Randoms of the past week

I’m back from a week of acting like an European public servant. It’s a tough life.

Richard Hoste reviews Richard Lynn’s new book. The review concludes:

So how will this nation of a billion people [i.e. China] treat the rest of the world after it’s raised its IQ to 150+? Lynn might be too optimistic here. He believes the Chinese will colonize the world and try to improve the IQs and living standards of their subjects. The Europeans will be kept around for their biological uniqueness and admired for their cultural accomplishments, the way that the Romans subjugated the Greeks but appreciated their philosophy and art. If the Chinese decide that the Europeans should be preserved they’d be doing more for them than whites are currently doing for themselves. A global eugenic superstate led by by the Chinese will be the “end of history.”

Lynn’s forecasts the next 100 years with a stone-cold detachment. The first government to utilize the power of biotechnology will take over the world. Thanks to third world immigration and egalitarianism, the decline of the West seems inevitable and eugenic policies unlikely. The future of humanity being in the hands of the dictators in Beijing may not be the most comforting idea in the world, but at least the reader of Eugenics may be convinced that intelligence and civilization will continue somewhere.

I’ve argued before that the free trade types radically underestimate the costs of unemployment (i.e. assume that it’s basically zero). Science begs to differ, it has found "that unemployment increases the risk of premature mortality by 63 per cent." But if we have lots of immigration, the chalupas will be really cheap, so we’ve got that going for us. Also, apparently high IQ immigrants are better than low IQ ones.

In the comments, Handle has some more thoughts on Charles Murray’s lecture, which he believes make "an interesting case for ‘The Full Moldbug’ Reactionary Argument."

It would be really fun to get Sonic Charmer and me in a room together to talk about this stuff.

Vox and I have the same personality type and it’s quite rare.

Vladimir took some heat after for his post on passivity. He responds here. First, when I read his post, I was reminded of Moldbug’s suggestion that you vote for whoever the newspaper tells you to vote for. That still seems like a decent idea, if for some reason you decide to vote. Second, though I’m not religious, I’m not anti-religious. Those of us that are not religious need to find our own ways to read writings by religious people. After all, until about 50 years ago, they were the only ones writing – if you can’t read their writing, you’re missing out on the last couple thousand years of human history.

Aretae summarizes his blog in one post.

Vladimir on modern policing.

Instead of getting arrested for protesting in favor of DC statehood, DC’s elected officials would make a better case if they spent their time not being corrupt. Just sayin’

OneSTDV notes that liberals are blind to conservative opinion. It’s particularly true with respect to abortion.

Kemba Walker has read one book in his life, and guess what sort of book it is.

About three years after a housing crisis caused by excessive borrowing due to ridiculously low interest rates, Matthew Yglesias believes that the US government should borrow more because the rates are really low. Occasionally, one can’t help but conclude that people deserve all the bad things they get.

The 20 different types of rape and some old words.

Don’t miss this informercial.

Richard Epstein:

In practice—and, increasingly, in legal theory—government officials have been given unprecedented ability to make exceptions to the law, both in enforcing it and in respecting the rights granted under it. Indeed, the past year has seen two of the most enormous pieces of legislation in U.S. history—the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act and the Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act—make the imbalance far worse. Both laws seek to dramatically transform vast swaths of the American economy; both give enormous power to the government to bring about these transformations. And yet both laws are stunningly silent on exactly how these overhauls are to take place. The vague language of these statutes delegates much blanket authority to government officials who will, effectively, make the rules up as they go along.

Advertisements

16 Responses to Randoms of the past week

  1. aretae says:

    Unemployment sucks. We all agree. So it’s especially important to eliminate all the things the government does to decrease employment. Minimum Wage, licensing restrictions, IP, pro-corporate, anti-self-employment law.

    Having to take orders from others is almost as bad.

  2. Svigor says:

    I’m an INTJ too. They are the rarest personality type, but not that rare. E.g., 135+ IQs are more rare.

    I normally don’t believe in this popular psychology stuff but that description is pretty damned accurate for me. Not the “your world is black and white” thing, though. I’m a “shades of grey” or “relativist” type in a lot of ways. You know, one man’s freedom fighter? But the rest of it is perfectly accurate.

  3. Tschafer says:

    I’m still trying to figure out what kind of person thinks that having to take orders from someone else is as bad as unemployment. This seems absurd, as long as we’re talking about orders that are neither unreasonable or immoral.

    • trewq says:

      Goony Libertarians.

