The Future of America?

Commenter Sagat referred me to a suprisingly good show by the History Channel describing what could happen in the US if civilization fell apart due to some pathogenic plague. The show tries to get you to buy into the swine flu / avian flu pharmaceutical scams, but I think any plague on a civilization-ending scale will be bioengineered by terrorists.

Yes, the show had its liberal moments, but overall it reinforces many bio-con talking points.

The protagonist is a hapless beta provider with an annoying cunt of a wife. Over the course of the show, he gets more and more alpha, and his wife responds by becoming more wifely. He never completely crosses the Rubicon into pure alpha territory, but the harsh conditions force him to move up from almost Omega to Greater Beta status.

The really interesting parts, as Sagat noted, were the thinly veiled HBD and WN references by the woven narrative of talking heads and the statements of fictitious characters. L.A. and other urban areas turn into hellholes of rampaging NAMs. References to Katrina abound. The wife pleads with her husband to move to the known WN haven of Idaho, presumably to escape the savagery of the NAMs in LA.  Eventually the family settles in a small, all-white town with a preacher who proudly claims those “recently from the desert” (mexicans) and “those recently from the jungle” (blacks) are being “winnowed out” (dying off, killed off). A revealing scene is also when the family moves into their previously occupied home and notes the previous family’s “interesting taste in crockery” (yes, History Channel, we get the pun) while unpacking. The part where the beta husband actually shows his wife what is printed on the pot is censored, leaving a frustrating gap. It might have been too much for the History Channels large NAM viewership, which they gave a nod to with every “This is not a real emergency” announcement.

This got me thinking, even if there is only a 1-5% chance of this sort of scenario, it would be prudent to have at least the following in one’s possession:

– a gun and ammo

– emergency 60 gallon water bags to fill up before the water is turned off

– gold and cigarettes for bartering

– medical supplies, 3-6 months worth of canned foods, and seeds

-how-to books on gardening, machinery, and other skills.

I think also think the show is right in forecasting an initial post-apocalyptic takeover by NAMs, since most white males are hamstrung by a beta mentality, like that of our pussified paramedic protagonist, and would get their asses beat. Eventually, however, a resounding pushback by whites to the point of ethnic cleansing would occur.

Boy I hope all of this does not happen.

Blacks and Hispanics Protest Accurate Art

A bunch of snobby blacks and Hispanics in NYC have been up in arms over Sofia Maldonado’s  murals that accurately depict female denizens of the ghetto (and the new Section 8 suburbs). 

 

You can view some of her work here:

 

Leaders and activists representing Hispanic and African-American communities of New York City gathered on 42nd Street in Manhattan on March 17th to demand the removal of a mural installed in the area,  around the corner from Times Square.

The mural, a 92 feet long by 12 feet high acrylic on plywood work by Sofia Maldonado is mounted on a construction site fence between Broadway and 8th Avenue in one of the most visited areas of the city. It depicts a group of Hispanic and African-American women.

In an open letter to the Board of Directors of the Times Square Alliance,. protesters claim the mural “is unacceptable” as it “depicts African American and Hispanic women in a negative light”.

 

While I commend the black and Hispanic protesters for their superior cultural taste, it doesn’t occur to them, strangely, that a good number of their co-ethnics do a great job of depicting themselves in a negative light. And since all cultures are equal, we should be able to find beauty in all of them!

Sofia responds to the protests, in typical batshit feminist fashion:

 “My artwork intends and aims to represent brave, strong, and tough women who have to overcome struggles in their daily lives and sometimes impose themselves in a male-dominated world. In a post-feminist society these women can own their bodies in a powerful way without being depicted negatively.”

 

Maldonado wanted her work to “represent a female aesthetic that normally isn’t seen in Times Square. Women who dress like this should be respected in society the same way as women with briefcases.”

 

I  actually support the reality-based work of Ms. Maldonado, although for slightly different reasons (I assume).  Contrary to her delusional fantasies, the dysfunctional “people” depicted in her art will never be respected on the same level as productive professionals of any race. The more her artwork is promoted, the faster the multicultural bubble will pop.  I say we should plaster these murals all over the country to remind other citizens exactly who their tax dollars are supporting in America’s ever-expanding wealth redistribution scheme.

