Quote note (#235)

The implausible telos of progressive race politics:

It is certainly possible to get to a place where jobs at Facebook are allocated by global demographics, with the requisite number of Aboriginals and so forth. South Africa, with BEE, is rapidly approaching this point. If you want to make all the present programmers at Facebook racists, it’s an excellent way to proceed, but I really don’t think it will lead to your uniform, perfect and beige dream world. (Not sure if you’re familiar with present conditions in the Rainbow Nation.)

The idea that the progressive race religion is something that can be productively reasoned about ended for many of us at precisely the moment NRx began. Still, trying — or pretending to try — to argue optimistically about it could (perhaps) remain worthwhile as an experiment, even without the slightest realistic chance that it could work.

Again, I’m not here to get you to agree with me; I know that’s impossible. What I’m curious [about] is whether you can at least agree to disagree.

That doesn’t seem much more realistic (so it’s probably an experiment — or cultural tactic — of some different kind.)

ADDED: “Of course, it’s incredibly important to keep diversity issues at the forefront of everyone’s awareness …”

April 1, 2016admin 46 Comments »
FILED UNDER :Discriminations


46 Responses to this entry

  • Quote note (#235) | Neoreactive Says:

    […] Quote note (#235) […]

    Posted on April 1st, 2016 at 12:00 pm Reply | Quote
  • Erebus Says:

    Yarvin’s original post was disgustingly apologetic — and the core argument was also quite wrong. (This is a digression, but, to be specific: The notion that modern society values and rewards raw intelligence more than ever before is utterly false — which is something that every serious student of history should know. This is in large part due to the fact that modern society values schooling over intelligence and ability, and modern schooling is downright abysmal. It selects for certain personality traits, not for ability. Other factors abound — there’s not enough room on this margin for ’em.)

    …Having said that, the conversations below the original post are hugely entertaining. If the idiots arguing with Yarvin raised a single good point, I haven’t been able to find it. You’re right: There’s just no reasoning with those people. It achieves nothing, and, in fact, those goodwhites simply take it as an opportunity to signal how virtuous they are. It reminds me of that old saying: “Never wrestle with a pig. You both get dirty… and the pig likes it.”


    frank Reply:

    This is exactly what I thought when I read the essay. Yarvin’s probably modeling his strategy after Martin Shkreli who masterfully flipped the script in the face of impossible looking odds, gaining the hearts of countless millennials and proggies by counter-signaling against IQ elitism while staying as honest as possible (keepin’ it 100) on the breakfast club show. I highly recommend the 30 min video pointed to by the link; it’s the definitive course on Shkreli style script flipping against Cathedral smearing campaigns.

    At first I was surprised that Yarvin replied to the morons in the comments, but it actually makes sense considered in the context of Shkreli Strategy. In any case, it’s always a treat to read his trenchant and witty prose.


    Erebus Reply:

    Always a treat, definitely.

    As for Shkreli: I don’t know whether he’s a genius or a fool, but he’s certainly serving an extremely valuable, almost heroic function. His brazen exploitation of pharmaceutical industry loopholes and the subsequent media outcry has done more to expose the criminal incompetence of the FDA than anything in recent memory. He’s going to pay the price regardless of his intentions, but his actions might lead to meaningful regulatory reform, which is almost certain to save thousands of lives and alleviate the suffering of millions.

    …People don’t realize how bad things are at the FDA. The loopholes Shkreli is exploiting have been, silently, misused by many other companies. (Such as Valeant, who invented the business model that Shkreli later copied.)

    Needless to say, the problem isn’t that the industry is under-regulated, but that it is over-regulated and micro-managed to an absurd extent. It’s comical that people think that little Shkreli is the enemy, when the FDA is both his enabler, and the world’s greatest example of a metastatic, malignant, and downright evil government office.


    Alrenous Reply:

    Paraphrasing, because I hate transcribing well,
    “In law, you can be prosecuted for not maximizing profits. I know people who have.”
    That’s measured quarterly. It’s flatly illegal to run a public company with long time horizons. Naturally this is blamed on greed and/or capitalism.


    grey enlightenment Reply:

    Damage control? Maybe. People seem surprised that Moldbug is not that extreme. He’s a technocrat or academic at heart, which is not a bad thing , but he’s not a Richard Spencer. Mldbug doesn’t want too much drama and he wants to keep the discussion focused on empirical matters, not too much on emotion.


    Posted on April 1st, 2016 at 12:10 pm Reply | Quote
  • TheDividualist Says:

    “He could be a cobbler and make shoes that last 10 years.”

    How could he? Only if the highly automatized shoes factory is outlawed. And the long lasting shoe smells like not a normal market outcome either – it seems customers mostly want their shoes cheap enough to buy new ones every time the fashion changes or just on a whim, and thus manufacturers don’t care about how long they last.

    I remember MM floated the idea years ago that selectively banning some industries from using high-tech in order to take care of the unemployment of lower IQ people may be a good idea, but frankly I don’t understand how could that work. It automatically means the loss of some kind of competitive advantage, like losing businesses to another country that does not do so and in the worst case even losing wars.

    I mean, I like the idea, I totally agree the three keys of human happiness that are today missing is stable families, real (ethnic) communities and meaningful, challenging work – but it seems we have exactly the same problem with the later that medieval guilds faced. They too tried to control innovation for the sake of job security and simply proved too weak for, the forces of economics were stronger, because interests find a way.

    The only kind of intervention I could imagine working is basically handing farmland to the perpetually unemployed and making them grow their food. But with certain populations even that doesn’t work. Eastern European countries found many Roma people are even unsuitable to be peasants – you give them piglets and teach them how to raise pigs and a week later all the piglets are eaten. Time preference. One village I visited hires them to raise potatoes on the farmland owned by the village council, pays them minimum wage, and then gives them the potatoes to eat. So far it was the only thing that proved to be working, for certain values of “working”. Still not a net asset…

    Frankly I’d pay low-IQ people to get voluntarily sterilized – that may be a Danegeld, but in the long run a good one. Or maybe just pay anyone who accepts voluntary sterilization without even a test: intelligent people who actually want kids won’t do it, and it does not matter much how everybody else chooses.

    Hey, I have a weirder idea. These days Twitter is so much cucks these and cucks that it gave me the idea to invent the good kind of cuckoldry. Store sperm from high quality men. Tell young ghetto girls they can only get the council flat and the welfare check if their kid is coming from these selected donors. Even if they have a boyfriend or husband.


    frank Reply:

    Smart children of single mothers sounds like a recipe for school shooters to me.


    Aeroguy Reply:

    “Smart children of single mothers sounds like a recipe for school shooters to me.” Agreed

    I’d even be willing to see the stupid guaranteed income (though since we’re targeting high time preference a lump sum would be both cheaper and more effective) for anyone on the condition that they’re childless and sterilized. It’s less danegeld than golden parachute, they seem like boondoggles but when you consider the cost of not removing them sooner it’s actually a bargain.

    If I were a billionaire or had a charity with billions I would setup clinics in diverse neighborhoods offering free vasectomies and tube tying along with a spin on a roulette that gives away guaranteed prizes ranging from air jordans, the newest iphone, up to a small chance for a souped up car with spinners. I would also keep a small army of lawyers and lobbyists who would ride on precedent from Planned Parenthood giving abortions to minors without parent consent in order to also provide my charity to minors because trolling.


    Skilluminati Reply:

    My own childhood was a near-miss like that, yeah.


    aglio Reply:

    The apologetic tone is annoying.

    That said the path to a changed society seems rather clear.

    We continue to bombard the outskirts (NRX) and slowly convert the center (Trump) and infiltrate the public spaces and culture (Alt-Right) and after this has been done long enough, we stand up and with our faces, mouths, and reputation say “Race is biological and is connected to intelligence. This is quantified by IQ statistics.”

    And then we become the leaders of society. Loss is not an option. Those who stand in the way stand in the way of reality, not mere human whim.

    To be clear, the real subject is that of eugenics. IQ and race are subjects which are innately connected to the question of eugenics. They are not separate, but the same. Any discussion of IQ and race is a discussion about eugenics. That is the sort of secret thing that is hiding inside of the average terror of your average person today. And largely the imagery that fuels the ideologue with the loud voice.

    I suspect China will lead the way to humane eugenics while the white race slowly fritters away aimlessly in multicultural hell. Then Japan will follow suit. Germany, Austria, Norway – all likely will lead the way to humane white eugenics.

    The real weak link remains the UK. I am not sure what separates the UK from Norway. That anglo gene seems to lead to a very emotional and weak mentality. Whereas, in China for instance we see that this just doesn’t exist. I honestly don’t know why.

    Taboo to say this, but Germany was the first nation to notice these things and implement them. Albeit in a way that has not been seen kindly by history, mind you. That’s true. The point is that they did it first, even if they did it in a non-humane way.

    I know this post is basically the exact opposite of the approach Moldbug has been taking. I believe what I am saying is completely true and I am simply saying what I see to be the rational facts completely free of any tainting from the emotional system.

    Eugenics is a given. Anyone with basic logical abilities and knowledge of population rise, limited resources, the book “The Bell Curve,” and the current rise of automation and artificial intelligence knows that there is no escaping this question. That’s just my opinion. The real question surrounds the word “humane.”

    I’d be lying if I said there wasn’t a sort of trolling mentality in what I’m writing. I know it makes people mad so I’m kind of playing it up. “WE MUST CULL THE ZOMBIES.” That said I actually do take this somewhat serious and I do genuinely believe it is the best approach to improving the human condition, by far. And I do believe it can be done in a way that fits with human rights. None of the soap opera music and weepy theatrics of Holocaust propaganda is allowed in the spaces of my mind – at least when it comes to the word “eugenics.”


    Posted on April 1st, 2016 at 12:36 pm Reply | Quote
  • John Says:

    Is it just me or does this read remarkably like a Scott Alexander post? Reeks of Bay Area poz and leftie apologetics in a way that never appears in the Moldbug canon. I guess this is him trying to salvage some measure of respectability on behalf of his startup.


    TheDividualist Reply:

    I think he feels he has a duty to not put the conference organizers into an even more painful situation, and that is fully understandable IMHO.

    Besides, as a nameless nick on the Internet, I feel like I really don’t have a moral leg to stand on to judge people who risk their careers with their real names or close. Not even Scott Alexander, it would be very, very easy for an infuriated feminist to dox him and probably get him fired even before he finished the residency requirement and basically fuck his career for good. So if he feels he must spew the poz and only let the truth sweep in here or there, I really cannot demand he should have more courage. And you neither, using just a first name. Note: I actually lived under a Communist regime, perhaps this why I am really empathic with this. I watched my dad and granddad bite their tongues and not speak up all the time, because they had us kids to think of. Courage and risk-taking should be concentrated to the places and times where it can actually make a change.


    Erebus Reply:

    But what he’s doing isn’t helping the conference organizers. If anything, it’s making things worse for them.

    Let’s face it: Nobody put a gun to Yarvin’s head and forced him to write an apologetic and almost deferential statement. (That statement’s tone is unmistakably that of somebody writing from a position of weakness.)

    Nobody’s forcing him to engage with the inane and ridiculous comments to his statement.

    Nobody told him that he had to speak to the media. (This was foolish, for obvious reasons. It should be titled “How not to respond to hostile media inquiries.”)

    If instead of abasing himself he’d simply stuck to a simple script — “I wish to keep my personal opinions private, will speak only of Urbit and other technical matters, and have no further comments or statements to make” — this little tempest in a teapot would already have dissipated.

    So, frankly, I don’t think that Yarvin’s behavior is understandable at all. Not in the context of “making things easier for the conference organizers.” So what we’re seeing is probably some sort of experiment or tactic, as Admin posited previously.


    grey enlightenment Reply:

    even the tag ‘free speech advocate’ is annoying. It’s like a way of dusting everything under the rug of ‘free speech’ without having to take a stand

    Tentative Joiner Reply:

    >probably some sort of experiment or tactic, as Admin posited previously

    One could hope the darkest, and most cliche, suspicions of the Left are true: the goal is to make NRx views more acceptable to hold for Bay Area techies. This is an interesting prospect, if only for the writing it would produce, but with the caveat that the version of NRx that gains acceptance may be distinctly (perhaps fatally) watered down. The — admittedly unlikely — worst-case scenario is it displacing the real thing.

    Leonard Reply:

    Yarvin is adapting his argument to the audience. To convince people it is much easier to draw out the conclusions of what they themselves already believe, rather than attempting to change their basic beliefs.

    If Yarvin were arguing with Christians, he’d talk about Jesus. If he was arguing with Muslims, he’d refer to the Koran. Similarly, to argue with a Bay Aryan, you have to show concern for blacks. So he does. He did not have to do that as much at UR, because its audience was not hostile pozzies. Although to be sure you can see it there if you look for it.


    Seth Largo Reply:

    Thank you. Moldbug is showing himself to be a consummate rhetorician. Aristotle and Cicero would be proud.


    Posted on April 1st, 2016 at 12:43 pm Reply | Quote
  • grey enlightenment Says:

    Like opening a shaken can of soda and expecting the trajectory of the fizz to be strait


    Posted on April 1st, 2016 at 1:15 pm Reply | Quote
  • SVErshov Says:

    “This world strikes me as terrifying and disastrous, even for an intellectual — and we’re not all intellectuals. Malik certainly isn’t an intellectual. ”

    very good point. intersting name also ‘malik’ common name among mullas. in hindi word ‘malik’ used often as owner, of shop, house.


    frank Reply:

    I believe it comes from the Arabic root ‘mlk’, which is also the root for “faculty/capability” and “owner/custodian/warden” and “property”. I guess Semites of the ancient world had an appreciation for the relations among responsibility, authority and property.


    Grotesque Body Reply:

    You fools, it’s “kill ’em” backwards.


    Posted on April 1st, 2016 at 1:21 pm Reply | Quote
  • vimothy Says:

    Totally OT, but: https://orthosphere.wordpress.com/2016/03/31/on-gnon/


    Posted on April 1st, 2016 at 1:42 pm Reply | Quote
  • Stirner Says:

    Sad that Yarvin has to be so apologetic in his rhetoric, but I guess business is business.

    Interesting to see that he is blogging again on non-technical matters. Moldbug managed to be profoundly influential using only an obscure niche blog. Giving Yarvin access to wider audiences unfiltered and unmediated may wind up backfiring spectacularly in the long run. Stock up on popcorn, lads.


    Mariani Reply:

    Urbit is a pretty big deal from what I can gather. Yarvin should definitely defang himself if it means becoming successful with his startup. Being powerful in the tech world matters way more than being powerful in the blogosphere.


    Grotesque Body Reply:

    Makes me wonder why he outed himself as MM given that UR has almost no relevance to Urbit, or if not (ie he was doxed) how that could have happened given that he’s supposedly such a Level 10 Computer Science Sith Lord.


    admin Reply:

    I’m fairly sure Yarvin didn’t deliberately out himself. He’s open to accusations of sloppy identity security, I guess, but doing that stuff well takes a lot of work. He probably couldn’t be bothered to take the effort (though I’m guessing he regrets such nonchalance now).

    Henk Reply:

    Self inflicted. Years ago, MM put up a post on UR linking to himself writing as C. Guy Yarvin about what later became Urbit.

    I think it was easy to believe that UR and UR-bit would be synergistic. Digital feudalism, not noticed after the fact as lamentable emergent property, but proudly crypto-locked into the product by its wannabe feudal overlord designers: Who besides UR readers would have been prepared to like that?

    Alrenous Reply:

    Yarvin was linked directly from Unqualified Reservations. The wall could not have been thinner.

    admin Reply:

    Guess this counts as not really trying.

    (My unpaid research assistant also passes on this and this, with the apt comment: “This is non-security. Saying it’s paper thin is an insult to paper.”)

    Posted on April 1st, 2016 at 3:18 pm Reply | Quote
  • Pseudo-chrysostom Says:

    Powers of old had a very expedient method of dealing with surplus males; ship them to the frontier.

    In recent times, holy terra has run rather short on any real frontier. Therefore, invest in space programs.

    And then get ready to purge the filthy xenos scum from the galaxy.


    Posted on April 1st, 2016 at 7:48 pm Reply | Quote
  • Brett Stevens Says:

    Does anyone believe there is any content to liberal democracy other than virtue signaling anymore? Or that there ever was? It was a power grab using social guilt and nothing more.

