Is anti-political correctness really the sum of it?

No. It might be the beginning. For me, it certainly was. (I was a True Believer Leftist for most of my teens and early twenties; studying linguistics led me to Steve Pinker . . . . all downhill from there.) But anti-PC is nowhere near the sum of it. It’s the tip of the iceberg. It’s a doorway. (Some people get stuck there, of course.) The PC police are the pawns, I suppose. Annoying, yes, but lined up in front of some real power.

It has to be some mixture between genetic make up and environment, though.

No one–not even hard hereditarians like the duo at West Hunter–would disagree. But even a pure 50/50 split would have serious policy implications. And ‘environmental pressures’ on human traits are by and large exerted in the early years of life, which, in the popular imagination, may as well be genetic pressure.

It doesn’t help that I remain deeply suspicious of EP and evolutionary biologys capacity to explain anthropological/sociological dilemmas. . .I believe that there is politically motivated ideology at the heart of EP/EB claims of this sort . . . A friend of mine said to me it is dressed up eugenics.

I’d say you should be more concerned with whether or not something is true than with whether or not something is politically motivated. (Darwin had eugenic sympathies; T.H. Huxley was entirely political about evolution; are you going to be suspicious about evolution, then? You seem more reasonable than that.)

One of the reasons I’m persuaded by HBD is that, in the span of just a few decades, it has been championed by leftists, rightists, and mild-mannered working class fellows like Charles Murray. It gets rejected because it’s scary, not because it has been shown to be false.

Intelligence, anti-social behaviour etc. are a lot more complex. Not just in proving, if proved the resultant explosion of questions on policy/history/race that would be blown wide open.

Egalitarian democracy for homo sapiens? Is it like asking a terrier to pull a sled? Can’t we at least ask the question? The fact that we can’t is more than a little suggestive . . .

Look, answer this question for yourself. A little thought experiment, a pure hypothetical:

In the news the other day, I saw that astronomers had confirmed the existence of a rogue planet, basically an overgrown comet. Its orbit isn’t a threat, but let’s say it was. Let’s say the astronomers also discovered that we have exactly two years before the rogue planet collides with Earth. Game over. Every nation on Earth has shifted all its energy into finding a way to avoid the collision. Which nation, Mark, do you think will save the day?

A national lab in Haiti staffed by Haitians.
A national lab in Israel staffed by Ashekanzi Jews.
A national lab in Ghana staffed by West Africans and a few Somalis.
A national lab in Ecuador staffed by mestizos and Amerinds.
A national lab in Japan staffed by Japanese and a few Koreans.
A national lab in India staffed by high-caste Indians.
A national lab in America staffed by Northern Europeans and various East Asians.

Rank them, according to most and least likely to save Earth and deflect the oncoming rogue planet through pure scientific and technological prowess and intelligence.

Then tell me you’re not just a little wary of the fellow who comes along and picks Option Haiti–and through international pressure de-funds Option America and Option Japan –because social justice dictates that we give preference to those without privilege.

I never thought the human uniformity doctrine was credible – but reading through some of these blogs – in their vehement tones and implications – more is going on than charting innate differences.

But don’t get me wrong, I know what it’s like expressing non-PC thoughts. I remember being at Warwick, in a sociology class. I said that seeing a group of black men heading towards me at night would arouse my spidey senses more than whites. I said there was something innate about that. Instinctive. Everyone went white (pun semi-intended). The only reason it wasn’t held against me was because I presented it in a fairly sheepish, arbitary manner; and maybe because everyone knew I wasn’t from a sociological background.

I notice plenty of PC wars going on in the mainstream. Stuff regarding the dominance of blacks in sprinting; or how, in my favourite sport (Mixed Martial Arts) are particularly met with confused stares. A commentator, Joe Rogan, keeps apologising for using ‘athletic and explosive’ to describe black fighters. But they ARE. It just is. The thought process boggles:

1) Black people are insanely good at A
2) Meaning they are better at other races at A
3) Therefore…. ugh… where does it lead! Differences, everywhere!
4) Let’s forget about it. Watch them run.

@SDL Reply:
March 21st, 2013 at 12:40 pm

“The Reacto-sphere’s indelicate (and sometimes jaundiced) tone about race and gender results purely from the fact that we aren’t allowed to talk about it anywhere else unless we’re true-believing Blank Slatists. To be anything less is to be an odd duck, at best, or a pariah, at worst. I can almost guarantee that the HBD crowd–most of them, anyway–would take a more careful tone if they were allowed to discuss these things in public, non-anonymous venues without being given the Linda Gottfredson treatment (AKA the Larry Summers treatment).”

Is anti-political correctness really the sum of it? I’l have to read around more. I was surrounded by pure blank slatists at Warwick. I was never completely convinced. Race and Gender being total social constructs didn’t sit well with me. It has to be some mixture between genetic make up and environment, though. You can’t ignore one or the other. It doesn’t help that I remain deeply suspicious of EP and evolutionary biologys capacity to explain anthropological/sociological dilemmas. For all the talk of Catherdral talk around these parts, I believe that there is politically motivated ideology at the heart of EP/EB claims of this sort. I’ll have to look at HBD. A friend of mine said to me it is dressed up eugenics. That concerns me.

Really liked this post. Although I’m still not entirely convinced with a lot of the neo-reaction I’ve been reading (especially the stuff on race), when you couch it in terms of ‘exit’, ‘pro-realism’, and combine it with the staccato and intensity of your earlier work, I’m close to being sold! ‘Voting with your feet’, as you have mentioned in the past, is probably the most praticallly consistent thing one can do.

Off topic – but ho hum.

In terms of the people you recommended me:

Theil does seems an interestering character. I read the ‘No tax, No death’ article in the New Yorker, not sure if he was being painted in a favourable light, however.

This Seasteading business is great stuff. Gave a Libertarian friend of mine a mind boner, for sure. you’re right about Patri, he does seem like he has stepped off an ‘another time’ ship. So yes, hopefully soon I’ll be clued up enough to be able to contribute to some of these exchanges.