beings who have all pulled on a pair of sneakers, ironed your clothes, put away groceries in a refrigerator, swept crumbs into a dustpan, used a mop, sharpened a pencil, signed your name with a fountain pen, mowed your lawn, driven an automatic vehicle, stopped at a traffic light, cooled your house with an air conditioner, or warmed it with a furnace, rode an elevator, dropped a letter in a mailbox, or donated blood—(ALL innovations by African-Americans, mind you)
Not really.
LikeLike
Epic post, epic comments.
“schweeple” and that list of Nubian devices of genius just cracked me the hell up.
And Roissy, depression and other personality factors are very much genetically determined…I thought that would be obvious to someone in the know re: bio determinism.
LikeLike
Gregor,
Ninety percent of the population, at least, is more than capable of earning a living. They all can’t be nuclear physicists, obviously, but even a low IQ job like janitorial work should provide enough money to get by. In fact, that was largely the case before we got hit with the disaster called “The Great Society.”
Of course, it’s becoming harder and harder for lower-skilled people to make a living, not because government programs aren’t expanding fast enough, but because we’re importing a large mass of low-skilled and unskilled workers that bid down wages (libertarians and neocons are just as guilty as liberals here–and they’re both just as bought into socio-economic determinism as liberals). But, we’re a bunch of racists if we try to address that problem.
Moreover, our education system is now channeled into a two-track system that tells students they can either go to Yale or go to jail. A lot of mid-level and low-level IQ folk would be helped if we could focus more money on trades. Unfortunately, this would lead to racial disparities in professions, and that’s UNGOOD, so it’s a no-go for most liberals.
LikeLike
I could be convinced of using biological determinism to deny criminals the chance of having any offspring. It’s not too difficult to see and agree on which individuals aren’t worthy of propagating their genes; however, “lucky gifted people” shouldn’t expect any sort of support of subsidy just for carrying great genes: that would become an immense perverse incentive to all sort of corrupt deals.
And biological determinism must throw ridiculous conservative ideas such as marriage as well. Humans genetic disposition towards polygamy is much more acknowledged than any correlation among race and IQ, yet paleocons are so much bent on justifying the latter without even daring to touch the former.
LikeLike
John Rawls was writing about this 40 years ago. Whether certain traits that determine one’s life prospects are determined more by heredity or environment doesn’t really matter from a standpoint of justice because neither one is under one’s control and therefore subject to claims of moral desert. Now the policy prescription for redressing distributive injustice may change depending on the extent to which you believe that social institutions can change human behavior, but the fundamental justification (which for Rawls is the argument from the Original Position) isn’t undermined either way. We should still strive to create a society where we treat others as though we could have been them.
LikeLike
javert,
bingo.
An interesting bit of tension is introduced into these circles by the glaring presence of polygamy among the other unspeakable observations of human nature.
The very craggy cradles of a man’s visuospatial chi – his masculine, heavy eybrow ridges – testify to the brutal fact of its presence.
but…
Without active group cooperation against it, this kind of discourse would have never evolved.
No computers, hell, probably not even any abstract signifiers.
The more you zoom out, the more of a joke it all is.
LikeLike
Left/libtards’ destruction of morals in the notion that “character doesn’t count” meets hypergamy in hormonal teenagers… on Maury (now we know what we’re gamin’ or cheated-on by a couple of years down the road):
LikeLike
roissy genetically speaking we know what the white lie entails in society…in terms of reproduction….liberal or conservative in the USA..as a political and mental alpha i concur more with caesar and napoleon…lets add george washington on that list. more liberal than conservative..but yes it was a different age and that is why i dont live in the USA anymore
LikeLike
LikeLike
Roissy, I have many questions for thee.
1200 years ago when the entire planet was a third world shit hole, what would you speculate the average IQ of Europeans would have been? I.e, if you presented a 9th century European peasant with a 21st century American IQ test, just like the ones presented today to blokes like ko!man!gue!!! and x!bil!kukue!!! of the Xhosa tribe, what do you think our 9th Century European peasant would score?
As a nobleman walking the filthy, disease ridden, winding streets of Dark Age European cities, sticking your nose up at the illiterate, uneducated, superstitious human excreta who occupied the overwhelming majority of the delapidated buildings, and who made up the majority of the population of the entire continent at the time, what would your biological determinstic self say about the FACT that the intelligent white middle classes of 20th century Europe would descend from this hastily multiplying intellectually devoid human scum pile?
Between then and now did the Homo Sapiens Europaeus genepool undergo some kind of miracle genetic transformation? Must have. Seeing as it is primarily genetics which determine the success of a society, and 9th century Europe was a third world shithole much the equal of 21st century Africa, the only logical explanation is that the genepool of 9th century Europe was devoid of any human potential. Just like Africa’s is today. Right?
But luckily for Europe, the genepool underwent a miracle genetic transformation. Brilliant individuals contributing cultural and technological advancements that benefited the entire population had nothing to do with it. In fact, the cultural and technological advancements must have happened BECAUSE of the unexplained miracle genetic transformation in the genepool!
OHHHHH… I get it now. Cause and effect. It’s so obvious… how can anyone miss it right?
I suppose that means the Africans haven’t a hope in Hades… unless the African genepool undergoes a miracle genetic transformation, just like ours did. If we can figure out how this miracle genetic transformation in the genepool occured, then maybe we can try and emulate it in Africa.
Problem is, for the life of me I can’t come up with a plausible explanation as to how it happened. Can you?
Good luck schmuck.
LikeLike
“..make you into a liberal.”
That’s all that needs to be said.
LikeLike
Reason why African blacks fail at IQ tests? The tests are culturally biased. How would you fare in a test based on aspects of intelligence valued within the zulu culture?
Reason why Western blacks recieving western education fail at IQ tests? Inferiority complex.
When it comes to sport, african americans as a whole have strong inner game, strongest on the planet no doubt. Superiority complex breeds success.
When it comes to academia, african americans as a whole have pathetic inner game. Weakest on the planet. Inferiority complex breeds epic failure.
The writers and readers of this blog should know better than anyone the power of inner game. The incantations of ones inner dialogue are self-fulfilling prophesies. If you’re told from a young age by society that you’re dumb because you’re black, chances are you will end up dumb, regardless of your education.
You all have the cause and effect in the wrong order. Some day I will prove it. Until then, the jury is still out. Don’t give up on n!66az just yet.
LikeLike
Yes, there is biological influence. But if man has any dignity at all, it must be in his choices. We live in a world where things are warped. We all know that. But all people can live lives of inherent dignity. They already have that, but they can also choose to live it.
LikeLike
Raw reality has this annoying tendency to let chips fall where they may.
You can believe whatever you want – genes, society, culture – is the key to shaping the individual.
But genetic research is absolutely trashing the blank slate.
The only way the left can preserve its arcane moral structures is to ban genetics research.
I wonder if that’ll be the left’s next step, when faced with the inevitable destruction of their much-vaunted worldviews.
LikeLike
Will, Pinker is not a liberal.
LikeLike
Stupid, Liberal, Anti-White Bigots.
SLAWBs
There are only two types of SLAWB: hopelessly stupid and hopelessly biased. You have to be one or both to believe the things SLAWBs believe:
diversity is a strength
every culture is equally good
race does not exist
the Western world need more immigrants
white racial identity is racist
non-white racial identity is wonderful
mentioning or alluding to minorities in an unflattering way is racist
refusal to feel guilty for being white is racist
refusal to hate all white people is racist
openly calling for the extermination of all white people is not racist
any white person accused of racism by anyone is a racist
anyone accusing a minority of racism is a racist — unless the accuser is a less racist minority (blacks < Muslims < Hispanics < American Indians << Asians << Jews), in which case the accused is the racist; or both are the same race (e.g. black vs. "Uncle Tom"), in which case whomever is least anti-white is the racist
science, statistics, and common sense are racist if they do not support any of the aforementioned beliefs
freedom of speech does not extend to questioning any of these beliefs (including this one), which is racist
a racist (by any of the above criteria) is the worst thing you can possibly be, and the use of violence to suppress his or her “hate thoughts” — and I do mean thoughts, not just speech — is a legitimate political strategy to be encouraged, if not mandated by law
etc.