    • Samson says:

      He said taking orders from others is *almost* as bad. That might still be hyperbole, but there’s no question that taking orders is generally emasculating and dehumanizing, and any man ought to chafe at it. Being an employee is really, really awful.

  4. Rob says:

    A highly unscientific analysis of the Personality test you linked to is here –> https://docs.google.com/document/pub?id=1yECVZJ6Qcyhx6_UdeC9Ig-lx55DSotC4qYovwIdluUs

    Found the source code online, and did a quick reverse engineering. Some of it is pretty smart, some is … less smart.

    • Rob says:

      N.B. I am not an expert on Myers-Briggs, or Psychometrics, or… well, much of anything. The test was just bizarre enough that I had to look into it.

    • Foseti says:

      Interesting. Frankly, I thought it was pretty odd.

      • Handle says:

        It turns out I’m INTJ (or close) as well. I took this test. I scored pretty close to the mean between E and I, and J and P though, so I’m a (E/I)NT(J/P).

      • Foseti says:

        I’m close to the S/N border.

      • Cerberus says:

        While INTJ’s (like me as well) may be rare among the population as a whole, we can expect them to be greatly overrepresented here. One of the key aspects of being an INTJ is being able and willing to reject common thought if it does not agree with our own judgement. This is difficult for most, and a prerequisite for being a reactionary.

  5. Handle says:

    In re: Passivism / Renunciation:

    I’m just not able to adopt this mindset. I think we should try to defeat our enemies, dispossess them of power, and and do what is optimal to achieve maximum influence over the future conditions of our posterity. Would abandon the notion of the duty to protect the welfare of your progeny in the face of danger?

    In re: Religious thought:

    I think what you’re getting at is that one should try and develop more than a mere “understanding” of how a religious person thinks, and achieve a capability to simulate their perspective in your own mind.

    I’m a religious person myself, and I’d qualify this by saying there are multiple ways of thinking religiously, and two nominally Abrahamic Monotheistic people can find each other’s attitudes to be quite incompatible.

    The “True Believer” Jihadist is a case in point. Lots of people can’t quite wrap their secular, rational, peaceful Western minds around such uncompromising and irreconcilable fury and hatred and God-drenched eagerness to die as their ultimate form of bliss and nirvana.

    But it’s real, and it wants everything you love to die.

    I think one has to be genuinely religious to truly appreciate the danger of other religious people when they embrace the dark side of the force. Some Rabbi once said that religion was like a well in the desert, to drink from in order to sustain and enrich our lives while walking treacherous paths, but that also, one ought to be careful not to fall in, because you can drown in too much of it.

    To most modern secular types, they see religiousness as either a very foreign and alien mental state, or as childish and immature, or backwards and ignorant, or essentially harmless, or “superficial or peripheral” to the “core equal humanity in everyone” or something.

    They really don’t know what it’s all about, and what the spectrum of possible human experiences, attitudes, believes, motivations, and so forth that it implies.

    But good, decent, and compassionate religious people nevertheless well know about the potential for extremism, what it meant by a “cult”, and “drowning” in the potential for suicidal or murderous insanity, and have a strong instinct in the recognition of such. Religious people can see a crazy death-cult for what it is – a huge danger which justifies a strong defense.

  6. RS says:

    > A global eugenic superstate led by by the Chinese will be the “end of history.”

    Unlike the potential for liberal democracy to end ‘history’ in this sense (can’t roll my eyes enough – what it’s doing is turning everything into S. Africa)…….. making everyone’s IQ 150+ might indeed end warfare. I would say it seems fairly likely.

    I wonder how Lynn thinks China is going to conquer everything. My guess is that there really is no technological answer to the nuclear missile – probably – so China basically isn’t going to conquer any nuclear armed countries. Western Europe will soon have serious problems, but even if the problems last a really long time, it will still have ICBMs. So what are you going to conquer it with? Of course I’m not totally ruling out some revolution in fundamental physics that changes everything, I just don’t think it’s all that likely.

  7. Tschafer says:

    I really like that Jihad rap song;

    “Send me a cruise like Maa’lam Adam al Ansari
    And send me a couple of tons like Zarqawi
    And send me a drone like Abu Laith al Libi
    And Special Forces like Saleh Ali Nabhani

    Send me all four and send me much much more…”

    I absolutely agree with you with regard to passivism, Handle. As I’ve noted before, when Moldbug is wrong, he’s REALLY wrong…

    No problem, dude!

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: