Theme: Ethnoculture
-
Curt Doolittle’s answer: There are some questions that you should not ask becaus
Curt Doolittle’s answer: There are some questions that you should not ask because they produce answers you will not like. It is my job to answer uncomfortable questions so I’ll give you the respect of the correct answer, if you’ll respect that it might be unpleasant. Persians divided from common… -
You have to be kidding? It will take the educated person less than three days to
You have to be kidding? It will take the educated person less than three days to compile a set of data from any given year from the dawn of the web, to show that the most overrepresented and most prolific voices are Jewish – it’s the reason for Jewish success: opinion exposition.
Source date (UTC): 2018-03-19 20:41:19 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/975834625896599553
Reply addressees: @tcjfs
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/975603954452238338
IN REPLY TO:
Original post on X
Original tweet unavailable — we could not load the text of the post this reply is addressing on X. That usually means the tweet was deleted, the account is protected, or X does not expose it to the account used for archiving. The Original post link below may still open if you view it in X while signed in.
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/975603954452238338
-
There is absolutely no evidence of integration anywhere on earth and never has b
There is absolutely no evidence of integration anywhere on earth and never has been, even in the USA whites still associate by european ancestry. Islamists and jews never integrate anywhere. Why, if the Levant failed over and over again “Will this time be different?” IT WON’T
Source date (UTC): 2018-03-19 20:26:19 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/975830849374621697
Reply addressees: @TOQJoyce
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/975743644140474370
IN REPLY TO:
Original post on X
Original tweet unavailable — we could not load the text of the post this reply is addressing on X. That usually means the tweet was deleted, the account is protected, or X does not expose it to the account used for archiving. The Original post link below may still open if you view it in X while signed in.
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/975743644140474370
-
RT @jordanbpeterson: Unhappy identity-politics alt-righters: “The Western World
RT @jordanbpeterson: Unhappy identity-politics alt-righters: “The Western World wasn’t always markedly tribal, but it sure is now, owing to…
Source date (UTC): 2018-03-19 12:03:58 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/975704431382712325
-
Cultural Specialization Requires National Specialization
To Jonathan Haidt via twitter: 1) Question. Wealth has allowed us to explore our individual differences, pursue individual preferences, and all but eliminate the dependence upon family. So why is it not deterministic that we will develop demand for separate states to further ends that we can now afford? 2) So, why isn’t it the next evolutionary consequence, to preferentially ‘speciate’ so that we produce commons that suit our desires? Why is ANY monopoly a good? The only monopoly good I know of is scientific (operational) truth. 3) Why does a monopoly continental government provide better technological, economic, political, and normative results than multiple regional or local governments that specialize to produce commons preferential to members and undesirable by other peoples? 4) Why aren’t we all conducting the natural evolutionary research program and therefore why isn’t this specialization in wants rather than monopoly desirable? Isn’t the answer to return to the reason for european rapid advancement: specialization? -
CULTURAL SPECIALIZATION REQUIRES NATIONAL SPECIALIZATION To Jonathan Haidt via t
CULTURAL SPECIALIZATION REQUIRES NATIONAL SPECIALIZATION
To Jonathan Haidt via twitter:
1) Question. Wealth has allowed us to explore our individual differences, pursue individual preferences, and all but eliminate the dependence upon family. So why is it not deterministic that we will develop demand for separate states to further ends that we can now afford?
2) So, why isn’t it the next evolutionary consequence, to preferentially ‘speciate’ so that we produce commons that suit our desires? Why is ANY monopoly a good? The only monopoly good I know of is scientific (operational) truth.
3) Why does a monopoly continental government provide better technological, economic, political, and normative results than multiple regional or local governments that specialize to produce commons preferential to members and undesirable by other peoples?
4) Why aren’t we all conducting the natural evolutionary research program and therefore why isn’t this specialization in wants rather than monopoly desirable? Isn’t the answer to return to the reason for european rapid advancement: specialization?
Source date (UTC): 2018-03-19 08:06:00 UTC
-
Cultural Specialization Requires National Specialization
To Jonathan Haidt via twitter: 1) Question. Wealth has allowed us to explore our individual differences, pursue individual preferences, and all but eliminate the dependence upon family. So why is it not deterministic that we will develop demand for separate states to further ends that we can now afford? 2) So, why isn’t it the next evolutionary consequence, to preferentially ‘speciate’ so that we produce commons that suit our desires? Why is ANY monopoly a good? The only monopoly good I know of is scientific (operational) truth. 3) Why does a monopoly continental government provide better technological, economic, political, and normative results than multiple regional or local governments that specialize to produce commons preferential to members and undesirable by other peoples? 4) Why aren’t we all conducting the natural evolutionary research program and therefore why isn’t this specialization in wants rather than monopoly desirable? Isn’t the answer to return to the reason for european rapid advancement: specialization? -
2) Question Part Two: So, why isn’t it the next evolutionary consequence, to pre
2) Question Part Two: So, why isn’t it the next evolutionary consequence, to preferentially ‘speciate’ so that we produce commons that suit our desires? Why is ANY monopoly a good? The only monopoly good I know of is scientific (operational) truth.
Source date (UTC): 2018-03-19 00:52:09 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/975535363132358659
Reply addressees: @JonHaidt
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/973617420366643212
IN REPLY TO:
Original post on X
Original tweet unavailable — we could not load the text of the post this reply is addressing on X. That usually means the tweet was deleted, the account is protected, or X does not expose it to the account used for archiving. The Original post link below may still open if you view it in X while signed in.
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/973617420366643212
-
Jonathan: Question. Wealth has allowed us to explore our individual differences,
Jonathan: Question. Wealth has allowed us to explore our individual differences, pursue individual preferences, and all but eliminate the dependence upon family. So why is it not deterministic that we will develop demand for separate states to further ends that we can now afford?
Source date (UTC): 2018-03-19 00:49:35 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/975534716618145793
Reply addressees: @JonHaidt
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/973617420366643212
IN REPLY TO:
Original post on X
Original tweet unavailable — we could not load the text of the post this reply is addressing on X. That usually means the tweet was deleted, the account is protected, or X does not expose it to the account used for archiving. The Original post link below may still open if you view it in X while signed in.
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/973617420366643212
-
Why Is It That Iranian Americans Make More Than Double Income Per Capita Than Iraqi Americans?
There are some questions that you should not ask because they produce answers you will not like. It is my job to answer uncomfortable questions so I’ll give you the respect of the correct answer, if you’ll respect that it might be unpleasant.
We were horrified by the Galilean Revolution but we adapted to it anyway. In the west we were horrified by the Darwinian Revolution. But we adapted to it anyway. We were somewhat horrified by the consequences of industrialization but we adapted to it anyway. So some knowledge must be adapted to if we want to prosper.
Persians divided from common ancestors with Europeans a long time ago, but are the ethnic group closest to West Eurasians (Europeans) – They integrate well, tend toward professional occupations, and demonstrate relatively high trust versus their other levantine neighbors. They have an extraordinary history of intelligence and scholarship despite the destruction to their civilization, language, culture, and demographics by the Arab conquest. So they are ‘compatible’ with American Civilization.
Persians, like the Ashkenazi, are high performance ethnic group. They will do better in any country no matter where they go. The Indians and Chinese start with very large populations, and their best talent travels the world. They are consistently high performers. The difference is that Persians and Ashkenazi produce asymmetric success despite their small numbers.
Some groups consist largely of the upper genetic classes, some the middle, and some the lower. Economic, scientific, and artistic performance corresponds directly with the demographic constitution of an ethnic group. So no matter what anyone does, the fact that some ethnic groups consist almost exclusively of the genetic middle and upper classes means that they will always statistically outperform those groups with large underclasses. It’s just math.
So the differences in performances of ethnic groups is not so much due to genetic differences between groups but the scale of the underclass and the drag that the underclasses put on language, culture, institutions, and knowledge.
The problem that produces inequality isn’t race, or ethnicity, it’s class. Some groups have vast underclasses, and some have nearly eliminated them.
The Arab conquest was the most catastrophic event in human history, destroying the four great civilizations of the ancient world, causing 500M dead, and creating a 1400 year dark age from which only a remote corner of northern europe was able to rescue the world from.
And the side effect of that civilization was a rapid expansion of the size of the underclass due to the inability to develop a middle class, due to low trust, due to tribalism. Outbreeding with the slaves didn’t help much either. It just made it worse.
https://www.quora.com/Why-is-it-that-Iranian-Americans-make-more-than-double-income-per-capita-than-Iraqi-Americans