In 2017 Idiocracy is a Documentary

[feathers]

http://i.imgur.com/CUyK1iZ.png

I have no idea who that guy next to Trump is prior to an hour ago

Definitely John Cleese. The right one at least.

[feathers]

Bottom line, in my personal opinion, there's almost no justification* for anyone, regardless of political stripe or in/out group membership, to drive a car through a crowd of people.

Except when they're in the way between you and the House of Whisky which closes at nine.

[feathers]

From their website, here are their requirements for joining:

You must be of at least 80% White/European heritage

Only 80%? When Der Adolf was still alive, that would have earned you a free train ride.

I am guessing that Jews...

You're gassing the Jews?!?

/telephone game

[shoutinghorse]

Dave's back .. and for good.

[Sunder]

Ted Cruz is more willing than Trump to call the Nazis Nazis. Ted Cruz.

It makes sense. The white nationalists are Trump's base, not Ted Stevens. They think Steven's father was involved in the Kennedy assassination.

Trump only has to worry about holding onto power for another 3-7yrs. To that end, alienating any part of his base would be foolish. He would be inviting a Republican ousting.

Career Republicans meanwhile have to worry about their party in perpetuity. Long term, the white nationalists are dead weight. And who cares if they piss them off? What are they gonna do, vote Dem?

[MacGruberKnows]

Of course the boy is called Star Cloud, why wouldn't he be, it's a very common name in Middlesborough.

Found the perfect playmate for the kid

http://www.bizpacreview.com/wp-content/ ... knee-5.jpg

[ThreeFlangedJavis]

PZ has weighed in on Charlottelville:
http://archive.is/IzAZk

Shun them, scorn them, punch them in the face. Tear down their monuments, trash their flags, fire them from their jobs.

Pierce R. Butler
12 August 2017 at 10:40 am
Keep an eye on the pics from today’s demo – there’s a prize for the first one to spot James Damore!

Never seen the atheist dweeb demographic so eager to rip apart the protections they derive from living in a modern Western democracy. Sadly, they won't suffer the fate they're asking for because most of the people they are hating on do believe in those principles.

[free thoughtpolice]

Cruz: Nazis are bad.
Rubio: Nazis are bad.
McCain: Nazis are bad.
Romney: Nazis are bad.
Trump: Did you see that chick's tits?

or
Trump: Grab em by the fasces.

[Sunder]

Gender neutral child pictured with toy car and mullet.

[Matt Cavanaugh]

From their website, here are their requirements for joining:

You must be of at least 80% White/European heritage

Only 80%? When Der Adolf was still alive, that would have earned you a free train ride.

Adi would've been 5% short.

[shoutinghorse]

[Old_ones]

The most interesting thing about the Charlottesville rally to me is the amount of coverage it is getting. Maybe part of this is that the Nazis went full truck-of-peace and killed some people, but still, this is far higher profile then the "battle for Berkeley" for instance, where antifa were the main instigators of violence. Today my feed is full of people incensed by Charlottesville, and most of them aren't even mentioning the fucking Nazi terrorist, its all shit about white privilege and "what right do these people have to be angry". Never have I seen a single post denouncing the violent asshole commies in antifa who think it would be awesome to bring back the Soviet Union. Not that my feed is a representative sample of society or anything, but it seems pretty clear to me who the media and culture view as a legitimate bad guy, and who they view as an inconvenient fact not worth talking about. Its a shame to me, because neither of these groups are worth a shit, and both deserve denouncing and FBI surveillance.

IMO the best case scenario is to have these assholes hold their rallies and counter rallies out in the woods somewhere, where there won't be innocent bystanders to get hurt. I would personally donate ammunition to an event like that.

[Guest_936d3dec]

Never seen the atheist dweeb demographic so eager to rip apart the protections they derive from living in a modern Western democracy. Sadly, they won't suffer the fate they're asking for because most of the people they are hating on do believe in those principles they are keyboard warriors.

Edit: Fixed That For You!

[paddybrown]

One thing I've only just discovered was that the spark for the whole thing was the planned removal of a statue of Robert E. Lee.

I had always been under the impression that America had made a concerted effort after the Civil War not to demonise the south. Yes, the north won, and yes, slavery was a great evil and had to be ended, but in the interests of unity and moving forward as a nation let's respect southerners as patriots and worthy opponents and not rub their noses in it. It seems to me that consensus lasted a remarkably long time, and has only begun to break down recently, along with the idea of respecting your opponent generally. Everybody thinks everybody else is Hitler. This isn't just an SJW thing - when Obama was trying to pass Obamacare the right were all talking about "death panels" and how supporting universal healthcare was tantamount to Hitler.

[Billie from Ockham]

Trump only has to worry about holding onto power for another 3-7yrs.

FYI: the odds of Trump finishing his first term (on many betting sites) has dropped below even

[shoutinghorse]

Professor Racist :o

[Old_ones]

I still don't really understand why you can't celebrate western heritage and culture, identify core value sets and make it clear that these are the "house rules" - without having to go all blut and boden about it.

Because the really hard question is whether those core values are "carried" by a particular genetic pool and (at the illustrative limit) might disappear entirely from the world if that genetic pool disappeared from the world.

The idea that we liberals generally have, is that the ideas around freedom that are characteristically liberal, are purely memetic, intertranslatable between races, anyone can pick them up and use them, etc. In which case "civic nationalism" and liberal democracy are just fine and will "win out" in the end.

The challenge from the Alt Right proper, and from some of the NRx/Dark Enlightenment crowd (which the Spencerian Alt Right proper is heavily influenced by), is ideas around liberty are specifically European (hence American, Australian, etc., too), and they're European because they're the largely genetically-mandated property of Whites.

