Randoms of the day

If you have a strong stomach, read this article about rape in Haiti (skip the next couple lines if you’re not up to it):

But that pain pales in comparison to the torment of learning last March that her 5-year-old granddaughter had been raped. . . .

Hers is a tragedy of rape compounded: Her granddaughter, now 6, was conceived in the gang rape of her daughter.

What happens when the democratic process is studied using modern social science techniques? Unintentional hilarity ensues, “Why don’t the best people win elections?”

The decline and fall of the American Empire.

Could we call the tribe Unitarian Universalists? “Dr. Haidt argued that social psychologists are a ‘tribal-moral community’ united by ‘sacred values’ that hinder research and damage their credibility.”

Birmingham sounds lovely!

I’m interested in a lot different subjects, all of which seem to be present in this story. Sexual dystopia may be triggering a sovereign debt crisis (paging GBFM!). The article also gets to Germany’s stealthy takeover of the EU, “Voting Ms. Angela Merkel as the next Italian Prime Minister would probably be a step in the right direction.”

Eugenics, anti-eugenics and dysgenics.

It’s a good thing we teamed up with the Soviets to make the British and French leave the Suez canal under Egyptian control.

Advertisements

22 Responses to Randoms of the day

  1. Obsidian says:

    Hi Foseti,
    I’ve heard quite a bit about Charlton, and decided after reading yoyur link to his blog, to go and check him out. In my comment I posted on the article you reference of his above, I referred to an article of my own, “HBD As Public Policy: Questions For The True Believers”, in particular point number four:

    “4. Speaking of the Bell Curve, one of its “solutions” was to restrict the ability of single moms to breed on the dole. The book came out circa 1994, and in 1996, then President Bill Clinton, with the aid of a GOP led Congress, passed Welfare Reform, which made TBC’s suggestions along these lines a moot, at best, point. However, among the HBDers, this remains a hot topic – hence constant recourse to “eugenics” selective breeding that is state sponsored and/or enforced. The HBDers say that the problem is that the dumb are outbreeding the smart, and that one way to address this is to find ways to curtail the former’s ability to breed.

    But aside from the facts I’ve noted above, what the HBDers never address is the fact that the Smart White People are dwindling in numbers, and they haven’t figured out how to deal with this. Some of them make passing allusions to things like “affordable family formation”, but the real deal is the fact that they haven’t figured out how to convince Smart White Women, to forego the elite university experience, the high prestige career experience, the Sex And The City experience, and be cool with popping out no less than three kids, starting around age 21 or so, with Jeremy the STEM Guy. Because even if they could get the dumb “NAMs” (Non-Asian Minority; a euphemism for Black and Brown/Hispanic people) to breed considerably less than they do, it still wouldn’t address what I’m talking about here. Simply put, there are enough Smart White People to go around. But the HBDers, for whatever reason, simply haven’t addressed this. And, put all that together with the documented fact that no state has ever been successful in getting its so-called better sections, however one may define them, into breeding MORE. They’ve been successful in getting them to breed LESS, but not MORE. No society has been able to pull this off. Not. A. Single. One. History isn’t on the HBDers side here. How do they explain this, and what is it about their plan, assuming they have one or two, that’s markedly different?”

    You can read my post in full here:
    http://obsidianraw.bravejournal.com/entry/60301

    Wondering what your response is in light of Charton’s post.

    Holla back

    O.

    • Foseti says:

      Obsidian, I think you’re probably right that the problem is not solvable using liberal techniques. I don’t think this makes HBDers incorrect. The fact that it’s not easily solved doesn’t mean that it’s not a problem. The human race is screwed if intelligent people breed less than unintelligent people. I think the human race is probably screwed.

      • Obsidian says:

        Foseti,
        The issue I’m pointing to in my post excerpt is quite clear to get; even you can do it, LOL. And that’s simply this:

        WHY haven’t HBDers been talking about ways to increase the Smart Fraction of White Folks? I say it’s because they don’t want to face some very inconvenient truths, among them being, that they simply cannot convince young, nubile, smart and pretty White Women with options, to have 2.5 kids with Jeremy the STEM Guy, in her early 20s. That’s why. And as we recently discussed in the hypothetical (and quite possibly real) scenario involving your son, many of the guys in this cohort simply don’t have GAME.