Neither type of SLAWB can be reasoned with. The hopelessly stupid SLAWB cannot understand, and the hopelessly biased SLAWB will not understand, or he will understand but pretend he does not understand because it profits him (e.g., Al Sharpton, Jesse Jackson, Jesse Jackson’s crazy son…).
Since they cannot be reasoned with, it is about time I stopped trying.
I have stopped trying
I mean it. I am done arguing with these morons and charlatans.
So now that I have stopped trying, what am I going to do with all my free time?
http://unamusementpark.wordpress.com/
LikeLike
In my experience, the best it ever gets “winning an argument” comes, if you are lucky, at the moment the other side starts using your ideas as if they had just thought them up on their own, right then and there. They get a surprised look on their faces as if a new and important thought had just occurred to them right then from out of the blue. It is not impossible that they will eventually give you some credit for their enlightenment, but it is not the way to bet.
F. Neitzche once said the modernists (prototype liberals) first took God out of Nature and then they killed God.
Leaving them with no concept of anything spiritual at all, not even with a small “s”. However, since they wished to put off looking at that situation in the eye they proceeded on as quickly as possible to adopt and dogmatically assert notions of equalism/multi-culti – diversity is strength – as a rapidly knocked together “religion”. It as least gives of some of the aura of religiosity (ie, things are tied together in ways hard to overestimate) because if every person is in fact “equal” and basically the same — then God/excuse me, Evolutuion must have been deeply committed to cosmic fairness and the eventual fraternity and libertee of all her creatures – However, Coming around see to admit that Evolution forgot to give a flying fuck about human equalism would mean that those subsequent dreams of “fraternity” and libertee all lack a foundation that could keep them from tumbling into the bottomless pit of existential nothingness, where only a few millons of fire-ants are there to help them feel at jome
LikeLike
I’d say that if you ask conservatives and liberals to a man, a higher percentage of liberals would believe in genetic determinism. A majority of Republicans don’t even believe in evolution. (http://www.gallup.com/poll/27847/majority-republicans-doubt-theory-evolution.aspx) The religious wing of conservationism far outnumbers the the secular wing. Even among the intellectual class of conservatives, seculars are often on the outs.
LikeLike
RC,
Pinker is socially liberal in the contemporary sense and economically liberal in the classical sense, which I suppose amounts to something like what now goes by the name “moderate libertarianism”. Although Pinker is now at Harvard, his interest in bottom-up economics is characteristic of (and was likely influenced by) MIT’s innovation-driven entrepreneurial culture. When asked about exemplary cases of unplanned private sector development, he cites linux and facebook . The following comment on post-Bush II economic policy captures his instincts concerning broader economic issues pretty well:
Everyone agrees that targeted regulation is needed in the domains of finance that brought us to this disaster, where a mad incentive structure and poorly understood dynamics combined to produce a catastrophic outcome. It is less clear that a general philosophy that “regulation is good” will be helpful across the board.
He voted for Obama in 2008.
LikeLike
Just so we’re clear, there are more White women on welfare than Black women. Whenever I see the term “welfare queen” I have to point that out. That was a horrible (clever?) lie that proves that a majority of American citizens are really bad with numbers, have an aversion to fact checking, and lack critical thinking skills when it comes to race.
Also, if anyone else watches Hoarders you’ll notice that over a 3rd of the interventions involve fat white people (20-60) collecting disability checks. Their disabilities don’t stop them from shopping for more junk! It’s always a “WTF?!” moment.
LikeLike
will – you’re playing with words. tsk.
the current meaning of liberal – the one being discussed here – is nothing like what pinker espouses. the irony you alluded to doesn’t follow. chomsky on the other hand…
LikeLike
There is simply no reason to give the total number of White/Black welfare recipients, unless — far from using “critical thinking skills when it comes to race” — you intend to misuse statistics to make Black dysfunction disappear. Rates are all that matters; the same goes for crime.
Thought experiment: you can live in a country with a million people and one percent of them (10,000) on welfare or in prison; or a country with 10,000 people and 25 percent of them (2,500) on welfare or in prison. Take your pick: higher total or higher rate.
LikeLike
@will, i dont mean to sound pissy.
i’m just saying i don’t think it’s right to say pinker is “liberal”, unless you mean “classical liberal”, which is almost diametrically opposite to modern liberalism
LikeLike
Giving those that aren’t as well off the opportunity and incentives to better themselves does not necassarily mean that the rich should be, “actively punished”.
A society with relative levels of equality is generally better for all and for the prosperity of all.
That’s my opinion, no doubt others will disagree.
LikeLike
“America is miscegenating very fast, I’d say faster than Europe. Maybe in 15 years, you’d have the Blank Slate, or would it be a Brown Slate?”
Well being that America was effectively built on the back of the slavery of the negro; what right do any of you yankee boys have to complain. You should have either sent them all back home early on when you had the chance or “cleansed” them much like you did with the American Indians when you had the chance.
LikeLike
Well being that America was effectively built on the back of the slavery of the negro; what right do any of you yankee boys have to complain. You should have either sent them all back home early on when you had the chance or “cleansed” them much like you did with the American Indians when you had the chance..
I agree. Let’s deport them.
LikeLike
So I’m assuming that the basic goal of amateur eugenics hour is to prevent the proles from breeding faster than the Ayn Rand club, right? The only issue is that by shitting on liberal social programs, the net effect is to encourage the proles to be fruitful and multiply, as well as encourage the teeming huddled masses to immigrate. Let’s see what conservatives want, shall we?
1. No Planned Parenthood. Ensure that poor people get knocked up and carry their genetically inferior children to term.
2. No Child Left Behind. Cut funding to ghetto schools, ensure that inner city populations lack the education to get jobs that would pull themselves out of the ghetto. Once again, let me point out that poor people breed like crazy.
3. No Minimum Wage, and bust the unions. Also means no citizens will work for two dollars an hour. Hello, illegal immigrants.
4. No laws for corporations. Hey wait a sec, who’s hiring all these illegals anyways?
I think Darwinism applies to humans just like any other animal, and I think having to pay an extra dollar in income taxes to keep the mouth breathers swimming in birth control pills is a dollar well spent. While plenty of liberal ideology is fundamentally stupid, I’m firmly convinced that maintaining a basic standard of living for the poor benefits us all in the long term, primarily in the form of less poor people. And I don’t see anything alpha about letting a bunch of Yale frat boys get kickbacks from military contractors so they can maintain their supply of stripper-ass delivered coke.
LikeLike
“You should have either sent them all back home early on when you had the chance or “cleansed” them much like you did with the American Indians when you had the chance.”
Which is proof enough that most American Indians died of disease, not genocide. Funny that a minority just as despised, yet healthy, managed to survive just as well as whites.
LikeLike
Bortimus,
I think having to pay an extra dollar in income taxes to keep the mouth breathers swimming in birth control pills is a dollar well spent. While plenty of liberal ideology is fundamentally stupid, I’m firmly convinced that maintaining a basic standard of living for the poor benefits us all in the long term, primarily in the form of less poor people.
I’d pay taxes for socially progressive eugenic breeding policies that didn’t look like it on the outside but managed the same effect in the end.
I’d pay more taxes for it, in fact.
Keep Planned Parenthood well-stocked and in every neighborhood. Keep mediocre-low level jobs that throw just enough cash at the poor to keep them from rebelling but not enough to encourage them to have more babies.