(The full chain of causality goes: genetics shaped races and sub-races in our ancestral environment, races and ethnic groups develop their own fairly specific family forms, which then shape the larger culture around them. And funnily enough, this was also partly the logic of the Frankfurt school, in its attack on the nuclear family as the main pillar of Western civ.)

So for the Alt Righters, the chant "You will not replace us!" has some urgency to it, in view of the amount of "replacement" they fear is going on around them, and around the world.

I don't think the Alt Right ideas about freedom and democracy being white property hold up to historical scrutiny at all. The Greeks may have invented the first precursor of modern representative systems of government, but there were other priors from non-white societies. There is evidence that framers of the US constitution took some notes on the way the Iroquois were running their society (https://amphilsoc.org/sites/default/fil ... ller_0.pdf). Further, most of "white history" has been feudal or autocratic, just like most of the post agricultural history of everyone else. I do think it's easy for anyone to regress back to autocratic society though, because of the frustrations and difficulties of representative government. Even though Japan was able to adopt representative government after WW2, China and Russia remained despotic hellholes, as they chose a "people's" government that had nothing to do with actually empowering people. The Nazis abused the freedom they had to organize in Wiemar Germany and subverted its governmental policies to establish Nazi Germany. That last case makes it particularly ironic that people who style themselves after Nazis would be talking about liberal democracy as the "genetic property" of white people. Liberal democracy wasn't the property of the Nazis - they destroyed theirs because they wanted an autocratic state something like that of Imperial Rome.

[Kirbmarc]

One thing I've only just discovered was that the spark for the whole thing was the planned removal of a statue of Robert E. Lee.

I had always been under the impression that America had made a concerted effort after the Civil War not to demonise the south. Yes, the north won, and yes, slavery was a great evil and had to be ended, but in the interests of unity and moving forward as a nation let's respect southerners as patriots and worthy opponents and not rub their noses in it. It seems to me that consensus lasted a remarkably long time, and has only begun to break down recently, along with the idea of respecting your opponent generally. Everybody thinks everybody else is Hitler. This isn't just an SJW thing - when Obama was trying to pass Obamacare the right were all talking about "death panels" and how supporting universal healthcare was tantamount to Hitler.

Political polarization has always been a part of American politics (just like in many other parts of the world). What has changed is that today with the Internet echo chambers and reunions of likeminded people are easy to plan, and grievance easy to fuel.

[Tigzy]

[...]Further, most of "white history" has been feudal or autocratic, just like most of the post agricultural history of everyone else. [...]

Indeed. To me, it seems the alt right idea that enlightenment values are somehow intrinsic to European peoples (at least, more so than they are to other peoples) is based far too much on how things appear in the present. Go back 800-1000 years, and you'd think the folks inhabiting the Arabian world would be the natural torchbearers for science and free enquiry, leaving the Europeans behind as a mere religiously obsessed rabble. Nowadays, of course, the reverse is largely true.

I'm pretty damn sure that cultures develop (and continue to develop) from a myriad of circumstances, in a process which may be as mathematically chaotic as those which lead to particular cloud formations. Perhaps certain biological imperatives play a part - but the significance of those imperatives may be no more important than all the earthquakes, plagues, wars and trifles - such as a squire late in supplying a stirrup to his Knight, who in turn was too late to take an arrow for his King - that determine the course of any culture. Some things can be a lot more seismic than others, of course - for Western Europe, one of the major factors favouring egalitarianism at the expense of feudalism was the black death, which decimated the serf population to such a degree that the remaining serfs acquired a rarity which gave them a great deal more bargaining power. But even the seismic events will have results dependent on a host of other events, both large and small. So even if biological/racial determinism was a major determinant, the cultural outcome would remain, as ever, indeterminate.

[Kirbmarc]

[...]Further, most of "white history" has been feudal or autocratic, just like most of the post agricultural history of everyone else. [...]

Indeed. To me, it seems the alt right idea that enlightenment values are somehow intrinsic to European peoples (at least, more so than they are to other peoples) is based far too much on how things appear in the present. Go back 800-1000 years, and you'd think the folks inhabiting the Arabian world would be the natural torchbearers for science and free enquiry, leaving the Europeans behind as a mere religiously obsessed rabble. Nowadays, of course, the reverse is largely true.

I'm pretty damn sure that cultures develop (and continue to develop) from a myriad of circumstances, in a process which may be as mathematically chaotic as those which lead to particular cloud formations. Perhaps certain biological imperatives play a part - but the significance of those imperatives may be no more important than all the earthquakes, plagues, wars and trifles - such as a squire late in supplying a stirrup to his Knight, who in turn was too late to take an arrow for his King - that determine the course of any culture. Some things can be a lot more seismic than others, of course - for Western Europe, one of the major factors favouring egalitarianism at the expense of feudalism was the black death, which decimated the serf population to such a degree that the remaining serfs acquired a rarity which gave them a great deal more bargaining power. But even the seismic events will have results dependent on a host of other events, both large and small. So even if biological/racial determinism was a major determinant, the cultural outcome would remain, as ever, indeterminate.

Yes, the selection of genetic traits is just part of the story. Environmental effects, geography and the accidents of history should also be considered.

The claim of the NeoReactionaries/racial realists that non-European people aren't as uniquely equipped to handle liberal democracy as Europeans is a very bold one, and there's just not enough evidence to support it (unlike, for example, the far more limited claims that women tend to be more interested in social interactions and men more interested in analysis)

[gurugeorge]

In response to some of the comments above: since the other factors are (I agree) so numerous and indeterminate, surely that indeterminacy cancels out for all the various ethnic groups, so the factor that is fairly determinate - genetics - is the one that's left over to make the biggest noticeable difference?

