BANNED USER: waging culture war repeatedly after multiple bans and warnings
Lepidus
No bio...
User ID: 1547
Banned by: @Amadan
Lepidus
1yr ago
IS MY CLASH WITH THEMOTTE POSTERS PURELY VALUE BASED
Let's assume that your poorly-developed, unsourced arguments are all 100% true. They're not, and throwing music and novels in there is almost absurd enough to suggest parody, but I don't want to deal with your Gish gallop, so I'm going to use my imagination.
Why should I care? If, as you seem to think, [redacted] are unfeeling automata who may neither comprehend art nor build genuine rapport...I'm not seeing the problem. Explain to me why the existence of such people is a bad thing. From: @netstack
17 upvotes!
Now, the fascinating thing about this post is it takes my position far further than I could ever imagine doing so and then confronts me with a person who claims it would be irrelevant if this extreme position were fully true. That "unfeeling automata" might, if representing a substantial portion of your elite, convert your somewhat free country into a nightmare where you never saw an unmasked face again, seems not to bother him in the slightest.
Now I'd be tempted to ignore this as a one-off but then there's this response to my comment on foot-binding.
"...Furthermore, similar laundry lists of objectionable practices would be possible to assemble concerning any race of people or, indeed, of the human race. Even assuming the Chinese are every bit as bad as you say, that doesn't make them special.** Even assuming the [redacted] are every bit as bad as you say**, that doesn't make them special." - naraburns
Now this is fascinating to me, because while I can intuitively understand the conditions leading to things like genocide, or more to the point physical child abuse, footbinding falls within the entirely alien moral universe world to me. Given the choice between an otherwise loving family who bound my feet, and an otherwise violent one that didn't I cannot possibly imagine choosing the latter. I'm pretty sure this isn't just my gender speaking for another gender, and I'm more than willing to entertain what might be considered misogynistic thinking. Yet @DaseIndustries hits me with this.
"...Read some interviews of surviving women from traditional families who have had that done to them, see what they think of it."
Now, I don't doubt that someone of Dase's intellectual caliber understands why the testimony of a person, victimized irreperably by loved ones, in a cultural context where this was normal; might be less than reliable. So I'm left, once again with the feeling that our underlying basic instincts must just be different in some way. How would we go about figuring out whether this is the case?
No Chinese-Americans are not just high IQ whites
1] From the moment of birth, Chinese-American infants show extreme acceptance to conditions that horrify European ones.
-Cover a European 40 hour old infants nose, either directly or by lying them face flat on the bed; and they'll struggle to uncover it. Chinese infants will breath through their mouth, otherwise remaining entirely motionless. Where European infants will become more aggressively distressed the longer you do this to them, Chinese infants will remain calm.
Study by Dan Freeman and his Chinese-American wife in Nature:
https://sci-hub.ru/10.1038/2241227a0
2] Dramatic differences remain at four months:
REACTIVITY BATTERY RESPONSES: Exposed to a battery of tests designed to elicit reactions; moving, crying, fretting, vocalizing and smiling; Chinese infants are undeniably different.
For example, the most mobile Chinese infants are less than a third as mobile as the most mobile American ones and half as mobile as the Irish sample. In each area except for smilling, American and Irish reactivity can be expressed as multiples of the Chinese ones; with a degree of difference that would be shocking in a gender study! This is even after 32% of the Boston sample, but none of the Chinese sample, was excluded due to infant non-cooperation.
See the chart on page three. It's really, really dispositive.
https://sci-hub.ru/10.1037/0012-1649.30.3.342
CRYING IN RESPONSE TO INNOCULATION: Other studies involve observing differences in rates of crying upon childhood innoculations, and compare American infants to Japanese ones. Here, you get shocking differences like, 4 out of 26 Japanese infants crying in response to a shot where every single American infant did so. This, at least partially results from considerable differences in levels of cortisol production, both prior to and immediately after innoculation.
https://sci-hub.ru/10.2307/1131465
General Note: I tried to find East Asian American studies for the four month behaviour section, but couldn't. Readers of the papers will find that they appear to be well controlled as these things can be, with the Chinese sample being from the infants of students at China's top university.
3] Dramatic differences obviously remain in adulthood:
3.1 THE BAMBOO CEILING: There is asian overrepresentation in every field involving intelligence and a bamboo ceiling in every subfield requiring a personality. To give one example from reuters:
"Asian Americans comprise 13% of associates at major law firms, but just 4% of equity partners — the lowest ratio among minority groups, the report notes. Only one of the current 93 Senate-confirmed U.S. Attorneys is Asian American, and their representation among law clerks has been stagnant for the past 25 years."
The difference between associates, and partners/US Attorneys is of course, that the latter might occasionally try a case or engage in unmediated interactions with people who are not like them and need to build up a rappor.
3.2 MASKS PEOPLE, MASKS! Explain to me why, until perhaps the last two months, your average East-Asian American was more likely to be masked than blue-anon types. Isn't the parsimonious answer simply that infants who won't fight to uncover their nose, become adults that are indifferent to showing their face?
Do we realy have to litigate this one?
3.3 MUSIC: Asian parents sure as hell get their kids to play piano, and early, often similarly strict musical upbringings are common among music stars generally. Where then, are the distinguished East Asian-American popular musicians?
3.4 NOVELS: Where are the great East Asian-American novelists?
@sword-of-empire: I can be reached at lepidusian@protonmail.com
Lepidus
1yr ago
Anecdote request on racial differences in innoculation response
For the doctors here. I'm wondering whether any of you have observed racial differences in infant responses to universal treatment experiences. I'm particularly interested in whether you've observed differences in crying rates between different race infants in response to innoculations, administered before cultural effects might be expected to take hold.
Rate estimates would of course be appreciated.
W.H, liberal morality, and why co-existence is undesirable
A little while ago, I read a story of a recent scandal which I think conclusively shows that the Dems have finally gone too far. You see, the state legislature of Massachusetts passed a prisoner rehabilitation weekend pass program, in which prisoners with good behavior could obtain leave to spend time unsupervised in society and then return to serve their sentences. Unfortunately they forgot to exclude first degree murderers serving life without parole sentences who, for obvious reasons, could not be trusted to return. As such, the court said they must be allowed to participate unless the legislature specifically excluded them. The legislature passed a new bill to do so, but the Massachusetts governor vetoed the bill.
Enter inmate W.H, who with his 2 friends got bored robbing a cooperative teenage clerk, so they stabbed him 18 times and threw him in a dumpster. Sentenced to life without parole, he was furloughed from prison and escaped. But normal life was of course boring. So predictably, he broke into a woman's home with a pistol, tied up her boyfriend, stabbed him, and then raped her in front of him.
Perceptive readers will have guessed by now that by recent, I mean 36 years ago. You see W.H is Willie Horton, the governor was Michael Dukakis and this was the scandal that helped sink his campaign for president. or as the Times covered it back then:
"Foes accuse Bush campaign of inflamming racial tension": https://www.textise.net/showText.aspx?strURL=https%253A//www.nytimes.com/1988/10/24/us/foes-accuse-bush-campaign-of-inflaming-racial-tension.html#site-content
Now, as much as i'd like to dunk on the Times they didn't cherrypick random nobodies. Their sources for the accusation of "inflaming the nation's racial fears", Dukakis' running mate, Jesse Jackson and the future DNC chair, Dona Brazille. And of course, if you look up Willie Horton today, basically every non-conservative source including your high school teacher will tell you about the "infamous"... ad, which unlike unleashing rape and murder on your innocent citizens violates the sacred values of our Democracy or something. Some degree of deliberate unrestricted warfare is going on here, but I don't think this fully explains it. I'm reminded of Amy Biel who went to South Africa to fight apartheid, only to be pulled out a car by a black mob which slaughtered her despite the protests of her black friends that she was on their side. And then her parents flew into the country to testify a the "truth and reconciliation committee" in favor of releasing her murderers. They then started a foundation and hired these murderers.
Hlynka, I'm sure, will find a way to call them hypocrites. Moldbug will ask, 'but don't these elves eat great food'? As for me, I neither desire nor expect cooperation with these people, whatever their thought process or culinary habits. I wanna see the conservative movement* draw a clear unambiguous moral line between us and them, accept those that will cross over, and to crush the opposition permanently and with the same concern they feel for their pets' victims.
Added:
*Of course they are more concerned with saving the enemies' feti.
Added:
Here are the two ads Bush ran on the issue.
Willie Horton ad https://youtube.com/watch?v=Io9KMSSEZ0Y
Revolving door ad https://youtube.com/watch?v=Io9KMSSEZ0Y Note how in the second one, the campaign goes out of it's way to find white criminals for it's footage.
This is it.
WELL THIS IS IT BOYS. I've been Permabanned. I appeal to the other mods not for "a second chance" but for an outright acquittal, as I believe this charge to be a travesty. Paging @naraburns, @ZorbaTHut, @TracingWoodgrains
Commenters who are tempted to draw conclusions from this ban should... do exactly that. Seriously, read @Amadan's rationale and try to defend his integrity. There are people who place no value on your life, and others who, whatever their pretensions to the open discussion of ideas and others who find pointing this out intolerable. The outer party lives on, laundering gross atrocities into respectability by demanding that you not be outraged by them. And so, in this eternal re-run of the scene from "politics and the english language" releasing monsters to slaughter innocents becomes, "a policy that resulted in a criminal doing some crime." Depicting the criminal becomes "racialized imagery", and the promise of open discussion becomes, "I'm not sure how you'd make it relevant today without being pure "boo Democrats,"...
Part 1: Da Jooz totally did it (Negro communism edition)
Prologue: David Cole Stein has a wonderful post on how conservatives do best when they 'notice': "Hey look at all the deranged homeless people screaming at you on the subway", but are limited by their own stupid tendency to also promote grand theories for why things happen: "The dems are brainwashed by Chinese communist propaganda". When you combine an observable and undeniable fact, with even a plausible but unprovable theory (and for the record I think CCP propaganda theories are psychotic), you provide people with a social license to dump it all in the trash. Some (Kevin McDonald cough) might find that a small price to pay to be considered Sherlock Holmes. Well, Motters, I'm not gonna let you get off that easy.
Thesis: Jewish elite overrepresentation in destructive cultural movements is not explained by their higher intelligence. It is also a critical factor, perhaps the critical factor in setting these off and shaping the direction these take. When Jewish elites act, they are representing the values of Jews in particular, not merely elites generally. Jews are always willing to go further than general elite opinion.
The Jewish Public vs. The Comparable Gentile Public
The civil rights movement immediately led to a continual orgy of violence and mayhem (the OG summers of Floyd), and that the American public begged someone to put an end to it. This was Nixon's silent majority. Here are the voting patterns of Whites with college degrees - at the time corresponding roughly in IQ to the average Jew, and Jews:
WHITE COLLEGE GRADUATES - NIXON - 80 - 82% ___ VS ___ JEWS - HUMPHREY - 81%
https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jewish-voting-record-in-u-s-presidential-elections
The harmful role of Jewish Elites
- The Abolition of freedom of association (Shelley V. Kraemer)
In 1948, The US government joined a black plaintiff and their black lawyers in suing to abolish restrictive covenants, which limited the sale of homes to Blacks. Note critically, that restrictive covenants were private agreements between private homeowners; and thereby entirely outside the scope of any plausible interpretation of the constitution. Of course, by US government I mean; Jewish solicitor general Philip Elman, four Jewish lawyers and not a single gentile lawyer. This great dose of Jewish overrepresentation was obscured on the advice of Arnold Raum (take a guess) who said:
It's bad enough that [Solicitor General Philip] Perlman's name has to be there, to have one Jew's name on it, but you have also put four more Jewish names on. That makes it look as if a bunch of Jewish lawyers in the Department of Justice put this out."
The Supreme Court sided with the US Government, and the only mechanism protecting tens of millions of Americans, including 80% of homes in Los Angeles and Chicago; from the carnage that was to follow, was rendered unenforceable. This was single most important battleground of the civil rights movement, and it was won by the enemy before people knew the war was going on.
RETRACTION NOTICE
Boy have I screwed the pooch here. As @Gdanning notes, Cohen was actually arguing for the company's ability to conduct IQ tests, not against it. He also alleges Jewish support for opposing racial quotas in Bakke v. California. I'll verify and update accordingly.
- School segregation and the other standard civil rights cases**
Here Jewish representation tends to be more balanced, corresponding well to their representation in the American elite generally. Critically however, Jewish lawyers never appear on the anti-civil rights side of a case.
- The murder of IQ testing (Grigg's v. Duke Power Company)**
Here again, the US government joined the black plaintiff in requesting that the Court establish the precedent that promoting based on intelligence tests would be like providing equality of opportunity "merely in the sense of the fabled offer of milk to the stork and the fox." In other words, presumptively discriminatory unless you could prove otherwise.
Perceptive readers will note that by US government, I mean Lawrence M. Cohen speaking in the name of the US Chamber of Commerce.
Response to Objections:
Readers may note that all of these decisions required the cooperation of a majority gentile supreme court. This is a fair objection but I would note that SCOTUS judges are immunized from repercusions by their lifelong tenure and high status. No one was gonna turn down offering a job to any SCOTUS judge afterwards, regardless of what he did. A lawyer who forcibly integrated your neighbourhood, was a different matter. I don't doubt that there were a few non-jews in the office of the solicitor general who supported Shelley, but only the Jews had the sheer guts to pursue it.
Anti-Semitism: It's not rocket science
The familial relationship takes certain actions of the table and requires others, even when it's bad. You may at times despise a member of your family, think their ideas or values are terrible, have had awful experiences with them... but a bridge remains despite the gaps. You probably wouldn't want him imprisoned, hanged or shot, even under pretty hostile circumstances. On a more general note, there may be countless family members who are not awful people but are simply less capable than you. If they weren't family members, you might have little to do with them and might rarely even consider them in your plans. But because they are, you do. Ethnies are partly socially constructed, but largely racially constrained families, and they contained a weakened form of the same instinct of moral obligation towards the members of the ethny. Elites from the same ethny may see their peasants as retrograde, but they don't normally arrive at the belief that these should be mercilessly crushed, or that public policy should show no concern whatsoever for their wellbeing.
Now take an ethny with a dramatically higher average IQ (10 -15 points) than the members of the society they live in. You have at once, a guaranteed factory of new revolutionary ideas; and no instinctive limiting concern for the vast majority of people who will be affected by those ideas. Now sometimes ethnies merge and form new identities. Most British, Germans, Irish and even Italian Americans eventually came to see themselves as Americans first. But the gaps between your average German and Italian are not remotely similar to the gap between your average Jew and non-Jew. This is without mentioning the massive religious elephant in the room, or the thousands of years of hostility it involved. No one wants to merge with a family that has a comparatively large percentage of loosers to the one they came from. So the Jewish ethny remains separate, and as such it's members pursue their ideological goals without any concern for the damage these impose on the host society. Naturally, eventually people get tired of this and respond with anti-Jewish measures.
Note that this theory of Jewish gentile relations requires no belief in a unique Jewish malevolence in order to arrive at the conclusion that the relationship between Jews and non-Jews will always naturally develop into hostility.
Lepidus
1yr ago
There's got to be a social aspect to the instinct. That's the only way I can see to explain the seeming unanimity of the response here vs the contrary unanimity at e.g. Uvalde and Broward County.
It might be relevant to note that nearly the entire Uvalde Police department seems to have been mixed race latino (visibly so), while up to 50% of the US Border Patrol is Hispanic or latino.
https://www.dailysignal.com/2018/06/26/fact-check-are-half-of-all-border-patrol-agents-hispanic/
Lepidus
1yr ago
Why Republicans fell flat: Abortion edition
So I've got a simple, yet hardly traditional theory on why Republicans underperformed so dramatically.
Yes, it was abortion. But no, it wasn't that voters were concerned about a women's right to choose, or some other similar notion.
Instead, they saw the morbidly obese women on the TV shouting their abortions, and decided, 'Yeah, no I don't want these ugly and miserable people reproducing, let them holocaust their offspring'. Republican advertising highlighting that aborted babies were disproportionately black, like that awful Blake Masters ad he rightfully never repeated, made people more pro-abortion, not less.
Boo hoo, having your access to institutions built by others limited may be unfair but it is not the worst thing in the world. Hollywood gentiles may have similar complaints but everyone just tells them to fuck off; or would if they dared voice them. Getting threatened at knifepoint by a degenerate who asks why u dared set foot in his neighbourhood and knowing that no one will come to help you but you are at the mercy of an 80IQ psychopath is.
Lepidus
1yr ago
Footbinding, as a universally engaged in practice among the Chinese upper class for hundreds of years basically the entirety of my point, in that it represents a qualitative deviation from anything the Europeans ever did; in that it represents extreme entirely unprovoked cruelty carried out personally again close innocent kin. As the treatment of close kin is the most basic area where base moral instincts could be expected to operate in, one could expect those who are qualitatively depraved in this area to exceed others in their quantitative depravity elsewhwere. Everything else is just window-dressing to show that the same soulless genes has not dramatically altered it's nature.
Most civilizations outside of Europe have populations of considerably lower IQs. No one has ever suggested that the problem with the Chinese was mere stupidity, with eugenicists like EA Ross (who campaigned to keep them out of the US, nonetheless agreeing that they were our intellectual equals. Thus, where people of equal or higher capacity to do something, do not in fact do that thing, inferring an absence of interest is more than reasonable.
The dog issue is only relevant in that they are still up to it - today. I'm fully aware that both European and non-european civilizations have been extremely cruel to animals in the past. Find me evidence of Brits or Germans cooking dogs alive when they had similar material conditions to modern China (beginning of 1900s) and you'll have a strong point.
Lepidus
1yr ago
China really is not so different from the West. For some reason the US has a practice of commonly mutilating the penis of babies. This doesn't cause so much harm as foot-binding yet it's bizarre and hostile.
Damn it random-ranger, here I was preparing the theory that adherence to non-racism makes Europeans into a moral mutants capable of suppressing their most basic moral instincts, and now I'm gonna have to add anti-semitism to the list. Seriously, I share a revulsion towards circumcision but let's compare the acts shall we.
Circumcision:
Brutal painful act lasting a few minutes, with additional suffering during recovery period
carried out against a creature who will not remember or know the difference,
reducing sexual fitness by (I'll just guess) 20%,
carried out by medical professionals beyond the sight of Non-Jewish parents.
Footbinding:
Several rounds of brutal painful acts distributed over several years, with additional extreme pain in between them,
carried out against a creature who will remember every moment of it, and is fully aware of the difference (she used to have fully functional feet),
permanent partial crippling into this disgusting... (I'll omit any words, you either feel it or you don't)
Carried out by the parents themselves with full knowledge and awareness of their actions as their daughter screams, over and over and over again.
Lepidus
1yr ago
The multi-century near universal practice of footbinding amongst the most educated and intellegint strata of society (but going down far lower) is definitionally not anecdotal. Footbinding represents a fundamental qualitative deviation from any widespread european practice and was continued up to the peak of independent Chinese civilizational development. Unless you reject HBD entirely, it is exceedingly stupid to claim that it cannot be cited as evidence of differing innate genetic dispositions.
Lepidus
1yr ago
The use of Reaganite as a slur on the racial front bugs me. He tried to kill disparate impact theory (ie. the theory under which the government enforces affirmative action) but was overriden by congressional republicans, tried to stay friends with apartheid South Africa (the party led by McConnell I believe, overrode him again), and had some pretty based quotes. "To see those monkeys from those African countries - damn them, they're still uncomfortable wearing shoes!" Then again, he did screw up on amnesty for illegals but that seems more justifiable.