    Overthrow, try again 🙂


    Posted on April 1st, 2016 at 7:57 pm Reply | Quote
  • Maclavello Says:

    In this particular instance, Moldbug indeed does fail even “to agree to disagree”. In case no one saw it, his interlocutor’s reply (and goodbye):

    “It’s a very strange feeling, to be civil with you. I don’t think you deserve it, and I wish I’d realized that sooner.

    At first, I couldn’t tell if you were malicious, confused, or just contrarian. It now seems pretty clear that you’re all 3.

    In any case, you’re not going to change many minds simply by being civil. I’m not sure why I thought I might. ”

    Hard-hearted, uncharitably suspicious, pathetic, and (if we let our cold realism warm even a bit) a little sad.


    Posted on April 1st, 2016 at 10:03 pm Reply | Quote
  • Pseudo-chrysostom Says:


    It just goes to show that (((moderating the message))) has never gotten anyone anywhere at any time.

    ZFG game will always steer you true.


    Seth Largo Reply:

    Where it gets you is your interlocutor looking like an ass in front of anyone who is undecided.


    Pseudo-chrysostom Reply:

    I am willing to grant if your audience is a melange of nordics that could actually get you some traction.

    Else, assholery is less refractory than you might think. In fact, it can actually be a vital part in getting people to like and respect you.

    Above all if you *adulterate* yourself, you’re already on the road to failure.


    Posted on April 1st, 2016 at 11:53 pm Reply | Quote
  • Grotesque Body Says:

    NRx (Landian version) is no more than drawing out the implications (in myriad domains) of taking “Exit > Voice” as axiomatic. Am I wrong?

    The beginning of NRx coincides precisely when one realises that Progress cannot be reasoned with because the end of rational discourse is when you realise how indispensable the possibility of Exit is under all conditions.


    Posted on April 2nd, 2016 at 6:56 am Reply | Quote
  • Oliver Cromwell Says:

    Moldbug is going soft. Saying that IQ doesn’t matter or shouldn’t be valued is an untenable position.


    Cavalier Reply:

    ” I will bend like a reed in the wind”


    grey enlightenment Reply:

    even soft moldbug is still better than 99% of stuff online

    In the essay he say IQ matters for certain skills (the analytical programming kind), but it does not make one a better person. I disagree with the latter. A kinda of cognitive dissonance


    admin Reply:

    Anyone with a clue is appalled by their own stupidity.


    Grotesque Body Reply:

    Denying traditional metrics of superiority (intelligence, physical attractiveness, wealth, athletic prowess) is the portal that delivers you to nihilism. Yes, intelligence does make you a better person, ceteris paribus, but it doesn’t have to be the only criterion of superiority. Moldbug is implying a false dichotomy where EITHER intelligence OR something else (and the latter is not named, because this is the nihilist’s rhetoric) is to be the sole criterion of superiority. As someone else mentioned in a recent thread, there may be persons alive today who are more intelligent in terms of IQ than Shakespeare, but the qualities he possessed , which we moderns (postmoderns?) for the most part do not have, more than outweigh that slight disadvantage. It’s not inconsistent to hold that person B is better than person A if person A is slightly more intelligent but far inferior in looks, personality, physical strength, moral conviction and so on, whilst also holding that higher intelligence ceteris paribus is always a good thing. If everyone was reminded what “ceteris paribus” means prior to every single discussion about race, IQ, merit and so on there would be far less confusion and bullshit.


    admin Reply:

    It is contribution to intelligence optimization that merits admiration, not its products (including IQ).

    Grotesque Body Reply:

    I’m talking about factors rather than products.

    reactionaryfuture Reply:

    I have said it before, but Nrx is an astonishing demonstration of the overwhelming power of dominate culture (itself created by power selection) to mould everything to it. Conquests second law. Of course IQ doesn’t make you a better person and the reflexive un-coordinated policing in the name of (heretical, but not really different) liberalism/progressivism is awesome to behold.


    Posted on April 2nd, 2016 at 9:29 am Reply | Quote
  • This Week in Reaction (2016/04/03) - Social Matter Says:

    […] of curriculum vitae. Perhaps. I interpret it more as hanging progs by their own IQ-ism. Land has a Moldbug quote note from that same thread. And more and more pushback. I think Moldbug was just being polite. People […]

    Posted on April 6th, 2016 at 7:55 am Reply | Quote

Leave a comment