And there's nothing in the GoT-ish European history of the past like the absolute power of "Eastern despotisms." The establishment and solidification of the ideas in the Magna Carta through the 13th century is a testament to the idea that kings should be bound by law and religious authority, not granted licence by it, etc. The development of Common Law is another example of what one might call proto-liberalism.

So even in times when the West didn't have a fully fledged democratic system, these ideas were native to Europe.

Someone mentioned the "peak civilization" of the Islamic world: but that was heavily influenced by ... Greek philosophy.

Again, the implication isn't necessarily that other races can't do individualism and democracy at all, of course they can, and have; and for sure, occasionally you can find similar ideas cropping up in other cultures (Laozi's philosophy is a notable example of something that's almost like a kind of libertarian individualism, Mohism an example of an egalitarian analogue). The point is just that they're not as likely to "take" for those populations, they'd need more constant nurturing and attention, more time, etc.

It's all a question of degree, of averages and overall tendencies in populations, rather than mandating that this or that person must have such-and-such traits because of their race. That may be how it degenerates among some troglodytes on the Right, but that kind of identitarianism and collectivism isn't implied by the idea.

[gurugeorge]

Just as an addendum, it's not as if group bonding via kinship is totally absent in the West, or group bonding by abstract ideals (or "sacred objects") is totally absent in other cultures - all these factors are present in a way because we're all human, the idea is just that the weighting of these factors is different in the different races and ethnic groups.

[Tigzy]

In response to some of the comments above: since the other factors are (I agree) so numerous and indeterminate, surely that indeterminacy cancels out for all the various ethnic groups, so the factor that is fairly determinate - genetics - is the one that's left over to make the biggest noticeable difference?

No, I wouldn't say it was the only one. Far from it (and this is even when we assume the nature/nurture debate might have been settled in favour of nature). Take geography: sure, it changes, but only over huge timescales. In terms of human civilisation, it has hardly changed at all. So throughout much of human history, we have had steppe peoples, desert nomads, plains folk, seafaring folk. Surely this would be at least as big a cultural determinant as human biology. And then you couple that with the local climates, the propensity for an area to suffer earthquakes, floods and the like - and then couple it with how isolated an area may or may not be, how easily it may or may not be conquered by another people. And so on and so forth.

[Guest_936d3dec]

[Malky]

Interesting post by Mano Singham:

https://freethoughtblogs.com/singham/20 ... more-42963

Nithing in UK newa BOUT THIS.

[Ape+lust]

PZ has weighed in on Charlottelville:
http://archive.is/IzAZk

Shun them, scorn them, punch them in the face. Tear down their monuments, trash their flags, fire them from their jobs.

Pierce R. Butler
12 August 2017 at 10:40 am
Keep an eye on the pics from today’s demo – there’s a prize for the first one to spot James Damore!

Never seen the atheist dweeb demographic so eager to rip apart the protections they derive from living in a modern Western democracy. Sadly, they won't suffer the fate they're asking for because most of the people they are hating on do believe in those principles.

Ugh, so true.

http://imgur.com/MRRAtEG.png

[deLurch]

On Crash Bandicoot, he was taking anti-psychotic medication back in highschool. (No word if he was still taking them, but my guess is that you just don't grow out of that kind of mental illness).

http://www.wcpo.com/news/national/charl ... man?page=2

Derek Weimer, who taught two history courses to Fields at Randall K. Cooper High School in Union, Kentucky, said he was a quiet, respectful student but had some "radical ideas on race."

"He was very infatuated with the Nazis, with Adolf Hitler. He also had a huge military history, especially with German military history and World War II. But, he was pretty infatuated with that stuff.

“His senior year, he was real gung-ho about joining the Army,” Weimer said. “And he, towards the end of the year, found out that he was denied, and it was because of a history of anti-psychotic mediation that he was prescribed.”

Also his mother got him an apartment. This was not a self sufficient young adult.


This may explain his barreling into the crowd, when by comparison it was clear behind him.

This guy actually has a history of significant mental illness. So much so that he was denied entrance into the army.

Of course in the US, being mentally ill is not a sufficient excuse. You have to be so mentally ill that you cannot tell the difference between right and wrong.

This guy's issue is he could not tell the difference between reich and wrong.

Hypothesis: Pissed off about events at rally. Speeds up at crowd he is pissed off at. Initial crowd scatter out of the way, so he increases speed to scare the shit out of them, maybe bump into one or two. The crowd is obscuring his view/notice of the two cars blocked at the intersection. Bam. He fucked up big time. Now he is surrounded by a crowd pummeling his car with baseball bats breaking windows. Only one choice but to throw it into reverse.

Which brings me to my next big question.

Is there a higher incidence of significant mental illness in the people who follow these white identitarian movements?

[katamari Damassi]

Let me add that Charlottesville has just been fucking Christmas in August for the left. This really is the moment they've been waiting for. They've suffered for their "Nazi punching" and other tacit endorsements of soft violence. The PR on that one had really become something of an embarrassment for them. This makes up for all that. If they get a denunciation out of Trump, that will only be the beginnings of their demands, which of course is why they may not get it. They're going to juice this one for all it's worth.

Yeah. Say what you will about antifa and violence, but the alt-right is ahead of them in fatalities caused.

[Steersman]

PZ has weighed in on Charlottelville:
http://archive.is/IzAZk
<snip>
Keep an eye on the pics from today’s demo – there’s a prize for the first one to spot James Damore!

Never seen the atheist dweeb demographic so eager to rip apart the protections they derive from living in a modern Western democracy. Sadly, they won't suffer the fate they're asking for because most of the people they are hating on do believe in those principles.

Ugh, so true.

