HBD on its own really is Nazi
June 27, 2014 § 71 Comments
The fact that there are basic and intractable differences between the races is as obvious as it is politically incorrect. One only has to look at the ethnic makeup of a professional sports team and a successful technology company to get the point. The notion that these differences only exist because of oppression by evil white racists, and that the terrible affront of substantive racial differences can be remedied if we get even more aggressive with even more comprehensive programs of mandatory tolerance, is well past its sell-by date.
Liberalism only functions at all because it implicitly divides humanity into the übermensch and the üntermensch: the free and equal superman, self-created through reason and will, and the subhuman oppressor that is interfering with the emergence of the free and equal new man. The free and equal new man is supposed to be politically emancipated from the chains of history, tradition, aristocracy, hierarchy, unchosen obligations, nature, and nature’s God. But things keep getting in his way, and that requires a Solution.
If you take liberalism and force it to acknowledge the truth that racial differences are real and intractable, the Solution necessarily takes on a racial dimension. It has to be a eugenic Solution; a Final Solution.
Zippy Catholic 
What do you mean by it being really Nazi “on its own”? It seems like it’s really Nazi with liberalism.
I mean, your entire first comment seems to illustrate that you believe in HBD. You just don’t think it makes a difference when talking about the dignity of the individual human person, which is absolutely true. Unless you have a totally different definition of HBD you’re using?
malcolmthecynic:
HBD (as far as I can tell) is an inherently modernist, darwinian take on racial differences. It is right there in the name.
IOW, HBD just is liberalism mugged by the reality of racial differences.
Agreed.
I suppose some folks might be inclined at first brush to contend that HBD is nothing but (ahem) an acknowledgement of the existence of intractable racial differences; that HBD itself is metaphysically neutral (ahem).
I am not so inclined myself though.
As I have mentioned on this blog before, the concept that “people are different” is a brute fact. The idea of ‘race’ as used by eugenicists/HBD adherents/etc. is rather less solid.
For example, modernist theories of race wish to classify the Aka and the Dinka as well as both the Chopi and the Hausa all as ‘Black’ despite huge variations in height, build, and skin color (and the fact that there are pacific islanders darker than any African ethnicity). Likewise the Han, Mongols, Tatars, Kazakh, Yamato, and Yakuts are all ‘Asians’ – again ignoring the rather huge differences in height, build, skin color, etc.
At the same time many of these sorts can be counted upon to attempt to divine a dividing line between a blonde, blue-eyed, fair-skinned man or woman from Iran and one from Russia, and one from Germany – a short, slight, pale-skinned, freckled redhead with green eyes with the last name O’Reilly is, to this group, vastly different than a short, slight, pale-skinned, freckled redhead with green eyes with the last name Goldberg – in each of these cases the ‘race realist’ will tell you some of these people are White and some are not, regardless of *similarities* in skin color, height, build, etc.
This is far too weird an idea to stand up to too much scrutiny.
If we wish to use rather large descriptors to lump people together in the hopes correlations might be generated, what about, oh, religious groups? Only Sephardic Jews have better overall academic success than Catholics – does this mean that people seeking academic success should convert to Judaism or Catholicism?
Married people live longer, healthier lives, make more money, have more sex. Obviously – marriage is good. Divorced people, though, are poorer, sicker, and die younger. So – divorce is bad.
Devout Catholics have the lowest rate of divorce – will this prompt any HBD promoters to become a devout Catholic?
It could be wrong, but I’ve always liked Steve Sailer’s definition of race: one big extended family.
As Zippy said elsewhere, Zero Group Differences is a lie but that lie is the only thing separating the liberal from the Nazi.
@ King Richard
While I disagree with HBD, race is an extremely complicated issue. It’s not as simplistic as left-liberals say it is(race is nothing) or as simplistic as HBD-types say it is(race is everything).
I would say genetics would make the race issue easier to discern but it doesn’t do that either. They have found DNA evidence showing that two distinct and mutually isolated groups of Mexican Indians are more distinct from each other than Europeans are to Asians. Genetic drift can do strange things, let alone genetic mimicry(like the Ainu who look white but are not even Caucasian).
As for the Jews, they were a hybrid population of Europeans and Middle-Easterners who from years of genetic isolations and drift have become distinct from both populations.