Lepidus
1yr ago
Christians and the Killing of abortion doctors:
I'm well aware that a strong case can be made for absolute Christian pacifism or more moderately for employing violence only with the consent of the ruling authority. Yet these positions are clearly not majority ones. Imagine if I posed to the average Christian the following hypothetical:
Tomorrow, the government passes a law declaring that blacks, being subhuman, are no longer entitled to any protection under the law. While the law allows you to kill a person who threatens the life of a regular person, killing a person who threatens a black is now murder. Mark 1.0 disagrees. While he is not black himself and has no special relationship with blacks, he consider them to be regular humans entitled to defense. As such, he goes to a black extermination center and kills a few of its exterminators. Are Mark 1.0's actions morally justified?
I think the vast majority of Christians would say that Mark was not only acting justifiably but commendably. If he started a revolution that overthrew the government, they would celebrate him as an example of Christian courage and dedication. If, however I replace Black with fetus, and exterminationist with abortion doctors, fundamentalists suddenly discover the value of 'giving unto Caesar', talk about how their belief in the sanctity of life is incoherent with killing abortion doctors and condemn Mark 2.0.
Once again, my claim is that there is no deontological theological justification that allows for Mark 1.0's actions, but not Mark 2.0's. Thus, when Christians claim to disown anti-abortion violence on religious grounds they are almost always either making a best methods utilitarian calculation (which given 60 Million abortions since Roe v. Wade seems rather specious) or demonstrating that their worship of the flag, trumps their commitment to God.
Lepidus
1yr ago
Whitey bad, white woman racist cuz she won't look at me. Whitey did slavery, he lied and put papa in jail, he owes me money. This is not complicated, and doesn't require acceptance of some batshit academic theory. Your insistence that this kind of thinking is not common among blacks is utterly baffling to me. Have you ever been near lower class blacks; talking amongst themselves about racial issues?
Furthermore, specific racial contempt is hardly relevant given how they treat each-other without needing any ideological excuses for it. The question is can my child walk the streets in a neighbourhood where they are around without fear of being hurt. I don't care why someone threatens me and those I care about, just that they do.
Lepidus
1yr ago
I don’t even know why i’m bothering to ask this, but have you ever been to China?
No. I have not.
Think the cultures fit well together and we could each learn a lot from each other.
Please, Name one aspect of Chinese culture that you would like to see implemented here given the option between it, and the similar version of it present in Western countries before the 1960s.
Lepidus
1yr ago
Yes. Here's the review: https://www.theamericanconservative.com/just-like-home/.
The Uvalde police actually appear to be entirely latino, of varying levels of distinctly visible native admixture. It's border patrol that is half-non latino.
And that’s before asking if 40% vs 11% chance of trust could actually make the difference. I can think of a lot of other reasons a man might do his job—or fail to do it.
I really don't know how to bridge the inferential gap here. If anyone else can, please be my guest.
Lepidus
1yr ago
Why would it be? Garrett Jones makes a compelling case that even European immigrants only assimilate about half-way, generations after they've forgotten even their original language. There is a considerable IQ gap between mestizos and white europeans. Why shouldn't our prior be an absence of complete integration?
Also, the idea that American citizenship means much when you can obtain it without knowing the language is prima-facie absurd. Even if you are a Civ Nat it should be obvious that we are a long way away from anything resembling integration conducive conditions.
Lepidus
1yr ago
Peter Singer has made a name for himself over the past few decades describing this as "speciesism" and comparing it directly to racism as a means of convincing people his view of universal utilitarianism is true -- I prefer just to bite down hard on that bullet and say I am not a racist for the same reason I AM a speciesist. All humans are superior to all other things, full stop. Human supremacy forever.
This is not biting the bullet. In fact it is the exact opposite of biting the bullet, and a perfect illustration of why the right looses. You don't want to admit White superiority because doing so has become taboo, but then you have no basis for human superiority other than 'because I feel that way'. Well, 'because I feel that way doesn't cut it' just in the same way that the 'whites and blacks are totally equal, I just think they should remain separate' copout of the segregationists who didn't want to offend their black housekeepers didn't cut it. Unless you are willing to draw your sword, cut down your enemies, and draw the line based on your sheer brutality and force of will, it has to be based in something anyone who matters can recognize. Failing to do so doesn't make you better off, it makes you look callous and pointlessly cruel.
