London Student: Exposed: London’s eugenics conference and its neo-Nazi links
A eugenics conference held annually at University College London by an honorary professor, the London Conference on Intelligence, is dominated by a secretive group of white supremacists with neo-Nazi links, London Student can exclusively reveal.
Content note: This article contains references to racism, anti-Semitism and child abuse.
The conference has taken place at UCL four times since its inception in 2014, and now even boasts its own YouTube channel bearing the UCL logo.
UCL have told London Student that they are investigating the conference. A spokesperson said: “We are an institution that is committed to free speech but also to combatting racism and sexism in all forms.”
Some background: This scandal broke out when Toby Young, a conservative British political figure with a colorful history of Twitter controversies, was appointed to a government board on education – and removed almost instantaneously, after this story broke in The London Student, and was subsequently reported across all of Britain’s major newspapers, including The Telegraph, The Guardian, and The Daily Mail.
Surprising enough – though perhaps not, for people familiar with the venom establishment conservatives are capable of – The Telegraph’s account is even more downright nasty and libellous than The Guardian’s, despite the former being considered to be the mouthpiece of The Conservative Party, while the latter is but a slightly higher end version of VICE and the late Gawker. In contrast, the usually tabloidy Daily Mail, representing Britain’s “Red Tribe,” has the most measured tone.
So what is there to say?
First, I really need to emphasize that James Thompson’s views are not controversial in academic psychometrics.
Yes, I suppose that by SJW standards, 83% of all IQ experts are white supremacists, since the only politically correct position is that 0% of group IQ differences are due to genes.
Incidentally, this would include people like Richard Haier, Jelte Wicherts and James Flynn, who all attended the ISIR conference conference in Canada last year, which according to The Guardian was “a similar conference” to the London Conference on Intelligence.
Customary reminder that IQ studies are the only major branch of psychology that is not afflicted by the replication crisis.
So hey, you want to defenestrate Thompson et al.? You would have to ban pretty much all of academic psychometrics for consistency.
UCL professor David Colquhoun expressed disbelief that the university would host such “pseudoscience” and stated that the organiser, Professor James Thompson, “clearly doesn’t understand genetics.”
“The actual genetic difference between humans, with respect to race or sex, is absolutely miniscule compared to what they have in common,” he told London Student.
This is just a direct example of Lewontin’s fallacy. Greg Cochran deconstructs it very concisely here.
Or if you need a higher profile name, here is what Dawkins has to say about it:
If any outside readers are interested in what typically gets presented at the conferences of this cabal white supremacists with Neo-Nazi links, a few of the speeches from 2017 are available online have been (hopefully temporarily) taken down, but you can still view Emil Kirkegaard’s speech.
As regards the allegations (frankly smears) against Emil Kirkegaard, they are based on the fantasies of a demented and unusually dedicated stalker, the contents of which he has addressed in some detail at his blog.
See also the video Emil has just released with Tara McCarthy about this affair.
One amusing thing jumps out in particular – the apparent inability of the “journalist” behind this piece to read the texts he links to.
Thompson is a frequent contributor to the Unz Review, which has been described as “a mix of far-right and far-left anti-Semitic crackpottery,” and features articles such as ‘America’s Jews are Driving America’s Wars’ and ‘What to do with Latinos?’. His own articles include frequent defences of the idea that women are innately less intelligent than men (1, 2, 3, and 4), and an analysis of the racial wage gap which concludes that “some ethnicities contribute relatively little,” namely “blacks.
It is safe to say that most people reading this on The London Student would come away with the impression that Fred Reed, the author of the article “What to do with Latinos?“, is some sort of hardcore anti-Latino fanatic.
Here’s a few quotes from that article:
The embittered anti-immigration people, readers of sites like VDare, would not care. Screw the vile brown scum, rapists and welfare parasites, murderers, drug peddlers, low-IQ nasty unevolved human flatworms. The bastards came illegally, so to hell with them. …
Many of the white nationalists exhibit an almost effeminate squeamishness at the thought of their precious bodily essences being polluted by oozing dark sludge. Well, as you will. There are reasons why this view isn’t going to prevail. See below.
Much hate so racism wow.
Meanwhile, in the world of reality, as opposed to the make-believe world of Britbong SJWs who don’t read their own links and don’t think anybody else would either, Fred Reed is married to a Mexican, voluntarily (and apparently happily) lives in Mexico, and is actually disliked in White Nationalist circles, to the extent that they are aware of him.
Anyhow, continue to read The Unz Review – apart from the content, which stands for itself, you will also be entertained by neverending media drama and flame wars with the collective Society 282 and their “powerful takes” (see right for an especially powerful example).
Jokes aside, though, it’s pretty sad. Considering the very close relationship between intelligence and economic development, understanding it better should be one of the largest priorities in terms of alleviating global poverty and suffering – especially since we might be on the cusp of technological solutions (voluntary bioengineering).
It’s also in the end futile. The West may well stick its head in the sand on this issue, but China surely won’t, and will be all the more dominant in the 21st century on account of it.
The usual smear, but not a bad advert for those inclined to think outside the Official Truth dogmas.
Bearing in mind the suggestion made by Steven Pinker (alluded to by Sailer here the other day) that exposure to truths not normally allowed to be stated can be a gateway to the Alt Right for many intelligent people, this kind of thing could be a good recruiting tool for the ranks of the deplorables.
To me at any rate, the juxtaposition of these two statements suggests that Thompson likely understands a lot more about genetics and its significance than Colquhoun. If Colquhoun wants to take Thompson on in the latter’s own area of expertise I think he’ll get a thorough intellectual thrashing.
If Colquhoun does know anything about genetics, he perhaps ought to take the authors or editors of this piece to task for making him look such an idiot.
And that’s a very nasty smear of Emil Kirkegaard further down in the article, wilfully misrepresenting, for obvious malicious intent, the content of the blog piece in question (note they left off its concluding sentences: “Oh, and perhaps the best solution to one who is exclusively aroused by very young children: castration, either medical or fysical. This will help reduce libido.”).
As usual, the genuinely nastiest individuals involved turn out to be the SJWs.
The Telegraph was useless even years ago when I read its website, its only difference from the Guardian is its somewhat more extreme promotion of Mideast regime change projects and America worship.
Really depressing, everything just seems to be getting worse and worse. I would have thought that by now the absurdity and the contradictions of the dominant belief system should have become increasingly obvious, but apparently not.
The audacity of these people (in this case a professor) is off the scale, how anyone who is supposed to be an expert on genetics can make such claims is disturbing to put it mildly.
LOL, I just noticed that second article links to Fred Reed: https://www.unz.com/freed/what-to-do-with-latinos/
Wow so much hate I can’t even.
Well, its completely true and utterly meaningless. We share 60% genetic similarity to a banana.
So we are more similar to bananas than not.
As West Hunt blog notes, it matters what those genes are. I would share a lot of absolute similarity with a clone of me with his amygdala removed, but in actual behavior, the absence of a brain structure in my clone will show.
AK: Just for reference: https://westhunt.wordpress.com/2017/12/19/how-to-be-different/
So is the actual genetic difference between humans and literal chimpanzees. What are we, about 6% different from them genetically?
It is even simpler to point out the difference between Usain Bolt (and the rest of the West African descended sprinters) and the average man, clearly the difference in speed is significant, whatever small difference in DNA there is makes all the difference. Unlike IQ, this cannot weaseled out by the usual arguments, it is too obvious to ignore.
Is he an “expert” on genetics? His Wikipedia page suggests he’s an old school pharmacologist, but that presumably wouldn’t necessarily require any knowledge of genetics beyond that contained in basic medical school courses.
His fatuous quote is more suggestive of someone with only a vague general knowledge of the subject, quoting something he’s heard someone say that sounds profound to him, but that is actually irrelevant to the present context.
Anyone know whether this Private Eye story is correctly quoting Emil Kirkergaard (re raping kids is ok if they are drugged)?
https://twitter.com/paullewismoney/status/951188200072142848
AK: Original article is easily Google-able: https://emilkirkegaard.dk/en/?p=3229
Is anyone surprised at this? The Gnostic Sect of Feelz has arisen…facts are irrelevant…
“The death of the spirit is the price of progress. Nietzsche revealed this mystery of the Western apocalypse when he announced that God was dead and that He had been murdered. This Gnostic murder is constantly committed by the men who sacrificed God to civilization. The more fervently all human energies are thrown into the great enterprise of salvation through world–immanent action, the farther the human beings who engage in this enterprise move away from the life of the spirit. And since the life the spirit is the source of order in man and society, the very success of a Gnostic civilization is the cause of its decline. A civilization can, indeed, advance and decline at the same time—but not forever. There is a limit toward which this ambiguous process moves; the limit is reached when an activist sect which represents the Gnostic truth organizes the civilization into an empire under its rule. Totalitarianism, defined as the existential rule of Gnostic activists, is the end form of progressive civilization.” —Eric Voegelin, New Science of Politics, 1952
Good luck my friends
In fact Kirkegaard’s blog was linked in the London Student article AK originally quoted, and AK has added a link to your post. Its description in both the London Student piece and the Private Eye article was wilfully and maliciously misleading imo.
You can read his piece yourself, but in any case just consider that his conclusion was: “Oh, and perhaps the best solution to one who is exclusively aroused by very young children: castration, either medical or fysical. This will help reduce libido.“
Tbh this really is a phenomenally stupid post which reflects very poorly on Kierkegaard, even if it’s just a thought experiment. I don’t think he’ll get much sympathy for such proposals (“raping an unconscious child as a compromise”…most charitable interpretation is that you’re somewhat autistic to get such an idea), especially from people with children.
I’m sure you are correct that that is how superficial readers of it, and non-intellectual types in general, will regard it.
If you read the piece carefully, though, it is not advocating anything and is merely discussing the hypothetical moral issues facing a hypothetical person born with the inclination towards paedophilia.
It’s a textbook example of how intellectuals discuss hypotheticals without concern for mere appearance. If that’s “autistic” then autism is what’s required for clinical thinking. The final two sentences suggest the author’s actual personal opinion on how to address paedophilia in practice.
I’ll copy the relevant part here:
Yeah sure, one possible interpretation (perhaps most likely) is that he’s merely stating the thought process of a pedophile. But let’s just say this is phrased in a way which lends itself to many possible interpretations (“One must dinstinguish between rape…” – so does Kirkegaard believe rape of an unconscious person isn’t that bad???).
At the very least, if you’re writing things under your real name on the net and hope to have some influence on a general audience, you should avoid writing something as idiotic as this.
Rather, he’s stating the ethical issues that a hypothetical obligate paedophile would face if he were to try to address his own condition based upon materialist assumptions and utilitarian ethics.
Yes (assuming it leaves no physical harm) – this is a basic materialist utilitarian ethical position.
The harm from rape cannot be some kind of spiritual or theoretical harm merely from the fact of having been raped, it must have a real basis (if you are a materialist and a utilitarian, which is the position Kirkegaard seems to be arguing from). In practice, a lot of the “harm” ordinary folk do perceive as flowing from rape is precisely this kind of mystical damage, of course.