Encourage functional families to breed. Even nice corn-fed religious families in the midwest. Their kids end up migrating to the cities, anyway.
You can achieve all kinds of great social goals with soft-sell eugenic policies without labeling them eugenic.
Too bad the racist right-wing got all vocal about it in the 30’s. The progressive movements in the 20’s were all eugenics proponents.
If the fringe racists hadn’t had their way, who knows – we might have bred out lots of people by now.
(yes, this means I might be admitting to being a closet racist, except that my discrimination is cross-platform. Stupid and violent is stupid and violent).
LikeLike
This stuff only betrays the blogger’s ignorance. Native endowment is central to the most influential, most important, most substantive work on behalf of liberalism in the 20th century: John Rawls’ A THEORY OF JUSTICE. Similar pro-“biological determinism” sentiments were expressed by none other than Noam Chomsky. Someone’s forty years behind the curve.
Also, snark aside, can anyone provide any evidence that Drum’s lying about having staked out this position awhile ago?
LikeLike
I’ve just noticed this now: how long has Roissy been going by the name of Heartiste?
LikeLike
Due to “bad luck” in the genetic lottery, I am not as good-looking as Brad Pitt, nor as famous. I demand liberals redistribute pussy to me immediately to rectify this cosmic injustice.
LikeLike
Morals are not logical. They are felt to be true, not by virtue of logic, but by virtue of being a deeply personal human feeling.
The funny thing is, morals are also not universal! At least two of them are held largely only by conservatives. These also have a biological basis – you need the genes to have these morals. Those two are the moral regard for authrity and purity.
The liberal value of fairness and equality may also have some as yet undiscovered biological basis, as give anyone a tab of exstacy, and they will be all at one and lovey dovey with you and call you brother.
LikeLike
So when it comes to arguing morals, it’s not possible. What you are doing is “arguing” for intractable emotional positions that you are either born feeling, or you aren’t.
The moral imperative is not a universal imperative.
Forcing morals as a univeral imperative is also immoral.
LikeLike
I don’t understand the argument of whether success is from genetics or by personal decision. It seems obvious to me that preferred genetic traits will make success more likely, but at the same time, identical twins, though genetically the same can have dramatically different results.
This seems so obvious that it makes me think this talk about genetic determinism is about something completely different.
In case I am thinking right, here are two points that prove genetics alone do not determine success.
Point one: the diversity of successful people. And, couple with that, the fact that some people who have traits that one would think limit a person’s success are traits that successful people have, i. e.: Al Gore is as dumb as a box of rocks and heavily delusional, yet he was a senator, a VP, and a hypocritical asshole.
Point two: identical twins. This is from personal observation. My father is half of a pair of identical twins. Though I love my dad, he was a failure as a father to six kids, but his brother was successful as a father, in business, and just about everything he touched turns to gold. In the case of both, I believe there success and failure were highly influenced by the women they married.
There are too many outside influences to say that success is determined by genetics. Even with outside influences, the path to success is by being at the right places at the right times. But, that is not blind luck. It is by maximizing opportunities. And the same holds true with women.
By maximizing relationship opportunities, you are more likely to be successful, despite having genetic shortcomings. Again I know this from personal observation, having known a man who looked like The Penguin, yet when he died at age 65, he had five women weeping over his grave.
LikeLike
The best thing about this post is that the writing is not disgustingly slack.
I have a name suggestion for this writer and it has a ring to it: Roissy.
😉
LikeLike
Ari Hinkelberger
Can we get back to the reasons my girlfriend is rationing the pussy lately? Maybe discuss a man’s drive to bed hotter and hotter women despite the fact that all vaginas more or less feel the same.
You would want to change the subject, “Ari Hinkelberger”.
LikeLike
The liberal value of fairness and equality may also have some as yet undiscovered biological basis, as give anyone a tab of exstacy, and they will be all at one and lovey dovey with you and call you brother.
X floods the brain with serotonin, oxytocin, norep, and dopamine at once. All this proves is that leftism is an obscene, mawkish impairment of the mind. Leave it to leftist pushers to now make of their values the next big undiscovered “instinct” ….
LikeLike
The moral imperative is not a universal imperative.
Forcing morals as a univeral imperative is also immoral. [and other such talk]
That’s nice, Xsplat, as far as elaboration of your subjective point of view is concerned. But if you intend your philosophical comments to be an objective statement, then my reading of your comment is tempered by an understanding that you might not be taking your status as apex-organism in a no-predator habitat into perspective.
As Meestah Beeg Man Yankee Dollah, you are a high-functioning version of a welfare single mother, who opines on marriage as a quaint and obsolete artifact, without realizing that she is in fact in a marriage – to the beta cuckold taxpayer.
Perspective, Xsplat, perspective. Lack of which keeps you at the level of a quirkily interesting writer with frequently useful LTR advice, but not a great wrter.
LikeLike
It’s amusing how no matter what the data, the conclusion never changes. Human nature is plastic and created by environment? PROOF that liberalism is right! Human behavior mostly genetic? PROOF that liberalism is right!!
And what’s sad is that so many liberals actually believe their fanatical ideologies are “scientific” and “rational.”
LikeLike
[…] Citizen Renegade: What we have here is a liberal seeing the light and coming to grips with the dawning fact that Great Society-like government largesse is futile in the face of intractable genetic predispositions. […]
LikeLike
There are also some nasty ideas about racial superiority bubbling underneath as usual too
Why do people insist on calling “bubbling underneath…” when it is openly said that white men have higher IQ and white women are prettier? It can be said more openly?
By virtue of the fact that you were born does not entitle you to anything at all.
Agreed
LikeLike
Anyone with a knowledge of history will know the connection between progressive ideology and Eugenics (biological Determinism by another name). The greater story is the attribution of this long held progressive belief to conservative values. Race and birthright always have been and always will be tools the left uses to forward its agenda of central control.
http://www.orthodoxytoday.org/articles2/RayEugenics.php
LikeLike
Brad DeLong may be right that IQ doesn’t predict much of anything above a certain level. Once you get into elite levels of IQ, how much you earn may be more about connections, social savvy etc.
LikeLike
You know, every time someone insists that the pyramids were built by Blacks I think, “We’ll, before you start going on about reparations, you’d better settle up with the Jews first.”
LikeLike
The thing is, success is very difficult and rare. It is not the norm. It should not be seen as the default state. Across the span of human history, the norm has been a short, rather brutish existence, full of pain and hardship, sprinkled with a few simple pleasures. Success requires luck and skill and timing, all converging at once when an opportunity arises.
The idea that we can’t rest until there is a plasma screen in every bedroom and an Escalade in every driveway is perverse.
Liberals seem to be on a mission to ensure that every person enjoys a level of material success that is extremely rare in a normal economy. A mission that, by design, is impossible to ever achieve, but will have loads of money thrown at it for decades.
LikeLike
PA
That’s a fun analogy, but you don’t have it quite right. I don’t think that marriage is quaint and obsolete – I merely wonder why high status men with options choose it.
I’ve chosen to live in a place where I get relatively high status and options. Those options show me what a world of options looks like. Add to that my lifelong predispositions against marriage, and it leads to the question. A question no one has really answered. Certainly not you.
Maybe you just can’t imagine having those options.
LikeLike
Culture, which may or may not be genetically determined as well, must play a part in the individual’s cognitive abilities. The child of two brilliant drunks will likely do far worse than the child of two intelligent teetotalers; an intelligent but poor person will have less education and far less life information than a middle to upper class individual.
LikeLike
Incubus, parents actually have little influence over their kids. The bulk of influence comes from their peers and general environment. At least according to my vague memory of vague studies – that’s the current wisdom.