        So, they – you – are screwed. Pardon the pun.

        Holla back

        O.

      • Foseti says:

        As I said, I pretty much agree with you. Though I’d add that you’re screwed as well. The world’s wealth is not created by idiots.

        I’d be happy to talk about ways to raise the birth rates of intelligent people, but I don’t know of any that work. I linked to some efforts by Singapore to raise the birth rate among the intelligent, but the efforts have failed.

      • josh says:

        “Not. A. Single. One.”

        http://www.amazon.com/Farewell-Alms-Brief-Economic-History/dp/0691121354

        Also, I don’t see why the white population of the world needs to increase. It’s higher than it has ever been before.

      • Obsidian says:

        Hi Foseti,
        Replies below:

        F: As I said, I pretty much agree with you. Though I’d add that you’re screwed as well. The world’s wealth is not created by idiots.

        O: Yea, but here’s the problem: I’m not the one obsessing over things like dysgenics and eugenics – guys like YOU, are. It’s simply not an issue for me, because I have Game and can always assure that I’ll be around in one form or another, Black and Proud. 🙂

        F: I’d be happy to talk about ways to raise the birth rates of intelligent people, but I don’t know of any that work. I linked to some efforts by Singapore to raise the birth rate among the intelligent, but the efforts have failed.

        O: Yes, and so has Stalin’s Russia, and Hitler’s Germany, and so on and so forth. In short, every nation that has tried such a thing, has failed. Miserably. The only thing the state is good at in this regard is reducing its birthrate – or to coin a phrase, to “abolish itself”.

        Put that with the fact that a considerable number of guys like yourself is simply incapable of learning and then employing Game to win the sexual attraction of mates, and well, there you go. I suspect an interesting exhibit will be seen at the Smithsonian circa 2050: “The Late Great White Guy”…

        Holla back

        O.

      • Foseti says:

        If everyone in the country has an IQ of 80, how exactly is game going to help you?

      • Obsidian says:

        Hi Foseti,
        You said:
        “If everyone in the country has an IQ of 80, how exactly is game going to help you?”

        O: LOL! Nice dodge, but no cigar. By you and everyone on the HBD side of the ball, it ain’t the low IQ folk who are having trouble getting the ladies to drop the panties and spread em – its guys like you. Let’s try this again, shall we?

        Smart White folk are dwindling, in large part because Jeremey the STEM Guy can’t convince Amy and Rachel to forego the Sex and The City lifestyle of which a big part is riding the Alpha cock carousel as long as they can. This greatly reduces the birthrate.

        Jeremy CAN’T learn Game, and in a time and age where what he offers isn’t in high demand by the ladies, he’s basically screwed. Pardon the pun.

        HBD in action, Foseti – don’t you just love it? 😉

        Holla back – stay focused this time, hmm?

        O.

    • josh says:

      Also, a huge amount of what women do is empowerment make-work. Fix the government, a lot of this stuff disappears and marriage looks a lot more attractive.

  2. RS says:

    > History isn’t on the HBDers side here. How do they explain this, and what is it about their plan, assuming they have one or two, that’s markedly different?

    Well, my society would be significantly illiberal. If you were a good-stock babe who wanted to do Sex & the City, you might face near-‘confiscatory’ tax rates — too bad, so sad. If you can and will bear that tax burden, fine — you’ll be contributing by doing so. Aside from dealing in money, I could also create artificial scarcity in certain luxury goods, or jobs, and create incentives that way. People would deal with it, because liberal axioms would be in relative abeyance. I would use education and mass media to inculcate the values of future collective thriving, which are commonplace in all traditional societies. Human nature admits of these values — or, it can and will admit. You just have to uninstall Sex & the City (in large part, not in whole) and install the other stuff.

    The new incentives in Russia have clearly worked swimmingly. By that I don’t mean that the total fertility rate is looking great in an absolute sense — I just mean that it moved a lot in response to not-so-ungodly amounts of incentive.