What matters is an ethnic group’s gestalt because the whole is greater than the sum of the parts that make up the ethny.
I think the traditional way to view race was not based in genetics or appearance but in ancestry.
Beefy,
I also seems to make us think about the wrong sorts of things We have stopped talking about virtue and character and instead speak of IQ and education levels. When I meet a stranger what is more important to me, his IQ or his honesty? While HBD types are obsessing over perhaps one standard deviation between large, ill-defined groups they are not talking about fixing culture or improving government.
I encounter this more directly – I want to discuss the sinful nature of usury-based economies and outsiders keep telling me the real question is the gender pay gap.
No – it isn’t.
I try to point out that Democracy is an inherently self-destructive system that must result in at best collapse and others tell me the most crucial political issue of the day is some election.
No – it isn’t.
And here are the neoreactionaries who ostensibly believe that the ideological underpinnings of the modern world are inherently defective and leading to a deeply dysfunctional society; and then the HBD elements tell me that a 7 point difference in IQ Means Something.
No – it doesn’t.
One of the great triumphs of Modernism is that its core assumptions are so pervasive that many who claim to oppose it don’t even realize they have simply formed a new subset
KR:
“Lumping” by religious group is perfectly valid too, but it deals with different characteristics. There are Catholics of every race, for example, but that doesn’t undermine the fact that there are general differences between races too.
And lack of a perfectly rigorous and consistently applied classification scheme doesn’t call into question racial differences either. There were different kinds of animals before Carolus Linnaeus was born.
Svar,
Not too long ago I ran into a young man that was furiously angry at a particular branch of Protestantism. His fury was stoked because this small group does not accept the theory of evolution.
“Those fools!” he yelled, fists clenched,
“And their poor children! If you don’t believe in the theory of evolution you simply can’t compete in the world! They are blinded and crippled by their ignorance!”
I calmed him and, having had this conversation before, asked him,
“Do you need to understand the theory of evolution in order to drive a car?”
He laughed,
“Of course not!”
“Do you need to understand the theory of evolution in order to feed a child?”
“Well,” he said, “to understand nutri-”
“A simple yes or no will do”
“well, – then no”
And I went on for a while until he agreed that unless you are in a very narrow range of professions you need not know that the theory of evolution exists in order to thrive.
Then I asked him,
“Can you state the theory of evolution in simple terms?”
“Well,” he said, “Not really. it is fairly complicated. It is all about genetics, and survival of the fittest, and”
I interrupted him again,
“I was a moderator on Talk.Origins on Usenet more than 20 years ago and I assure you, the theory of evolution can be stated very simply. Can you do it?”
He couldn’t, so I told him the actual theory of evolution, which he admitted he had never heard before.
Being true doesn’t necessarily make something important or, more directly, that it is necessarily important to you.
Like I said, “People are different” is obviously true.
While HBD types are obsessing over perhaps one standard deviation between large, ill-defined groups they are not talking about fixing culture or improving government.
They will tell you that some races aren’t capable of improving their culture and government beyond a certain level due to being r-selected/short term time preferences, etc., all of which are allegedly genetically determined.
I don’t claim to know where the nature/nurture divide is, but I don’t think its just coincidence that there aren’t any starting “white” cornerbacks in the NFL, or that East Africans usually win marathons. I’m willing to accept that the racial lines we draw aren’t entirely useless. The real question is, as a wise man once asked “what is to be done?”
KR, too be honest, I can’t tell if we’re in agreement or not. It seems like we are.
As for IQ and education, that is a Manosphere/HBD sperg obsession. They are not the same thing as intellect or cunning and will never be as valued as the latter.
Honor, loyalty, and courage are far more important that IQ and education.
CJ, Svar,
It appears we are in agreement. As used by Moderns ‘race’ appears to be a tool to allow those using it to avoid deep thought; thinking of people as a member of a defined group is far easier than evaluating and judging them for who and what they are.
Especially when that someone is yourself.
Judging others on ‘average group IQ’ and such is also much easier than evaluating and judging them for their individual actions and their character.
Especially when that someone is yourself.
Just out of curiosity, what is the theory of evolution in simple terms?
Scott W:
I laughed out loud when KR said that. There is no theory of evolution.
