The question isn’t how we get along, it’s Genghis Khan’s question:
“Why should the strong refrain from decimation, enslavement, enserfment, or rule for maximum profit?”
The only incentive for the strong is whether cooperation is preferable to conquest. It is only preferable for conquest if it is sufficiently preferable to conquest to refrain from conquest.
So, as the Great Khan said:
“Given that cooperation is not preferable or possible, and serfdom and slavery are costly, that leaves decimation, or rule for the maximization of profit.”
“We might prefer the former or the latter. However the enemy would undoubtedly prefer separation to decimation or rule under out maximization of profit. And this is the wise choice. Since we can still cooperate indirectly by trade while having no influence over one another within the same polity.”
The problem the Khan faced is that he lacked the ability to produce institutions capable of sustained rule, just as expansionary aryans lacked the ability to produce institutions of sustained rule for maximum profit.
The Indo-Aryans succeeded only under decimation and replacement in europe, not by any other means.
So the Khan was wrong. Decimation was actually the right answer.
September 21st, 2018 1:26 PM
THE THIRD QUESTION OF POLITICAL PHILOSOPHY
[T]he question isn’t how we get along, it’s Genghis Khan’s question:
“Why should the strong refrain from decimation, enslavement, enserfment, or rule for maximum profit?”
The only incentive for the strong is whether cooperation is preferable to conquest. It is only preferable for conquest if it is sufficiently preferable to conquest to refrain from conquest.
So, as the Great Khan said:
“Given that cooperation is not preferable or possible, and serfdom and slavery are costly, that leaves decimation, or rule for the maximization of profit.”
“We might prefer the former or the latter. However the enemy would undoubtedly prefer separation to decimation or rule under out maximization of profit. And this is the wise choice. Since we can still cooperate indirectly by trade while having no influence over one another within the same polity.”
The problem the Khan faced is that he lacked the ability to produce institutions capable of sustained rule, just as expansionary aryans lacked the ability to produce institutions of sustained rule for maximum profit.
The Indo-Aryans succeeded only under decimation and replacement in europe, not by any other means.
So the Khan was wrong. Decimation was actually the right answer.
—“In the West, mass literacy under majoritarian democracy has definitely contributed to dysgenia inasmuch as it has served as vector for political Abrahamism (weaponization of the under classes).”— Inquisitor
—-“When you leave Cuba for the first time, you discover many things that you had been blind to,” said Yaili Jiménez Gutierrez, one of the doctors who filed suit. “There comes a time when you get tired of being a slave.”—
photos_and_videos/TimelinePhotos_43196237263/42262255_10156650204327264_4241097243488157696_n_10156650204322264.jpg The distribution isn’t quite even.
I love how they take from 85-115 as average. that’s ridiculous. 106 should be the dividing line, so that we talk about quality more so thaan the flatness of the distribution.
Really 95-105 is average and we need 100-110 to be average.Andy CurzonGood ^^ (useful data).Sep 20, 2018 8:16amJames JensenEveryone said I was not living up to my potential… but, secretly I knew I was doing exactly what I could… in fact, when I really tried to reach beyond my home life and local environment I got lost down some dark hole… I think in circles, around and around… my wife is the smartest and stupidest person I have ever known… whenever I have an insight and share it with her she says something like “and, you have just learned that? I’ve known that since I was a child… you can’t be that dumb “… but it is new to me.Sep 20, 2018 11:34amJames JensenSep 20, 2018 11:36amHusam Aldahiyat100-110 can’t be “average” since IQ is by definition normed to have 100 as its reference point.Sep 20, 2018 12:43pmJames ArcherYou and I both know why they consider 85-115 to be average. If they didn’t, a whole group of people would be considered retarded or borderline retarded.Sep 20, 2018 1:05pmBryan Nova BreyIn line with your assessment here, I’d like to read your thoughts on this post by Jordan Peterson (I’m not a fan) and the most popular reply by TheDrogger who throws him off so much that he has to edit his original post.
From my perspective JP is manipulating the IQ distribution and claiming 3 standard deviations for average population and only 2 deviations for Jews and then calculating the resulting populations. He also doesn’t compare Jews to Whites.
Thought you’d enjoy ripping JP apart in an area of statistics, IQ, population, and disproportionate representation.
https://jordanbpeterson.com/psychology/on-the-so-called-jewish-question/Sep 20, 2018 1:07pmJoshua SkeensVox Day did a VERY extensive rebuttal on this that got him started down the warpathSep 20, 2018 1:17pmBryan Nova Breylink? I’d love to read it.Sep 20, 2018 1:23pmJoshua Skeenshttp://voxday.blogspot.com/2018/05/an-eminent-person.html
Check anything with the “Jordanetics” tag.Sep 20, 2018 1:28pmBryan Nova BreyI think @[11833594:2048:Eli Harman] did a great job ripping apart JP, though my comment is more specific to the argument JP made regarding the Jewish Question. I think Curt will articulate what JP is doing and how he fakes the IQ distribution.Sep 20, 2018 2:43pmWyatt StorchThanks for this. Stealing.Sep 21, 2018 9:02amEli HarmanJordan Peterson is a Jew; maybe not literally but in all other important respects…Sep 21, 2018 9:23amChristopher MatthewThere is a massive difference between 85 and 115.
Not just in terms of criminality, but education, professional success, choice of mate, how many children, etc etc.Sep 21, 2018 10:00amAaron KahlandI just read Jordan Peterson’s response to the criticism provided by TheDrogger and there is a significant error in Peterson’s calculation.
He claims that Jews with IQ’s of 145 or above are, in percentage terms, commensurate with their proportion of millionaires / billionaires. However his baseline for the total is merely the Jewish and White population.
However, White Americans now make up little over 60% of the overall population. His baseline thus comprises only 63% of the total US population. Treating the remainder US population as he has done Whites would ought to reduce Jewish millionaire numbers to 25% of the total.
Peterson’s calculation therefore only adds up if he assumes that there exist no 145+ IQs outside of the US’ White and Jewish populations.
Although it might be argued that US adult population demographics are likely to increase the accuracy of Peterson’s baseline, it nevertheless remains considerably off.Sep 21, 2018 10:02amDylan BoswellWhew! Just in the 2.2% by a hair (4 points).Sep 21, 2018 10:36amCarl OnniThe fact that there still is a identifiable jewish people is proof enough of strong in-group preference. It is simply not possible to propagate through time as a minority without it.Sep 21, 2018 3:05pmAlex BirchThis is sort of why I quit following bell curve lit in college, whereupon I realized with each successive generation of dysgenics, authorities will simply readjust the curve to such a degree that the marginally gifted appear geniuses, and the highly gifted, threats to our civilization. After a while, the facts become impetus for action. There is only one sane response to this catastrophe.Sep 22, 2018 12:16amThe distribution isn’t quite even.
I love how they take from 85-115 as average. that’s ridiculous. 106 should be the dividing line, so that we talk about quality more so thaan the flatness of the distribution.
Really 95-105 is average and we need 100-110 to be average.
photos_and_videos/TimelinePhotos_SxeO6JU-xg/42262255_10156650204327264_4241097243488157696_n_10156650204322264.jpg The distribution isn’t quite even.
I love how they take from 85-115 as average. that’s ridiculous. 106 should be the dividing line, so that we talk about quality more so thaan the flatness of the distribution.
Really 95-105 is average and we need 100-110 to be average.Andy CurzonGood ^^ (useful data).Sep 20, 2018, 8:16 AMJames JensenEveryone said I was not living up to my potential… but, secretly I knew I was doing exactly what I could… in fact, when I really tried to reach beyond my home life and local environment I got lost down some dark hole… I think in circles, around and around… my wife is the smartest and stupidest person I have ever known… whenever I have an insight and share it with her she says something like “and, you have just learned that? I’ve known that since I was a child… you can’t be that dumb “… but it is new to me.Sep 20, 2018, 11:34 AMJames JensenSep 20, 2018, 11:36 AMArman GhaffariIt really seems strange to me that I’m far above average. I feel like a retard.Sep 20, 2018, 11:54 AMHusam Al-Dahiyat100-110 can’t be “average” since IQ is by definition normed to have 100 as its reference point.Sep 20, 2018, 12:43 PMMarcus JamesYou and I both know why they consider 85-115 to be average. If they didn’t, a whole group of people would be considered retarded or borderline retarded.Sep 20, 2018, 1:05 PMBryan Nova BreyIn line with your assessment here, I’d like to read your thoughts on this post by Jordan Peterson (I’m not a fan) and the most popular reply by TheDrogger who throws him off so much that he has to edit his original post.
From my perspective JP is manipulating the IQ distribution and claiming 3 standard deviations for average population and only 2 deviations for Jews and then calculating the resulting populations. He also doesn’t compare Jews to Whites.
Thought you’d enjoy ripping JP apart in an area of statistics, IQ, population, and disproportionate representation.
https://jordanbpeterson.com/psychology/on-the-so-called-jewish-question/Sep 20, 2018, 1:07 PMJoshua SkeensVox Day did a VERY extensive rebuttal on this that got him started down the warpathSep 20, 2018, 1:17 PMBryan Nova Breylink? I’d love to read it.Sep 20, 2018, 1:23 PMJoshua Skeenshttp://voxday.blogspot.com/2018/05/an-eminent-person.html
Check anything with the “Jordanetics” tag.Sep 20, 2018, 1:28 PMArman GhaffariThis has been debunked by Vox and DukeSep 20, 2018, 2:40 PMBryan Nova BreyI think Eli Harman did a great job ripping apart JP, though my comment is more specific to the argument JP made regarding the Jewish Question. I think Curt will articulate what JP is doing and how he fakes the IQ distribution.Sep 20, 2018, 2:43 PMWyatt StorchThanks for this. Stealing.Sep 21, 2018, 9:02 AMEli HarmanJordan Peterson is a Jew; maybe not literally but in all other important respects…Sep 21, 2018, 9:23 AMChristopher MatthewThere is a massive difference between 85 and 115.
Not just in terms of criminality, but education, professional success, choice of mate, how many children, etc etc.Sep 21, 2018, 10:00 AMArno KælandI just read Jordan Peterson’s response to the criticism provided by TheDrogger and there is a significant error in Peterson’s calculation.
He claims that Jews with IQ’s of 145 or above are, in percentage terms, commensurate with their proportion of millionaires / billionaires. However his baseline for the total is merely the Jewish and White population.
However, White Americans now make up little over 60% of the overall population. His baseline thus comprises only 63% of the total US population. Treating the remainder US population as he has done Whites would ought to reduce Jewish millionaire numbers to 25% of the total.
Peterson’s calculation therefore only adds up if he assumes that there exist no 145+ IQs outside of the US’ White and Jewish populations.
Although it might be argued that US adult population demographics are likely to increase the accuracy of Peterson’s baseline, it nevertheless remains considerably off.Sep 21, 2018, 10:02 AMDylan BoswellWhew! Just in the 2.2% by a hair (4 points).Sep 21, 2018, 10:36 AMCarl EluThe fact that there still is a identifiable jewish people is proof enough of strong in-group preference. It is simply not possible to propagate through time as a minority without it.Sep 21, 2018, 3:05 PMAlex BirchThis is sort of why I quit following bell curve lit in college, whereupon I realized with each successive generation of dysgenics, authorities will simply readjust the curve to such a degree that the marginally gifted appear geniuses, and the highly gifted, threats to our civilization. After a while, the facts become impetus for action. There is only one sane response to this catastrophe.Sep 22, 2018, 12:16 AMThe distribution isn’t quite even.
I love how they take from 85-115 as average. that’s ridiculous. 106 should be the dividing line, so that we talk about quality more so thaan the flatness of the distribution.
Really 95-105 is average and we need 100-110 to be average.
photos_and_videos/TimelinePhotos_SxeO6JU-xg/42262255_10156650204327264_4241097243488157696_n_10156650204322264.jpg The distribution isn’t quite even.
I love how they take from 85-115 as average. that’s ridiculous. 106 should be the dividing line, so that we talk about quality more so thaan the flatness of the distribution.