[.img]http://imgur.com/MRRAtEG.png[/img]

Zinnia Jones, the twat who insists that "trans women are female". For that alone he should be ridden out of town on a rail if not put into a padded room or drummed out of the human race.

But, the story in question from The Hill, along with a relevant quote or two:

Wrath of right falls on Google

.... Wesearchr, a crowdfunding site that supports alt-right causes, launched a fundraiser for him that has raised $40,000 as of Friday afternoon.

Some GOP lawmakers also took to Twitter to show their support for Damore and scold Google.

“I am very troubled by @google's treatment of James Damore,” wrote Rep. Dana Rohrabacher (R-Calif.). “You shouldn't lose your job for telling the truth!”

Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas), the No. 2 Republican in the Senate, said in another tweet that the firing violated Damore’s First Amendment rights. ....

“If Google continues to ignore the very real issues raised by its diversity policies and corporate culture, it will be walking blind into the future—unable to meet the needs of its remarkable employees and sure to disappoint its billions of users.” [Damore]

Interesting that there's now $40k in Damore's war chest as it was only some $10k when I looked earlier in the week.

[Ape+lust]

[Brive1987]

Let me add that Charlottesville has just been fucking Christmas in August for the left. This really is the moment they've been waiting for. They've suffered for their "Nazi punching" and other tacit endorsements of soft violence. The PR on that one had really become something of an embarrassment for them. This makes up for all that. If they get a denunciation out of Trump, that will only be the beginnings of their demands, which of course is why they may not get it. They're going to juice this one for all it's worth.

Yeah. Say what you will about antifa and violence, but the alt-right is ahead of them in fatalities caused.

I thought it was decided that Antifa were a different (and extreme) kettle to the regressive-left doxing cunts.

Similarly, given the United Nations of groups on the right, Nazi loving supremacists should get their own badge. And no, I have no idea what to do with the shades of grey. On either side.

But broad groupings around the extreme are as silly as when PZ decided the Pit was composed of MRA channers.

[Really?]

I'm sure that any increase in Nazi punching won't result in an increase in lefty-punching.

[InfraRedBucket]

I know it's not Tom OF Finland Friday yet, but back in blighty, the BBC have been pushing the boundaries a bit for "free to view" licence funded telly , broadcasting a documentary on Robert Mapplethorpe.
Featuring all the hits we know and love from his portfolio including the self portrait with bull whip up his arse, man in a polyester suit, assorted erect cocks , fingers in urethras, watersports and the infamous fisting image in all its semi abstract glory. No pixels and shot close up. Maybe they hope to slip it under the radar of the usual moral media policemen.
Don't know if the DailyMail etc have been outraged but don't care to look.


If you can get BBC iplayer still available for a couple of weeks at:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/p0 ... e-pictures

[Brive1987]

The claim of the NeoReactionaries/racial realists that non-European people aren't as uniquely equipped to handle liberal democracy as Europeans is a very bold one, and there's just not enough evidence to support it (unlike, for example, the far more limited claims that women tend to be more interested in social interactions and men more interested in analysis)

I guess we can just ignore Iraq, Afghanistan, Egypt, pretty much all of sub Sahara Africa, Libya, Pakistan, possibly Turkey, Russia (from monarchy to Commie) etc. The point isn't that other societies can't adopt foreign constructs (Singapore, India etc) - it's just far more difficult to take delivery of a job lot when you don't have the historical and cultural evolution to underpin the exercise. This has nothing directly to do with race or blood or skin let alone racist magic. Singapore had English Empire rigour applied in a way missing in Africa - while India also had a tradition of structured rule.

One step further and you could argue that it's this natural antipathy to third party cultural norms that makes certain group infusions a challenge for Paris Western Europe, Canada and Australia.

[KiwiInOz]

Call that a punch. He may as well have been pulling his beard.

[Kirbmarc]

The claim of the NeoReactionaries/racial realists that non-European people aren't as uniquely equipped to handle liberal democracy as Europeans is a very bold one, and there's just not enough evidence to support it (unlike, for example, the far more limited claims that women tend to be more interested in social interactions and men more interested in analysis)

I guess we can just ignore Iraq, Afghanistan, Egypt, pretty much all of sub Sahara Africa, Libya, Pakistan, possibly Turkey, Russia (from monarchy to Commie) etc. The point isn't that other societies can't adopt foreign constructs (Singapore, India etc) - it's just far more difficult to take delivery of a job lot when you don't have the historical and cultural evolution to underpin the exercise. This has nothing directly to do with race or blood or skin let alone racist magic. Singapore had English Empire rigour applied in a way missing in Africa - while India also had a tradition of structured rule.

One step further and you could argue that it's this natural antipathy to third party cultural norms that makes certain group infusions a challenge for Paris Western Europe, Canada and Australia.

I'm not disagreeing that cultural and historical evolution play a role in the development of democratic institutions, and I agree that seeing liberal democracy as a foreign imposition on your culture colors it negatively (especially if there's an experience of colonialism which gives negative connotations to Enlightenment "western" values). I also happen to think that trying to impose freedom is a contradiction.

But the point of contention isn't as much about countries who struggle or even never attempt to implement liberal democratic ideals. The initial issue (from which we've all strayed) is whether the rise of the number of non-white people in the "west" will lead to issues with liberal democracy. The issue here was more about finding the right way to integrate people from non-liberal democratic cultures than about arguing about whether it's possible to "export democracy" through "benevolent" imperialism.

That's the most pressing issue, and I think that it's one that needs to be tackled through education, through tough standards of integration and by fighting against isolating forces (like Saudi/Qatari sponsored muslim identity politics/Salafism). I'm also not prejudicially against regulating immigration.

Even if one completely stopped immigration from muslim-majority countries (which is by itself pretty illiberal, and not what I'm in favor of) there's also the problem of muslims who already live in the west. Either you find a way to integrate them or you find yourself with the problem of a state within a state, which could trigger Steersman-esque demands for "population transfers".

[CommanderTuvok]

A picture of someone punching somebody with a beard.....

.....why does that make me slightly aroused?

Can't quite figure out why!

;)

[DaveDodo007]

One thing I've only just discovered was that the spark for the whole thing was the planned removal of a statue of Robert E. Lee.

I had always been under the impression that America had made a concerted effort after the Civil War not to demonise the south. Yes, the north won, and yes, slavery was a great evil and had to be ended, but in the interests of unity and moving forward as a nation let's respect southerners as patriots and worthy opponents and not rub their noses in it. It seems to me that consensus lasted a remarkably long time, and has only begun to break down recently, along with the idea of respecting your opponent generally. Everybody thinks everybody else is Hitler. This isn't just an SJW thing - when Obama was trying to pass Obamacare the right were all talking about "death panels" and how supporting universal healthcare was tantamount to Hitler.

After the war Robert E Lee was a great advocate of reconciliation which helped heal the wounds of the civil war. It is no surprise that the lefty/liberals hate him what with them being mentally ill cunts.

[DaveDodo007]

Trump only has to worry about holding onto power for another 3-7yrs.

FYI: the odds of Trump finishing his first term (on many betting sites) has dropped below even

Trump will be judged on one thing only, if he brings jobs back to the American people he will be reelected if he doesn't then he wont be. End of.

[Steersman]

Not sure that it's really necessary to do anything. If most women aren't much interested in computer science then it seems a bit bass-ackwards to kind of trick them into pursuing a career in the field.

I agree, but it would be interesting to know why? Do women simply find engineering a less attractive career? If that is so, I don't see the need to continue the investigation to ever greater depth, but how do you go about proving something like that?

Good questions, particularly as understanding those reasons is likely to have, or should have, some impact on various policies. And since fMRI hasn't quite advanced, yet, to the point where we can see all of the gears and cogs in our brains in action leading to certain behaviours, we are kind of obliged to rely on surveys and statistical samples of various externals. And, as Shatterface just noted about autism and IT, and as many others have done about similar phenomena in the context of the "Google Manifesto", there is no shortage of evidence to justify concluding that many behaviours and aptitudes correlate to a greater of lesser extent with our nominal sex.

Somewhat apropos, there's this rather amusing opening in the Areo magazine article that rayshul had linked to:

James Damore, the Google employee who wrote the viral Google manifesto, was fired yesterday for “perpetuating gender stereotypes.” From the various reactions I’ve read, you would think Damore wrote the next iteration of Mein Kampf. Gizmodo labelled it an “anti-diversity screed.” Mashable called it a “racist/sexist manifesto” when reporting that the author’s identity had been revealed.

"Nazis!!11!!" But I don't think Google and its chief honcho - whose days may be numbered - really has a clue that there are some very good reasons for those stereotypes, and that they're not all based on social construction. You might check out this article - Stereotype Accuracy is One of the Largest and Most Replicable Effects in All of Social Psychology - by Lee Jussim who was one of the four authors of a Quillette article defending, more or less, Damore's Manifesto.

Not to say, of course, that social construction and similar factors don't play a role, but sure a lot of evidence that biology is also a major factor. Although that doesn't mean that "biology is destiny", or entirely so; that one can't override or nullify some of the more "problematic" or "undesirable" effects. For example, I remember reading of Chastity Bono's experiences of taking testosterone, and how that had made him more focused and goal-directed and less willing to put up with his girlfriend's aimless chatter. An earlier comment of mine on the topic in response to some amusing and topical observations on those correlations by sex from rayshul:

I have recently attended an event for women in IT or general digital shit.

I will say the highlights were:

* the speaker talking about how emotional she was about stuff
* the repetition of that great albright quote about women who don't help women are all going to hell
* one questioner suggesting she couldn't get through the glass ceiling because of sexual objectification in music videos
* at a conference for women which does women awards, people having tantrums over the fact people thought an award a woman got was a "woman award"
* learning how everything is bad and women have a hard time of like literally everything
* finding out that being a seamstress is apparently not a worthy career
* observing women nod a lot when other women preach

I'm really fucking over having a vagina.

Genital reconstruction surgery is probably a bit much - a bridge too far - and maybe not all that effective, but a passable alternative might be some maintenance doses of testosterone. ;-) From a comment on a review of Chastity Bono's book Transition:

Chaz's male privilege becomes rather disturbing near the end of the book, when he describes his impatience with women's "chatter," accuses his loyal girlfriend Jenny of being a "nag," and suggests that his research into transitioning indicates that his "reasoning could become more linear and [his] thought process more logical" once he went on testosterone.

Seem to recollect running across a little more detail along the same line but it doesn't show up on a cursory search.

Though somewhat in passing, I see that Chaz' book was titled The Story of How I Became a Man which I think is rather unlikely unless his hormone therapy has led to him growing some functional testicles.

But amazing the extent to which our hormones, particularly testosterone and I assume estrogen, influence our behaviours, even as early as in the womb. Moot precisely how they do that, although probably of some import, but it seems rather clear that they do so, for good or ill, and to a greater or lesser extent. I remember reading years ago an observation or aphorism by Philip Wylie [Generation of Vipers, and a number of thought-provoking sci-fi books to boot] to the effect that "we aspire to the discipline of the instinct by the heart and the mind". Clearly we can overcome or compensate for many of the "limitiations" or problematic tendencies in the biological hands we've each been dealt, some more so than others, and some "not yet" if ever.

[DaveDodo007]

[...]Further, most of "white history" has been feudal or autocratic, just like most of the post agricultural history of everyone else. [...]

Indeed. To me, it seems the alt right idea that enlightenment values are somehow intrinsic to European peoples (at least, more so than they are to other peoples) is based far too much on how things appear in the present. Go back 800-1000 years, and you'd think the folks inhabiting the Arabian world would be the natural torchbearers for science and free enquiry, leaving the Europeans behind as a mere religiously obsessed rabble. Nowadays, of course, the reverse is largely true.

I'm pretty damn sure that cultures develop (and continue to develop) from a myriad of circumstances, in a process which may be as mathematically chaotic as those which lead to particular cloud formations. Perhaps certain biological imperatives play a part - but the significance of those imperatives may be no more important than all the earthquakes, plagues, wars and trifles - such as a squire late in supplying a stirrup to his Knight, who in turn was too late to take an arrow for his King - that determine the course of any culture. Some things can be a lot more seismic than others, of course - for Western Europe, one of the major factors favouring egalitarianism at the expense of feudalism was the black death, which decimated the serf population to such a degree that the remaining serfs acquired a rarity which gave them a great deal more bargaining power. But even the seismic events will have results dependent on a host of other events, both large and small. So even if biological/racial determinism was a major determinant, the cultural outcome would remain, as ever, indeterminate.

If this is true then why are the rest of the world risking death just to live in the Western world?

[DaveDodo007]

[...]Further, most of "white history" has been feudal or autocratic, just like most of the post agricultural history of everyone else. [...]

Indeed. To me, it seems the alt right idea that enlightenment values are somehow intrinsic to European peoples (at least, more so than they are to other peoples) is based far too much on how things appear in the present. Go back 800-1000 years, and you'd think the folks inhabiting the Arabian world would be the natural torchbearers for science and free enquiry, leaving the Europeans behind as a mere religiously obsessed rabble. Nowadays, of course, the reverse is largely true.

I'm pretty damn sure that cultures develop (and continue to develop) from a myriad of circumstances, in a process which may be as mathematically chaotic as those which lead to particular cloud formations. Perhaps certain biological imperatives play a part - but the significance of those imperatives may be no more important than all the earthquakes, plagues, wars and trifles - such as a squire late in supplying a stirrup to his Knight, who in turn was too late to take an arrow for his King - that determine the course of any culture. Some things can be a lot more seismic than others, of course - for Western Europe, one of the major factors favouring egalitarianism at the expense of feudalism was the black death, which decimated the serf population to such a degree that the remaining serfs acquired a rarity which gave them a great deal more bargaining power. But even the seismic events will have results dependent on a host of other events, both large and small. So even if biological/racial determinism was a major determinant, the cultural outcome would remain, as ever, indeterminate.

Yes, the selection of genetic traits is just part of the story. Environmental effects, geography and the accidents of history should also be considered.

The claim of the NeoReactionaries/racial realists that non-European people aren't as uniquely equipped to handle liberal democracy as Europeans is a very bold one, and there's just not enough evidence to support it (unlike, for example, the far more limited claims that women tend to be more interested in social interactions and men more interested in analysis)

You are Jared Diamond and also full of shit and I claim my five pounds.

[DaveDodo007]

In response to some of the comments above: since the other factors are (I agree) so numerous and indeterminate, surely that indeterminacy cancels out for all the various ethnic groups, so the factor that is fairly determinate - genetics - is the one that's left over to make the biggest noticeable difference?

And there's nothing in the GoT-ish European history of the past like the absolute power of "Eastern despotisms." The establishment and solidification of the ideas in the Magna Carta through the 13th century is a testament to the idea that kings should be bound by law and religious authority, not granted licence by it, etc. The development of Common Law is another example of what one might call proto-liberalism.

So even in times when the West didn't have a fully fledged democratic system, these ideas were native to Europe.

Someone mentioned the "peak civilization" of the Islamic world: but that was heavily influenced by ... Greek philosophy.

Again, the implication isn't necessarily that other races can't do individualism and democracy at all, of course they can, and have; and for sure, occasionally you can find similar ideas cropping up in other cultures (Laozi's philosophy is a notable example of something that's almost like a kind of libertarian individualism, Mohism an example of an egalitarian analogue). The point is just that they're not as likely to "take" for those populations, they'd need more constant nurturing and attention, more time, etc.

It's all a question of degree, of averages and overall tendencies in populations, rather than mandating that this or that person must have such-and-such traits because of their race. That may be how it degenerates among some troglodytes on the Right, but that kind of identitarianism and collectivism isn't implied by the idea.

You are just being too nice and dare I say it political correct, as I have yet to see Western individualism on a large scale outside the West.

[Tigzy]

[...]Further, most of "white history" has been feudal or autocratic, just like most of the post agricultural history of everyone else. [...]

Indeed. To me, it seems the alt right idea that enlightenment values are somehow intrinsic to European peoples (at least, more so than they are to other peoples) is based far too much on how things appear in the present. Go back 800-1000 years, and you'd think the folks inhabiting the Arabian world would be the natural torchbearers for science and free enquiry, leaving the Europeans behind as a mere religiously obsessed rabble. Nowadays, of course, the reverse is largely true.

I'm pretty damn sure that cultures develop (and continue to develop) from a myriad of circumstances, in a process which may be as mathematically chaotic as those which lead to particular cloud formations. Perhaps certain biological imperatives play a part - but the significance of those imperatives may be no more important than all the earthquakes, plagues, wars and trifles - such as a squire late in supplying a stirrup to his Knight, who in turn was too late to take an arrow for his King - that determine the course of any culture. Some things can be a lot more seismic than others, of course - for Western Europe, one of the major factors favouring egalitarianism at the expense of feudalism was the black death, which decimated the serf population to such a degree that the remaining serfs acquired a rarity which gave them a great deal more bargaining power. But even the seismic events will have results dependent on a host of other events, both large and small. So even if biological/racial determinism was a major determinant, the cultural outcome would remain, as ever, indeterminate.