As I said in another thread, intractable group differences in, say, IQ are really only a problem under liberalism. If HBD became widely accepted, it would render much of our public education policy nonsensical. Educate youths as far as their intelligence will take them, sure. The more important teachings, both for this life and the next, are focused on virtue and piety. Liberals won’t allow Christian piety to breach the walls of public education so they focus on liberal piety instead.
Judging others on ‘average group IQ’ and such is also much easier than evaluating and judging them for their individual actions and their character.
Not every situation allows for the development of a fine judgment of an individual’s actions and character. When it’s possible, yes, but when not, the results of pattern-matching will have to suffice.
Peter Blood:
Exactly right. Information is not free. Getting to know individuals takes an investment of time and effort. The ‘cost’ (in both monetary and non-monetary terms) of understanding an individual increases exponentially as we attempt to comprehensively fill in the ‘gaps’ (ahem).
Stereotypes are inevitable.
[…] Source: Zippy Catholic […]
“I suppose some folks might be inclined at first brush to contend that HBD is nothing but (ahem) an acknowledgement of the existence of intractable racial differences; that HBD itself is metaphysically neutral (ahem).
I am not so inclined myself though.”
This gets to the root of where some of the things you write conflict with the way I and perhaps others think. When you write about HBD or “neoreaction” or the “patchwork” or whatever concept you are writing about you are, it seems to me, thinking and writing not just about that particular concept or idea; but, about all the people who hold that idea, the other ideas they generally hold, and other ideas that are generally associated with that idea.
In my humble opinion this association of ideas with movements muddles conversation. If one wants to talk about the claim that there are biological differences across races there should be a word to describe this claim. I thought HBD was this word; but, if it is really something more, a word describing a whole movement or a whole worldview well now I need a different word that is limited to just the idea. Or do you think that is not possible?
Kevin Nowell:
Most modern people have this notion that it is possible to talk about some interesting and complex aspect of reality without ‘importing’ all sorts of implicit and assumed metaphysical baggage, if you will.
But it isn’t.
So, then, we can’t talk about anything without talking about everything.
That isn’t what I said though.
For example, modernist theories of race wish to classify the Aka and the Dinka as well as both the Chopi and the Hausa all as ‘Black’ despite huge variations in height, build, and skin color (and the fact that there are pacific islanders darker than any African ethnicity). Likewise the Han, Mongols, Tatars, Kazakh, Yamato, and Yakuts are all ‘Asians’ – again ignoring the rather huge differences in height, build, skin color, etc.
Vox Day cited a study showing diversity even within the Han based on cultural practices that may have entrenched group differences between factions within the larger Han group. Fascinating stuff, and obviously going on appearance alone is insufficient as Ashkenazim are allegedly an average of 15 IQ points higher than than “white Europeans” who happen to look just like them.
HBD is really just a way to get the camel’s nose into the tent. By forcing them to acknowledge the reality of group differences, liberalism will take a major blow. Not strong enough to defeat it, but enough to force it along into its uglier next stage which will cause many people of good will to abandon it.
I think VD is onto something with his emphasis on eucivic vs dyscivic genetic drift and how culture may play a large and poorly understood role in how different groups adapt at a biological level. It’s interesting that if one looks at the Germans of 1AD, one finds a people quite similar to many modern black and hispanic groups in terms of suitability to living in a complex civilization. It took centuries of exposure to Greco-Roman civilization, centuries of warfare winnowing the population and Christianity to turn Germany into what it is today. A similar process is underway in other groups now.
Mike T:
Or not, as the case may be.
“It’s interesting that if one looks at the Germans of 1AD, one finds a people quite similar to many modern black and hispanic groups in terms of suitability to living in a complex civilization. It took centuries of exposure to Greco-Roman civilization, centuries of warfare winnowing the population and Christianity to turn Germany into what it is today.”
I think we need to make a distinction between primitives and barbarians. The Germans were barbaric but they were not primitive. They may not have had the greatest, most glorious civilization on the face of the planet and lacked refinement but they did have culture and they did practice monogamous marriage.
You could say the same about the Japanese or the Five Civilized Tribes before contact with Western Europeans. And of course, many groups had glorious civilizations and now live in hellholes(Middle-Easterners, North Africans, and Indians come to mind).
Talking about Hispanics is complicated. Looking back into their history, you can see that they had a Catholic Christian European based civilization(including with Mestizos and Indios) and while they were not as advanced as say the U.S. or Britain, not many countries were or are, including the rest of Europe, China or Japan.
Now we come to the Africans. Blacks have been in America for just as long as whites have and yet they have not reached the levels that natives and Hispanics have reached with the exception of the Mulatto upperclasses in New Orleans and the Caribbean. I personally have no definite as to why that is, but I do know that it is.
An ethny does not need to be prosperous to be respectable, just in-line with the Natural Law, which the Germans were(and even more so than the Romans in that period).
We live with HBD-awareness already and yet it hasn’t resulted in utopia. That is, our elites are overwhelmingly selected from high-IQ (as determined by test scores and proxies for test scores) groups. And yet, despite their supposed greater inclination to civic-mindedness and moral quality due to those giant brains, we aren’t getting a higher trust society or policy prescriptions that are socially useful. We aren’t even getting better news reporting, and journalism is almost entirely full of the kind of HBD-approved whites and Asians that are supposedly better at “maintaining society”.
Svar,
Here’s the post I referenced about the Han.
In defense of blacks, I would point out that Sub-Saharan Africa did not have the level of exposure to advanced civilizations that many other groups had. Riffing a bit on that post about the Han, the tendency of certain groups to practice polygyny in various forms probably played a role in promoting dyscivic tendencies over time. A few hundred years of exposure is probably not enough to change that.
I am also not sure I agree that the distinction between primitive and barbarian is that important. If you created a ghetto in ancient Rome occupied by German tribesmen, I bet you’d find a similar lack of respect for Roman law and culture as what you have exhibited by those in modern ghettos. It took a very long time before the Germans as a people could reach the point where a German enclave in a non-German city would likely be peaceful, productive residents not a liability for the non-Germans.
We live with HBD-awareness already and yet it hasn’t resulted in utopia.
You mean the same elite that is shocked that group differences continue to manifest themselves in hiring and education no matter how much overt discrimination they inflict? That sounds quite aware of group differences (HBD-awareness if you prefer)…
And yet, despite their supposed greater inclination to civic-mindedness and moral quality due to those giant brains, we aren’t getting a higher trust society or policy prescriptions that are socially useful.
It takes a certain level of raw intelligence to reach a certain level of stupid. That applies to all levels of stupidity and idiocy, including moral idiocy.
FWIW, I don’t think IQ is destiny. High IQ can be a handicap more pernicious than a very low IQ. One has to wonder how much black progress has been stymied by policy predicated upon the assumption that white and black people are fungible, rather than encouraging processes tailored to help blacks according to the factors most affecting them.
“In defense of blacks, I would point out that Sub-Saharan Africa did not have the level of exposure to advanced civilizations that many other groups had. ”
Well, the question is not that of Sub-saharan Africans but that of American blacks. They have had as much contact with an advanced civilization as the Five Civilized Tribes and now, even more so than the natives who are generally isolated from the mainstream.
“I am also not sure I agree that the distinction between primitive and barbarian is that important. If you created a ghetto in ancient Rome occupied by German tribesmen, I bet you’d find a similar lack of respect for Roman law and culture as what you have exhibited by those in modern ghettos.”
Of course.
” It took a very long time before the Germans as a people could reach the point where a German enclave in a non-German city would likely be peaceful, productive residents not a liability for the non-Germans.”
Not too long ago, in my homestate of Texas, they were seen as much as a liability as the Mexicans.
Even within a broad civilization, various cultures and ethnicities still have their clashes.
They aren’t shocked about those group differences when it comes to their jobs, neighborhoods and the .01 children they have. I look at what they are actually doing. HBDers just want the elites to admit the elites live like HBD has some validity.
I just don’t see how a bunch of careerists obsessed with power above all admitting group differences are among the ways they order their personal lives would bring about utopia. But HBDers sure seem to think that is all it will take. Since they are always on about how “awareness” is all that’s needed, just like the SWPLs who test high enough and are currently running everything into the ground.
Where I live is whitopia. Our infrastructure is a crumbling mess and our government is riddled with graft and corruption (from whites and East Asians, almost exclusively). Not so different to Detroit, actually worse because the disarray and general lack of civilized behavior is spread across multiple states, counties and cities.
And the people in charge of ruining it all are not affirmative action NAMs, and in most of the country they aren’t. Lois Lerner’s no NAM, but the typical government worker.
I just find HBD pointless. It’s not even serious about the science part, as anything interesting that diverges from the bio-determinist wing is handwaved, dismissed or otherwise blown off as irrelevant.
That isn’t what I said though.
I think there’s a fair point there though. Specifically:
If one wants to talk about the claim that there are biological differences across races there should be a word to describe this claim. I thought HBD was this word; but, if it is really something more, a word describing a whole movement or a whole worldview well now I need a different word that is limited to just the idea.
So, what word SHOULD we use when discussing the concept of biological differences between races?
There is no such thing as “a word limited to nothing but the idea”. Language and meaning don’t work that way, as much as positivists may believe or wish that they did. “Assume positivism is true, then tell me what I want to hear” is begging the question at a basic foundational level.
Point made. Still, do you think there is or can be a word that means “biological differences between various racial/ethnic groups?
malcolmthecynic:
I wouldn’t use the qualifier ‘biological’ because of its baggage. I don’t see what is wrong with the words “racial differences” to talk about racial differences.
“Not so different to Detroit, actually worse because the disarray and general lack of civilized behavior is spread across multiple states, counties and cities.”
I seriously doubt that a mostly white city in the PacNW is worse than Detroit. Maybe it’s as bad as Southern Europe or China even though I doubt that since the whites of the PacNW are mostly Northern European.
“So, what word SHOULD we use when discussing the concept of biological differences between races?”
What about phenotype and genotype?
“Racial differences” is no more difficult to type than “human biodiversity”, is composed of simpler and more generally understood words, and can be made into an acronym for the sake of compact typing just as easily.
What it doesn’t have is the propaganda value of a scientific sounding darwinian neologism. That is, the term “racial differences” doesn’t have the same metaphysical baggage as “human biodiversity”.
[…] I made the contention that “human biodiversity” is basically nazi or close kin to naziism, because national […]
This uninformed, repetitive, immature, and ill-considered slander is only going to work against you in the future. At some point you really are going to have to read an entire long-form post before offering your opinion.
Tell me, Mr. Informed Judge of Movements, what was your plan for getting the Catholic church to acknowledge racial differences in both morality and general intelligence, and their effects on religious practice, in a way that does NOT lead to the church becoming just another liberal enforcer of the destruction of natural authorities, in fact and in deed? If HBD leads to Naziism, has mainline Catholic Christianity showed any objection to Weimar Republicanism, and eventually Communism?
Other evil racist hatemongers have made the observations that certain tenets of Christianity may indeed not actually be accepted by people of certain intelligence levels. We haven’t moved from that to KILL ALL UNTERMENSCHEN AND JEWS because most serious HBDers have, in fact, dissociated themeselves from liberalism far earlier than most liberals, and are generally open to a peaceful seperation, which is currently happening now in furtive, byzantine, and expensive ways, rather than being straightforward, public, and honest.
The ones who have the greatest trouble with this are the ones who are still living in the Valley of the Shadow of Martin Luther King, Jr, and see all attempts at breaking with the respectable position as being irreconcilably lost (because there is no world outside of polite, “adult” company in their minds.)
You don’t need to have a theory about how morality should be enforced in order to understand morality.
Just because the church hasn’t created a comprehensive list of every kind of sinful behavior (*cough cough* positivism *cough cough*) doesn’t mean that nothing the church hasn’t explicitly declared to be sinful can possibly be sinful.
The church is not your daddy.
You’re begging the question by assuming that the church should have to be the moral policemen in the first place.
My version of communism isn’t Stalin’s communism. My communism isn’t corrupt.
(IOW, just because some people get off the bus early, that doesn’t change the natural end of the philosophy.)
Detroit’s got fluoride in its water. Portland does not. And Scandinavian-descent people are not the majority of white ethnic groups in the Pacific Northwest. But we have crumbling roads, cities going back to woods, sewage treatment problems, and other massive infrastructure fails, just like Detroit, only everywhere instead of one city. Our building stock is abysmal. Despite being built almost entirely by whites, it’s incompetently made and falling apart all over the place.
And there are drive-by bicycle stabbings (by whites to other whites). Well, I guess Detroit hasn’t got those. Viva la racial difference in the type of violent crime.
Don’t get me wrong, I choose to live in a whitopia because it’s underpopulated and all of this stuff can be fixed by moving in people who want something better. It’s just the idea that being white means you won’t have tons of problems is clearly disprovable by, well, the Pacific Northwest, which is a government-funded white reservation and shows it if you actually have to live here.
“And Scandinavian-descent people are not the majority of white ethnic groups in the Pacific Northwest.”
I meant Germanics and Celtics not just Scandinavians. So Anglo-Saxons, Scots. Welsh, Irish, Germans, and Scandinavians.
“But we have crumbling roads, cities going back to woods, sewage treatment problems, and other massive infrastructure fails, just like Detroit, only everywhere instead of one city. Our building stock is abysmal. Despite being built almost entirely by whites, it’s incompetently made and falling apart all over the place.”
Your claim was that the PacNW’s corruption is worse than that of Detroit’s. Once again, I highly doubt that. Sure there is corruption just like there is everywhere but overall 99% of people would prefer to live in the PacNW than Detroit. Detroit has more resemblance to Port-Au-Prince and Johannesburg than to an American city.
“…a people quite similar to many modern black and hispanic groups in terms of suitability to living in a complex civilization.”
‘Hispanic groups and complex civilizations’?
Are you attempting to claim that the Reconquista, the Spanish Empire, and the Spanish Golden Age were all the efforts of people ‘ill suited for ‘complex civilization’? Or are you lumping people of widely divergent genetic and cultural backgrounds because they all happen to share the second most common native language on Earth? Because either way this statement lends itself to easy dismissal while also proving my point.
Yes, yes, I know you will point to the term ‘many… … groups’ but this is, again, proving my point. It is like ‘Dystopia Max’ who thinks discussions of morality have to be centered on race because he thinks the Church has never considered how intelligence intersects with learning and the development of morality. As trained theologian I can assure you – this only demonstrates DysMax’s profound ignorance of the depth and age of the Church’s moral theological foundations.
As I have said ‘people are different’ is a brute fact, but may be largely trivial unless you try to make it into something it is not.
Stereotypes exist. Another brute fact. So do statistics. A person is neither.
You don’t have the bandwidth/time investment/whatever to judge others you meet as individuals? What are you doing, drafting a large army in a short period of time with no chance to perform evaluation testing?
This region remains exceptionally underpopulated, which disproves the premise that “everyone” wants to live up here. Also, I only was saying that there was a lot of corruption at multiple levels of government compared to lots of corruption at one level of government (Detroit). That is completely true. Corruption is rampant here, it’s not insignificant, it’s why our bridges are crumbling (one of them floated away and may yet again, frankly).
I’d put in links, but the sheer amount would send my comment into moderation for a thousand years. Oh well. You can also just watch Portlandia and figure out that all is not golden in whitopia.
“Agreed.”
Same here. Nothing to add.
The real question is, as a wise man once asked “what is to be done?”
About what? I don’t understand why racial differences are seen as a problem to be solved.
We’d be best off if everyone converted to Christianity and/or took their faith seriously.
The odd thing about HBD is that they insist that race and intelligence are the keys to moral superiority (defined as being a godless, fornicating abortionist who lives off inflation, apparently). But when you point out that black IQ has been climbing steadily over the years, and that American blacks get biologically “whiter” every generation, and that these “improvements” have accompanied a black slide into depravity and savagery… no response.
And now the same decline is spilling over into the white and even the Asian populations. They’ve got no answer, but they’re sure that blacks are responsible for that, too.
Hard to take them seriously.
Scott,
The simple, accurate theory of evolution is;
“within large populations allele frequency changes over time”
KR:
Carefully crafted to avoid saying anything interesting, and thereby avoid criticism.
“This region remains exceptionally underpopulated, which disproves the premise that “everyone” wants to live up here. Also, I only was saying that there was a lot of corruption at multiple levels of government compared to lots of corruption at one level of government (Detroit)”
Don’t get me wrong, I would not want to live in either, Texas is the best. But if I had to choose, I would choose the PacNW even though it’s full of faggy liberals because that’s still better than Detroit.
“But when you point out that black IQ has been climbing steadily over the years, and that American blacks get biologically “whiter” every generation, and that these “improvements” have accompanied a black slide into depravity and savagery… no response.”
Do you have evidence for either assertion? By biologically “whiter” do you mean infusions of European blood? I highly doubt that.
“And now the same decline is spilling over into the white and even the Asian populations. They’ve got no answer, but they’re sure that blacks are responsible for that, too.”
Once again, evidence?
“About what? I don’t understand why racial differences are seen as a problem to be solved.
We’d be best off if everyone converted to Christianity and/or took their faith seriously.”
That and better immigration laws.
About what? I don’t understand why racial differences are seen as a problem to be solved.
What I meant was; what (if any) changes should there be in law, public policy, private behavior, etc. once we accept the fact of racial differences? Beliefs have consequences. HBD’ers insist that people recognize the truth about racial differences. My question is “let’s say that we do. Then what?”
And my answer would be stricter immigration laws against certain groups.
Svar,
“What matters is an ethnic group’s gestalt because the whole is greater than the sum of the parts that make up the ethny.”
Right. And that something is best called The Nation.
Chesterton dealt with the race-realists of his time that were being bores on Teutonic, Latin and Celtic races all the time. He pointed out the Nation is a real, living thing while these “races” are conjectures and speculations.
It is in The Heretics.
The political consequence of widespread acceptance of HBD is rejection of default political equality and acceptance of political inequality.
But, unlike Zippy, I say it is not Nazism. It is Nazism only to the liberals that have made political equality a hill to die upon.
vishmehr24:
The reason you don’t understand my point about HBD is because you are a positivist.
HBD’ers insist that people recognize the truth about racial differences. My question is “let’s say that we do. Then what?”
Let’s divorce this from HBD for a moment, and just say racial differences, since I don’t care about HBD. The relevance of recognizing racial differences would go something like this:
1) Self-identified race correlates well with intelligence.
2) This is not allowed
3) Thus, cognitive differences in general cannot exist, since the correlation is not allowed
Recognizing that yes, cognitive differences between people in general exist means that the way the entire school system is set up is more than wrong. It’s completely backwards.
If you’ve noticed that this doesn’t really have to do with racial differences, you’re absolutely right. But, you know, denial is more than a river…
Do you have evidence for either assertion?
Ugh. I do not engage argumentum ad ignorantiam. Nice try, though.
[…] is false and women are not attracted to obsequious nice guys. Or you’ve realized that there are differences between the races that cannot be managed out of existence by an ever-escalatin…. All your life you thought otherwise, but now you realize that you were wrong about something […]
Positivist: A person who either criticizes or asks clarification from Zippy,.
@vishmehr:
Actually, a positivist is one who engages in the error of logical positivism. This doesn’t have to be done consciously – in fact it usually isn’t. It is one of the most pervasive modern errors, and quite often so ingrained that people can hardly even comprehend the existence of another mode of thinking.
You’ve demonstrated several times over on this blog now that you’re one of those people.
vishmehr24:
Read Incompleteness by Rebecca Goldstein and Quantum Mechanics: Historical Contingency and the Copenhagen Hegemony by James Cushing. The former may give you a decent idea of what positivism is if you haven’t picked it up from me. The latter will explain why your attempt to demarcate physics from other knowledge as “the study of the computable aspects of things” doesn’t work.
[…] frequently underlying, the really obvious “emperor with no clothes” errors like feminism and racial equality. As I’ve mentioned before I still pull little remnants of these subtle weeds from the garden of […]
[…] Liberals (which includes almost all modern people) are ironically so narrow-minded that they see other kinds of liberals as the farthest pole of conceivable political opposition. Those few who manage to permit their thoughts to stray outside of the Overton window tend to do so in quite predictable ways. […]
[…] order for modern people not to immediately reject them by default. That’s why the term “human biodiversity” is used these days to refer to racial differences, rather than using the term “racial […]
[…] politics. But if things get really ugly in the coming decades, don’t say I didn’t warn you. By the nature of things, as the gravitational force of liberalism compresses our reality ever […]