Yes, it’s pragmatically foolish if you have intentions of becoming a politician, but if all intellectuals were forced to confine their discussions and speculations to issues that wouldn’t spook the horses, as it were, then intellectual life would be severely inhibited – this is of course exactly where we are currently headed.
But pretending that it represents any kind of advocacy of paedophilia by Kirkegaard is outright dishonest.
Criticise his materialist premises and utilitarian ethics, fine. Dispute the argument he sets out based upon its content, fine. But unless he’s set out a position promoting paedophilia elsewhere, and his final two sentences can be shown to be unrepresentative of his true position, there’s no basis for the smear that Private Eye and the London Student have perpetrated here.
Funny. Over the holidays I’ve been reading Jordan Ellenberg’s How Not to Be Wrong, which discusses some history of statistics and genetics, particularly Francis Galton. (Ellenberg is mostly fair-handed throughout the book, but can’t resist suggesting Galton was a proto-Nazi. Well Jews, even if they are mathematicians, can be forgiven for being a little touchy on these matters.) Anyhow, there is at UCL to this day a Galton Professor, though nowadays of Genetics rather than Eugenics.
I’m not sure about that at all…I’m not that knowledgeable about philosophy, ethics etc. (much of it seems like a waste of time tbh), but someone’s personal bodily autonomy should be a greater good imo than the short-term sexual pleasure of the rapist. There’s also the matter that to rape an unsconscious person you have to drug that person or render him/her unconscious which has an inherent risk of doing serious damage. Even from a materialist perspective the benefits to the rapist and the possible/likely harm to the victim are grossly disproportionate.
Sure, but that’s what’s going to happen…and you see, even here we’re now discussing this nonsense, not the real issues of race, IQ etc. It’s just stupid to write something like this, it’s perfect ammunition for the other side.
Also the risk of sexually transmitted infections. Also the right of the other person not to be drugged unconscious without consent. It’s already impossible for a child to consent to being drugged.
Certainly in retrospect that post was politically inadvisable, and could have been argued better (the multiple spelling mistakes in it indicate that it was written spur of the moment), but let’s be realistic here for a second.
EOK was never especially interested in politics. (Too bad that politics did become interested in him).
The only reason it surfaced was because he had the misfortune of acquiring a demented and unusually dedicated stalker.
It happened in 2012. Almost anybody who has written a substantial amount of content over many years can be made out to be the lowest scumbag through quote-mining and elision of context.
“Personal bodily autonomy” as a thing that can be damaged in itself (absent knowledge of it by somebody) is not a term that would (or should) have any meaning for any materialist worth his salt.
Nor would a materialist utilitarian find it easy to justify such a vague concept as outweighing the pleasure of the assailant. Indeed in order to say that such a harmless rape of the unknowing would even not be a net good, considering the pleasure achieved by the rapist, he’d probably have to bring in practical societal effects and claim that notwithstanding the pleasure of the rapist, allowing it would not serve the greatest good of the greatest number
I am not a materialist utilitarian, by the way. I would tend to focus just on the rapist’s behaviour being wrong per se, like that of people who engage in consenting adult homosexual behaviour, without regard to a requirement to prove substantive harm. The degree of any harm would obviously play a big part in determining the seriousness of the offence.
Not necessarily, and in any case many real world examples are based upon intentional self-drugging (drunken women).
We must agree to disagree (even though I disagree with Kirkegaard’s premises and his ethics). Not that it is in practice providing ammunition for his enemies to lie about – we agree on that, but on whether intellectual discussion without regard to concerns for appearance is valuable per se. The fault is with the liars, not with Kirkegaard.
Sorry, but that’s just self-defeating, you may not like the fact, but if you claim that rape and consensual homosexual intercourse are equally bad, most people will dismiss you as an irrational loon. I find it immensely frustrating that we’re having to discuss such irrelevant and frankly nonsensical issues in a time when race replacement and Islamization proceeds at an unprecedented pace throughout Western Europe. It’s bad enough that most of us are probably mostly limited to impotent posturing on the net instead of real political action, this doesn’t help at all.
“Almost anybody who has written a substantial amount of content over many years can be made out to be the lowest scumbag through quote-mining and elision of context.”
So is that Ph.D. that you consider doing in a field run by neo-Nazis that organize secret conferences at UCL?
For most people, the expected value of doing a Ph.D. is negative. Drop me a line when you are free to meet. I’ll buy a bottle of wine and try to talk you out of it. It’s a rite of passage.
This conversation is leading down the road to fleshbots.
I never saw it, but I remember a trailer for an anime movie back in the day (I think it was one of the Ghost in the Shell series) that revolved around a story with doll pleasure bots that are going crazy or some similar theme.
Fred Reed wrote an article with similar hypotheticals a little while ago revolving around virtual means to solve this problem for those that are deemed incurable.
Of course, one must be careful in the West, it would be another nail in the coffin of reducing reproduction rates even further.
Peace.
I didn’t claim that, and I do not care what “most people” think of my writings here – I’m not a politician and nor do I have a career to protect (one of the benefits of being amongst the older section of the population, with grown up children).
We don’t have to discuss it, and discussion forums such as this are not a place for political action, they’re a place for discussion.
Well, in some German cities they offer professional counselling for pedophiles who don’t want to act on their urges, so they can learn how to deal with their condition, which situations to avoid etc. Sounds like a good idea to me. Certainly better than moronic musings about whether raping an unconscious child isn’t really that bad.
This is good – this should be something people can get help with. I haven’t been dealt this trial in life (thank God), but everyone has their own unique cross to bear. Like drug addiction or any other habit that is damaging to oneself or others, help for this should be available without people feeling ashamed – especially if they haven’t committed a crime.
I do know that my own spiritual teachers help counsel people with these problems.
Peace.
The Telegraph has been left for awhile. Was wondering what the Toby Young fuss was about.
The banana-ness and fruityness really comes out in SJWs.
What can be done about that?
Toby Young writes about Conferencegate here: https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2018/01/toby-young-once-more-unto-the-breach/
From that piece:
lol, what a moron. But sadly not untypical.
That might actually have been the second GiTS by Mamoru Oshii (2004), loosely based on one of the 20-page-or-so comics of the first GiTS manga by Shirow (late 80s I think).
Re-watching the trailer, I occurs to me that the depression, melancholy and possibly hopelessness of the movie has suffused into the Real World like high-fructose corn sirup. What happened?
Nothing – it’s not a bug it’s a feature.
Peace.
Yup – that’s the one I remember. My manga phase in life was done by then so I didn’t really watch it, but those are the themes I was talking about. If anyone is going to break the sexbot market wide open, I think the Japanese seem most poised to; due to culture, aging population, many men having given up on marriage, etc.
Was a big fan of Shirow’s “Appleseed” comics in the 90’s. The artwork and themes were phenomenal.
An idea for an interesting anime series would be a steam-punk world where the Ottomans had not declined like they did and took over half of Europe. With the Russian Empire on their East and a joint British-Spanish Empire to their West. Throw in a Chinese alliance to help save the Incan Empire.
Peace.
That quote was deep:
“Humans have forgotten that they are humans.”
Reminds me of:
“And be not like those who forgot God, so He made them forget themselves. Those are the defiantly disobedient.” (59:19)
Brave new world…
That would seem to be a possible solution for a number of sexual perversions. Although I can see downsides as well.
Even without adding the sexual perversion angle fleshbots are going to trigger an amazing amount of hysteria. Feminists are already going nuts on the subject. Although curiously enough feminists seem to have no problems with women using sex toys as substitutes for men.
Self resolving issue. Just add time. May cause secondary reactions in surrounding media.
Gnosticism 2: Revenge of the Cathars.
DAS RITE!
Stupid beyond describing.
Sure, they are taking the quote out of context, but that is entirely predictible, unless you are idiotically naive.
Gotta say that I’ve always thought that Voegelin misunderstood Gnosticism and criticized it for all the wrong reasons. I sympathize with his battle against Totalitarianism, but I don’t see that Gnosticism is the real enemy in that regard. His criticisms were written decades before the translation of the Nag Hammadi scriptures, when Gnosticism was much less understood. Past time to revise his misunderstandings.
When I see “arguments” like this, I find myself wondering: So what is this guy claiming? That, in fact, you can’t tell the difference by sight between an African and a European, because they’re more similar than different genetically?
But if you can tell the difference, why can’t there be differences between them in things we can’t see? What’s so special about the things we can see?
The most basic and obvious sanity checks on the argument fail. The argument proves too much.
Pseudoscience, sure. It’s there alright, just not where this crackpot says it is.
How long Greek democracy lasted?
How long Roman democracy lasted?
How long US democracy will last?
I would like to see discussion about that!
Keep in mind that this blogpost is from 2012 when I was not at all known and had not even published a single paper on HBD. It’s hardly a big failure to fail to anticipate that I would become famous enough 5-6 years later and that some malicious person would quote mine the text. In fact, I had forgotten about the post.
“The actual genetic difference between humans, with respect to race or sex, is absolutely miniscule compared to what they have in common,” he told London Student.
And humans have 96% of the same genes as chimpanzees, so the difference is miniscule.
Not mistakes. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/English-language_spelling_reform
Articles like this, in my opinion, just show how science is politicised.
And how the importance of tests is overestimated, IQ is not intelligence.
IQ tests just measure IQ.
IQ tests on immigrants in the Netherlands, kept secret, for testing if they are capable for jobs with our railways, do show that on average they are less suited than ‘real’ Dutch.
On the other hand, I’m amazed at the courage of immigrants to open small businesses, not always with success, but they try.
My ‘Turkish’ hairdresser exists for at least twelve years.
I suppose culture has much to do with it.
You saw this in the USSR after it fell apart.
Russians, accustomed to living in a big bureaucracy with anything regulated, did not know what to do with the new liberty.
I think it was Uzbecs, a traveller in the region observed, who were delighted that they could reusme trading.
I do like old jazz, as far as a know an exclusively black kind of music.
Melville J. Herskovits, ‘The Myth of the Negro Past’, 1941, 1958, Boston
describes how negro culture does, did, exist in the USA.
Britain has stricter libel laws than the US. It would take one law suit to make this type of shit go away rather quickly. British celebs are always suing the tabloids and winning for all types of things. Thompson and friends should get these clowns in court and bombard them with scientific literature and other expert testimony. If Orwell were alive he wouldn’t believe how insane the world has become.
What, in a nutshell, was Gnosticism about then, and can you provide a link/book?