Really 95-105 is average and we need 100-110 to be average.Andy CurzonGood ^^ (useful data).Sep 20, 2018, 8:16 AMJames JensenEveryone said I was not living up to my potential… but, secretly I knew I was doing exactly what I could… in fact, when I really tried to reach beyond my home life and local environment I got lost down some dark hole… I think in circles, around and around… my wife is the smartest and stupidest person I have ever known… whenever I have an insight and share it with her she says something like “and, you have just learned that? I’ve known that since I was a child… you can’t be that dumb “… but it is new to me.Sep 20, 2018, 11:34 AMJames JensenSep 20, 2018, 11:36 AMArman GhaffariIt really seems strange to me that I’m far above average. I feel like a retard.Sep 20, 2018, 11:54 AMHusam Aldahiyat100-110 can’t be “average” since IQ is by definition normed to have 100 as its reference point.Sep 20, 2018, 12:43 PMMarcus JamesYou and I both know why they consider 85-115 to be average. If they didn’t, a whole group of people would be considered retarded or borderline retarded.Sep 20, 2018, 1:05 PMBryan Nova BreyIn line with your assessment here, I’d like to read your thoughts on this post by Jordan Peterson (I’m not a fan) and the most popular reply by TheDrogger who throws him off so much that he has to edit his original post.
From my perspective JP is manipulating the IQ distribution and claiming 3 standard deviations for average population and only 2 deviations for Jews and then calculating the resulting populations. He also doesn’t compare Jews to Whites.
Thought you’d enjoy ripping JP apart in an area of statistics, IQ, population, and disproportionate representation.
https://jordanbpeterson.com/psychology/on-the-so-called-jewish-question/Sep 20, 2018, 1:07 PMJoshua SkeensVox Day did a VERY extensive rebuttal on this that got him started down the warpathSep 20, 2018, 1:17 PMBryan Nova Breylink? I’d love to read it.Sep 20, 2018, 1:23 PMJoshua Skeenshttp://voxday.blogspot.com/2018/05/an-eminent-person.html
Check anything with the “Jordanetics” tag.Sep 20, 2018, 1:28 PMArman GhaffariThis has been debunked by Vox and DukeSep 20, 2018, 2:40 PMBryan Nova BreyI think Eli Harman did a great job ripping apart JP, though my comment is more specific to the argument JP made regarding the Jewish Question. I think Curt will articulate what JP is doing and how he fakes the IQ distribution.Sep 20, 2018, 2:43 PMWyatt StorchThanks for this. Stealing.Sep 21, 2018, 9:02 AMEli HarmanJordan Peterson is a Jew; maybe not literally but in all other important respects…Sep 21, 2018, 9:23 AMChristopher MatthewThere is a massive difference between 85 and 115.
Not just in terms of criminality, but education, professional success, choice of mate, how many children, etc etc.Sep 21, 2018, 10:00 AMAaron KahlandI just read Jordan Peterson’s response to the criticism provided by TheDrogger and there is a significant error in Peterson’s calculation.
He claims that Jews with IQ’s of 145 or above are, in percentage terms, commensurate with their proportion of millionaires / billionaires. However his baseline for the total is merely the Jewish and White population.
However, White Americans now make up little over 60% of the overall population. His baseline thus comprises only 63% of the total US population. Treating the remainder US population as he has done Whites would ought to reduce Jewish millionaire numbers to 25% of the total.
Peterson’s calculation therefore only adds up if he assumes that there exist no 145+ IQs outside of the US’ White and Jewish populations.
Although it might be argued that US adult population demographics are likely to increase the accuracy of Peterson’s baseline, it nevertheless remains considerably off.Sep 21, 2018, 10:02 AMDylan BoswellWhew! Just in the 2.2% by a hair (4 points).Sep 21, 2018, 10:36 AMCarl EluThe fact that there still is a identifiable jewish people is proof enough of strong in-group preference. It is simply not possible to propagate through time as a minority without it.Sep 21, 2018, 3:05 PMAlex BirchThis is sort of why I quit following bell curve lit in college, whereupon I realized with each successive generation of dysgenics, authorities will simply readjust the curve to such a degree that the marginally gifted appear geniuses, and the highly gifted, threats to our civilization. After a while, the facts become impetus for action. There is only one sane response to this catastrophe.Sep 22, 2018, 12:16 AMThe distribution isn’t quite even.
I love how they take from 85-115 as average. that’s ridiculous. 106 should be the dividing line, so that we talk about quality more so thaan the flatness of the distribution.
Really 95-105 is average and we need 100-110 to be average.
—-“When you leave Cuba for the first time, you discover many things that you had been blind to,” said Yaili Jiménez Gutierrez, one of the doctors who filed suit. “There comes a time when you get tired of being a slave.”—