LikeLike
Aryan
He he. It’s funny how you think in terms of groups, rather than ideas. Very cliquish. Which, I believe, is a hallmark of conservatism, and the opposite of which is the very type of thinking you find defective.
He he.
Of course we all realize that refusing to believe in cliques is a type of clique – those who refuse to refuse are the out-group. But still – that lovey dovey all inclusive let’s all just get along liberal vibe is nice and groovy. It’s worth noticing that conservatives get off on that high less. Could be chemical.
Liberal people can be groovy.
LikeLike
Liberal Credo: Spend other people’s money, to test policies in other people’s back yards.
LikeLike
And so, Incubus, it must be argued that in some rich and inclusive societies, the best reproductive strategy is to just dump your superior genes into many smart girls, and let society and random cuckolded or newly arriving fathers be the general influence on stimulating the native IQ.
I’m not saying that’s best for the kids – but it could be if you have no paternal drive and would just ignore them anyway. Just saying, that the cad reproductive strategy exists, and can be comparatively successful in creating successful children who turn into successful adults.
And “but what if everyone acted that way” is not an argument against that strategy. Game theory demands that not everyone is going to act that way. So they don’t.
LikeLike
Xsplat, the analogy with welfare single mothers has to do with your flip comments on the uselesness morality.
Both you and that hypothetical welfare recipients are dismissing certain traditional arrangements, oblivious to the fact that you both benefit from them being in place. I her case, it’s marriage. In your case, morality in general.
I don’t knock your circumstances. The queston is, would you change your tune should natural predators be introduced into your habitat?
LikeLike
@ The man who was ……….
Above a certain level of IQ, you are surely a net taxpayer, below another threshold, you are certainly a tax consumer.
LikeLike
PA, you seem to have completely missed my point that morality is biologically determined.
Funny that, considering the theme of this post.
And that I’ve been trying to drum this viewpoint into the readership here for years.
It seems some people refuse to even cognize the idea.
LikeLike
//the dawning fact that Great Society-like government largesse is futile in the face of intractable genetic predispositions//
You make it sound as if the environment one finds oneself in has no bearing on how genetic predispositions manifest themselves. It’s fairly common knowledge that even genetic predispositions are multifactorial, involving a complex interaction between genes and environment. The environment can certainly augment or diminish positive or negative predispositions even if genes remain intractable for the time being.
The task of government and the individual is to then minimize the negative social consequences of certain predispositions.
LikeLike
“Well being that America was effectively built on the back of the slavery of the negro.”
this is a flat out lie. even a basic understanding of the history of this country will tell you that.
put that one in the box of lies along with “the expanding welfare state has helped non-asian minorities”.
LikeLike
America built on the back of slavery?
Heh… horses did far more towards the building of this country than did negroes… and without fucking up the current state of the Union.
Fail more.
LikeLike
I want to see evidence of THOSE claims.
Our “best and brightest” seem to wind up as hedge fund managers, then Ponzi schemers, then inmates at Camp Cushy.
Japan, Korea, India and CHINA would beg to differ with our failing Welfare State country on how to reward successful minds.
I see no Jonas Salks or Thomas Edisons.
What American *should* do, is ban exaggerated blanket statement makers – then ban the word “should.”
LikeLike
“Japan, Korea, India and CHINA would beg to differ with our failing Welfare State country on how to reward successful minds.
I see no Jonas Salks or Thomas Edisons.”
are you implying that without an expanding welfare state, the great american inventors would not have been successful?
LikeLike
Japan, Korea, India and CHINA
India is Brazil without bikinis, soccer, samba but with turbans instead.
They have a huge underclass, as big as Brazil’s, and a permanent social-democratic government enabled by that.
Americans overestimate India
LikeLike
Evolution can work wonders in only a few generations. You’re dealing with statistical distributions – not absolute eliminations.
If you want to get the American black population average IQ up, and we’re not playing catchup with the Flynn effect, then you need about 8-9 generations to bring it into the zone.
But this is what you need:
– Massive selection. Stupid people need to fail, become homeless/lose economic power *AND* not be able to breed. Arriving at both conditions is difficult.
– Social segregation: The stupid/violent poor underclass can self-segregate and isolate itself socially. This is what has happened with urban blacks. So long as these people more or less cease breeding (or find it exceedingly difficult) and fail to produce grandchildren, their proportion in the population and the genes they represent will decline statistically.
– Behaviors: Violence, impulse control – same.
As far as Europeans go, two things:
– Jews seem to have achieved a much higher average IQ over the course of just 200-300 years. I’d be surprised if it required much longer than this. Partly, this was due to the native European population absorbing the Jewish lower classes/outcasts, but mostly it was due very obviously from internal selection factors.
Get that process working for blacks. It’s savage, but it works.
– White people: Whites and Asians may have deeper advantages that go back to the neolithic or much earlier. The innovation zones for genetic mutation seem to have been on the fringes, ecologically: during the last ice age, the selective stress on the marginal populations in Eurasia were likely severe, thus accounting for a deeper difference in IQ.
THAT SAID,
those genes will still be present in some measure in African descendants – just less.
So select for them.
It means ditching the welfare state, savagely punishing antisocial behavior, and letting nature take its course. For about 4 generations, the effects will have a high human cost. This is evolution, and how it’s always worked.
You especially need to cut down on the rogue male effect: blacks who are able to form stable family units have to be massively encouraged through rewards; those who don’t need to be discouraged.
Shaming single mothers, economically isolating them and their offspring, punishing the kinds of choices that end up getting people in these situations – all of this is good.
before the liberals start calling for my extermination, note that we may have arrived at this point for whites/Asians following the same route. This process is exactly what was normative in recent times for Asians and whites:
Evolution.
Those who stepped outside were welcome to get lost. Slut shaming was common. Imprisonment for abandoning your family was also common, as was also extended family networking.
In being kind to people, you may be very unkind to their gene pool.
Blacks are consistently at the bottom of the achievement pool when it comes to anything involving intelligence, all over the world, including on their home turf.
Why is it so insulting or radical to suggest that sub-Saharan blacks (and tropical Asians) were under different selective pressures and as a result have a different statistical distribution of traits?
The evidence is getting hard to deny.
That said: Human populations have porous borders. Genes spread fast, especially if they offer an advantage in the game of mate selection. Humans also move around a lot: Look at the Bantu migrations from northern Africa to the South over 200 years. Lots of genes were likely carried with them.
So select for it.
For passive eugenic policies designed to mimic evolution and help out blacks, you’re going to need political / social ideologies with a lot more political capital than those we have now.
But the welfare queen state helps no-one.
LikeLike
The most humane way we can do this is to pay low IQ women to take contraceptive injections.
LikeLike
Remind me again why it’s the responsibility of the West to improve today’s negroes… merely because we forcibly upgraded the standard of living of a small percentage of them in the distant past.
LikeLike
We need to do something, because —
1) Affirmative action glosses over the problem and is likely permament, and unless you like whites (and Asians) being on the end of the application list, and getting regular accusations of racism because there aren’t enough black physicists, we should do something.
2) Blacks aren’t going away. You’re fucked if you’re waiting for that.
3) Hispanics are flooding in. Same policies need to apply to them. And we need to shut the door.
4) Blacks aren’t going away. Did I mention? You want our urban cores to be third-world hellholes forever? We need to deal with the actual people we have, not wish them away in lala land.
LikeLike
As for my–how did one of you put it? “Congoid” list of innovations”…was it? I don’t ask you all to simply take MY word for it. Slide your hands out of your pants–place them upon your keyboard–and Google search. Technology is grand–and seemingly inspired in technicolor. As for the rest of the other nonsense? How very sad. And totally expected.
LikeLike
Whatever.
We can breed dogs, but not people?
All social policies that affect how many babies we have are eugenic.
Believe it or not, we’re under more or less constant selection pressure. But the actual selection pressures are unconscious or misdirected much of the time.
