@Seppukurious's banner p

Seppukurious

Not an hero we need right now

0 followers   follows 0 users  
joined 2022 September 06 09:47:09 UTC

				

User ID: 836

Seppukurious

Not an hero we need right now

0 followers   follows 0 users   joined 2022 September 06 09:47:09 UTC

					

No bio...


					

User ID: 836

Anyone else can either do it themselves or volunteer for death by catapult. As ammunition, not target.

Why not (kind of) both?

Maybe so, but even then, it is still centring the groups with worse average social outcomes, and downplaying the ones who are more successful than whites.

You're not wrong in general, though I think the steelman goes something like: the overrepresentation is not just in excess of what you'd expect given equal IQs between groups; it also goes beyond what you'd expect given the actual measured IQ differences between the groups.

To be fair, nobody thinks the kilt makes it okay today, either. That’s still a masculine signal.

Well of course. You wear it with a prosthetic big hairy scrotum. Or big hairy badger, if you prefer to take the principle to extremes.

I don't care if that thing succeeds or fails, so long as I don't have to pay for it or live in it.

Is that you, Antidem?

https://antidem.wordpress.com/2015/07/15/dear-black-people/

I almost married a black chick, even though I believe in hbd.

I was never in that situation exactly, but I would have no objection to marrying a black girl as long as she was smart (and, y'know, hot etc.) ... but I worry about how that conversation would go if you were ever called upon to explain your beliefs to her. Did your almost-wife know about your HBD position - or indeed, was she already HBD-pilled?

a German dialect where instead of "größer als" they'd say "größer von"

In English there are relatively few grammatical differences between the American and British standard dialects, but 'different than' vs. 'different from' strikes me as a perfect analog here.

Though both of those have a whole country where they are part of the local standard.

Suppose you are a billionaire and want to decrease the amount of racism in the world; what decent options do you have?

Monkey's paw curls up one finger: If you could exterminate the human species, there would be no racism anymore. A nasty enough bio-engineered pandemic could maybe do it; or you could get to work on that paperclip maximizer.

We make a little music, it's called - we make a little music.

Fair enough. I have, but I can't remember exactly where.

(At any rate, as mentioned elsewhere in this thread, I am nowhere near good enough at maths to test the hypothesis)

One amusing consequence of (d) is that, if you are aware of the fertility-reducing effects, and if we take the ethical stance that reasonably-foreseeable consequences of your actions can be presumed to be intentional, then promoting womens' education among a population counts as genocide.

Well, suit yourself, but the point that a beer absolutely can be a class marker still stands. The relevant part of the SSC post:

The people who are actually into this sort of thing sketch out a bunch of speculative tribes and subtribes, but to make it easier, let me stick with two and a half.

The Red Tribe is most classically typified by conservative political beliefs, strong evangelical religious beliefs, creationism, opposing gay marriage, owning guns, eating steak, drinking Coca-Cola, driving SUVs, watching lots of TV, enjoying American football, getting conspicuously upset about terrorists and commies, marrying early, divorcing early, shouting “USA IS NUMBER ONE!!!”, and listening to country music.

The Blue Tribe is most classically typified by liberal political beliefs, vague agnosticism, supporting gay rights, thinking guns are barbaric, eating arugula, drinking fancy bottled water, driving Priuses, reading lots of books, being highly educated, mocking American football, feeling vaguely like they should like soccer but never really being able to get into it, getting conspicuously upset about sexists and bigots, marrying later, constantly pointing out how much more civilized European countries are than America, and listening to “everything except country”.

(There is a partly-formed attempt to spin off a Grey Tribe typified by libertarian political beliefs, Dawkins-style atheism, vague annoyance that the question of gay rights even comes up, eating paleo, drinking Soylent, calling in rides on Uber, reading lots of blogs, calling American football “sportsball”, getting conspicuously upset about the War on Drugs and the NSA, and listening to filk – but for our current purposes this is a distraction and they can safely be considered part of the Blue Tribe most of the time)

I think these “tribes” will turn out to be even stronger categories than politics. Harvard might skew 80-20 in terms of Democrats vs. Republicans, 90-10 in terms of liberals vs. conservatives, but maybe 99-1 in terms of Blues vs. Reds.

It’s the many, many differences between these tribes that explain the strength of the filter bubble – which have I mentioned segregates people at a strength of 1/10^45? Even in something as seemingly politically uncharged as going to California Pizza Kitchen or Sushi House for dinner, I’m restricting myself to the set of people who like cute artisanal pizzas or sophsticated foreign foods, which are classically Blue Tribe characteristics.

In general, yes, but I would have thought that the stereotypical BLM supporter (or at least the average black BLM supporter) would already regard the police as the lowlifes, or at least, would place approximately zero trust in them, and ... while it might be too much to say that they hold black criminals to be figure of trust exactly, the group's behaviour certainly seems to reflect what one would expect if one believed that black criminals were more worthy of honor and protection than their victims.

