hanikrummihundursvin
No bio...
User ID: 673
hanikrummihundursvin
4yr ago
When members of parliament were having a discussion on banning infant genital mutilation the nation got a harshly worded letter from the ADL mentioning that there would be consequences if the people of the country and its representatives voted the wrong way. Following this the subject was dropped despite popular public support. There has also been one of the largest uptake of drug addicts and deaths following the introduction of drugs like Oxycontin. Outside of such direct examples of effect there are countless examples of indirect effects. Since, culturally, we are all living in America and there is no escape.
hanikrummihundursvin
4yr ago
You brought up mechanisms as an alternative explanation to jewish IQ. I wouldn't mind it if there were charismatic, ingenious, curious, high IQ people from Planet X running things so long as things ran in ways that weren't deleterious to my life. But that's not how things are run. Things run on the basis of group based favoritism and the people who run things have a very clear bias that they act on with impunity.
This is the product of jews in positions of influence and power. From marxist economics to Boasian anthropology to Freudian psychology to Frankfurt School sociology to jewish second and third wave feminism to neo-conservatism and towards whatever this modern amalgamation of all of this crap can be called. Today I'm living it.
I guess the mechanism matters to me because I find the idea that the smart, high IQ, ingenious, charismatic and naturally curios path and philosophy towards life should necessarily reach the conclusion that celebrating the demise of people who are identified as being like me to be insane. I can't read about the history of these allegedly horrible people, that have literally carried the world on their backs out of the goodness of their hearts and believe that their demise could in any way be better for anyone. I can't look my family members in the face and pretend that their lives live up to the horror stories conjured up about them by race hustling jews that occupy positions of power in academia and media. Similarly I can't imagine that the best way to run a pharmaceutical company is to kill hundreds of thousands of people by marketing extremely addictive painkillers to them. I can't imagine that the best way to cast women into movie roles is to see who is willing to suck your deformed penis. I can't imagine that an industry centered around pornography could be a good thing. If jews were really in positions of power because of the things you attributed to them then I could only be insane. You can't prop up an industries of sexual exploitation or mass drug addiction without there being some missing ingredients from your list of inherited mechanisms.
Who financed the railroads, the factories, the shipyards, the mines, the refineries, the mills?
Who invented and built them? Who invented and built the society that made those inventions possible? Who came in after all the leg work was done and leveraged their ill gotten gains to leech off of this process? Why on earth did jews need to finance Europeans in the first place instead of just financing themselves doing this?
Then grant me this, at least - which country do you live in and, if diverse, to what tribe do you belong? I am always interested.
I'm from Scandinavia.
hanikrummihundursvin
4yr ago
I don't see how that matters. The government shouldn't be in any way shape or form associated with censoring legal speech. It's not allowed to do that.
As a hyperbolic example, I am not allowed to ask someone to kill someone else. It doesn't matter if the person asked could say no. If they act on the request I am accessory to murder at the very least.
hanikrummihundursvin
4yr ago
I care because I don't like to be ruled over by a population group that gleefully advertises its hatred and genocidal tendencies towards mine. The question wasn't whether the mechanism by which they accrue power is hereditary or not. The question was what their IQ was and by what mechanism they accrue power.
The question and distinction between ability to do good and ability to do bad, i.e. exploit and leech, is extremely important. As as the case with Freud in the past and various jewish charlatans that abused the privilege of the position afforded to them by gentile society and used it to actively sabotage and destroy the lives of the people that maintained that society.
This might is right dogma you are hiding behind has no relevance here since the question is not who is winning but why they are winning. You've already granted my point and I have little interest in hearing you grandstand on the corpses of dead slaves and homeless bankrupted peasants in the name of jewish supremacy.
In other words financiers and labor-market brokers, the two most important roles in pre-modern commerce
No, I mean slave merchants and usurers. Two things that were not needed for Europe to prosper. As is made obviously clear by the fact that modern prosperity rose from North/Western European technological advances. Which, to bring the discussion full circle, contradicts the notion that jews were somehow needed for their alleged intellect.
hanikrummihundursvin
4yr ago
It's obviously a factor that you left out of your previous comment. Just getting your foot in academia is half the battle for most of the novel scientific advances. Most of which happen as a result of larger teams with networking that relies entirely on the institution. Considering the obscene overrepresentation of jews in all levels of academia I can't see how you could argue to the contrary. Especially considering the actual IQ of jews. The amount of exclusion going on in those institutions at the cost of gentiles is, again, obscene and is in no way justified by any metric. Or maybe it is, we'd have to see what the jewish thought and policy leaders have to say on that question. Hopefully they have some justification outside of racial hatred. Though I am so far yet to see it.