Every economic policy we ever enact that impacts whether or not X person has babies is in some way a selective pressure.
It’s absolutely possible to breed humans the same way we breed dogs. In fact, we do it all the time.
Look around you. We’re animals – exactly like every other animal. We can breed dogs – we can breed anything.
In fact, we do.
I’d just like to make it more conscious.
Sub-Saharan Africa and its descendants clearly have a different distribution of natural talent.
Is it just social conditioning that makes East African long-distance runners impressive? West Africans good at sprinting? West African women having a peculiar and identifiable body shape?
Maybe race is an illusion and we’re all delusional.
LikeLike
O., unfortunately for you someone DID do a google search, and posted a link upthread that pretty much debunks every one of those invention claims.
LikeLike
Gorbachev’s evolution towards race realism is among the most remarkable stories of this blog, on par with Dave from Hawaii marriage’s tales.
Think about a demented, cafe con leche though game-savvy sipping liberal who got angry whenever someone mentioned possible inate differences between Koreans and Nigerians who is now advocating the end of the Welfare state..
What happened, Gorb? I know that in Brazil, the US and France March/April are the months in which you are obliged to fill your income tax forms.
Did it hurt?
My first Income tax did that for me.
LikeLike
Quite the contrary. I’ll restate it:
Japan, Korea, India and CHINA differ with America’s failing Welfare State on how to reward successful minds. These countries reward intelligence, America rewards PC welfare state allegiance, stifling all who are against the Democrat Party line.
We have no more Jonas Salks or Thomas Edisons. But plenty of McG’s and MMORPG “champs.”
Meaning nothing.
LikeLike
Hey. I have the same opinions I always did. I’ve been a race realist since I went to college.
This is where retard racists and I part company:
– Culture/socialization/specific environment/genes (race): It’s almost impossible to pull out the threads from each other.
– African-American culture is particularly sick. It’s so sick, compared to anything in actual Africa or anywhere else in the world, we can’t know how much worse off blacks are here compared to other races. The culture is poison.
– Blacks aren’t going anywhere. Unless we want all our cities to look like this:
http://www.alternativeright.com/main/blogs/malinvestments/america-s-hellholes/#disqus_thread
we need to do something.
I’ve always thought eugenics were a good idea. I just have nothing against the high end of any gene pool – black or Asian or white.
We always have selective breeding policies, anyway. I just want them conscious and planned.
LikeLike
Unlike America, which pays it’s “underclass” to breed wildly so they can get GED’s in prisons,
India puts them to work in factories, that make tangible goods.
LikeLike
[quote]”Blacks aren’t going away.”[/quote]
Maybe yes, maybe no.
Merely because your sister had jungle fever, don’t think that the rest of us are resigned to the status quo.
Once there are no longer 150 channels on the dish and a McD’s on every corner, we’ll see what’s what as far as ethnic cleansing goes.
It’s already started in a some Hispanic neighborhoods in CA, from what I’ve been hearing.
LikeLike
@ Gorb
Go look for your comments a year ago.
@ Firepower
Disagreed. They had one of the nicest governments on Earth, maybe THE BEST in the World, when I was backpacking there in 2003/2004. Then they restored the Social Democrats to power, based on votes of the lower castes and muslims. Think about a combination from Hell.
And that government has been reelected. Dude, it is easier to grow when you are poor, but the Fabian Socialists in New Delhi will everything they can to tax productive Indians.
It is Brazil without hot girls and soccer and also the eugenic effects of crime (blacks shoot mostly blacks). And carrying almost 200 million muslims.
LikeLike
[…] per a discussion at Roissy’s yesterday, this case goes to show you that genetic determinism is much stronger than […]
LikeLike
I always say blacks have a shitty culture. We can repair much of the damage by altering it – if this is possible.
And I still say we can absorb immigrants (presumably not the shit of the world) if we acculturate them.
Alas, this requires that we actually acculturate them. We can make anyone English – but, like, we actually have to do it.
Inviting them here and then allowing them to not integrate is poison. And there has to be a control on the numbers – you can let lots in, but it has to be over an extended period of time. Once the older generation is absorbed, you can absorb more. You need–
A confident culture, that aggressively proselytizes to newcomers
A culture proud of itself, that knows its own boundaries, but is confident enough to adapt
bear in mind this implies we’re choosing our own immigration strategy which right now we’re not.
And for that reason, Muslims, at least, should stay out.
My views have remained static. I’ve seen nothing to change them.
Maybe all my conversations with Obsidian pissed me off enough to be more blunt.
LikeLike
I already said it, go read what you wrote a year ago. Nothing but culture separated Seoul from Lagos. Many people remarked here how amazing it was that someone with such a deep understanding of individual human being could have such idiotic opinions about larger groups. You even got angry when someone mentioned that there are relatively more beautiful women in Poland than in Sudan.
LikeLike
@gig,
Then I was being contrary.
Maybe I was channeling Obsidian.
I think Sudanese men likely find Sudanese women attractive, moreso than, say, Asian women.
On the other hand, universals are also present, and I’m just not sure anyone finds Austronesian women (or men) attractive.
And what’s up with Mexico. The Mayans may be descended from some pretty impressive civilization-builders, but damn – are they an unattractive people, as a rule.
Compare to, say, the traditional Iroquois. They were tall, stately, and said to be extremely attractive – in a Nordic Asian kind-of way, full of vigor and vim and quiet reserve and charm.
Also good with a tomahawk.
LikeLike
I see your point, but think we are somehow discussing different issues.
Even a brutal Communist dictatorship (surpassing Socialism’s controls) like China is succeeding by taxing the shit out of its Richies to subsidize their humongous underclass. Whatever underclass they, or India, don’t decide to let die in a toxic-waste slum.
Each has (probably) temporarily placated the poor with jobs. Only time will tell if/when these poor chafe at their surroundings and eventually revolt. China already is leery of the Arab “Spring.”
I hear ya about Brazil: it’s favelas and slums = avoidable flyover country for the rich with helicopter pads on skyscraper roofs.
LikeLike
“O. Omerasu
As for my–how did one of you put it? “Congoid” list of innovations”…was it? I don’t ask you all to simply take MY word for it. Slide your hands out of your pants–place them upon your keyboard–and Google search. Technology is grand–and seemingly inspired in technicolor. As for the rest of the other nonsense? How very sad. And totally expected.”
hey, guess what? I googled “automatic transmission invention” and guess what the first result was?
http://www33.brinkster.com/iiiii/inventions/#automatictransmission
most of the things you listed are on there…strange…. it’s almost as if our culture is invested in emphasizing the accomplishments of certain individuals beyond where they reasonably should be.
@Firepower
couldn’t agree more then. our society needs to be pouring much more resources into top performers (top 5% or so), giving the people for whom college is a good investment of time in more focused opportunities (top 30-40% or so), and then differing types of vocational/apprenticeship programs for the rest at a much earlier age.
a college education is not useful or really feasible for the majority of the population, we need to quit pretending like it is.
LikeLike
“A specter is haunting America, the specter of human biodiversity.”
LikeLike
Giving everyone a college education is a liberal exercise.
All people are equal – we should all have the same chance. To be lawyers and doctors.
Why have requirements for colleges at all? WHy even have SATs? Why not just eliminate hierarchy completely:
issue everyone the same salary, give everyone the same paper qualifications, and assume all people are always equal.
There’s no reason everyone should go to college. In Korea. there are college programs in – get this – modeling. And store management. You can get a BA in managing a retail store.
WTF.
It’s a society obsessed to the point of distraction with paper certification. Students who go abroad don’t bother to learn English – they just get pieces of paper that said they did. Contrast with the Japanese: When they go abroad, they’re positively adventurous by comparison. They study to learn.
Koreans study for pieces of paper. The only thing that matters is pieces of paper.