No amount of 'well, it's very rare' will mollify a person angry about that.

True, I suppose, but if cops get away with murdering black people less often than black people get away with murdering black people, it at least allows you to point out the skewed priorities (where 'get away with' includes the perpetrators never being identified because the witnesses all refuse to cooperate with the police).

Huh. It had previously never occurred to me that the reason for the Irish and Indian flags looking kind of similar was anything but coincidence.

From what I gather, the Magyars were a warrior nobility who converted the central European peasants (who were not really that genetically distinct from the Germanic and Slavic people around them) to speaking Hungarian, but were never that huge in number and were mostly wiped out in wars with the Mongols and the Turks. Meaning today's Hungarians aren't really all that mixed, but ... not in the way you might think.

Anyway, the census categorization that calls 'Hispanic' an ethnicity is using the word 'ethnicity' in a somewhat non-standard way. Perhaps it has to, since the people of Latin America have, like you say, such a wide spread of degrees of admixture, from pure European, pure Amerindian and pure sub-Saharan African, to any combination of the above, that there aren't really neat boxes to put people in where ancestry and culture are tightly matched. But it's not an ethnicity in the sense that, say, Welsh, or Igbo is an ethnicity; more just a hold-all cultural category for 'people from south of the US/Mexico border, at least some of whose ancestors spoke Spanish'.

If it's obvious and simplistic, do you concede the point about it being possible for a beer to be a class marker? Because your denial of that was upstream of this whole exchange.

It is not reasonable to assume gay men are more likely to sexually harass straight men than that straight men are likely to sexually harass each other.

This strikes me as prima facie so implausible that I am genuinely curious what your basis is for believing it. You are claiming that men who are not sexually attracted to other men are more likely to give them unwanted sexual attention than men who are sexually attracted to other men? Perhaps you meant on a raw numbers level, there are more male-on-male sexual assaults committed by straight men than gay men, which is plausible given how many more straight than gay men there are. But as a proportion relative to population, why on earth would we expect men who are sexually interested in X to be less likely to aggressively angle for sexual contact with X than men who are not sexually interested in X? It would be like expecting gay men to be more likely than straight men to sexually assault women.

seaponies

Oh come on. 'Kelpie' was already a perfectly cromulent word.

The premise of BLM is not that what happened to George Floyd was a personal tragedy for him but a rare, highly-unrepresentative stroke of bad luck, requiring a calm local investigation into what went wrong. The premise of BLM is that cops are routinely targetting black men for death, requiring nationwide [protesting/rioting and arson] to persuade the authorities to rein in the police violence ... and, implicitly, that the racial disparity in rates of deaths-by-cop cannot be accounted for by a comparable disparity in the rates of the kind of behavior that tends to draw the potentially-lethal attention of the cops.

You have people who are 130Iq on this site arguing that the US going from 100IQ to 95IQ is a CATASTROPHE. But what about the gap between 100 and 130?

To be fair, if there were a country with an average IQ of 130, for them it would be a catastrophe to be reduced to an average of 100. It's possible that, for a fixed percentage of 130 IQ people a country might have (assuming it's a low percentage), having a population average of 100 is still going to get you a significantly better standard of living than a population average of 95, even if the gap between 100 and 130 is much larger.

BIPOC

... pointedly doesn't lump together all the non-white people. 'Black and Indigenous People of Color' (where 'indigenous' can be taken to include people with a substantial Native American ancestry component, thus sweeping up most Latinos who aren't Conquistador-Americans) excludes Asians of both the South Asian and the East Asian persuasion. It's implicitly a catch-all term for 'non-white people who have worse average social outcomes than white people', a PC alternative for what used to be called 'non-Asian minorities'.

I don't think you understand that Europeans are themselves descended from extremely deeply diverged races.

No, I'm well aware of that. Just that after millennia of intermarriage, modern Europeans are a lot more homogenous (and largely distinct from the original Magyars, even though modern Hungarians claim continuity with them). I'm sure that the same would happen in Latin America too, given time, and barring any further large population migrations.

Hell, there is an entire industry of wannabe Solzhenitsyns sharing by now cliched Orwellisms that “The purpose of propaganda, at least in its late stage form, is not to inform you, or deceive you, or even manipulate you. It's to humiliate you.”

Sorry to nit-pick, but isn't that a Theodore Dalrympleism?

As a practical matter, if you are going to participate in discussion in what is still essentially the free-floating descendant of the comments section of Scott Alexander's blog, it is probably worth being familiar with the classics just to be up to speed with what people are talking about. But in this particular context, (a) I Can Tolerate Anything Except The Outgroup is a fun read, and (b) it talks about exactly the sort of way in which what beer you drink can be a class or "tribe" marker.