 

I’m adding Sofia to my blogroll.

 

 

Nature vs Nurture is Stupid

It’s rather ridiculous to me how HBD-deniers always trot out cultural explanations as some kind of trump card to nullify any genetic explanation of human group variance. Jews have high IQs because study is so ingrained in their culture, Chinese have high innate visuospatial ability because of their writing system, and blacks are more athletic because…wait, is there ever a culture-only explanation presented for this?  But I digress. The blinders are quite selective, since they are irrational blinders.

Does it not occur to these egalitarians that someone who is genetically dumb would not be reproductively successful in a Jewish population? Cast out to the goyim, he would be. Does it not occur to these people that a Chinese person who had difficulty with literacy due to diminished visuospatial ability would not be as desireable of a mate as his literate peers? Nerdy blacks are socially ostracized while black females gravitate to criminally-inclined men with testosterone overload. Culture is indeed very important. Why? Because it shapes the genes of the population.

Conversely, it should be obvious that the Chinese writing system would never occur in a population with the average qualities of sub-saharan Africans.  Genes shape culture.

The catch is you can modify an individual’s culture, but you can’t change his genes. The traits he either does or does not have will need to be selected for/against by the population at large, due to the culture of the population. Our wars in the middle east and in our ghetto schoolrooms have shown what a losing battle it is to shape a population’s culture. It’s much easier to strike at the root and adopt eugenic policies.

This is all so intuitively obvious that it shouldn’t need to be said. But judging from the comments I’ve read here and elsewhere, it should be.

In other genetic news, there’s a new and improved genetic test for Alzheimer’s.

Sorry, those-who-would-blame-vaccines. Autism is largely genetic. And the reason why it is concentrated heavily in areas like Silicon Valley should be painfully obvious to any of us who know computer geeks.

Beyond Belief

One of the relics from a more superstitious era that manages to poison the debate-wells in our (relatively) enlightened times is the word belief.

A religious person would say he believes in God, or he believes that the Earth was created 6000 years ago with Adam and Eve riding dinosaurs shortly thereafter. These beliefs are a psychological commitment to an assertion, however likely or unlikely that assertion may be.

A so-called “rational thinker” may scoff at the simplicity of a religious person’s beliefs, but they often make the very same fallacy that superstitious people do, resulting in all the same negative side-effects. Here is what happens:

1. Rationalist encounters a hotly contested argument – Argument AB.

2. Rationalist weighs the body of evidence on both sides.

3. Rationalist concludes that Side A has more evidence than Side B.

4. Rationalist decides he is a believer in side A.

This is where things go wrong. Rather than simply remembering that Side A simply had a more convincing case at the point in time whereupon our protagonist reviewed the evidence, Rationalist instead decided to stake belief in the Side he found more likely.

be·lief : 1. The mental act, condition, or habit of placing trust or confidence in another: My belief in you is as strong as ever. 2. Mental acceptance of and conviction in the truth, actuality, or validity of something: His explanation of what happened defies belief.3. Something believed or accepted as true, especially a particular tenet or a body of tenets accepted by a group of persons.

// Synonyms: belief, credence, credit, faith

It often does not matter whether the Rationalist staked his belief in something only 55% more likely than the alternative . The word belief was born and raised  in a black and white world of Good and Evil, Right and Wrong, of intellectual Authority and Submission. Let’s watch what happens next to our Rationalist:

5.  Skeptic presents evidence that counters Rationalist’s new belief  – and may even tip the scales in favor of Side B!

6. Rationalist, now psychologically invested in Side A, has a non-rational, visceral reaction to Skeptic, and foams at the mouth like a Catholic priest encountering the work of Galileo. An unproductive flame war (Inquisition) ensues! (we’ll ignore the fact for now that our Skeptic may just be another kind of believer, and that more often than not, self-proclaimed Rationalists are merely parroting other members of their intellectual tribe instead of actually doing steps 2-3)

It’s my opinion that too many people still think in the old religious manner of belief and non-belief. If we expand our minds to think in a more probabilistic Bayesian fashion, then we can avoid the emotional shock of encountering evidence that shakes our deeply held beliefs – since any such beliefs will become almost non-existant.

I find thinking in such a way allows me to explore the arguments of various unorthodox (and ridiculed) possibilities. What I often find is that while unorthodox Position X is unlikely to be true, I subjectively assess the actual odds of X’s truthiness at much higher levels than someone would who thinks only in terms of 0% and 100%. The implications of this are significant: With 5 unorthodox Position X’s at 20% probability-of-truth, any one of them is still unlikely to be true, but chances are one of them is.

I think we need a new word to replace “belief”. Is there a word out there that conveys acceptance of something found more likely to be true, without all the dogmatic psychological baggage of belief?

Best of the Blogroll

I’m a little late with some of these, but better late than never. I’ve been busy recently so here’s some web browsing fodder to keep you all occupied while you await my next armchair crank theory. Here are what I found to be the most interesting posts by those on the PG blogroll:

Beta Revolution- Word of the Day: Autocannibalism

Chuck Ross on fatties

HalfSigma’s posts on value transference here here here here here and….well, just click on the front page for the rest.

Ferdinand on the absurdity of paying for online news articles.

Levi Johnston, Infant Mortality and Race

Jamila on that overhyped, absurd theory entertained by some MRA guys that men will leave sex with women for hi-tech blow-up dolls in the near future.

OneSTDV takes on David Shenk‘s stupid new book. Shenk responds in the comments.

Steve Hsu on cognitive thresholds.

The Asian of Reason illustrates Asian math standards vs. American standards in his post The Quantitative Advantage.

Vincent on White Knighting.

Enjoy. There’s other great posts on these blogs, and I didn’t link to those blogs where reading every post is obviously mandatory, like Roissy, Razib on Scienceblogs, and Steve Sailer.

The Defining Trait of a Natural Alpha

I spend a lot of my time just watching people and forming new offensive stereotypes taking notes. Those of us who have studied Game material know the importance of dominance in social settings, and how some people are “Natural Alphas”. From my observations, I’d wager that natural alpha males are 1% or less of the general population. When I meet a natural alpha, I observe closely, and I’ve learned some interesting things, but there is one behavior that is an instant alpha marker.

The one trait that all natural alphas share is a complete disregard for another person’s personal space.

When natural alphas walk by, they brush against you. They absolutely refuse to concede any space to you, the beta interloper, even when social norms indicate that they should. Most normal people make a mutual, cooperative effort to avoid close contact. Not alphas. If they are in a crowded club, they walk straight through, bumping drinks and making no apologies. In a movie theater, they walk down the aisle not caring if people tuck their feet in.

And they do all this unconsciously, not seeing anything odd with this behavior.

I’ve tried it myself, and it works. Nobody fucks with a guy who doesn’t budge.

If you meet a  natural alpha, often you do not need to resort to verbal tactics to AMOG him. Invade his personal space and don’t budge one inch when he invades yours. (Yes, you will make contact, and yes it will feel awkward for those of us who aren’t alphas. But do it anyway.) Since this is all an unconscious process for naturals, he will instinctively submit to you when you out-alpha him in this manner.

Calculated effort defeats unrealized potential. All the time.

Planet Grok’s Positive Eugenics Plan for America

Today, at this very hour, the United States is facing a severe crisis of genetic proportions, with millions of our low-IQ, unskilled workers and “guests” breeding like rabbits on Viagra, subsidized by free pellets and easy females. Meanwhile, our most able citizens are opting out of the breeding process, putting our country on a course for demographic disaster. It is time for action. Drastic action. Our country needs a genetic bailout. Here is my six-point plan:

1. Close and secure our borders, and deport every illegal alien we can reasonably find.

2. Everyone with an IQ of 90 or below that chooses to get sterilized receives 4 thousand dollars for every point below 90; provided they also pass a lie detector test verifying they didn’t cheat by answering everything wrong.