Credentialism will kill us, too. For Koreans, it just makes most peoples’ degrees look ridiculous.
LikeLike
Strawman much. Some of the most virulent critics of the blank slate are, in fact, liberals.
Much like the debate between command economies and completely free markets, you’ll find most people somewhere in between. It is then only a debate of degrees.
LikeLike
“Wilson
Strawman much. Some of the most virulent critics of the blank slate are, in fact, liberals. ”
list them please. bonus points for supporting links.
“Much like the debate between command economies and completely free markets, you’ll find most people somewhere in between. It is then only a debate of degrees.”
while i suspect that most people’s private beliefs follow this trend if they were honest about them, the liberal lockstep mantra on this is de facto blank-slatism by virtue of not only never explicitly discussing any kind of genetic differences, but more importantly by raining unholy hell on anyone who floats such ‘unclean’ ideas- see james watson for evidence on that (the harvard president’s scandal regarding women in STEM fields is of a similar vein as well).
i’d be VERY interested to see any somewhat prominent liberals criticizing blank slatism. just because i haven’t personally read about them doesn’t mean they don’t exist, but i would be surprised.
LikeLike
“Heh… horses did far more towards the building of this country than did negroes… and without fucking up the current state of the Union”
Well then, you should have taught horses to pick cotton, tobacco etc.
LikeLike
Bio-determinism leads to left-wing policies more than right. The right in the United States believes that all men are created equal in the eyes of the law, and that we are endowed by our Creator with certain unalienable rights, among them a right to life, liberty, and property. The left took that concept to a grotesque extreme and mandated equality of outcome because it came to them in a dream once. So both sides have a plausible claim to be anti-determinist.
But if you presume to be any sort of friend of liberty, you must accept the premise that all men are created equal. It just doesn’t work when “some animals are more equal than others.” It necessitates the empowerment of a judge-master to determine the hierarchy of unequals.
This is a happy little topic because it exposes the tyrannical heart at the bottom of lazy-minded “libertarian” commenters inspired by Roissy’s call to arms against the left. (See “Gorbachev’s” unabashed call for eugenic policies.) Scratch a libertarian, find the hidden totalitarian.
LikeLike
[…] – “Top Ten Signs You’re a Beta Male“, “Liberals and the Acceptance of Biological Determinism“, “Piss Bomb“, “Dating Preferences vs […]
LikeLike
There are many, many liberals out there who fully acknowledge that genetics play a major, if not the primary role in how successful someone is in life. No statistics are presented on this blog to show otherwise. There’s just the usual “do you seriously expect me to believe” retorts. I could just as soon say that most conservatives believe that “hard work” is the main driver of success, and not genes. Given the uneven genetic hands we’re dealt, the moral justification for redistribution comes quite easily if you’re familiar with the concept of the “veil of ignorance.” Less sputter, more rigor.
[Editor: The veil of ignorance also provides no justification for confiscating the income of smart people who, after all, have no control over their inborn predilections.]
LikeLike
@Begby
“No fair! Extremely attractive women owe it to homely men to have indiscriminate sex with them, since these men are unfortunate victims of the genetic lottery.”
I agree, when and where will there be a government form for me to fill out for this important social benefit?
LikeLike
@Liberal
You need to answer old guy’s comment.
You said “Given the uneven genetic hands we’re dealt, the moral justification for redistribution comes quite easily…”
So tell your sister to start stripping for the homeless.
It isn’t fair that she gives it all to just one guy.
LikeLike
Liberal said: “I could just as soon say that most conservatives believe that “hard work” is the main driver of success, and not genes. Given the uneven genetic hands we’re dealt, the moral justification for redistribution comes quite easily if you’re familiar with the concept of the ‘veil of ignorance’.”
Conservatives value hard work because genes along don’t do anything. That part is true. Liberals are the one who wish intelligence away as a “social construct” of race/class/gender that doesn’t mean anything… then turn around and use IQ tests to get a murder of death row by an IQ point or two. Puh-lease! Conservatives recognize individual abiliy and motivation vary; liberals just want to get more votes/support (free benefits, y’all– keep it up and they’ll be wealth-redistribution in it for you, too!).
LikeLike
Ah, Detriot… monument to left/libtard social policies.
LikeLike
More…
LikeLike
Abilities are needs; people able to become greatness have greater needs than avg person.
In the USA we have a culture of leaving people to fend for themselves. But Amerika is NOT magical; reality DOES exist here. So, when people of high ability are deprived of the resources necessary to meet their needs, the cream does NOT rise to the top. Instead, a clusterfuck of psychopaths does.
The culture of leaving people to fend for themselves (leaving it to family/church is EVIL) is an attempt to make the USA “of, by, and for” the TARES – inhospitable to the Good Seed.
I am tall, white, hetero, top 1% of IQ, and I had great ambitions (all inherited); and yes, I worked hard. It got me NOWHERE.
My life has been a nightmare of stupid, crazy, shallow liars pretending they’re better than me because they thrive on the barren ground.
I refuse to lie. I will not pretend stupid people are smart; I will not pretend bad ideas are good. Is it impossible for me to be middle-class in the USSA w/o lying? Why the fuck shouldn’t I just start killing people?
LikeLike
//Ah, Detriot… monument to left/libtard social policies.//
No, Detroit is what happens when an entire city is structured around one industry and that industry suffers massively during a recession.
Post hoc ergo propter hoc
LikeLike
JJ
You mean like Houston was structured around the oil business that collapsed along with its real estate and banking back in the mid-late 1980s?
Yeah
The place is a waste land nowadays. Houses are almost free and people are still scrambling to move away. Coyotes and feral hogs have been seen downtown and have started to scare the many homeless into shelters at night. Especially since there are no street lights any more since that last round of spending cuts.
LikeLike
And how after Katrina, the people of New Orleans behaved the same was as trapped, starving and desperate people after the Kyoto Earthquake or the Tsunami this year.
Yup. Exactly the same.
LikeLike
Here are just a few ways to justify redistribution in principle.
Utilitarian- If you look at the marginal utility of wealth for people at various income levels you’ll find that reducing the wealth of wealthy individuals causes their utility to decrease less than it causes the utility of poorer individuals to increase. Also look at Mazlow’s hierarchy of needs.
Neighborhood Effects- Countless examples of where one party performs an action which directly or indirectly benefits a second party and it’s unreasonable for the first party to demand compensation from the second party (a defect in the free market by the way). In these types of instances government intervention in the form of taxation MAY be appropriate.
Necessity- Governments provide numerous services and benefits to its populace for which redistribution is a practical necessity.
Social Contract/Law- By choosing to live within a certain country’s borders, one neccesarily consents to the laws of that country, taxation being one of those laws. One can certainly work to change the laws, however.
Fairness of the first distribution- It opens quite a can of worms when one concludes that the distribution of wealth, property, etc. in the first place was not just. Thus, everything that comes from that is rightly injust (look at the Libertarian argument for reparations).
It’s silly to apply these things to internal, intangible things like happiness because they’re not readily exchangeable among other reasons. You cannot extract happiness from a person and inject it into another.
LikeLike
gig
“They had one of the nicest governments on Earth, maybe THE BEST in the World, when I was backpacking there in 2003/2004. Then they restored the Social Democrats to power, based on votes of the lower castes and muslims. ”
The last straw for me regarding the greatness, heck even a degree of worth of democracy. Though your praise sounds too much.
LikeLike
[…] Dating Preferences Vs Options, Piss Bomb, Liberals And The Acceptance Of Biological Determinism, Top 10 Signs You’re Not A Beta […]
LikeLike
@ namae nanka
I stand by my opinion. Although those Hindu Nationalists had many flaws, the alternatives available were George Bush, Tony Blair, Hosni Mubarak, Putin and Hu Jintao.