If this is true then why are the rest of the world risking death just to live in the Western world?

Eh?? I'm saying that cultural development isn't solely or heavily contingent on biological imperatives. How does non-Westerners wanting to live in the West refute that?

[Steersman]

One thing I've only just discovered was that the spark for the whole thing was the planned removal of a statue of Robert E. Lee. ....

After the war Robert E Lee was a great advocate of reconciliation which helped heal the wounds of the civil war. It is no surprise that the lefty/liberals hate him what with them being mentally ill cunts.

Learn something new every day.

But, apropos of your avatar pic, I'd argue that there are, in fact a virtually unlimited number of genders, at least from the perspective that gender is just a fancy word for personality: as many genders as there are or have been or will be people. But I'd argue that there really are only two sexes - male and female - at least in the human species, individual members of which are termed, defined as, "men" and "women" respectively. Lots of terms for those who don't have a sex, who aren't capable of producing the corresponding gametes, such as girls, eunuchs, transwomen, transmen, intersex, menopausees .... But rather clear from even a limited understanding of human biology that there are only two - count 'em, two - sexes. Though trying to get some of the usual suspects to admit even that much is like the proverbial pulling of teeth:

https://twitter.com/SteersMann/status/8 ... 4055497728
Crickets ...

[DaveDodo007]

Let me add that Charlottesville has just been fucking Christmas in August for the left. This really is the moment they've been waiting for. They've suffered for their "Nazi punching" and other tacit endorsements of soft violence. The PR on that one had really become something of an embarrassment for them. This makes up for all that. If they get a denunciation out of Trump, that will only be the beginnings of their demands, which of course is why they may not get it. They're going to juice this one for all it's worth.

Yeah. Say what you will about antifa and violence, but the alt-right is ahead of them in fatalities caused.

Wait, what. If violent thugs with baseball bats and in one case an axe surround you and you are not allowed to be scared and floor it. Fuck this planet if this is true because I would have done exactly the same.

[Guest_84d94f98]

They actually found a real one to punch.

Next thing you know, one person is dead and several other people are run over.

Actually punching real Nazis turns out to not be that great of an idea.

[DaveDodo007]

I'm sure that any increase in Nazi punching won't result in an increase in lefty-punching.

This is what I don't get (maybe because I'm a conservative) but don't the lefty/liberals realize that actions have consequences? I know that I keep claiming they are mentally ill which would answer my own question but I have the forlorn hope that someone can explain their behaviour by rational means.

[DaveDodo007]

Indeed. To me, it seems the alt right idea that enlightenment values are somehow intrinsic to European peoples (at least, more so than they are to other peoples) is based far too much on how things appear in the present. Go back 800-1000 years, and you'd think the folks inhabiting the Arabian world would be the natural torchbearers for science and free enquiry, leaving the Europeans behind as a mere religiously obsessed rabble. Nowadays, of course, the reverse is largely true.

I'm pretty damn sure that cultures develop (and continue to develop) from a myriad of circumstances, in a process which may be as mathematically chaotic as those which lead to particular cloud formations. Perhaps certain biological imperatives play a part - but the significance of those imperatives may be no more important than all the earthquakes, plagues, wars and trifles - such as a squire late in supplying a stirrup to his Knight, who in turn was too late to take an arrow for his King - that determine the course of any culture. Some things can be a lot more seismic than others, of course - for Western Europe, one of the major factors favouring egalitarianism at the expense of feudalism was the black death, which decimated the serf population to such a degree that the remaining serfs acquired a rarity which gave them a great deal more bargaining power. But even the seismic events will have results dependent on a host of other events, both large and small. So even if biological/racial determinism was a major determinant, the cultural outcome would remain, as ever, indeterminate.

If this is true then why are the rest of the world risking death just to live in the Western world?

Eh?? I'm saying that cultural development isn't solely or heavily contingent on biological imperatives. How does non-Westerners wanting to live in the West refute that?

Because if biological imperatives were world wide then they would already be living in their preferred country.

[Mothra's Dentist]

i normally fight against censorship and mob violence but I have to admit to feeling a bit happy when this happened to the leader of the Charlotte March when he tried to give a press conference. Sorry for the accompanying music. It is refreshing to see him being tackles by a woman at the end.

[Guest_84d94f98]

i normally fight against censorship and mob violence but I have to admit to feeling a bit happy when this happened to the leader of the Charlotte March when he tried to give a press conference. Sorry for the accompanying music. It is refreshing to see him being tackles by a woman at the end.
https://youtube.com/watch?v=fFN5w7RQM7Q

Assuming that guy is of the same ilk as the vast majority of the protesters there I wouldn't even piss in his pot.

Were the cops arresting him at the end? Other people were punching him and being violent, and he was attempting to avoid physical violence and not punching back. I don't like him. But he does not deserve violence. He just deserves to be laughed at. I did kind of like the music though.

[DaveDodo007]

One thing I've only just discovered was that the spark for the whole thing was the planned removal of a statue of Robert E. Lee. ....

After the war Robert E Lee was a great advocate of reconciliation which helped heal the wounds of the civil war. It is no surprise that the lefty/liberals hate him what with them being mentally ill cunts.

Learn something new every day.