3. Every married couple with an IQ above 120 gets 10,000 dollars per new verified child for every point above 120, and a 4% reduction in federal income tax for 18 years per new child.  So a married couple with a combined average IQ of 125 who has three kids under my plan would receive federal grants totaling 30,000 and a 12% reduction in federal income tax.

4. I recognize that there are probably more heritable traits that contribute to productive success than just IQ, so anyone with a net worth of over 5 million dollars gets a 5% reduction in capital gains tax per verified child, a 10% reduction of estate tax per verified child, and a 5 % reduction in income tax per verified child, in addition to the grants.

5. Immigration. While most of the so-called immigration we have seen recently has been harmful, it does not have to be this way. High quality immigrants contribute greatly to our country’s success, as our country’s history with Jewish, German, and Asian immigration has shown. I propose opening our country up to more high quality immigrants from non-hostile countries by slashing the red tape and waiting periods, and granting these aspiring immigrants 4,000 dollars for every IQ point above the minimum of 120 to start a new life here in America. In return for this generosity, they will not be allowed to vote or seek public office for 25 years. No new immigrants with an IQ below 120 will be admitted.

6. Slash welfare benefits. Eliminate the EITC and limit the length of time one can spend on any social safety net to 3 years per lifetime, with 1 year being the limit for Medicaid.

Any questions?

So President Grok, how did you come up with your numbers?

I basically pulled them out of my nearest volcano. An IQ of 90 -120 seems to be a reasonable range for “normals”, so no incentives or disincentives there. But if you’d like to take the time to propose better or harsher incentives and disincentives respectively, you’re welcome to do so. Paulson said he chose 700 billion because it sounded like a pretty big number, so I’m being a little more rigorous than my predecessors.

Won’t this cost a lot of money? Could it bankrupt us?

On a nationwide basis I expect it will cost less than the bank bailout and will be a true investment in our genetic future.

Eugenics? Are you a Nazi?

No. My plan is both race and class-blind, and it does not force anything upon any citizen.

Well what about disparate impact?

If intelligence is malleable (wink), then all minorities need to do is hit the books a little bit using the IQ test information that can be downloaded from www.whitehouse.gov. There will be equal access to all information about our new IQ tests.

Swip-hop

It’s a well known fact that on any college campus, there will be groups of SWPLs who profess an undying love of hip-hop. SWPLs take pride in vicariously identifying with the black struggle, so appreciation for a particular black artist or artform is mandatory for social acceptance. For those that choose hip-hop, this produces a conundrum: how can a group of people with relatively high IQ’s really appreciate the music that so well evinces the low IQ of another group?

Answer: they follow the spirit of SWPL rule # 116 and listen to hip hop that actual black people do not listen to, like Mos Def, Little Brother, The Roots or Talib Kweli. Rap artists like these fit the minimum IQ threshold for a white person to listen to without suppressing nausea, but by definition the music these types of artists produce also precludes them from having many actual black fans.

Sometimes SWPLs will make an IQ exception for especially weird hip hop acts like MF Doom, because they equate strangeness with “artsy”.

No rap artist wants to appeal to SWPLs, in part because the more intelligent black artists who make Swip-hop have fantasies about lifting their race up through their music, and are resentful that the only people who show up to their concerts are white. SWPLs are also very trendy and will outgrow their love of this “real hip hop” (which is anything but) shortly after graduating (when they will move on to trendy indie rock bands), therefore there is no sustainable revenue source to be gained from any generation of SWPL fans. It’s a constant treadmill the artists run, trying desperately each year to remain relevant to each incoming class of college freshmen.

There are three target audiences of modern hip hop: The SWPLs, white proles, and black people (white proles and blacks have more cultural overlap than blacks and SWPLs, so distinctions are not as stark here). Of these target audiences, the monetary sweet spot is the white proles. Jay Z and 50 Cent are two artists who have hit the sweet spot of white prole appeal.  The most intelligent hip hop artists are able to make Swip-hop, but recognize the financial folly of doing so, so they lower their standards to suit white proles. Jay Z admits this when he says, in his song “A Moment of Clarity”, “I dumb down for my audience and double my dollars”.

Besides IQ, another large reason SWPLs do not like these successful, “commercial” hip hop acts is solely because they are widely liked by white proles. The standards of white proles are rather low: to be accepted by white proles as a listenable hip hop act, they only have to have a reasonable level of black acceptance and also have their singles appear alongside Britney Spears on top 40 radio stations. In many ways, gaining the acceptance of black hip hop fans is even harder – to do this, a hip hop artist has to compile a lengthy criminal record in order to appear “true to the streets”. Since there is little direct financial benefit in having a black fanbase, who just purchases albums bootleg anyway, many hip hop artists try to skip this crucial step, only realizing their mistake when the white proles reject them for not having enough black acceptance.

There’s only one hip hop act I can think of that appeals to black people, white proles, and SWPLs, and that is Nas. SWPLs like Nas because he is responsible for the quintessential “classic” (SWPLs love anything “classic”) hip hop album “Illmatic” , white proles like Nas because he is on the radio and is also accepted by black people, who like Nas because Nas “keeps it real” and still acts ghetto. Nas’s large black fanbase mean that SWPLs will profess their love for Nas but will never actually go to one of his concerts (unless their college in the boondocks has booked him), because then they will be forced to look down the dark canyon of HBD reality, something they can not stomach.

Lest I forget to post these and thus deprive you all, hat tip to commenter PA on Obsidian’s blog for these awesome Swip-hop videos:

What does Razib think of GNXPers?

“in my experience as a blogger most “discussion” is retarded and most discussants are barely sentient.” here

Not “in my experience as someone who reads many blog comments”, but “in my experience as a blogger”.  Ouch.  Lol. There’s not really a charitable way to spin this. Razib thinks we’re a bunch of  ‘tards. Oh well, I guess.

Controversy in the Comments

Some people seemed to take my post “The Racial Tallies Are In” a lot more seriously than I did. David Alexander felt the need to become the Atlas of the black race and wallow in the pits of racial despair yet again. Obsidian chided me for not being DA’s shrink, again. A couple of Hispanic commenters took offense at my joke that Hispanics have no racial strengths (despite the fact that I can almost guarantee these commenters look nothing like the border jumpers) and some White Power guy felt the need to make an ill-informed and offensive rant. I briefly thought about censoring Mr. Stormfront, but then I figured that since I had already let Obsidian call white people “crackers” several times, I would let this comment slide also. The Asian of Reason took the assessments in stride as usual, and contributed to my mission of building more accurate racial stereotypes.

All very interesting.

Vincent Ignatius made a couple of good points that tied into an earlier post, Mr. Kurtz syndrome. He commented that the people who seem to be the most snobby about their intelligence are those ~2 standard deviations above the norm, because those that are much higher have a hard time relating to people in general, even other “smart” people. I think he’s on track here.

Mr. Kurtz Syndrome is most likely going to set in when a person’s idealistic notions of reality come crashing down. When you have an IQ of about 130 or so (top 2 or 3 %), you’ll spend your youth surrounded by other people of about the same intelligence. Many families have an historical mean IQ of 130. I’d wager that this describes the average AP student in a US high school (besides those schools in heavily minority districts where students are improperly tracked into AP classes).  When your IQ gets to ~ 3 standard deviations, it is hard to relate to even the “smart kids”, so you either 1) stop being picky, or 2) don’t develop any friends at all, and fall off the “nerd cliff”. Those who have extremely high IQ’s are thus unlikely to develop Mr. Kurtz syndrome because they are unlikely to develop overly idealistic notions of intellectual equality to begin with.

Obsidian just put up a new post where he seems to think the end result of HBD acceptance is the extermination of black people. That’s silly. But he wisely chose to quote at length the much more articulate David Alexander, which may make his post worth responding to.