    People will respond to these incentives — you just have to be robust about it, not stick to weak-tea incentives like they have usually tried in Western Europe. It’s a little easier to get Russians to respond… compared to Belgians, or Swiss, they are poor, don’t like to work, and are naturally a little more attentive to collective goals and the chain of the generations, and less attentive to keeping up with the Joneses. Getting Taiwanese to respond would be still more difficult, compared to Belgians. Malthusian conflict was over the long-term past a bit more likely to be resolved by bloodshed in Russia, whereas in Belgium (or moreso, Japan) it was a bit more apt to be resolved by peaceful, lawful economic competition (ie keeping up w/ Joneses), with the losers getting stuck with starvation/infection. (You need more and better nutrition for optimum immune system function than you need for keeping body and soul together.)

    Illiberality can be moderate and balanced. Take Franco. He was very illiberal starting out (like the other side, he executed on the order of 100,000 civvies). But his later methods were like this: get a letter from a Catholic priest if you want a shot at a job from X set of desirable jobs. In other words he used robust, but not cruel, force to make Spain Catholic.

    Maybe his regime could have survived in most world contexts. In reality, it just so happened that Hitler had recently poured out ruin upon authoritarianism and rightism. And there were other unfavorable circumstances. The ultimate disastrousness of Western left-liberalism was not yet apparent. So Franco and friends were not able to transfer power to a new king and court. They also ought to have set up a process by which the king could be impeached in rare cases.

  3. RS says:

    > (like the other side, he executed on the order of 100,000 civvies)

    Maybe not all civvies, actually. Civvies plus disarmed fighters.

  4. dearieme says:

    The US always had a desire to dismantle the British and French Empires, but seemed quite untempted to try to do the same for the Russian/Soviet Empire. I assume it’s cultural: the British and French assembled theirs using ships, the Russians and Americans using horses.

  5. RS says:

    I think the end of the British Empire had a big relationship to radical liberalism’s effects on fertility:

    http://www.newamerica.net/publications/articles/2006/the_return_of_patriarchy

    I have heard, from another source than the above, that it was after the Boer war that influential persons began to feel that the empire was beginning to compete with the security of the metropole. Clearly, the intransigent Boers provided a stimulus to this feeling — but it was also 20-22 years since fertility had begun dropping quite precipitously in 1878 or 1880. I can’t find those numbers right now, but I’ve examined a graph of them carefully in the past.

  6. james wilson says:

    As Bruce Charlton has written, clever sillies–those very intelligent people with those incredibly bad ideas–are not reproducing, further proof that they are mal-adapted. This is not a problem, this is a solution.

  7. RS says:

    Foseti, random comment — you might enjoy this blog of Mr Thrasymachus of Mangan’s and UR, if you haven’t seen it. I got a kick out of it.

    http://thetraitorsamongus.blogspot.com

  8. tschafer says:

    With all due respect, Obsidian, why don’t you find something new to say? Your comments on various websites always amount to the same thing. You’re obviously a fairly intelligent guy – don’t you ever get tired of harping on that one note?

    Find something fresh to say. Even you can do it. LOL.

    • Obsidian says:

      Hi T,
      Sure! As soon as Foseti and the rest of the HBD crowd changes their one string guitars, I’ll change mine. Why hate on me for saying what I say, but you have no problem with them saying the same shit every single day? Hypocritical a bit much, hmm?

      O.

  9. Yalc says:

    I love Obsidian’s claim that he’ll continue ‘in one form or another’ when Foseti is the one with children and Obsidian isn’t.

    • Obsidian says:

      Hi Yalc,
      My personal life one way or another is irrelevant, since I rarely discuss such things online. Moreover, whether I had kids or not, the fact remains that Smart White folks are indeed disappearing. So if you HBD types really wanna do something useful, you need to stop hating on O and get some Game, LOL.

      Oh wait, HBD precludes many of you from doing that…

      O.

  10. podard says:

    Does anyone know how to reconcile the alleged dysgenic drop in global IQ (as low-IQ people breed more and more, and high-IQ people less and less) with the Flynn effect, which posits (and as far as I can tell correctly) that global IQ is actually rising? Me, I’m baffled.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: