BANNED USER: waging culture war repeatedly after multiple bans and warnings
Lepidus
No bio...
User ID: 1547
Banned by: @Amadan
The Indigenous populations of the Americans came primarily from Asian populations around 18K years ago who underwent one hell of a trek. Funnily enough, 2 day old Navajo and Japanese babies show similar responses on the cloth over nose cognitive test (near complete docility) which would be extremely abnormal in caucasians. The separation between Africans and every other group is over 50K years. Given the standard theory that we all came out of Africa, it makes intuitive sense for the least cognitively capable members of our species to be the ones that didn't make it elsewhere. The Saharan desert is not exactly tolerant of the unintelligent.
Evidence for the horribly run nature of African societies, or malnutritution and parasite load doesn't exactly counter the validity of the genetic hypothesis. All of these are highly indiscriminate, killing the smart at similar rates to the stupid. You need particular conditions for selection pressures to favour intelligence over the simpler traits they might favour (speed, muscle, and high testosterone for example). Note that these are all areas where Africans excel, with African infants showing greater muscle control at birth than caucasians or asians (but not aboriginals).
Lepidus
1yr ago
Well, I can only say that my personal experiences with American (as opposed to immigrant) blacks have been pretty universally hostile and this was before I had any racist tendences, but I guess personal experiences or tolerance must vary. Thank you for your anecdote.
''' Black criminals are not an existential threat to you or your family. Mostly they are a threat to each other, and to a lesser extent other blacks and the blues who live around them. If you live in a bad neighborhood, move."'
- More whites are victimized by blacks than blacks are. Note that given the rates of residential segregation, which are maintained by whites spending something like a third of their income in bidding wars to price out blacks, this often involves them leaving their neighbourhoods to get us. True most lethal victims of black violence tend to be black, but do you really think this is the only justifiable concern when it comes to walking the streets safely? Source: NCVS 2021 - https://bjs.ojp.gov/content/pub/pdf/cv21.pdf.
Yes, most whites in proximity to black violence tend to be blues, but that's because most people who haven't fled the big cities already are blues. Should I not have the right to live in the (severely declining) centers of our civilization if I want to be safe?
Lepidus
1yr ago
In East Germany the church was allowed to remain under only limited molestation, and to have it's own an associated political party, provided it proclaimed that actually Christians are perfectly loyal communists. I wonder how many people actually ended up believing this. It can even be supported biblically, but was clearly not the source of the East German Lutheran's professed values. No Christians had not been loyal communists, until the powers that be told them, and then they cited their faith to support it. The fact is the average evangelical Christian was perfectly fine with racial identity and segregation until power told them they were wrong. Evangelicals found a way to overlook the historic Christian opposition to abortion, and correspondingly the Southern States had the most liberal abortion laws until after Roe v. Wade. Belief in the morality of inter-racial marriage was at 4% when the laws banning it were struck down. It only reached 50% in the 1990s.
Lepidus
1yr ago
I just can't figure out the sense.
Resulting casualties.
Lepidus
1yr ago
It’s all so tiresome. On the one hand Dems cheating wouldn’t exactly shock me, but every single time the GOP candidate does so much stupid shit that I can’t possibly trust anything they say. Kari decided that the best way to get votes in godamn Arizona would be to shit on John McCain and tell his supporters they weren’t welcome. I mean wtf? If dems stole this one, they stole it fair and square.
Every time this subject comes up I wonder if zombies are the main life form in existence or if modernity has somehow created them. Who the hell comes up with the thought experiment of a “philosophical zombie” who is identical in every way but lacks consciousness and forgets to consider the possibility of p-zombie 2.0, one that seems identical until you ask them about consciousness?
And who but a zombie hears their interlocutor denying the existence of qualia and then tells them, “you lie!” without imagining that they might be accurately reporting on their own inner experience?
Lepidus
1yr ago
A) The rule that homicides are a good metric for general crime because they are unlikely to be swept under the rug may only apply to Western countries. How many intrepid journalists are looking to expose underreporting in third world countries, and would anyone care?
B) Nonetheless, levels are probably substantially lower as blacks aren't necessarily gonna be soft on black criminals in a black majority country. There may be collective punishment mechanisms in play.
Actually I think the Jewish problem is mainly socially constructed, and that the only genetic aspect to it is their high IQ. Imagine if you will, the Irish suddenly becoming 15 points smarter and a million of them migrating into the UK while obtaining a corresponding share of the Irish elite. You think the part where the key factor in Irish identity is their oppression, mostly real but sometimes fictional by brits is somehow gonna be forgotten? You think they might not sympathise and ally with every other resentful anti-British group ion the planet? Then what should Brits do?
I think Moldbug's categories don't really apply well here. Republicans had generally been pro-some civil rights but drew the line at private property. Democrats hadn't been too concerned with private property, and were pretty statist, but as I noted elsewhere their version of progress circa 1918 was 'eugenics, self determination for competent races and segregation'.
There were pro-civil rights brahmins and anti-civil rights brahmins, pro-civil rights optimates and anti-civil rights optimates. New catholic elites, which don't really fall under either group, but I guess we can call them Brahmins provided we don't foget this is ahistorical were the only other group consistently allied with Jews and blacks.
Yes, obviously the blacks (not many yellows back then) play their role as stormtroopers, but no sane person imagines blacks pulling off the conquest of large chunks of metropolitan America on their own. White Catholics are an important part of the story, but at least their participation on the enemy side was temporary self interest while they integrated and a good half of them if not slightly more are now on the right side. Jews are the permanent Lieutenant and above staffing force for the permanent revolution, and it's not obvious that there are any concessions that could pacify them.
even if your thesis is true, so what? If the civil rights movement is indeed a destructive plot by triple-parens them, I can't get myself to think this is particularly immoral given that they have a pretty solid case for retaliation/self-defense in destroying whatever it destroys.
What did we ever do to them? This is the only country that let Jews in without discrimination, restricting their immigration only when Jewish revolutionaries began rampaging through eastern europe. They've made fortunes here. And now, a country that has done so much for humanity must have all it's cities turned into open air sewers because? Seriously, what have we done that justifies this?
And if what you mean is that Jews are entitled to do whatever it takes for them to feel safe even in the absence of a casus belli, why should we not feel the same way and act accordingly?
I think so far I've been a net beneficiary even taking into account all of its failings and wrong turns and local negatives.
And how is that? Furthermore, shouldn't your reaping benefits from this country engender some kind of gratitude and desire to defend it?
Lepidus
1yr ago
By 1969 there's also a doubling in the burglary rate which climbs continually since 1960. I can't quickly find a comparison point to the 1950s.
At the risk of making discussion even less substantive and more personal, I ask: are you, by any chance, like myself, a self-hating person of East Asian descent?
No. Sorry, that would be an epic twist wouldn't it?
We'll challenge our other friends to name a single courageous, empathetic, inspiring Chinese leader...
This one is easy, Lee Kuan Yew on all counts.
Anyway, if you do not happen to be an undercover East Asian, I suppose I can only express my hope for general tolerance.
Any self hating Western oriented Chinese person, provided they are not self hating in the woke direction, gets westerner points from me. If it weren't for the mask I'd consider you an honorary Aryan, but nonetheless you can rest assured that I have no intention of doing you any harm. My concerns are about future immigration, and the rise of China the nation. As for all Asians currently in the US, I don't think they should ever suffer anything other than full legal and social equality.
Lepidus
1yr ago
It was not me. I’d bet on your Jew recognising himself in the mirror though.
Lepidus
1yr ago
What was the nature of the forum audience and when was this (If you can be slightly specific without doxxing yourself of course, if not be as vague as you need to be or PM me)?
The lack of empathy you observe in mainland Chinese culture is in large part due to the cultural devastation unleashed by communism over the past century, which has created a far more atomized, materialistic, acquisitive, and sociopathic society than existed previously or that can be seen in ethnic Chinese communities that did not undergo the twin calamities of the Great Leap Forward and the Cultural Revolution.
Do we have any reason to believe that this is true? People living with the shame of being part of an inescapably horrible society are not exactly going to be immune to fabricating the idea of a brighter past.
Consider this quote from, Ralph Townsend a US Consular official writing before the war and before the Communist takeover.
"Almost any veteran foreigner who has traveled up and down the rivers of China will be able to recount one or more cases where he has personally observed a man
drown without efforts to save him by other Chinese a few feet away on shore or in a boat. "
His experiences disgusted him so much that he published a book called "ways that are dark, the truth about China", and went around the U.S claiming that the Japanese were actually the good guys (getting arrested and charged with the Manafort offense - acting as an unregistered agent). That, or he was on their payroll from the start and made shit up, I guess we can never know for sure.
Having read it, I can say that the Wikipedia summary in no way understates the allegations he makes:
Through a large number of personal and second-hand anecdotes, Townsend argues that the Chinese may be the only people in the world who are completely unable to comprehend the basic human impulses of sympathy or gratitude toward other people. Because the Chinese feel no empathy toward others, they behave in an unbelievably sadistic and cruel fashion toward one another, and they view altruistic foreigners as targets to be mercilessly taken advantage of.
I actually agree with you entirely on the implausibility of success via conservative boycotts; I was addressing the implied discrepancy in degrees of concern. 1st, there's the domestic and personal versus foreign angle, then there is a secondary discrepancy in what success looks like. Were boycotts to succeed on the politics front, I think the world would be improved (this almost certainly won't happen). Given the state of much of Africa, I'm not sure boycotts would deliver the goal of improving life quality for the affected people, even if they worked. Those children in the mines, might be better off than in the alternative. Sorry for the lack of clarity.
Lepidus
1yr ago
Someone somewhere tweeted that in a hilarious irony white nationalists are gonna go extinct for the same reason as liberal whites eventually will, their undying devotion to people who hate them. That majority whiteness seems to be a pre-condition for the kind of relatively free individualistic western society, does not mean that there aren't a lot of spiteful whites who must be excluded or supressed for anything decent to exist. Why should their neurosis of self hatred be excused simply because it's one that whites have a greater predisposition to?
It's madness.
Lepidus
1yr ago
The elites of every major western European nation have accepted massive populations of migrants despite these being entirely a financial negative, several times more violence and criminality prone than the native populations, and on top of that open hatred for western society and social attitudes that were in every way the polar opposite of everything enlightenment or post-enlightenment. And they've done this wave after wave, with full awareness of the consequences. They did this despite massive public disaproval, with little to no opposition by conservatives.
In America, A black man born to a family in the top one percent is as likely to be incarcerated as a white man born to a family making 36K. The average black teenager in a family making 200K will get the same SAT score as a white child from a family making 20K. Our elites (including the conservative ones) respond by discriminating against whites, decreasing penalties for criminality and burying the race of anti-white criminals while boosting every single case of a white hurting a black.
The nature of America's new creed is so obvious, that even white red tribe normies whose family members are murdered by blacks understand that they are expected to express their forgiveness for the killers to the national press.
AS FOR JEWISH ELITES:
- ''' Wouldn’t this predict that Jewish elite should favor gentile subjects over Jewish ones? '''
In many cases they do. But the important divide isn't Jewish vs gentile, but Western vs foreign. You could make hundreds of millions of people temporarily better off by bringing them to European countries. But they inevitably make European society worse. If a non-ethnocentric Jew does not gain a special willingness to privilege the interests Europeans over non-europeans, being a general lover of gentiles makes them a worse enemy than an ethnocentric Jew, because then undermine your society even when their ethnic interests are aligned with it (keeping muslims out).
I don't think Stupidity is genuinely the issue here. Instead, I think the Republican party is an engine for managing the gradual and peaceful surrender of it's base to intolerable conditions. If you say, look the Democrats have openly violated all the rules on which the country is based and they won't stop, then there is little else left to do but to fight. It's a cross the Rubicon or perish moment and the GOP base still has a shot at prevailing in open conflict. Instead, the party tells it's people that if we can just catch them pulling off this criminal conspiracy, then the system can be saved. At the end of the day, party operatives would rather lead their base to irrelevance than to allow for a war which would hurt their class allies. It's why we get all this talk about Hispanics or Blacks as natural conservatives, as the party abets the dilution of it's own loyal voters... etc.
Lepidus
1yr ago
I think the insight, and I wish I knew who came up with it, is “for the vast majority of people, facts and arguments are not so much about true and false, but social signaling.”
Yeah, I get that. The whole point of my post was to wonder whether there are exceptions to this rule, or whether apparent exceptions were just people who got their signals wrong.
Lepidus
1yr ago
Was demanding the unconditional surrender of Germany at a time when millions of Jews might still be saved from the concentration camps in line with "Jewish interests"? You could argue either way, but rational calculation is hardly guaranteed when hatred or extreme fear, whether warranted or not, is in the driver's seat.
Lepidus
1yr ago
Yes, but his behaviour and that of the general scientific community towards the issue; is to put it least aggressively, remarkably incurious in a way that suggests censorship either direct, or of the cathedral kind. I have a pretty low opinion of Academics, but even I don't think they are incapable of realizing that even dumb 5 - 6 year olds can understand basic questions. And I don't think they are nearly incurious enough to simply drop research into something as salient as mirror self recognition.
There's something big here.
Lepidus
1yr ago
Perhaps the creation of a Hapa race, occupying a healthy middle point between the excessive individualism, sentimentality and recklessness of Europeans (the acute failure modes of which we are witnessing all around us) and the excessive communitarianism, coldness and safetyism of Asians, is the key to unlocking a superhuman race of people...
Wait what?
This reminds me of Russia fetishism among the Trad-right. Oh here look a 'traditional" society with a third our church attendance, higher abortion rates, higher divorce rates, lower fertility, extreme alcoholism and spousal abuse... But look at manly Army ad they have. Yes, and what does traditional comradery mean in a nation with Russia's history of de-facto slave armies? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dedovshchina
You can't just use words, and assume that the versions of them that exist in other societies have anything to do with what you are envisionining. What does communitarianism mean here?
Well, even in the most atomized White American neighbourhood, If I have an accident and am dying in public view, I can be 100% certain that someone, who i've never met will stop and try to help me within seconds. Can you say the same in China? Why not?
And how, in the wake of our covid response do you feel like describing Americans as reckless and asians as safetyist, with the ideal somewhere in between, is reasonable. I mean, I know there are some Whites who feel we didn't mask enough, but you might be the first White nationalist sympathetic person I've found expressing that view.
Lepidus
1yr ago
Genocide is barbaric even in a time of war. Killing enemy soldiers is normal in war but a crime in peace, while an agreement is in place. You wish to apply the rules of peace and tell me I shouldn’t target enemy soldiers because that would make me just as bad as them. And of course if there was an agreement in place it would be an atrocity. But this agreement having been shredded by the enemy, we are in a state of war.
Yes, I anticipate your objection that that is what both sides would accuse the other side of. The thing about being an adult is you have to weigh the evidence and make a choice. At the very least if you abstain from making it, you should take the Scott Alexander route and admit you are doing it for your own good (TheMotte statement, Kolgomorov) instead of dressing it up as superior morality above the petty squabbles between left and right.
Who ended federalism (violation 1) and then overrode the legislature of the national population (violation 2)? Who unleashed violent actors to terrorise it’s enemies and cleanse them from urban life?
These are not at all hard questions.
Given our history?
Even the supposed epitome of semi-modern American racial brutality, lynching - killed 4743* people, only 72% of whom were black. If you assume racial demographics of crime were the same back then (nearly all victims were accused of rape and/or murder), it is exceedingly likely that they were nearly all guilty. Arguably in fact, given that Blacks are roughly 60% of murderers today nationally, and the South were most lynchings occurred is disproportionately black, even the Jim Crow south might have disproportionately lynched Whites!
More options
Context Copy link