LikeLike
Eric said: “Here are just a few ways to justify redistribution in principle. …”
You forgot the most important one for left/libtards:
To have power and feel good about themselves spending other people’s money.
LikeLike
k I get it. I was totally oblivious of world politics at that time. Their hindu nationalism line was jarring to a kid who had grown up with kids of other faith, even though my family supported that whole-heartedly. But old man Vajpayee will forever be my PM.
And it was another shock to find the similarities with american political scene when I started reading about the excesses of feminism and MRM.
LikeLike
Well, I am as far from Indian as possible. A Brazilian backpacking in SOuth Asia who took the time to read local newspapers during the long three months spent in India and Nepal.
I went to Gujarat to see the lions and the former Portuguese colony of Diu, and by that time the province was ruled by Himmler reincarnated, a guy called Marenda Modi or something like that. I had not seen such a demonization since the Yugoslav wars.
Well, once I started reading about him I couldn’t believe that I had found a guy that would do exactly what I would in any circunstance. WHen I left everyone was sure that the Nationalists would win.
Then “India” (or the alliance between muslims and low caste Hindus) chose the Fabian socialists.
LikeLike
@Micky
“Is it just me or are most liberals just neurotically emotional fucks that give in to empathy circle jerks because they have nothing better to bitch about
i wish my life was so damn comfortable and easy that i had the time to sit there like a little bitch and get my sensitive little heart all pissy over perceived injustices.”
Yes indeed, I’ll start caring about the oppressed just as soon as I get a nice fat trust fund.
LikeLike
Off-topic, but…
You know how “serial monogamy” is the natural form of femal promiscuity and “divorce rape” is her taking you to the cleaners en route to the next chump… well, Urban Dictionary has a new word for things:
Marriage Hooker
a women that uses her vagina as lure to fish for men, uses pregnancy to trick the men to marry then uses children and divorce to sustain her living habits and ultimately ruin men’s life. In fact, more nasty than a normal hooker.
http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Marriage%20Hooker
How ’bout that?
LikeLike
@David Rockefeller
““Oh btw , i’m sure all that top %1 have the best genetic qualities you’ll ever see”
no way. not if you’re talking inherited money.
their problems and screw-ups are far worse than later generations regressing to the mean, the founder of the family money being an absolutely extraordinary person, the descendents being average, ordinary.
the 3rd-/4th-/5th-generation rich folks i encounter at work would be living in cardboard boxes under a bridge if they didn’t have their trust funds.
every social dysfunction — booze, drugs, illegitimacy, crime — that applies to poor people who lack memory of a family member ever working for a living applies in spades to rich people.
weird how the top and bottom of the economic/social spectrum converge.”
This is the truth.
LikeLike
I have frequented this blog for a while. One thing I have noticed is that the writers seem dead-set on proving that whites are superior in IQ and thus overall human capability. What I don’t agree with is this huge effort among individuals such as these to prove once and for all that there is a race ladder (of course with whites at the top).
If there IS a race ladder, geneticists will shed light on this in the years to come. But don’t deny that people such as the writers of this blog are all-to-eager to hear the narcissist-inducing news that whites are superior to the inferior mud-people.
LikeLike
@Horatio Sanchez
“Due to “bad luck” in the genetic lottery, I am not as good-looking as Brad Pitt, nor as famous. I demand liberals redistribute pussy to me immediately to rectify this cosmic injustice.”
YES, YES, YES.
LikeLike
Some guy likes 85 year old women:
http://www.wpix.com/news/wpix-upper-east-side-85yearold-sexually-assaulted-in-broad-daylight-20110530,0,7508397.story
Does anyone detect a thrill from the 77 year old when she’s saying in an interview that she could be next? Or is that just imagination?
LikeLike
Looks like it was a “liberal” Democrat who just blocked the passage of the PROTECT IP Act in the US Senate:
http://www.cmswire.com/cms/enterprise-20/wyden-blocks-protect-ip-copyright-bill-citing-overreaches-that-threaten-the-internet-011414.php
The same old fake Republicans like Warren Hatch of Utah, were pushing this through in the usual “bi-partisan” fashion showing they serve corporations and not the people (individual liberties).
LikeLike
That was Orrin Hatch of Utah (fake Republican) along with Chuck Grassley of Iowa.
All these guys have to do for their constituents to consider them “Republican” is to be against premarital sex. But for the Democrat Senator Wyden (Oregon), websites like Twitter would now be liable for links to “pirate sites” made on them.
And these bastards try to control the Internet that way every year. Every year it’s a different law that sounds good. Each law attempts to make it Google or Twitter’s fault if they don’t monitor the content being generated on their sites and block what the government says is bad.
LikeLike
For all of the smart viewpoints that this website espouses, its almost counter-intuitive to read liberal / conservative generalizing in some articles.
I agree with almost every one of the perspectives put forth on this site, but would never, ever align myself with the republican / mainstream conservative party. Doing so intimates that you support a party who wants to crush the economic class to which you belong (lest you are in the top 1%) and therefore indicates a lack of IQ in socioeconomic race / class issues that come with the liberal / conservative generalizing. Think about it.
Get off the bandwagon and pick your issues based on what is best for the health of your specific race, class and gender. That is, your specific self interest. That goes for everyone reading this, no matter what your race class or gender is.
Associating yourself with political parties that are removed from your self interest (republican leaders unquestioningly support the dilution of the middle and lower class workforce through backroom facilitation of unfettered illegal immigration) is low IQ.
LikeLike
And that’s not an endorsement for the democratic party, but rather a call not to think in “binary” terms when it comes to USA politics. Slamming one party does not mean that the other party is the correct choice. Because you have found sufficient reason to hate one party does not cause to follow that you must be aligned with the second party by some sort of ‘default’ membership logic.
I put quotes around the word binary, because in reality the two parties in power are really slightly different versions of the same party.
LikeLike
xsplat
That’s way overstating the thesis of a book written a few years ago by a woman, that reviewed studies relevant to the issue.
Her conclusion was the by mid and late adolescence in America, peers had more ongoing influence, but that’s a bit more, not parents usually having none. As well parents have tons of influence in earlier years. Those earlier influences and what school district the parents chose to live in have a lot of bearing on who the teens’ friends will be. So does genetics inherited from his or her parents and other ancestors.
LikeLike
Gorbachev—
It became sicker and sicker starting in the 60’s. I don’t’ think it was nearly as sick before that, ironically when blacks faced segregation and Jim Crow laws at least in the SE. Not nearly so much in the north. A be more in California than the north.
It was leftist PC whites telling them they were victimized, they’re owned, they’re naturally just as smart and able to succeed just as much, and if they don’t it’s evil whitie’s fault. It’s overall the opposite of the self reliance of the Yankees and Germans (who often intermarried) and populated the northern half of the country. It’s the PC shaming by charging racism of any whites that tell the real truth about why blacks continue to lag in school and work: black culture, genes, and unwed or divorced and not remarried mothers.
LikeLike
Here’s a newsflash: both political parties support unfettered illegal immigration. The Repubs for the slave labor and the Dems for the fraudulent votes.
[Editor: This isn’t going to end well.]
LikeLike
@Doug1,
Lots of older blacks are ashamed and astonished at how disgusting, how degraded black culture has become.
Saying it’s shit insults some shitty but redeemable cultures.
Nowhere on Earth, in no slum or ghetto, will people make apologies for the crap that goes on among urban blacks here.
Whine whine whine racism whine whine whine oppression whine whine whine slavery.
Even African blacks are shocked at the whiny, lame-assed self-exculpatory excuses blacks have here.
Anti-intellectual, actively anti-social, aggressive, deliberately ornery, filled to choking with “sass” and “righteousness”.
It’s crap.
Before you determine just how crappy blacks are here, genetically, you need to acknowledge that the culture tends to breed complete retards and sociopaths.