An interesting post by Château Heartiste may contain the key to saving the ‘truth’ movements in the West
Heartiste’s key insight is that there is one major truth arena that tends to win almost instant wake-up from most males in the West … a much easier lever against the Powers That Be
And this is very important given how easily the Unz-type material can be slammed as ‘racist’ and suppressed
To expand a bit upon Heartiste’s article – Heartiste names 2 big truth arenas tho actually there are three, major areas of blogging etc that attempt to ‘red pill’ against oligarch-run Western propaganda:
(1) Unz-type ‘realism’ about differences amongst humans along ethnic, racial, tribalist, cultural heritage etc lines, IQ, HBD etc
(2) ‘Manosphere’ realism about the true nature of male – female sexual psychology, female passion for alphas and rougher ‘bad boys’, female contempt for beta cucks, ‘hacking’ female mentalities for sexual success, why women are pro-migrant ‘refugees welcome’, how oligarchy is sponsoring male-and-family-destroying gynarchy that is looting-plus-denying most males … as Heartiste points out, this is THE RED PILL that is immediate with every male, who can see these operations verified in his own dating – sexual life and amongst contacts
(3) Truthing on the major items of news and political events, exposing false flags and scams, Operation Gladio, 9-11, the fake ‘trips to the moon’ of which 2018 begins the 50th anniversary (Dec 1968 Apollo 8) … this last is often snickered at by bloggers in (1) and (2) as ‘conspiracy’ etc or unimportant, a distraction
The reality is that internet ‘truthers’ have an entry point to their battle against oligarch schemes, in any of the 3 areas above, which leads them (slowly sometimes) into the other 2
But as Heartiste points out, it is the ‘manosphere’ stuff – rather painful for women to admit, but damn bloody true – that is the easiest Red Pill of all … sure a lot of cucks can self-delude about it for a time, but not without a lot of cognitive dissonance stress, this is the easiest Truth for men by the millions to grok … and it is a matter of sheer practicality for men whether they are single and seeking to bed girls and win a good wife, or married and in danger of having his wife use the state to seize his income stream whilst she goes in search of fulfilling her alpha-male fantasies
Truth in the other areas is often not ‘immediate’ in people’s lives … Even tho the racial – ethnic issues are ‘street reality’, a person’s actual life is often managed into a ‘bubble’ where the rough city areas are avoided etc, so it is ‘distant’ just like ‘who did 9-11’ or the latest Gladio B ‘terrorist massacre’ … whereas the male-female issues are in your face, unavoidable, there to be seen and felt in your own bed
The question of things like IQ tests is to prove in this context you’ve brought up that differences on a biological, genetic level do indeed exist, contra the official regime propaganda that only superficial differences exist.
Why is this done in this context? To argue for racial self-determination. All of these other groups for example all of those Turks and North Africans in the Netherlands have a country to return to. The Dutch and Frisians not so much. But I am sure you would have no problem anyway in subjecting them to death by hybridization (miscegenation pressured, coerced and forced by the state — for their own good for “integration” of course) with invasive species i.e. the “wonderful” Turks like the one that does your hair. Already you now see calls in newspapers in countries like the Netherlands that the natives should “integrate” and “assimilate” to the foreign hordes who are now beginning to outnumber them in major cities. Why is this acceptable to you?
That is what the immigration debate is about and the IQ testing is related to that as a way of proving difference contra the accepted state propaganda. For researchers it is more academic but it’s obviously true as it’s the most replicated finding in the entire field and maps up too well with real-life outcomes.
“And humans have 96% of the same genes as chimpanzees, so the difference is miniscule.”
Many closer to 100%
“absolutely miniscule”
This may in fact be true, but oh what a difference this difference makes! I am more than sure that your mom and my mom will be able to pick us out despite our “absolutelty miniscule” genetic differences. Likewise, a wild chimp (with “>99.9%” genetic homology with humans) will not approach its genetic similar (Homo sapien) on first sight. Well perhaps chimps are racists….
but a human or a chimp cannot tell the differences? what would happen if we gave you a chimp heart, if you needed one? (Or conversely, if the chimp needed a kidney, may we give it yours?) The so called disappearingly differences in genes between one species and another (i.e. “race” 1 vs. “race” 2) are significant. Well shucks “100%” is such a huge number….
It is not at all acceptable to me that ‘real’ Dutch should adapt to immigants, or their offspring.
But indeed, in our Randstad, the area Amsterdam Rotterdam, with a sizable proportion of inhabitants from outside, other ideas exist.
It is therefore that the nickname RamPstad exists, ‘ramp’ is catastrophe.
Our ‘elite’, themselves living in neighbourhoods exlusively white, propagates diversity.
The media follow, as they do in anything, such as the certainty that climate change can be fought by reducing CO2 production.
We have now two ‘anti immigration’ parties, Wilders’ PVV, and FvD of Baudet, the last one just exists, and has just two seats.
Polls, however, seem to show that elections now would give FvD fifteen seats.
It may well be that the 2019 elections therefore will be the end of Rutte.
If then a majority government can only exist with FvD, as it is now in Belgium with NVA, also NVA, the political landscape may change drastically.
In Belgium the chairman of the NVA, Bart de Wever, mayor of Antwerpen, is seen as the real prime minister of Belgium, pro EU clown Michel now already makes statements like ‘I’m nog going to be blackmailed’.
Alas for him the simple fact is that he cannot reign without NVA, and that new elections would give NVA even more seats.
The EU member countries are ever more split, and becoming ungovernable, as we now see in Germany.
Merkel and Schulz, convicted to each other, seem to have reached an agreement.
How long it will last, I wonder.
There also are huge differces, on taxation, and on immigration.
And two captains on a ship was never a good option, especially two with large ego’s.
How the EU is falling apart one sees by Tusk’s warning, that the moment Poland pays more to Brussels than it receives, Poland may leave the EU.
Brussels interferes with what Poles see as internal matters.
This is how judges are nominated, and that Poland should accept Muslim immigrants, Poland is deeply catholic.
Relatively easy to leave, they still have their own currency, the zloty.
If then a majority government can only exist with FvD, as it is now in Belgium with NVA, also NVA,
should be
If then a majority government can only exist with FvD, as it is now in Belgium with NVA, also anti immigrant
https://www.vrt.be/vrtnws/nl/2018/01/12/londense-burgemeester-na-annulatie-bezoek-trump—hij-heeft-eind/
Here you see the split, the Muslim mayor of London does not want Trump in his city
A gaggle of nerdy goofs arguing about groups of people they have never met. It’s a little different at street level.
Look, it is true that life in general evolved, but:
On the 6th day, God created the human brain and placed the same brain in every person while all other human phenotypes evolved via natural selection.
The brain is immutable, unchanging, and infinitely plastic, and everyone who is placed in an enriching social environment can do just as well as everyone else.
That means the brain can’t evolve, can’t be different between people, and is in fact a blank slate just like Rousseau said, relying on his exhaustive understanding of biology and genetics, which was much more advanced in the 18th Century (the Age of Reason) than it is now (the Age of Fake News).
Heretics who deny the brain creationism must be burned at the stake, not simply called names by the papers.
Besides, modern western societies will fall apart unless brain creationism is accepted everywhere by everyone, and all “pseudo-scientific” attempts to use empirical data to contradict true science must be banned and its results burned.
“Much hate so racism wow.”
Anatoly, you lost me here. What does this mean?
AK: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doge_(meme)#Structure
Wake me up when they burn Peter Singer at the stake.
“Colquhoun researched the nature of the molecular interactions that cause single ion channels to open and shut, and what it is that controls the speed of synaptic events.”
— Yes, Colquhoun is no expert in genetics. His training makes inexcusable his obnoxious treatment of the data collected on IQ.
100% = 1, so quite a small number really.
Why do People Kill in the Name of Religion?
Jewish / Muslim Riots
Muslim / Hindu Riots
Buddhist / Muslim Riots
Muslim / Christian Riots
Good luck my friends
Don’t get too comfy, you may be a magic Muslim now, but they will get around to you.
The London Student hit piece, with its glaring dishonesty and PC-related contortions, unintentionally serves as an advert for UnzRevew, one of the best forums for the informed free thinkers. That will helpfully allow some UCL students (with adequate IQ) to get access to really intelligent discussions.
PS: Why did the London Student editors fail to find a single respectable geneticist to check the scientific merits of the conference and presented data — before disseminating the hateful and ignorant diatribe? Seems that it was their ignorance and striving for cheap PC-related publicity that guided their choice of publication.
News editor: Emma Yeomans
Deputy news editor: Will Ing
Head of video: Rebecca Pinnington
Review editor: Sam Taylor
is outright dishonest.
Aww, and you had me believing that I was special.
Now I see that the dishonest arrow is one of the first out of your quiver regardless of the subject or commenter.
Gilad Atzmon talks about how this SJW nonsense is destroying the west.
He might go along if his death could cause the freeing of, say, 50 cows.
Gofundme anyone?
edit: /sarc
PS: Why did the London Student editors fail to find a single respectable geneticist to check the scientific merits of the conference and presented data — before disseminating the hateful and ignorant diatribe?
The editors are fools–totally uninterested in what is true or not. Their value to the world, and to themselves, is completely wrapped up in their virtue signalling.
They have no higher value or purpose in life than to make themselves feel good about themselves.
Toby Young is an interesting character. He played a key role in setting up Charter (free) schools in the UK which made him the bete noire of progressive educators. My own opinion of him is kind of similar to my opinion of Charles Murray; he’s pretty much a cookie cutter establishment conservative but has strayed off the reservation on one or two occasions. What really brought him down this time seemed to be when a handful of female Tory mps joined in the witch-hunt. I stopped paying any attention to him after he started banging on about “Britain’s responsibility to liberate Syria from Assad”.
“IQ tests just measure IQ.”
In the context of a developed country, the correlation between IQ scores and general intelligence (‘g’) is 0.90, where ‘1’ would be a perfect correlation. ‘g’ is predictive of many real-life outcomes.
These days in the Netherlands the concept ‘constructive journalism’ exists.
This journalism is taught at at least one institute educating journalism.
What the exact meaning is of ‘constructive’ I never found out, but clearly it differs from objective news.
The editor in chief of the website De Correspondent denies that objective news exists, all news must be in the frame of a world view.
The editor in chief of our public tv news Gelauff stated on tv ‘that one can only accuse a politician of lies AFTER the politician has admitted to have lied’.
When I write to media that I want facts, and am quite capable of forming my own moral judgment, no reply.
I suppose it is in the same frame of mind that I’m often reproached of specifying the literature on which my comment is based.
As Lasch already wrote in 1978, I think, we live in the post truth period.
So, what are you complaining about ?
That truth was the basis of the most positive aspect of western culture, that truth also does not seem to exist any more.
George Orwell in 1948 was a far sighted man, I fear.
How he foresaw these developments, I wonder.
If you look at the history of societies and empires, almost none of them last more than 200 years. The United States is due.
This might have something to do with the principle that populations with courage, foresight, and determination found nations and empires … and then they breed progressive generations of degenerates who live off the fat of their forefathers. Within eight generations or so, the degeneration reaches critical mass.
Aka the ‘Singer or 50 BBQ’.
I think that complex systems simply die over time in the same way biological systems do, with various cancerous elements rising and eventually strangling the system from working. Secondary diseases finish off the job.
Policymaking had become increasingly nonfunctional, even in the 90s it was noted that political discussion had increasingly degraded into pure rivalries and politicians started raising funding for their next campaign almost as soon as they entered off.
“Man killed God, he [Nietzsche] says, because he could not bear to have anyone looking at his ugliest side.”
“Up to that time man had lived in the childhood shelter of his gods or of God; now that all the gods were dead he was taking his first step into maturity. This, for Nietzsche, was the most momentous event in modern history, one to which all the social, economic, and military upheavals of the nineteenth and indeed of the coming twentieth century would, as he prophesied, be secondary. Could mankind meet this awful challenge of becoming adult and godless? Yes, said Nietzsche, because man is the most courageous animal and will be able to survive even the death of his gods. The very process of tearing consciousness loose from its roots, which ends inevitably in Ecce Homo in the grandiose inflation of the ego, had for Nietzsche himself the significance of a supreme act of courage. Not a day goes by, he wrote in one of his letters, that I do not lop off some comforting belief. Man must live without any religious or metaphysical consolations. And if it was to be humanity’s fate to become godless, he, Nietzsche elected to be the prophet who would give the necessary example of courage. It is in this light that we must look upon Nietzsche as a culture hero: he chose, that is, to suffer the conflict within his culture in its most acute form and was ultimately torn apart by it.”
William Barrett, Irrational Man, A Study in Existential Philosophy
And the same goes for the actual genetic difference between humans and chimps, and the actual genetic difference between humans and baboons, and the actual genetic difference between geniuses and retards, and…
IOW “miniscule” = yuuuge.
On the other hand, the actual genetic difference between Jews and Palestinians really is miniscule.
There was a notable exception to which we all owe; https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Byzantine_Empire
“The Byzantine Empire, also referred to as the Eastern Roman Empire, was the continuation of the Roman Empire in the East during Late Antiquity [4th century AD] and the Middle Ages, when its capital city was Constantinople (modern-day Istanbul, which had been founded as Byzantium). It survived the fragmentation and fall of the Western Roman Empire in the 5th century AD and continued to exist for an additional thousand years until it fell to the Ottoman Turks in 1453. During most of its existence, the empire was the most powerful economic, cultural, and military force in Europe. …”
Hey iffen,
Sure – the way things are working out – this is probably going to be a long slog. We’re going to be in their target once they find out they can’t mold us into some quasi-ethnic identity. They did have the upper hand in the Muslim world for a bit, but that’s been peeled back. Maybe the West is capable of that kind of recovery, maybe not.
Peace.
Excellent quote. I wonder what Nietzche would think of Western culture in its current form? Does it meet his expectations? Now that the training wheels of religion have been cast aside, is the bicycle going full speed ahead?
Peace.
“Let me slit your carotid artery; the change will be negligible, way less than 1 percent.”
“Here, try this ice cream, it’s less than .1% turd.”
MY BABY JUS WORKED HARDER! HE JUS WANTED IT MORE THASS ALL!!!
Hey Laugh Track,
I think he was not talking about Gnosticism in the narrow sense of the ancient sect, but rather are gnosticism as a guiding philosophy as mentioned in this article:
“One movement in Western history, however, began with the premise that nature is inherently evil, and that is Gnosticism. For the Gnostic, the natural order—the known universe—is a vast cosmic mistake….Distinctions we would think are natural, such as the distinction between male and female or the distinct natural necessity of male-female coupling for procreation, are deemed corrupt. Likewise are the institutions arising from these distinctions—like marriage or family—inherently false and delusive.”
http://thefederalist.com/2015/06/29/gnostic-mysticism-grounds-modern-progressive-ideology/
Peace.
Political aspect of Globalization is a;ready going down the toilet.
US was excluded from Minks agreement.
US was excluded from Levant agreement. (Russia, Turkey, Iran, and Syria.)
Now US is being excluded from Korean agreement.
Now some Muslim punk mayor of London is telling the US president that he is not welcome in HIS CITY! (How ridiculous can we get?)
……………………………………………………
While China is quietly building the silk road.
Globalization with its Project for new American century is dead in its track.
It will take a quite long time for American public to realize that America is not a shining city on the hill anymore.
The truth will be shocking.
America will be rusted dusted surrounded by cobweb, city on the hill.
Yes, yes and yes; the specific points that you and reiner Tor have articulated here are all ones that I was ready to point-out before reading your posts. Namely, the inevitable risk of transmitting infection to the child and the problem of drugging without consent (and that informed consent for such is impossible to obtain from a child).
German_reader:
Randal:
The specific hypothetical in question concerns a child. I am assuming that you would concede that a child is incapable of meaningfully consenting to being drugged/ “intentional self-drugging”. If you do concede that, then I must ask: Short of the case of a child who was in a comatose state, how could the hypothetical act in question be possible? If the child were merely asleep, wouldn’t there be a risk that he could awaken at any point during said act?
You are missing the point of the hypothetical which seems to have been about how to develop a materialist ethical position.
Your points would actually be interesting in that context but can mostly be handwaved away leaving the hypothetical in the same place vis-a-vis the original philosophical problem.
German_reader’s response did not, it referred to rape in general, and I was responding to that.
The points you raise here, and german-reader’s and reiner tor’s similar ones, are all pretty much completely irrelevant. You all seek to address [selected and unrepresentative extracts from] the blog post as though it were a real world policy proposition, when as I have pointed out it was in fact a brief hypothetical discussion of some ethical aspects of the issues raised by the problem of paedophilia for society and individuals affected (as he saw it – I do not share his view of it), from the point of view of utilitarian harm reduction.
If you really want to speculate about an indication of the author’s real world prescription for paedophilia based upon this brief blog piece, then you would all be far better off concentrating on the bit of the blog that you ignored, namely the final two sentences, where he arguably does seem to be turning to real world proposals: “Oh, and perhaps the best solution to one who is exclusively aroused by very young children: castration, either medical or fysical. This will help reduce libido.”
The sad thing is that you all illustrate the basic human problem that enables smears such as that perpetrated by the London Student to be effective – the inability of most people to understand or accept theoretical discussion of emotively hot button issues and their unwillingness to refrain from exploiting that effect in relation to political enemies or advocates of things they dislike. This has always been part of human society, and its flowering in our society into the illiberal “hate speech” persecutions of dissidents by SJWs is only the latest and most noxious case of it.
The lie that Kirkegaard discussing issues relating to paedophilia with clinical detachment means he is an apologist or advocate of paedophilia is not that far removed from the political correctness lies that are rampant in our society, that criticism of or disapproval of blacks, jews, homos etc, or their behaviour, equates to hatred of blacks, jews, homos etc.
That’s more like antinomisnism.
Gnosticism as a philosophy says this entire world is irredeemably tainted, and we must reject it in its totality.
It’s natural outcome is quietism and passivity. The modern world is about celebrating this world, and building it up. It’s about as opposite to gnosticism as you can get.
Gnostics always got a bad rep in the West. The Church persecuted gnostics heavily.
If you deny the world too thoroughly, the world will have its revenge.
It’s not surprising to see Vogelin blame our modern mess on gnosticism. It’s a master stroke of misdirection, and closes the door to inquiring into world denying systems, as such systems are inimical to modernity.
Agree.
If I were his spiritual adviser I’d probably want (or rather have wanted) a little talk with him, but I’m not.
Kirkegaard’s argument is just stupid even from such a perspective; drugging and raping someone else is a crime, is generally considered as a crime (is there any country on earth where such an act would be legal?) and is likely to remain so. The benefit to the rapist is far outweighed by the possible/likely harm to the victim (including the chance of death if the medication is too strong, a risk which must be especially acute with children), plus the negative consequences for the rapist himself if caught. Even from an utilitarian perspective this must rank as weird nonsense. Yes, it’s unfair if something like this is dragged up for a smear campaign, but I see no point in defending the original argument.
Well, it is quack science. What nonsense to claim that one is able to assign the respective shares in difference in (supposed) IQ to environment and genes. It isn’t as if those “scientists” had a braincamera where they monitor the genetic IQ. – It’s foolish enough to claim that there are differences in IQ across ethnic groups, but this division of it into environment and genes, really takes the price. One must understand that this is nothing but the aethetic opinions of these scholars. A form of sick art.
So environment can’t impact ability, that makes sense. I always figured that the reason that Tibetans had larger lung capacity and high altitude adaptation was due to the Ancient Precursors and had nothing to do with mountainous living. Stargate when?!!
You’re not incapable of understanding the difference between a philosophical discussion of ethics and a practical policy recommendation, you just seem reluctant to apply it.
You mean like this “quack” article from that purveyor of “junk-science” the journal Nature:
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41539-017-0005-6
“Strong evidence shows genetic factors account for a substantial proportion of variation in educational attainment and its many precursors. A number of individual genes and biological pathways have been identified that underlie this variation. This biology clearly implicates the brain, often pointing to pathways shared with neurological and psychiatric disorders. Empirical results from GWASs can be used to construct genetic predictors that may have uses in experimental education studies, intervention studies, and studies of causality.”
He would have hated it.
Nietzsche was religious. The Superman and the Will To Power are grandiose religious conceptions.
There is a standard of religious value – Power. There is a grand religious goal – become Supermen, transcend humanity.
People like this must be burned at the stake or rationality itself will become corrupted:
“Q.Thank you for talking to us, Professor Haier! Is there anything else you would like to add?
A. Only this: Over my career I have seen unbelievable advances in understanding the nature of intelligence despite concerns about what the data might mean. The most important thing in science is to go where the data take you. You will undoubtedly be surprised, and delighted that you have helped discover new things. This is how society advances.”
http://quillette.com/2017/12/24/neuroscience-intelligence-interview-richard-haier/
Obviously if what the data means is wrongthink, the data must be suppressed and the scientist subjected to the Inquisition. Even the Roman Catholic Church understands this reality.
Death to Heretics! I F#$%ing Love Science! Brain Creationism is true! Right-wingers are stupid!
Well as I think I’ve made pretty clear, I don’t agree with Kirkegaard’s premises or his philosophical approach, and (unsurprisingly) therefore most of his argument. But we don’t need to agree with him to defend him against an obvious shameless smear.
Here are more heretical writings:
http://quillette.com/2017/06/11/no-voice-vox-sense-nonsense-discussing-iq-race/
At least Vox had the good sense to suppress publication of this article, and straw man Sam Harris.
Obviously, unless these “pseudoscientists” with their fancy Ph. D.’s and their devotion of their lives to intelligence research are rounded up and burned alive, they are going to keep spreading these heresies, and people might begin to doubt brain creationism.
Yes, it’s unfair if something like this is dragged up for a smear campaign, but I see no point in defending the original argument.
You just don’t get it do you?
If a few raped children are the price we have to pay insure a normalized safe space for neo-Nazi progaganda, then they will just have to bear the burden.
Offering optional, voluntary counseling sounds fine as long as we are talking about individuals who can reasonably be determined not to pose any greater threat than the average or typical member of the general population does of actually harming a child. (And I certainly believe that this is the case for at least some and perhaps even most of those who find erotic appeal in children.) But what about the rest, i.e., those for whom we have reasonable grounds for suspecting that they do pose a significant threat? Does society not have an obligation to intervene, forcibly if necessary? At least with compulsory counseling and monitoring, if not with castration (likely chemical)? If we have sound reason to consider someone a threat, must we wait for him to commit a crime before curtailing his rights and freedom?
Imo the correct response when it’s pointed out that someone is the victim of this kind of nasty, dishonest smear should be: “yes, that’s disgraceful and the perpetrators are shameless antisocial liars who ought to be tarred, feathered and ridden out of the public square on a rail”. Or some such. Not: “well yes that wasn’t a very nice thing for them to do, but look how stupid the victim was”. The latter would at least make some sense if at the time the words used to smear the victim were written he was a public figure or especially a politician, but even then arguably wouldn’t be the most useful or appropriate response.
If you do instead choose to attack the victim’s particular arguments, then imo first you need to make sure those criticisms are accurate and appropriate within the terms and context for which the original piece was written, and second you really should not complain later, when someone points out flaws in your criticisms, that you have been “forced” into discussing his arguments instead of other issues you regard as being actually important (as you did in your post 21 – which, I note now with amusement, drew an “agree” from iffen who therefore must be assumed to be either too stupid to see that your points in that post were straightforwardly wrong, or still emotionally scarred by my harsh truths about him the other day).
I don’t agree with much of what Kirkegaard wrote, as I’ve made clear, but most of it is perfectly acceptable and even arguably correct, within the terms for which it was written.
He was on the pointy end of being a member of a communist guerrilla that got turned into “literally fascists” when the Real Players deemed it politically expedient. Having escaped a torture cellar must have left some impressions.
That could potentially be a very dangerous concept…might be used to lock up most of the commenters here so they won’t commit any hate crimes 🙂 But it’s an interesting question. I don’t really know how society should deal with known pedophiles, very difficult issue imo.
But we all understand that’s not what Randal is defending, nor what Kierkegaard was advocating for.
But that’s exactly the point…Kirkegaard’s piece was phrased so carelessly that imo it wasn’t really clear if it’s just a thought experiment or an attempt to understand what might go on in the mind of a pedophile. If it was intended as that, ok, but then more careful language should have been used. If Kirkegaard however does indeed believe, drugging a child and raping it might be an acceptable way for a pedophile to deal with his issues, why should I have sympathy for such a demented belief?
I don’t really have more to add regarding this issue…probably have written way too much about it anyway.
That’s a feature not a bug as far as iffen is concerned. Remember he’s well established here as an anti-antiSemite witch-finder – their whole modus operandi is based around taking things people say and misrepresenting them into evidence of “hatred”.
It’s no accident that he should be perpetrating or defending this kind of smear operation as well, and it’s a useful illustration of the similarity I mentioned in post 87 above.
But we all understand
I fully understand that that is exactly what is driving Randal.
Kierkegaard was apparently thinking out loud and didn’t realize it.
Why should “more careful language” have been used?
Must every little blog piece written by a student of philosophy (or anyone) be written so as to defend against the possibility that some nasty-minded political enemy might twist it into something it was not intended as, at any point in the student’s future life?
That is indeed the logical conclusion of your criticism here (and it’s also the way social media seems to be actually taking us, but I refuse to concede that as something to be encouraged, or even as something not to be resisted where possible).
The results replicate, and they also pass tests of reliability and validity. You do not seem conversant with commonplace empirical findings in the field.
As long as (for better or for worse) other sex toys and any number of forms of pornography remain legal, can there be any coherent, compelling rationale for not allowing sex-bots? Seems to me that question remains valid irrespective of any possible value that said objects could have as a solution to anything.
Similarly, when it comes to inanimate likenesses of minors in erotic contexts, whether drawn or computer-generated images, dolls or full-fledged sex-bots; must the questions of legality or even morality of said material and objects depend upon any positive value it may have?
That certainly does seem like a contradiction. I would like to see such feminists challenged on it.
He actually experienced “these developments” in Spain, when he went to fight for “liberal truth and justice” in the Spanish Civil War, and discovered first hand just how much “truth and justice” the “liberal” socialists and communists really have.
I refuse to believe that Will Ing is a real name.
I think the deputy editor is called Barkis.
“It will take a quite long time for American public to realize that America is not a shining city on the hill anymore.”
Actually, I believe that most Americans already know this. It’s their neoliberalcon rulers who push this particular brand of insanity. Most Americans wish to leave others alone and in turn be left alone.
Government subsidized airfare.
If it’s under your real name on the net, probably yes (and that’s one of the reasons why I’m not on any social media)…not that I like this state of affairs, but unfortunately that’s how it is. I can see an argument for ignoring these taboos though to bring them down, but that’s obviously pretty risky for one’s personal prospects.
IIRC several people have imported a “childlike” doll into the UK and been arrested and charged.
Apparently such a thing is illegal to import, though not illegal to own, a/c/t the Independent newspaper.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/paedophiles-child-sex-dolls-prescription-stop-attacks-child-protection-stopso-therapists-a7872911.html
This does rather stray from the topic, in that AFAIK none of the victims of the latest witch hunt are in fact paedophiles, just academics in fields that The Inquisition doesn’t like.
Thanks, Anatoly. Now I feel out of touch and uninformed, but that isn’t your fault. 😉
Even as sarcasm, wasn’t that over-the-top? Surely, you cannot actually believe that what you have articulated was even so much as remotely suggested by anyone in this thread (at least of the comments that I have read as of this posting, which I believe covers most of the relevant ones).
(Let me briefly note that from what I have read of iffen’s exchanges with Randal and perhaps a few others on matters related to the JQ and free speech, etc., I would say that I, a Jew, generally find myself falling somewhere in between.)
anti-antiSemite witch-finder
I prefer the tern Nazi hunter. :)
I have never intentionally misrepresented something someone has said or written in my entire life.
You, on the other hand, are the crème de la crème.
He would have hated it, for sure.
I think his will to power was a sort of conscious religious substitute for a lack of religion. He had no religion and saw none available in the emerging modern materialism, but saw the need for one, and attempted to make one out of sheer will. I would say it was a failure. But as the only alternative he saw to nihilism, to create his own meaning by willing it to mean something, it was a glorious attempt at tilting against the void.
I don’t think it was really about power at the root of it, nor would I say that power is the grand religious goal. I think it is meaning, which Nietzsche sought to create by means of power and will. It was his attempt at being religious but not having one to be.
He would have one look at the modern West and conclude that he was correct in his prediction about what happens if the godless society fails to make the pursuit of Superman its new religion.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Last_man
you cannot actually believe that what you have articulated was even so much as remotely suggested by anyone in this thread (at least of the comments that I have read as of this posting
No, not by this thread alone, but taking the totality of his comments that I have read, it is clear to me that this fixation on the ideal of free speech is his motivation and the actual specifics of this instance are backdrop. Further, the “ideal” of free speech is just a means to an ends, namely, normalization of neo-Nazi propaganda.
Yes. I didn’t think that my commenting on these tangents would be considered inappropriate but in case any of it was, I apologize to the host and to the others here.
Thank you to all who replied to my comments. I hope to still followup and reply to at least some of those that I have not replied-to yet but it won’t be before sometime Saturday evening at the earliest. Wishing everyone a good weekend.
I don’t think it’s unreasonable to ask that one at least ought to decline, on principle, to join in criticisms of those targeted by these kinds of smears.
This particular smear was outright dishonest (Kirkegaard’s writings were intentionally misrepresented) but to be honest I don’t like the modern idea that someone can’t do a job because he said something unpopular years ago even when what was actually said is reasonably accurately reported (this is broadly is the background of what was being done to the establishment “conservative” character Toby Young who was the main target of Private Eye’s piece, prior to them piling on). I do recognise that that is a much easier line to stick to when it is people on your own side who are being targeted, but then again it’s such a common practice of modern leftists (“he said/wrote something sexist/racist/islamophobic/homophobic/anti-Semitic – sack him!”) that there are grounds for arguing that leftists do deserve it when they occasionally get some of it back.)
but it won’t be before sometime Saturday evening at the earliest.
It’s okay that you let us know that you are observant. It doesn’t really matter to the Jew-haters, you know, or me, for that matter.
ROFL!
Anatoly, help me out here. I want to point out the gross misrepresentation iffen just made in post 99:
but since you and reiner so brutally mocked me for falling for Greasy’s “trolling” the other day I’m worried that maybe I’m just too autistic to recognise when a flat-out lie is a troll, and I’ll make the same mistake again……
I mean it is brazenly obvious, which says maybe troll, but I just couldn’t stand to be mocked again…..
I don’t agree with that, if I think something is stupid, I’ll say so. There might be some circumstances – e.g. in a political party – where one should hold back with criticism, for the sake of the common cause, but I don’t feel this applies here. And I didn’t intend to bash Mr Kierkegaard or present him as a supporter for pedophilia, my criticism was more meant as a suggestion that he should be more careful with his language in future so as to avoid any slanderous misrepresentations of his views.
Nah you’re on safe ground here, Greasy is a /pol/ troll at heart, iffen is a more serious Galactic Brain sort of fellow.
Hey AaronB,
Good to see you about. What I meant was along the lines of what I read about the general philosophy, kind of like this:
“…knowledge of transcendence arrived at by way of internal, intuitive means. While Gnosticism thus relies on personal religious experience as its primary authority…”
https://www.theopedia.com/gnosticism
The idea of using one’s personal experience, one’s intuition and disregard things like facts, tradition, etc. Though I get what you are saying about this:
“If you deny the world too thoroughly, the world will have its revenge.”
This is also a good point.
Also – very interesting points from Plato’s Republic:
https://twitter.com/GleamingRazor/status/941109455621709825
Peace.
I do think this conversation has gone on long enough. Kirkegaard himself came in to give his two cents on it – what more is there to say?
I want to point out the gross misrepresentation iffen just made in post 99
Truth has been a defense since the 17th century. (We got it from the Anglish.)
Yes, sorry, I’ll stop.
Cheer up Randy, and get back on the other thread.
It looks like you may be correct.
All the fingers are starting to point to Uncle Sammy’s fingers.
Good point – the man was a forward thinker.
So it seems, without the training wheels, the bike doth wobble…a lot.
Peace.
I don’t think it was brutal. I don’t even think it was mocking. I was really surprised it went over your head. But as I wrote, it happens in the best families. Even I am not perfect.
Iffen is less obvious, I’m inclined to think he is very much in earnest here. But I still hope he’ll admit that this was a little bit over the top.
Are you just trying to make me feel better by pretending to fall for one of mine, now?
😉
Meanwhile, at Peter Woit’s Not Even Wrong blog (which is about the problematic use of String Theory in Physics, in case you were wondering), we get this sidenote:
Is Princeton ready to battle an SJW cohort and their mighty pens?
So it seems, without the training wheels, the bike doth wobble…a lot.
Unicycle, and when what we need is a two-seater, if not a three.
Sorry, since I found out that I am a Burkette, the mental anquish keeps me off balance.
“Well, it is quack science.”
— Have you looked into the data? Too difficult for you? Guess, you are not from engineering department and you have a very foggy understanding of what the word “statistics” means.
I used up my agree button, but yes, so it seems.
That’s a pretty intelligent summation of the Nietzsche phenomenon. I agree with what you say.
He presented himself as a hard headed atheist willing to face the bleakest implications of unbelief, but he was religious to his core, and thought he could pluck meaning out of thin air. But created meaning is no meaning. By definition, meaning cannot derive from an arbitrary act of our will, but must be embedded in reality. He committed a category error, the poor fool.
But what’s so bad about nihilism, anyways? Why was he so terrified of it, really? It’s very freeing and liberating, and leads to a wise resignation. All our political problems solved at a stroke. As Wittgenstein said, if there is meaning, it must come from outside this world.
This failure to read sources is a persistent issue with left/liberal journalists. Back in the 90s, liberal journalists in the MSM attacked The Bell Curve for mentioning race in relation to IQ. This left readers with the impression that all 600 plus pages of the Bell Curve were about black dysfunction and how it’s all to do with the low IQ of black people. However, most of the book was simply about the IQ spread within populations and how difficult it to change IQ within a given population. Only a small section of the book addressed the issue of IQ and race.
Another example of a book attacked by the left was The Man Who Would be Queen by Michael Bailey. This was attacked by trans activists for being a hit piece on late onset transsexuals. However, 90 percent of the book wasn’t even about late onset transsexuals. It was about the correlation between feminine behavior and homosexuality in cisgender males. In that sense it was more offensive to masculine homosexuals than butch trannies.
Liberal journalists and SLWs don’t actually seem to care that much about actual far-righters (probably because there are so few of them and they have no influence) and spend most of their time attacking moderate people for occasionally transgressing mainstream thinking and etiquette.
Right, but it’s just in the sense that you acquire “gnosis” of an ineffable Godhead. Not the kind of “knowledge” that allows you to disregard tradition , etc. It’s just mysticism, really, and exists within a tradition and presupposes a religious attitude towards re world.
Well, they say philosophy is a series of footnotes to Plato 🙂 He’s great, we should all read more of him.
Yes, that’s the nature of a thought experiment.
The genetic difference between Sepphardic Jews and Palestinians (Arabs) is indeed quite small.
The genetic difference between Ashkenazi (European) Jews and Palestinians, by contrast, is meaningfully greater. In large part, this is because Ashkenazi “Jews” typically have a large Italian genetic contribution, followed by Germanic or Slavic genes, making most of them more white European than Semitic.
I still hope he’ll admit that this was a little bit over the top.
Can you be a little more specific as to what you want me to admit?
I did not mean that I thought Randal was advocating for child rape.
I meant that if Randal was [forced to choose] between allowing child rape and preserving his “ideal” of free speech then he would choose free speech.
Anyone is free to correct me.
Right.
Kirkegaard said something that can be misunderstood, but he did not say anything at all that is dreadful or disgusting or awful.
In modern times, we usually accept professional roles, people play. That’s what Kirkgaard did: He spoke with the professional distance of a scientist about something that’s terrible.
Science is a professional field and has no obligation to be easily understood by lay people.
Lay people, who don’t get this, should be told very nicely and right away, that they act amateurish in a professional field, and that they therefor are only taken serious in regard of that aspect of their behavior – and nothing more: It’s the scientific communities duty, to defend this absolutely crucial line between the professional field and the realms of – the others.
If scientists fail to live up to this duty, they fail to be modern (=enlightened) scientists.
That it takes courage to be a scientist does not indicate, that it’s wrong to be a scientist – it indicates that being a scientist is an honourable position. Therefor, I conclude with Kant’s imperative: Sapere aude! – Take the risk which enables you to think – and which implies: To defend your field (science) against those enemies, who don’t care, because they don’t know.
That all sounds reasonable but how on earth can you tell which people are a genuine threat before they have committed any crime?
Do we rely on reports from psychologists or psychiatrists? You might as rely on phrenology.
And do you really want to give psychologists/psychiatrists powers that even the police don’t have? You’d be giving them the sorts of powers that the secret police in totalitarian countries would have dreamed about.
No civilised society has ever thought it had the right to order pre-emptive punishments of people who might hypothetically commit crimes.
“Anyone” is free to correct you with regard to the inner moral preferences on a bizarre scale of some third person.
Righto.
“most charitable interpretation is that you’re somewhat autistic to get such an idea”
Dear German_reader,
The British always liked to joke about the Germans’ apparent lack of a sense of humour and taking British sarcasm too literally. 🙂
“Britain has stricter libel laws than the US”
Agreed.
Note how nothing derogatory or critical is ever written about Richard Branson? His father was a barrister and he has excellent and unlimited legal resources.
AK: Because I don’t want your Holocaust denial spam in my comments. I will note that apart from being an asshole, you are also a cretin – if you had two brain cells to rub together, you would realize that this is particularly not the sort of comment we want to a discussion on this of all topics, given the propensity of SJW journalists to seek out the occasional deranged quote or comment, and present it as typical for our community so as to discredit us. But maybe that is your intention.
In the OP and comments there is “neo-Nazi” this, “neo-Nazi” that, which are part & parcel to the discussion here, yet you refuse to allow my related comments .
Why do you censor views & opinions that are all about what YOU & others have posted?
What the hell is wrong with you?
[snip]
Do you actually make money with your stupid Holocaust denial forum? Your advertising for it is pretty obsessive.
Congratulations on your concision; that is a lot of wrong in a very tight space.
They don’t have a brain camera, they have the scientific method.
There are IQ differences across ethnic and racial groups, you blithering idiot. Even the academic left acknowledges this (the retarded idiot lying scumbag piece of shit grass roots left, not so much); what they deny is any genetic cause. You uneducated boob.
Calling it mere opinion is leftist projection. Leftists are used to basing entire swathes of their “philosophy” on nothing but feelings, and quite contrary to reality, so they’re primed to project that tendency onto others.
Protip: try reading up on this subject before hardening your worldview. Since I can’t rely on you having a proper education: reading up means reading up regardless of the political orientation of the source, and otherwise avoiding logical fallacies (a web search can take you to several primers on logical fallacies).
Agreed, though not much more European than Levantine; IIRC, it’s like 55/45, or thereabouts. I think it’s best to shorthand that to “half and half.”
Any normal person would agree. I would choose free speech over legalization of child rape. Would you not? You talk about it as if you thought legal child rape was obviously better than free speech. Why do you hate free speech so much? Or, why do you like child rape so much?
Trolling aside. What would iffen choose, if he had a choice?
A) Cultural rot (including ubiquitous pornography, gay marriage in the constitution, media celebration of mixed race couples, shitty hip-hop music, etc.), replacement level mass immigration, racial privileges for nonwhites, massive interracial crime rates where whites are overwhelmingly the victims, including rape and murder (but never mentioned in the media, except to pathologize whites’ fear of it), neverending wars (with hundreds of thousands or even millions of deaths) for Israel or just for the hell of it, risking nuclear war with Russia, North Korea, even China, etc. AND a practical ban on public criticism of Jews.
B) None of the above, but free speech even for Nazis.
The E European asjkenazi jews are decendants of the Asiatic Khazars, who had in the west christian neighbours, and in the east Muslim.
They wanted to upgrade their polytheistic religion to monotheism in the 8th or 9th century, in order not to offend the neighbours they chose judaism.
Shlomo Sand, ‘The Invention of the Jewish People’, London, New York, 2009, 2010 (Tel Aviv, 2008, hebrew)
Palestinians are descendants of jews, they were driven from their land by descendants of Asiatics.
I read his book Homage to Catalonia, that maybe explains the present problems in Spain with the region.
Orwell was a volunteer fighter on the side of the official democratic Spanish government, then socialist.
But this book gives no clue as to why he wrote ‘1984’.
Perhaps Huxley’s Brave New World inspired him.
Wrong. Disproved by genetics.
Note that the IAS (Institute for Advanced Study) is distinct from Princeton University. While certainly a PC place, there is not so much SJW activism, since it consists of faculty and visiting faculty, but essentially no students. On two occassions the natural scientists at IAS had a big battle with the social scientists when the latter wanted to hire some science-denying postmodernists as permanent faculty.
On the other hand, IAS occassionally shows extremely poor judgement, like when they recently invited Bill Browder to give a lecture.
Are those really alternatives though? I mean, they do have free speech in the US, at least for now…you can say even pretty extreme things there like “gas the k**es” or say extremely negative things about blacks, and you won’t be locked up or face any legal repercussions (you’ll just suffer social death and maybe lose your job…it’s not clear to me how you can easily prevent that). You can certainly criticize America’s wars in harsh terms. Things are different in Europe of course, where it’s increasingly heavy-handed open censorship and “hate speech” laws…but in the US context it seems kind of pointless to insist political discourse is just distorted because of a lack of “real” free speech.
I’d say the advertising for the holocaust is pretty obsessive.
Just now the now the 96 year old Auschwitz bookkeeper was condemned to a jail sentence.
Here in the Netherlands my impression is that not one week passes without some reference to the holocaust.
And tv still shows WWII pictures, or depicts, as right now on Belgium tv ‘hero’ Winston Churchill, who in 1941 could have saved the British empire by accepting the peace proposals Rudolf Hess brought.
What exactly these proposals were is a secret to this very day, I suppose that, if they become known, Churchill at once loses his hero status and becomes what he was, the undertaker of the British empire, as the British historian Charmley shows.
His book was never, I suppose could be, published in the original english.
John Charmley, ‘Der Untergang des Britischen Empires, Roosevelt – Churchill und Amerikas Weg zur Weltmacht’, Graz 2005
Title translation ‘The disappearence of the British Empire, Roosevelt – Churchill, and how the USA became a world power’.
‘Untergang’ means ‘going down’, I do not know of a good english equivalent.
Francois Kersaudy, ´De Gaulle et Roosevelt, Le duel au sommet’, Paris, 2004
describes how Churchill in Casablanca found out he was at the mercy of Roosevelt, who was able to impose unconditional surrender.
How many unnecessary deaths this unconditional surrender caused, anybody’s guess.
Japan in early 1945 was prepared to surrender under conditions, two atomic bombs had to force the surrender.
Check these:
https://www.thenewamerican.com/culture/history/item/4668-the-60th-anniversary-of-orwell-s-1984
Another interpretation, in line with Pink Floyd’s “The Wall” I guess:
https://mises.org/library/brilliant-confused-radicalism-george-orwell
I really have to read more Orwell.
“The Fall of” as in “Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire”
I wrote practical ban because I meant all that – social death, loss of livelihood, harassment by SJWs, etc. All this means that in practice it’s not much better, if at all, than it was to criticize the communist government in 1980s Hungary. It led to harassment, loss of livelihood, etc., but they rarely locked anyone up for more than a couple days or more likely a few hours. I don’t think it’s that much of a difference whether the harassment is done by the police or by voluntary SJWs.
And people do get harassed by the police and the courts in countries other than the US, with some people getting locked up for a few years for hate propaganda or what not.
It was a good idea though.
OTOH, this is a domain where even SCIENCE! cannot lay the discussion to rest:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khazar_hypothesis_of_Ashkenazi_ancestry#Elhaik_study
“Britain has stricter libel laws than the US”
Not to mention having the burden of proof ass-backwards.
Since AK has made geo’s depiction of me as a Pea Brain official, I realize that my efforts here trying to contend with mental giants will be inadequate. It is made much more difficult because some of the giants have zero reading comprehension.
I did not comment directly upon the pedophilia issue because the solution of castration just below the Adam’s apple is ideal. Problem solved.
Possession and production of child pornography is severely punished in the US. There is no “safe space” for child pornography “speech.” Castration would be welcomed by me as an additional penalty.
I am a great supporter of free speech.
My criticism of the neo-Nazi speech here at Unz is not a violation of anyone’s free speech. You will notice that when the UR gets a mention in the MSM it is negative. It is used as guilt by association. I am trying to do my little part to prevent the comment section from being categorically and completely vilified as racist and anti-Semitic.
The SJWs described in AK’s article are my enemies. That does not make you 88s and fellow travelers my friends. The fact that you consider the SJWs your enemy does not make the SJWs my friends.
(I don’t put you, RT, in the 88 bin.)
It is not open and shut.
There is adequate information to conclude that a small % of individuals will commit a great % of the crime and disorder and these individuals can be identified when they are children and early adolescents.
This is probably the main point – to corral the general public into the SJW defined mainstream.
I regularly see it at work with regard to Islam. There are lots of North African immigrants here with all of the women wearing headscarves as required by Islamic religious orthodoxy.
However, a few of them don’t wear their headscarves, and get a lot of disapproval from their society and the “bad woman” label, apart from looking uncomfortable with their independence.
Under “Goodthinker” rules, the truth of things doesn’t matter – it’s all a question of uncritically accepting the SJW narrative as a complete package inc. Whites born guilty, the Holocaust 6 million, self destructing Building 7, gay marriage etc.
Do otherwise, and you`re excommunicated by polite society as in “That’s Not Who We Are”.
“Just now the now the 96 year old Auschwitz bookkeeper was condemned to a jail sentence.”
— This jailing brings attention to those ifluental American and Israeli Jews who have been actively collaborating with Ukrainian neo-Nazis, by providing them with money, weaponry, logistics, and political support. The 2014 putsch in Kiev, organized by ziocons, exposed a spectacular tolerance of the Anti-Defamation League (and others from Holocaust biz) towards modern-day Nazis and towards the glorification of Nazi collaborators. After the “Kagan revolution” in Kiev of 2014, a neo-Nazi battalion “Azov” has been financed by a pillar of Ukrainian Jewish community Mr. Kolomojsky (he also has Israeli citizenship!) to fight the pro-federalists in eastern Ukraine where Mr. Koomojsky still has assets. Since 2014, famous monuments to Jewish victims of WWII have been regularly desecrated; neo-Nazi parades celebrating Nazi collaborator Bandera became a tradition — some streets were even renamed after Nazi collaborators.
Ukraine currently has its first Jewish president Groysman (“elected” by DC). Neither the EU nor the US took any actions against the post-Maidan rise of neo-Nazism in Ukraine. Yet a “96 year old Auschwitz bookkeeper was condemned to a jail sentence.”
In 2014, Ukraine has lost its independence and become a Ukrainian Kaganat with neo-Nazi in charge of Ukraine’s national security apparatus. This is on a par with Israelis’ support for ISIS– financial, medical, logistical, and more. No wonder that ISIS has never attacked the hand that feeds. https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-04-28/isis-apologized-israel-attacking-idf-soldiers
https://www.voltairenet.org/article182840.html
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uljUTmLaGZ4
Actually, you can find a lot of interesting material at codoh.com. Certainly I would not call it stupid. You know very well that the official narrative of WWII is off and sometimes way off. Many issues brought up by the so called H-deniers can be dismissed quite easily but some cannot, so eventually they will have to be incorporated into the new narrative.
Welcome to England, mate.
https://youtu.be/ZD3EHJzgZTc?t=1247
I have yet to find an issue which cannot easily be dismissed. You can raise any such issues in this thread.
But you go well beyond that, e.g. you try to enforce silly speech codes like “disputed territories” instead of “occupied territories” regarding the Israel/Palestine conflict. It’s true that there are quite a few commenters on Unz review who can be regarded as genuinely antisemitic…but that’s an unavoidable consequence of the nature of the site (somewhat right-wing orientation in general) and the lack of censorship in most comments sections (which imo is generally a good thing and what sets the site apart from so many others). And you won’t change that by indulging in personal vendettas against other commenters, least of all on AK’s blog which definitely isn’t one of the Jew-obsessed parts of the site.
It’s funny to see this play out in real time. Apparently the SJW madness is poised to bite the hand that feeds it. Even popular mainstream shows of just a decade or so ago are being deemed controversial:
“Millennials watching Friends on Netflix have expressed reservations about the popular sitcom’s storylines, describing it as transphobic, homophobic and sexist.”
http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/tv/friends-netflix-sexist-racist-transphobic-problematic-millenials-watch-a8154626.html?amp&__twitter_impression=true
To Hollywood I say…
http://ampthemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/Best-Funny-April-Fools-Day-Jokes-3.jpg
Sure, I didn’t dispute that, the situation in Europe is very bad and getting worse. I hardly write comments on German sites anymore, and would never give my easily identifiable real name anywhere, because I don’t want to risk getting into trouble for something written in the heat of an argument. Last time I had a political discussion with other Germans on the net, they wanted to report me to police…I’m not naive, I know how it is.
Against harassment etc. there should certainly be legal protection…but what can you do against social death? If society, especially society’s “elites”, decide you should be an unperson for holding certain views, or if nobody wants to employ you anymore, what can you do against that?
Thanks for the link. I was not at unz.com when the discussion took place. I see you were quite active there. In October last year I got involved in a discussion on H. here http://www.unz.com/article/books-banned-by-banned-books-week/ where I tried to be reasonable, i.e., be in a place when one is slammed from both sides by people like Wally and people who are, let’s say, more like you.
Loss of livelihood in late communism (1980s, especially the second half of the 1980s, what with Gorbachev and perestroika and glasnost and whatnot) was actually probably better than it is now. Those few people who were actively involved in anti-communist activism often received grants from Soros (yes, he was a thing back then) or similar Western charities, and a decade ago one former liberal activist wrote that though at the time he thought of himself as being brave for withstanding loss of employment etc., he now realized that his income clandestinely and often semi-legally received from Western sources was probably higher than that of his ex-colleagues who stayed employed at the university. (He is now on the far left, and so is in some aspects anti-West and anti-Narrative, at least in the Hungarian context.) The authorities could easily shut down that source of his income, too, and sometimes they did, but they often chose not to because at the time Hungary needed to be in the good graces of the Western powers because of the huge current account deficit which meant that by that time Hungary always needed Western loans to keep the economy from collapsing. Hungary joined the IMF in the early 1980s, the first one from the Eastern Bloc, and the Western powers used their influence to pressure the authorities not to come down too hard on leftists.
Now if you lose your job, where can you get any money? From Putin? First, Putin won’t help you. (Nor would anyone else, not the Chinese, not Kim Jong Un, no one.) Second, if he did, it would make your situation worse, you’d be declared a traitor. And third, you don’t even want to be associated with any potential sources of income. Hungarian dissidents in the 1980s generally wanted Hungary to be like the West at the time, like West Germany, or the USA, or UK, or something like that. But now, do you want your country to be like Putin’s Russia? Well, not really. Or the People’s Republic of China? No. Then like Kim Jong Un’s North Korea? A bad joke.
So basically not only don’t you have an external supporter, but you don’t even have a potential supporter, one whose money you’d gladly accept, had he offered it to you.
I agree with that, the reality of our situation is very bleak. There’s no outside power that is sympathetic to Western nationalists or would support them (and yes, in any case you’d be considered a traitor if you accepted such support)…some in the West hope the V4 nations could play such a role, but I have my doubts. They may well either succumb to EU pressure or get coopted into pernicious alliances with establishment forces in the US (you already see some hints of that imo in the excessively pro-Israel statements – basically including support for Israel’s settlements policy – by some V4 politicians; and the Poles apparently intend to sue Germany for WW2 reparations through US courts…which imo is another sign how little the Polish right really understands about the present situation).
And the situation in Western Europe isn’t just due to pressure from above…a non-trivial segment of the population really are true believers who think “racists” should be ostracized from society and have their lives destroyed.
The analogy with China’s Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution really is pretty close on this point. At first, the Red Guards were used by Mao to attack his opponents in the CCP Establishment, but gradually they became so fanatic and unruly, they soon began attacking leaders they considered insufficiently radical and eventually each other.
Supposedly, they eventually became such a political problem that Mao decided to have them “learn from the masses” by shipping them all off to rural pig-farms to spend their days spreading manure alongside hostile peasants.
I suppose that the American analogy would be to ship a million or two ardent college SJWs off to Somalia or the Congo to put their multiculturalist theories into local practice.
It seems to be obvious that the dissenting movements by V4 with respect to the EU are only possible with the US/Israel umbrella extended over the V4 countries. This is the sense of their resolve and strength. Once the US and/or Israel pulls the plug the V4 anti-immigration stand will fold regardless of preferences of V4 populations. The political class and the elites have no loyalty to the people.
This is worse than in Nazi Germany. At least there the Nuremberg Laws were clearly stated and if they were interpreted it was only in favor of a victim (“I decide who is a Jew.”). Even the III Reich was a Rechtsstaat. But the definition of a racist is nonexistent, it is fluid with expanding tendency. There is no legal recourse, no appeal.
Elaine Pagels’s books are excellent in this regard. I agree that the boogeyman of Gnosticism is misdirected. If anything the Gnostic archetype of the Demiurge is a good a myth as any to describe the Puritan labyrinth of Law we find ourselves entangled in. It’s like the myth of Satan constructing his own kingdom out of God’s materials but without the moralistic baggage.
And what is more noble and virtuous than that?
The SJW of the modern West will gladly usher in our future utopia over your dead body.
Uhuhuuuuu…. you seem to have a very idiosyncratic definition of “Rechtstaat” (literally “a State based on justice”)
A State where the following can happen:
doesn’t have any of the attributes of a Rechtsstaat.
Or German women whose Jewish husbands got arrested can lead a protest in Berlin that ends in the release of their husbands.