But, apropos of your avatar pic, I'd argue that there are, in fact a virtually unlimited number of genders, at least from the perspective that gender is just a fancy word for personality: as many genders as there are or have been or will be people. But I'd argue that there really are only two sexes - male and female - at least in the human species, individual members of which are termed, defined as, "men" and "women" respectively. Lots of terms for those who don't have a sex, who aren't capable of producing the corresponding gametes, such as girls, eunuchs, transwomen, transmen, intersex, menopausees .... But rather clear from even a limited understanding of human biology that there are only two - count 'em, two - sexes. Though trying to get some of the usual suspects to admit even that much is like the proverbial pulling of teeth:

https://twitter.com/SteersMann/status/8 ... 4055497728
Crickets ...

If you what to mock the whole gender is a spectrum stupidity and it is anti-science then I don't think you need to use my avatar as an excuse, because it is the usual lefty/liberal anti-science creationist bullshit. They are fucked up loonies who are in a position of power in our education Institutes and need to be killed with fire.

[Tigzy]

Because if biological imperatives were world wide then they would already be living in their preferred country.

You're gonna have to explain further - I'm really not sure what you're trying to get at here. My point is that the genetic makeup of the various human races isn't the sole or main determinant of how various cultures develop; that's it more likely, IMO, that a vast number of attributes outside of the biology (though biology may play a part) determine how cultures develop.

A case in point: the Moriori people of the Chatham Islands. They were descended from the Maori, and had developed a pacifist culture. This is in contrast to certain tribes of the Taranaki Maori from New Zealand who had developed a culture which was not quite so pacifistic; in fact, they were brutal, supremacist cannibals. Two of these Taranaki tribes invaded the Chathams in 1835 - at a great and bloody cost to the Moriori, it has to be said.

Now, remember that the Moriori had Maori origins. Genetically, the Moriori and Taranki Maori were the same people. And yet their cultures were vastly different. A largely genetic explanation for cultural development therefore does not hold water here.

[DaveDodo007]

i normally fight against censorship and mob violence but I have to admit to feeling a bit happy when this happened to the leader of the Charlotte March when he tried to give a press conference. Sorry for the accompanying music. It is refreshing to see him being tackles by a woman at the end.

Get fuck as you are a censorious piece of shit. I haven't even listened to what he had to say and don't feel the need to do so. Though if you approve of oppressing different view points with violence then you are a scum sucking maggot and get fucked you subhuman twat.

[DaveDodo007]

*fucked.

[Tigzy]

http://i.imgur.com/N4mC1e8.png

[Steersman]

<snip>
If you [want] to mock the whole gender is a spectrum stupidity and it is anti-science then I don't think you need to use my avatar as an excuse, because it is the usual lefty/liberal anti-science creationist bullshit. They are fucked up loonies who are in a position of power in our education Institutes and need to be killed with fire.

Don't think you really got or understood my argument as I think it is quite reasonable to argue that gender is a more or less continuous spectrum. Looks like most of the usual suspects are conflating sex - which isn't continuous as it has only two possibilities - with gender which is and has an infinititude of them; sex looks to be a component of gender.

You might consider that sex is more or less analogous to, say, three types of motors - gas, diesel, electric - in an automobile. And gender is analogous to a virtual infinitude of various combinations of transmissions, colours, trim, wheels, and motors in different vehicles. Sex is to motors as gender is to that entire panoply or spectrum of actual vehicles.

It is maybe splitting hairs, but not being precise about definitions and how they relate to one another is just simply pandering to the delusional, or allowing ideologues to redefine words on the fly to justify untenable dogma.

[DaveDodo007]

Because if biological imperatives were world wide then they would already be living in their preferred country.

You're gonna have to explain further - I'm really not sure what you're trying to get at here. My point is that the genetic makeup of the various human races isn't the sole or main determinant of how various cultures develop; that's it more likely, IMO, that a vast number of attributes outside of the biology (though biology may play a part) determine how cultures develop.

A case in point: the Moriori people of the Chatham Islands. They were descended from the Maori, and had developed a pacifist culture. This is in contrast to certain tribes of the Taranaki Maori from New Zealand who had developed a culture which was not quite so pacifistic; in fact, they were brutal, supremacist cannibals. Two of these Taranaki tribes invaded the Chathams in 1835 - at a great and bloody cost to the Moriori, it has to be said.

Now, remember that the Moriori had Maori origins. Genetically, the Moriori and Taranki Maori were the same people. And yet their cultures were vastly different. A largely genetic explanation for cultural development therefore does not hold water here.

Thanks for the history lesson though I already knew what happened in the Chatham Islands. All you need to do is look up world wide IQ rates and then see which countries have the best living standards. Of course you are not allowed to mention it as that would be racist and we can't have that. When you see Westerners fleeing to Africa or the Middle East for a better life well then you get to tell me biological differences are not a 'thing.'

[Tigzy]

Thanks for the history lesson though I already knew what happened in the Chatham Islands. All you need to do is look up world wide IQ rates and then see which countries have the best living standards. Of course you are not allowed to mention it as that would be racist and we can't have that. When you see Westerners fleeing to Africa or the Middle East for a better life well then you get to tell me biological differences are not a 'thing.'

But that's not the point I'm -

Oh whatever.

Blimey.

[Mothra's Dentist]

i normally fight against censorship and mob violence but I have to admit to feeling a bit happy when this happened to the leader of the Charlotte March when he tried to give a press conference. Sorry for the accompanying music. It is refreshing to see him being tackles by a woman at the end.

Get fuck as you are a censorious piece of shit. I haven't even listened to what he had to say and don't feel the need to do so. Though if you approve of oppressing different view points with violence then you are a scum sucking maggot and get fucked you subhuman twat.

My, such a temper! Jason Kessler didn't get hurt, just humiliated, so don't worry, he'll be able to spout his anti-semitism and white supremacist views all he wants (He is already on Alex Jones).
Sorry, I just don't like mobs of any variety, and love for mob leaders of all types to be publically humiliated.
--yours truly,
A scum sucking maggot and subhuman twat