When blacks acculturate, even stupid blacks end up contributing something. I’ve been in African villages with kids and adults, the dumbest of whom had decent values.
And yet, here, some little twisted 10-year-old sociopath shoots a white guy and people ask why whites are responsible. Swarms of black kids beat the shit out of random white guys and trash stores and we ask why “youth” are acting out.
Fuck off: Africans don’t do this shit in normal African countries. In times of war, shit like this happens all over the world. But the black culture we have here seems to generate the lowest possible common human denominator every time.
If we had no blacks here, or, say, blacks with a culture that qualified as remotely human, our stats would resemble Canada or New Zealand for crime, education and economic indices.
Instead, we get this shit.
But in 1940, it wasn’t this way. Some black schools in Chicago boasted high-performers. Blacks had their own banks and retail stores. They had actual fucking neighborhoods.
I never argued we’d get lots of black nuclear physicists. But we could have blacks who made acceptable fellow citizens.
Right now, our cities are in the vice-like death grip of human garbage strangleholds.
You need to travel to other countries – even third-world countries – to realize how shitty the average black attitude here is, how twisted their sense of entitlement is, how fucked up their attitudes towards success are, and how trapped in their own delusional self-pitying hatred American Blacks really are.
They may idolize anti-authoritarian cool, but their own culture has doomed them.
Whatever fucked them from the 1960’s, it fucked American blacks but good, right up the ass.
Criminal, shiftless, useless, poisoned.
We think it’s normal because we live here. Got to Asia. They think we’re living with a bunch of uncivilized apes.
And with good reason.
LikeLike
I would be very interested to know what Virgil Kents thoughts on this are? What are his two cents when the editor is deep in discussion with his computational geneticist buddies?
LikeLike
So, what I get from this thread is:
1) Mathematically speaking: IQ = f(race)
2) Bad Things Happening! Caused by Liberals? Bad Things Happening! Caused by Liberals? I’M JUST ASKING QUESTIONS, STAN.
3) Logic dictates that whites are better:
a) Income and social status is a function of genetic fitness
b) Whites have higher incomes and social statuses
c) Ergo, whites have better genes
4) Roger Ailes and Fox News have no absolutely no bias whatsoever and are committed to reporting only the verifiable truth, with no personal or political agenda.
5) Liberalism == Marxist Soviet Communism. No exceptions.
6) It’s Obama’s fault.
LikeLike
@Gorbachev
“whatever happened in the 60’s”
It was the 80s that it happened, but by and large the biggest and worst turning point in black culture was when the CIA started funneling crack cocaine into the inner cities. After pushers like Freeway Ricky Ross moved the goods, the money went to fund a CIA-led war in Nicaragua. Once we found out what the CIA was doing (creating American ghettos to fund an illegal profiteering war in open defiance of the Constitution), we took action…
…and elected the people responsible into the White House.
LikeLike
@Anonymous,
What get me is this.
Blacks weren’t anything like equals, but they weren’t parasites before the 60’s. They had self-sufficiency and their communities were worthy of the name.
Segregation seemed to be almost good for them – in the north. Chicago was famous for this. In the teeth of brutal racism, they were doing relatively well.
Then the whiny antagonism started. Did Jews whine? How about Asians?
The difference was that whites enabled them. Instead of just respecting and rewarding blacks who made it, including not a few scientists, doctors, and whatnot, they decided they’d atone for 400 years of shitty behavior with self-respect obliterating good intentions.
I’m convinced segregation and racism was, ironically, better for healthy black self-esteem.
I know enough older blacks who are flabbergasted with the crap that black America has become, all of these people dismissed by their kids and grandkids, to know that something was up.
Now we have an indigent class of perpetual sociopathic criminals and a culture that breeds it.
As a nation, it’s humiliating.
All the black bravado in the world is worth nothing. The culture breeds failure, criminality and contempt.
I’m willing to credit the CIA and crack some of this. But by the 70’s, the rot was a deep infection.
They heyday for black success was ironically some of the worst periods of black history: 1910-1940. You had black scientists, artists and musicians slamming shit home and independent businesspeople clawing their way up a ladder on their own – forget assistance, they were being held down by whites. And still many were successful.
Might I be out of bounds to suggest that there was a correlation. This was the time of least indulgence by useless white do-goodies.
Forget looking at Jews or Asians. Black history in the US completely derails any delusions you might have about how awesome AA is.
AA is the shortcut for losers and lazy bastards. And you get what you pay for.
LikeLike
The Civil Rights Movement is (and always has been) the psy-op of the (not really hidden, just un-acknowledged) race war.
LikeLike
@Gorbachev
Nah, you’re right. I’m with you too.
Not saying we should go back to institutionalized racism, mind you. However, I think you’re seeing something here that lots of people in the black community aren’t. Namely, that while institutionalized racism has been beaten back as much as possible, there’s been a new wave of entitlement racism to take its place.
Unfortunately, it’s not limited to blacks.
Many of my white friends can’t seem to perceive the favorable racism from which they’ve benefited over the years, but they’re acutely aware of the gradually waning power of the WASP establishment and what it means for them. Likewise, many of my black friends can’t seem to perceive the racial barriers that have fallen, and fail to attempt surmounting them because they assume they’re still insurmountable. Finally, almost all of my friends, regardless of race, have failed to acknowledge that the world no longer operates on the same principles that it did mid-century. Almost all of them have some kind of entitlement issues. I know one dude who was off to a great start- toured Japan for 3 years, did art shows in several countries- then when he got back to America, he sunk into the wage-slave cycle and just got bitter. “The government gives all this money to niggers so they can buy Escalades, and I don’t even have time to work on my art.” … “The government should pay me to make art instead of paying welfare to lazy shits.”.
I hate to say it, because I’m including myself a bit here, but the generation is as much at fault as the race. It seems that many people under 30 these days feel like they’ve been cheated out of something they were “owed”. My generation was never told that we would have to work our asses off, put in tireless dedication, sometimes do things we hate, etc. We were told “Do what you love! Be what you want to be! You can achieve anything!”, when the truth was a lot closer to the truth as spoken by Tyler Durden. We are not special or unique. We are not destined to be rock stars and astronauts. Rock stars and astronauts did all those things above- worked their asses off, did things they hated, etc. My generation expects that every job after college starts at $40,000 a year with full benefits.
LikeLike
Thank you anonymous. Ive been thinking about this post a lot and my conclusion at its most succinct is, control the frame control the picture, Pimpin aint easy.
LikeLike
Lets say for a moment that the world changed tomorrow and it was now accepted that there are indeed differences in IQ and especially between the races. And that some races in particular have a propensity towards violence. The liberals would then argue that because of these differences the more intelligent and productive citizens should cough up cash to look after these less intelligent people (yes whites included). In a way I would be okay with that if there was a caveat that states that these people would no longer enjoy all of the same rights that they enjoy today. Basic human rights of course would be covered. But things like voting rights, equal rights, bussing and a myriad of others “rights” would be modified. And of course crime and punishment as well as policing procedures would change. Vocational education would also be the name of the game. Replacing the never ending money hole that is inner city public schools.
LikeLike
My advice to members of the chateau. Pause your debauchery for a moment and buy a copy of Modern Biology of the Cell.
Next realize that the biological determinism vs. tabula rasa is just another false reductionist dichotomy like liberal vs. conservative.
http://www.nature.com/nrg/journal/v6/n6/abs/nrg1616.html
Easier to understand: http://blog.cholesterol-and-health.com/2011/02/new-genetics-part-iii-genes-dont.html
If you think that genes dictate who you are; you are wrong. If you think that genes don’t affect who you are; you are wrong. Unfortunately, the universe is not that simple and we’re constantly revising our flawed understanding and realizing how little we actually know.
LikeLike