Friday, January 18, 2013

Odds and Ends

You can ignore race, but the government won't ignore yours under Affirmative Action. 

You can ignore race, but you can't make the realities go away.

You imagine that if we stopped grouping people by race the differences would cease to matter. But linguistic reforms can't make distinct sets of inherited traits disappear or go unnoticed.

Anything systematically derided by professional intellectuals and pseudo-intellectuals as being "merely a social construct" represents something whose underlying objective realities pose a threat to the socially constructed egalitarian zeitgeist.

"Racism" is a social construction, because if people in society stopped believing in/exhibiting racism (however defined), it wouldn't exist. Race isn't a social construction but is instead a genetic construction, because racial traits such as skin pigmentation exist independent of any belief in denial of them.

People who idealize equality and deny the existence of biologically objective racial variation are just as illogical, dishonest, and politically motivated as those who idealize one race as being inherently superior to all others. Standing athwart of race idealism of all sorts is cold, hard race realism -- the scientific approach, for those willing to follow the truth wherever it may lead.

If Homo Sapiens were made up of a single race, then there would be no such thing as racial bigotry. If the localized genetic variations due to geography were meaningless, then bone marrow registries could arbitrarily match European-descended recipients to African-descended donors (and vice versa) without putting patients' health at risk (due to the immune system's tendency to reject materials obtained from people of a different race). Your own body discriminates based on race.  Your immune system is "racist."  And as studies of infants suggest, so is your brain.

The dogmatic egalitarian's goal in any argument is to provoke you into embodying a stereotype that can be dismissed with a pre-packaged, self-righteous sneer.

I have a great deal less disdain for the overtly moralistic opponents of recognizing racial distinctions than I do for the sophists who corrupt science and language to try to make any honest discussion of race impossible.

You can concoct as many different ad-hoc historical narratives as there are multiracial countries in the world to try to explain how racial orderings in each one somehow always end up the same as everywhere else.  Or you can try employing Occam's razor. The single premise of biological differences helps explain patterns of behaviors consistently observed among biologically distinct types of humans everywhere.

It would have been obvious to both whites who first encountered blacks and blacks who first encountered whites that at least two distinct types of humans exist bearing distinct characteristics from head to toe. Their minds formed a concept of that before the concept got expressed through language.  One need not know how many groups of humans with shared phenotypes exist to know that some do.

Racial discrimination against blacks is taboo and exists incidentally. Racial discrimination against whites is institutionalized and universalized (by government-mandated Affirmative Action). 

Blacks are about 2% of the crowd at a typical baseball game. But bombastic, race-card-playing black guys are about 10 times that proportion of baseball analysts on TV, thanks to Affirmative Action. It's the politically correct duty of white baseball fans to suffer these ill-qualified Diversity tokens.

Whites are the only racial group that is stereotyped and vilified as "privileged" even though Asians and Jews in the U.S. have the most wealth and power per capita. Whites are the only race that is exploited institutionally on the basis of their induced collective guilt and discriminated against institutionally at universities and workplaces, excluded from all definitions of forced "diversity."

Government programs, controls, and takeovers are called "democratization" even if the majority opposes them. Affirmative Action has persisted in states where direct democracy citizen initiatives have banned it. "Democratizers" don't believe in democracy.

The principle of freedom of association entails the freedom of disassociation. That some Somali Muslim decides to pop out 10 kids and the UN deems them "refugees" from anarchy, does not give her or her kids a positive right to claim citizenship in Sweden or the United States or any other nation whose inhabitants value immigration policies that select for people with education, skills, and cultural compatibility. 

Immigration restrictions are defensive. The citizens of a libertarian nation surrounded by Islamic jihadists would be acting rationally to defend their lives and property by delegating authority to an institution that kept them out. Since the net effect of immigration is dysgenic and is corrosive of the libertarian polity, zero immigration would be preferable to indiscriminately open immigration. 