I value specific features of the human experience that set us apart from animals is that position. By discarding it you haven't bit the bullet, you've shot yourself in the face.
Why is it so hard to admit that It was wrong to tear down the earlier hierarchy?
Lepidus
1yr ago
-
I not only don't care about them, I fundamentally don't understand why people do.
-
(Obviously this is not to say that I want those people removed -- that sets a dangerous precedent because who decides?)
In any society containing modern progressives (ie. postwar ones), you don't exactly get a choice on the matter. These people represent enemy civilians at best and enemy soldiers at worst, in a zero sum war against your basic rights and interests - to stop half way at indifference is to declare the bizzare position of neutrality towards yourself.
Lepidus
1yr ago
This one should be relatively easy to solve. What percentage of the institutionalized was black?
Our struggle with China is racial
There are aspects of human civilization which would, with enough time be understood and adapted by any sexually reproducing species of sufficient intelligence, simply because they are instrumentally valuable with regards to the instincts that all biologically similar animals share. Animal likes food too. Animal likes sex too. Animal plays games too. Animal fights enemies and wages war for resources too. Many animals beat few animals, so animals have incentives to form alliance structures or be outcompeted and exterminated. Yet wouldn't it be surprising if they valued the same things, or felt the same ways, where instrumental necessities didn't require it? Shouldn't we then expect to see, dramatic differences in what are superficially institutions, even amongst intellectually comparable animals?
Consider the family. Every functional civilization has been patriarchal at least until recently; and the physical and cognitive differences explaining this are seen in the animal world as well. Woman needs man, and man must find his mate. It'd be great if she were loyal though. Yes you could punish disloyalty after the fact but that's not exactly foolproof. Hey what if she literally couldn't run away? If every couple breaks the feet of every daughter then she'll make a perfectly suitable mate! The logic here is of course unimpeachable; and yet is there any reason to believe Nero himself wouldn't react with a similar disgust to it as modern (non-anthropologist) man?
Where unimaginable cruelty naturally pervades even the closest family bonds between the strong and the weak; concern for outsiders may be expected to be similarly lacking. A toddler bleeding out in plain view to the complete indifference of most passers by is not at all surprising when you remember what their close genetic ancestors did, nor are the countless similar videos you can find on the Chinese interwebs: https://youtube.com/watch?v=ECeC4R-Gjtc.
I don't need to mention that where humans cannot expect compassion, the fate of man's best friend is not at all uncertain.
Other areas of human life like the ability to be moved by beauty seem similarly lacking in a civilization whose pre-1800s painting and sculpture never approximated that of Ancient Rome, much less Michael Angelo, when portraying human subjects (as opposed to landscapes were they admittedly excelled).
A people with innately different instincts in one field, might also be odd in other ways, like committing mass cannibalism against political enemies in the absence of famine: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guangxi_Massacre .
Their literature might include bizzare scenes, like a inferior man demonstrating his pious hospitality to his superior by secretly killing and cooking his own wife to feed him. https://old.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/ghmx4v/what_can_romance_of_the_three_kingdoms_liu_an/
Different from birth
Someone covers your nose or lays you face first against the bed. What do you do? Seemingly every non-disabled European American newborn that isn't cognitively impaired has the same reaction; to move, struggle and fight against this horrifying imposition. Nearly every Chinese American baby has a different reaction; complete non-reactivity.
Isn't this precisely the kind of difference common stereotypes, a history of slavish behaviour, and the above section would suggest? Can you think of a more elemental test of innately different instincts than a newborn's reaction when you screw with his breathing? Have you noticed that basically everyone still wearing a mask is Asian?
https://sci-hub.ru/10.1038/2241227a0
** The necessity of racism **
What does it mean to allow members of a high IQ species of alien fundamental moral and aesthetic instincts to increase their power in our institutions?
What does it mean, for an entire nation of them to become the dominant power on the planet?
More options
Context Copy link