Obviously what happened outside of German territory (Extra-judicial prison and killzones for nationals or conquered territories are established) is another story but as far as Germany proper and German citizens (including also foreign resident and even the so called slave labour to some extent) could rely on German justice system. In 1939 incarceration rate (including the KL’s) in Germany was 4 times lower than 2017 incarceration in the US.
“Rechtstaat” (literally “a State based on justice”)
I do not think so. Literally “state of law” regardless whether the laws are just or not. Justice is entirely something else.
Okay, I’ll try really, really hard to do better.
(I don’t think you and I have the same understanding of what vendetta means.)
The Spanish Republican government was not exactly democratic. In theory perhaps, in practice no.
Are you saying they can be identified with sufficient accuracy to justify pre-emptive punishment?
Tell em all about the street Spanky
Charmley’s books were certainly published in English. They’re excellent by the way.
It is a great understatement. See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_Terror_(Spain)
The estimates of the number of victims of red terror range from 38,000 to 172,000.
Can potential neocons be identified as children? What are the markers? Thousands, possibly millions of lives are at stake.
Could we preclude them from government positions other than planning the next local Turkey-Trot?
Peace.
“Anti-sexism” is white supremacism at its most fanatical. Except perhaps for its bastard offspring, antihomophobism.
All the other races of the world are comfortable with the basic facts of biology and sex.
Can potential neocons be identified as children?
Good question. Can radical Islamic terrorists be identified early?
What is a Turkey-Trot?
Is that some kind of Armenian payback? Communist cells in Ankara?
Are you saying they can be identified with sufficient accuracy to justify pre-emptive punishment?
No, and I am not sure the concept of pre-emptive punishment works for me.
Maybe early corrective education camps would be an option. 🙂
Even if you “knew” that 75% of group A was going to commit X, does that justify sacrificing the other 25%?
Neocons are people who understand that 1) might makes right, 2) political power is there for the taking and once taken can be wielded to create or maintain one’s version of right, and 3) they understand the mechanisms for taking and using political power.
Hey iffen,
There are certainly patterns to discerning potential Muslim terrorists- Olivier Roy has written probably the best articles/papers on this. Just as there are patterns to discerning potential Neocons. Certain profiles exhibit more proclivities to their respective pathologies.
If we are talking pre-crime and putting percentages through algorithms to work it out then let’s extend it broadly. Let’s catch the petty thief and the guy who manipulates the derivatives market to tank economies. Let’s catch the terrorist and the guy who skirts legal restraints in smashing countries they don’t like.
I’m fairly certain only the little guys – who do a minuscule amount of damage compared to the big guys will be the subject of pre-crime.
As to the Turkey-Trot, that’s what they call the annual city community jog/walk they do around Thanksgiving time in my parts.
Peace.
I have yet to find an issue which cannot easily be dismissed. You can raise any such issues in this thread.
To say that I am impressed by your comments there doesn’t come close.
http://www.unz.com/jthompson/have-criminologists-tampered-with-crime/
Ok – so you’re still talking about patterns in catching the small fish. I’m talking about the big fish, the guys that graduate from Harvard and have 6 figure salaries and wear suits and ties.
Otherwise we can be honest and just say we’re not interested in the big fish or that the big fish are too big to fail.
Peace.
Otherwise we can be honest and just say we’re not interested in the big fish
I know that you are not putting me in the we.
The big fish can already be readily identified. Getting at them is the problem there.
Put me in charge and I’ll guillotine a few hundred sewer pond scum like Mitt Romney each day until I run out.
Replace “political” power, which is a silly specification anyway, with “sexual” power, and you have your classic predator, pedophilic or otherwise.
People who think about morality a lot might have problems rejecting moralistic baggage, and might even think something wrong about doing so.
That’s the problem. It’s a ticklish problem for a legal system based on the presumption of innocence. Although of course the presumption of innocence is not such a popular concept these days.
And of course there’s the slippery slope problem. If we practise pre-emptive punishment, or even send potential offenders to re-education camps as you (presumably facetiously) suggested, it’s not going to stop with potential sex offenders. When you give governments powers like that they always use those powers in ways you hadn’t anticipated.
I could easily foresee calls for early “intervention” to deal with potential homophobes, racists and sexists.
And wasn’t there a case back in the mid-20th century when a certain European government decided that an entire ethnic/religious group was a potential threat and that they should all be sent to camps?
“they also pass … validity”
No they don’t. No construct validity for IQ exists.
https://notpoliticallycorrect.me/2018/01/07/iq-and-construct-validity/
Let’s throw in some test construction too while we’re at it.
https://notpoliticallycorrect.me/2017/12/24/iq-test-construction/
https://notpoliticallycorrect.me/2018/01/15/people-should-stop-thinking-iq-measures-intelligence-a-response-to-grey-enlightenment/
Good stuff man – great deep-diving into the subject. Love it!
Where the hell have you been?
Peace.
Why?
Knowledgeable, thorough, dispassionate, even-handed, fact-oriented, etc.
It doesn’t matter if Colquhoun is an utter ignoramus compared to Thompson. This isn’t a debate. It’s a defenestration.
It justifies not having them in your country if they’re foreign people and have a homeland of their own, that’s for sure.
That’s the part that had me LOLing. Five years ago, and this is the first I hear of it?!
Memorialized for Posterity. This is the point of your final exit from serious discussion.
An analogy might be what we’re going to have to do in the face of billions of African migrants this century. We don’t want to think of ourselves as having to do what we will actually have to do. It’s not pretty, or easy, or clean, or neat.
But we actually do have to protect our society, even and especially unto the young and innocent. Nothing valuable comes without a price, and that most definitely includes the defense of our nation and our people. We’ll find this out one way or another, and before it’s too late, or after.
Agreed idiotically naive if he wanted to be a politician or seure tenure, but the satirical element provided unambiguously by its concluding words should surely be a reminder of Swift or Marx (as in his marvellous description of criminals as providers of employment for poĺice, lawyers and magistrates) and as such providing a commentary on those that don’t get it.
But let me take the opportunity to express my surprise that the utilitarian analysis is allowed to omit the potential flow on effects from the rape-when-asleep becoming known to others as it might and the likelihood that indefensible behaviour by others will be encouraged, or just made more likely (and not just by the spread of knowledge of a happening but the writing about it as possibly acceptable).
Thank you.
I’ve been over at Thompson’s blog debating the finer points of calories in and out, obesity and type II diabetes mellitus.
Most welcome. One of the reasons I come to UNZ is to benefit from people such as yourself who have done a deep-dive into a particular field of study/knowledge and become – if not experts, at least those who know where to look to find the answers and sift through the immense amount of information is out there on a given topic.
Your contributions are much appreciated.
Peace.
Meet Jared Cohen the neo-Bolshevik: http://www.voltairenet.org/article199378.html
“Ex-collaborator of Condoleezza Rice, then Hillary Clinton, and now of Eric Schmidt, Jared Cohen shares the scientist philosophy of the directors of Google (transhumanism). According to him, it is possible to overthrow governments by using the right algorithms on the social media.”
— Would not it be great if these “engineers of human souls” had found courage to correct their own inadequacies, shortcomings, and obnoxiousness?
IF this was done to my child I would waste no time pondering the damage done. The pervert would be dead.
Pretty soon anybody saying “genetics” or “genes” will be instantly locked up as Nazi.
Your arguments are fallacious, determined by your desired false conclusion that intelligence is not real and measurable, hence immune to any evidence or argument. While intelligence has a physiological substrate, and varies accordingly, it is more than its substrate and also varies for essentially psychological and environmental reasons. Intelligence is fundamentally not a physiological measurement, though it correlates with some such measurements. It is a psychological measurement, and that is perfectly legitimate. Your pretending that only physiological measurements are valid makes you sound like some sort of crazed Behaviorist.
Intelligence is a measure of the difficulty of questions one can be expected to answer, the measurement is both of difficulty of questions and of ability. If one can measure the difficulty of questions, and one empirically can, by giving them to many people and seeing what percentage get it right, then one can also measure the ability of people by seeing at what difficulty level of questions they start to make mostly errors. Some matrix math and a log transform then gives you a scale of difficulty/ability that provably supports all four arithmetic operations, so is a true measure of ability t – if the questions have certain statistical characteristics showing a consistent pattern of agreement among themselves as to the likelihood of people of different abilities (as measured by the other questions) getting them right. Sometimes questions fail to meet this standard as tests are developed, they are identified and eliminated in norming the test. This is sufficient construct validity, which is shown by the high correlations with all the other tests and the shared predictive power for all the good things correlated with intelligence, most notably the ability to answer all sorts of natural and artificial questions correctly. (If you think differently, then come up with a test whose questions pass the statistical standard for being a unidimensional measurement of mental ability but do not correlate with longevity, health, morality, and prosperity. It can’t be done.)
For all questions there is an quantifiable imprecision, the probability of answering a given question correctly vs. ability goes up not like a step function, but a softened version of a step function. With several questions slightly above and below a given ability level, the uncertainty in measurement of ability can be both reduced and estimated, giving confidence bars to the measurement of ability. Now, with computer adaptive testing, the difficulty of the questions can be matched to the test-taker’s ability through a zeroing-in process in just a few questions from a large question bank, and given a few more questions gives more precise measurements of individual ability than tests. So tests, while having known and even quantified imprecision are valid and improving.
In the end, you sound like SJW. Didn’t finish Kierkegaard video, but are you defending child molesters?
No; are you defending anti-semites, comrade?
My point was not to advertise my Judaic observance but rather to simply serve notice that it would be at least 24-plus hours before I would again be available to participate in the thread. Perhaps there was no need to do that (at least for an absence that relatively short*) but it seemed proper and courteous to me, given the context of my comment.
I generally only mention my Judaic observance (or even merely identify myself as a Jew) if I feel that doing so is truly germane to my comment.
(*As it happened, I became extensively diverted and first managed to return to this thread now, over a full week later. And, while I’m at it, I might as well as add that, regrettably, I may not manage to follow-up beyond this comment.)
Aren’t the military-industrial complex and Empire building and maintenance at least as much to blame for interventionist, war-mongering foreign policy as the Zionist lobby or “the hell of it”?
You ate correct. There have been several organ transplant cases in the Middle East in which both the donor and recipient families are less than thrilled to learn how close the match is.
but it seemed proper and courteous to me, given the context of my comment.
So it was, and please excuse my somewhat snide comment.
Hopefully, you will make it back as your comments are usually top notch.
And the empire-building has been going on since 1846 at least, when California was stolen annexed by the US.
And the empire-building has been going on since 1846 at least, when California was annexed (that’s the polite word for it) by the US. The idea that the US has a God-given right to rule the planet has very deep roots in the American psyche and certainly predates the influence of the Zionist lobby. Where the idea came from I have no idea. Maybe it’s connected with the curious nature of American Protestantism.
Thank you, iffen. Your kind words are much appreciated.
I enjoy and appreciate many of your comments as well.
Where the idea came from I have no idea. Maybe it’s connected with the curious nature of American Protestantism.
Curious?
I think that it comes with the empire. Many (most?) peoples get this idea, only a few pull it off.