World Public Opinion: 61% of Egyptians approve of attacks on Americans. Pew Research (2010): 82% of Egyptian Muslims favor stoning adulterers; 84% of Egyptian Muslims support the death penalty for leaving Islam. 78% of British Muslims support punishing people who publish cartoons featuring Mohammed; 68% percent support the arrest and prosecution of people who "insult Islam." Fortunately for Coughlan and other Islamophiles, stupid American baseball-cap-wearing rednecks tolerate being mocked.

Blacks control the White House, many large cities, school districts, Congressional districts, etc. They have a lot more political power than Asians but a lot less academic and economic success. Black political power does blacks no good, as Walter Williams has noted, and does the country no good. Blacks behaved less violently when they had less political power in the 1950s.

68.5% of all murders, rapes, robberies, and assaults in New York City are committed by blacks (City Journal).

A happy antinatalist isn't an oxymoron per se, but any antinatalist who exuded happiness would be working at cross purposes with promoting the ideology.

The entitlement/dependency mentality of seniors is a sad thing to observe. They become like children all over again, demanding goodies and pouting if they don't get their way.

Waiting until middle age to reproduce is dysgenic. "Older men are more likely than young ones to father a child who develops autism or schizophrenia, because of random mutations that become more numerous with advancing paternal age, scientists reported on Wednesday...The risk of chromosomal abnormalities, like Down syndrome, increases for older mothers ,but when it comes to some complex developmental and psychiatric problems, the lion’s share of the genetic risk originates in the sperm" (New York Times).

On Atheism+ adherents: I think their prescriptive package deal of social, sexual, and racial equality is their religion. Theirs is a full-on revolt against Darwinism. They just happen not to be revolting in the name of a God.

On anarcho-capitalists: It's a shame that anyone with some intellectual capacity would waste it on constructing the floating abstraction that is the libertarian version of the same false utopia Marx promised.

On Objectivism: If you boil Objectivism down to reality, reason, self-interestedness, and freedom, then I am an adherent of that philosohical framework. But the term "Objectivism" denotes a package deal containing Ayn Rand's idealistic and dogmatic extrapolations from said framework.

Your use of statistics shows conclusively that you put together this video confusedly. Now why don't you run some numbers on a question that would actually reveal something interesting about our respective subscriber bases? What percentage of EvoGen's subscribers correctly recognized that he had been misapplying the concept of heritability before he finally admitted it? And what percentage of mine did?

EvoGen will forever be tormented whenever he encounters the term "heritability." His mind will automatically associate it with the humiliating experience of being publicly corrected by two of the people in this world he hates most.

Africans' IQ scores rise from averages of 70-80 in their homelands to about 85 in Western countries. The black IQ average in the U.S. has been about 85 for decades and shows no signs of improving versus a white average of 100. IQ is about 75% heritable in the U.S. The durable 15-point black/white gap is similarly attributable to inherited biological differences between blacks and whites, including differences extending to brain size, shape, and structure.

I support "a" state, not "the" state.

Things will get worse over the course of the next generation. The cultural brainwashing is too powerful. And the demographic trends are already set in motion. But looking out 50, 60 years, when we might still be around, advances in biotechnology and genetic engineering could help usher in a new dawn for humanity that sends us in a direction we can't now predict.

Sunday, January 13, 2013

Automotive Realism

A car's performance can be explained solely by environmental factors.   These factors include road condition, altitude, and quality of fuel.  The fastest sports cars tend to receive better care by their wealthier owners, are more likely to get premium fuel, and are more likely to get access to the fast lane based solely on their appearance.  Society perceives sports cars as fast, so they are more likely to be yielded the right of way.  

It's society's fault that sports cars go faster than minivans and sedans.  The they are all made from the same materials, even if they look different.  If you identify all the elements contained within a car, then chemically, there is more variation within car types than between them.

If all car types had the same social standing and had access to the same resources, they'd go equally as fast.  To suggest otherwise is automotive racism!