Jews outperformed even in the Ottoman Empire and Eastern Europe, both of which had native populations that did not have the pathological lack of ingroup preference with which some HBD proponents diagnose Western Europeans.
I guess we have a difference in defining performance. As far as I understand the history of jews as something other than wandering gypsies is that of slave merchants and usurers. I wouldn't call it a success to be run out of every other place in Europe and then managing to outcompete Turks in swindling their own peasants only to lose it all to the Greeks. But in any case I don't understand the relevance of this. Neither Turks nor Ukrainian peasants are, as far as I can tell, a relevant comparison to anything.
hanikrummihundursvin
4yr ago
Considering that most people in these institutions are not 155+ IQ, no the situation does not make sense. You have to crank the dial on the IQ score all the way up to get a number that doesn't betray the glaring obviousness of jewish overrepresentation. Which is why when the claim is 115 for jewish IQ, the IQ barometer is set at 145 or 140, and when we lower the jewish IQ score, the barometer for IQ goes up accordingly. I don't think this is a game worth playing and it becomes obvious how ridiculous it is when looking at the actual IQ scores of jews.
hanikrummihundursvin
4yr ago
If most HBD figures cited an inflated Chinese IQ score they would be wrong as well. I don't understand this authority worship here. Looking at studies on jewish IQ in the US, most focus on children and/or unrepresentative samples. I see no reason to look at the aggregate of bad studies over a single decent one regardless of what 'leading figures' have to say. If this is what they say I don't see a reason to consider them leading on the topic. Nor do I consider the disagreement between us to be on an equal level.
I don't understand your last paragraph. I'm not saying that it's a myth that jews are overrepresented where they are. I just hazard a guess to say that they are where they are, on top of everything you laid out, because of heavily expressed ingroup bias. Or, for a lack of a better term, nepotism. And I am sure that this is an inherited trait like all psychological traits are.
hanikrummihundursvin
4yr ago
They can cite higher numbers if they want, just like I can cite numbers that say the average IQ of a fieldworker in China is 122. That doesn't mean its very smart to do so. Considering that looking at a small sample of jewish children from high achieving families might skew the data. Similarly to how only looking at test takers from elite universities in Beijing might.
Lynn looked at vocabulary scores of jews living in the US as a proxy for IQ and saw that in that category they had an advantage that ultimately translates to 7 points. Considering that jews, in every study I've seen, are carried by their verbal score, but lag behind in other scores, such as spatial memory, I'd consider 104 to be a reasonable lower estimate, and considering I could be wrong somewhere, a 109 is a reasonable upper estimate.
I don't know why you think Lynn is such a bad researcher. He generated a lot of controversy with his rough estimates for IQ for areas that did not have much data. But it's not like he didn't know that these were rough estimates. The controversy was, as far as I could tell, carried nigh entirely by hysterics from people who did not belong at the table of psychometric research in the first place.
hanikrummihundursvin
4yr ago
No, looking at the tail ends the total number of jews is too low to account for the overrepresentation. At the elite level jews are outnumbered 6 to 1.
hanikrummihundursvin
4yr ago
So why not revolt against the modern world, if it is dehumanizing us like this? Or, a more modest proposal, rethink how we develop or interface with technology?
I mean, it seems to be a rather self defeating argument to bring up the fact that we have more ways now than ever to connect when we are standing right next to the fact that we are connecting less and less. And it certainly didn't stand as a valid argument in my household that playing video games was more fun than visiting grandma during Christmas. And whilst I didn't agree with it as a kid, I can certainly agree with and appreciate it now.
hanikrummihundursvin
4yr ago
I should have clarified, an 'imported' or foreign born asian wife. What I was saying is that this single data point doesn't necessarily point in the direction you need it to. It's not a matter of how many, it's a matter of recognizing that the course of your life and your expressed political beliefs don't always line up 100%. And just because they don't doesn't mean you don't feel how you feel regarding politics and your in and outgroups.
hanikrummihundursvin
4yr ago
Not necessarily. A jew marrying a gentile can still be excessively ethnocentric in all matter besides marital. Similar to how an anti-immigration forklift operator can have an asian wife. .
hanikrummihundursvin
4yr ago
Looking at jewish IQ and the total number of jewish people in the entire world, any high IQ jew would be outnumbered by a similar IQ Anglo, in the US alone, by a factor of 6.
hanikrummihundursvin
4yr ago
European jews don't have an IQ of 115. At best you have an upper bound estimate at around 109. Lower bound being 104.
hanikrummihundursvin
4yr ago
The extra qualifiers are completely irrelevant or flat out wrong. Irrelevant in the sense that, similar to how people want to put themselves behind thought crimes, if I break a window in response to a republican getting elected am I then a better person than if I break a window due to a democrat getting elected?
Flat out wrong in the sense that the people went to protest, not to overthrow the rule of law but to, in their view, justly impose it. They believed that Pence had the legal authority to overthrow the FAKE election results and reinstate a the authentic election results.
In either case it's an wordgame of chess where the entire argument is based on bad faith assumptions about these people. But also, in either case, it would still be completely wrong and irrelevant since we have an example of the same actions taking place when Trump was elected. But then, every single time, the argument oscillates back to 'but that wasn't a serious threat' despite it being already established that no one believes that the J6 was a serious threat either.
hanikrummihundursvin
4yr ago
The mythology of culture as an external force that perpetuates itself on its own motion is just that.
The only coherent definition of cultural expression is that of genetic material expressing itself in an environment. If you drastically change the environment you change the culture. On top of that, genetic expression can change environment in a feedback loop. But as soon as you change the genes, such as can be seen with, for example, Pakistanis in Britain, you get a massive shift where it becomes obvious where the non-Pakistani genes were doing the work and where the environment was modulating behavior.
There is also a hidden assumption here I find wrong. That, because someone in the past was using primitive tools or technology they must be 'primitive' in comparison to a modern human, that their modes of behavior and emotion were somehow primitive or different in a way that would distinguish them from the emotional expressions of a modern human. There is no reason to assume that the people of the past differ from the people of the present. I am in fact quite sure that a lot of people from the past would become quite docile if they lived in the same luxury modern people live in. And they would modulate their behavior accordingly if their luxurious lifestyle was threatened by them stepping out of line. In fact, it would be absurd to suggest otherwise given this is where the modern man came from. Even if the transformation wasn't without some culling of volatile genetic material, there is no reason to assume that the all the volatility of the past was culled, and that it did not instead modulate to a more prosperous future.
hanikrummihundursvin
4yr ago
Race isn't the question. The question is instead just a proxy for race. Repeat ad infinitum.
hanikrummihundursvin
4yr ago
I agree completely. Where I don't agree is that if we just had voting booths and term limits, those problems would be in any meaningful way affected.
hanikrummihundursvin
4yr ago
Take any defamation case that did not result in a trillion dollar fine and compare it with this one.
hanikrummihundursvin
4yr ago
Most places have serious issues.
hanikrummihundursvin
4yr ago
Saying that countries have weaker executives is irrelevant to the fact that there are people in power who sit there for years.
My country, generally considered one of the best in the world when it comes to democracy stuff, had a president who sat in office for 20 years. An office that had the executive power to refuse to sign laws into effect, which the president used more than once. During the same time the prime minister had held office for 12 years as such. You can play pretend and say that because the country is run by a parliament filled with political parties there is some wiggle room for... whatever it is you think is not 'dictatorship', but in reality, the prime minster was also the guy that had executive control over the biggest party in the country and was very buddy buddy with another party leader of a very big party which meant they had de facto complete control over the country. Having a weaker executive was irrelevant. These guys could do what they want, which they did.
I don't see why the label of 'dictator' is in any way relevant nor, still, do I understand the doom and gloom of your post or the implied optimism of alternatives.
hanikrummihundursvin
4yr ago
A lot of places don't have a two term rule or anything similar, leading to prime ministers who sit 10-15 years and there are no issues. In short, I'm not really understanding the doom and gloom in your post.
hanikrummihundursvin
4yr ago
That answer is obviously lacking considering no other defamation cases end up with a trillion dollar tagline.
hanikrummihundursvin
4yr ago
Those would all be relevant arguments if we were talking about purely win/lose consequence. But we're not. We are talking about trillions vs slaps on the wrist.
The term 'revolt against the modern world' is not revolutionary in the marxist sense. It's referential to Evola and a book that carries the name. It's less Karl Marx and more Varg Vikernes.
More options
Context Copy link