Re: Chinese deaths under Mai

Probably mostly “unintentional”

According to some reports, Mao actually dictated the percentage of the population of each city or region to be killed, presumably on the Napoleonic principle, pour encouragez les autre.

In his book, The Problem of China, Bertrand Russell asserted that the Chinese are a generally callous people. But, killing someone to minimize compensation payments to an accident victim … Jeeze.

The FT is just too much hassle. First they nag me for my login credentials and after that they tell me I am naughty for using an adblocker.

E* A* Ross , not AE Ross.

https://www.ft.com/content/e9f24cee-360f-11e7-bce4-9023f8c0fd2e

Sweet Chaina

I have little impression that [many* most*] of chainees have severe emotional deficits, it may explain why ”they” [many* most*) are so subtle and careful…

and the {{{westerners}}} still help them to explode their sweet people… what a su**er…

It’s seems a true conspiratorial conjecture. Avg feminist women are so “dumb” or at least they are so hopeless in this fundamental aspect, dead-brain, that seems impossible to believe they are thinking in this lines. They are so just hopelessly intellectually disordered that they no have a minimally decent idea what they are doing or defending. We are talking about short and magical thinking prone people. People who say this things about regular leftists seems don’t live with them to have anecdotal but possibly true idea how “dumb” they are. Simple and confuse minds. They are a abnormal version of normie people, or abnormies. Maybe the powerful bitches have other plans that ally with your thinking lines, but the avg feminist it’s unlikely that will think in this long term strategic and”sophisticated” ways. Most feminists are not marrying with Moslems. Maybe the near future show me I was wrong about it but by now what I see is a mentally disordered women defending in dogmatic ways what illiberal media tell.

Concur all, and more.

The decline, and indeed the demise, of the West will in the future be traced by historians to the emancipation of women, and in particular the granting of womens’ suffrage. The Western political order was patriarchal and is being systematically destroyed by feminists, this being clearly proved by the occupation of Europe by Muslims with the full support of the powerful female leaders: Merkel and May.

Their position on mass immigration of Muslims is not idiosyncratic, it serves the interests of many women. Consider a women at the bottom of the social heap: she can be a welfare mum, in a series of unstable relationships with ne’er-do-well males, or she can wear a bag (no need to worry about hair or make-up when going out) and enjoy a relatively idle life raising babies as an auxiliary wife to a virile, upward mobile, settler Muslim immigrant.

I understand, maybe you offend only me, lol. most people here don’t care about this issues.

it is clear that the Western nations have adopted a dysgenic population policy, under which intelligent women are encouraged to pursue financially rewarding childless careers, while ignorant, idle and generally stupid women are paid welfare to produce children most of whom will never know their father.

Excellent take, CanS. The problem in a nutshell: Feminism.

I said it that way because i couldnt find a better way to say it. English isnt my first language. I would have used the same words to describe the poorest indians too…..the poorest indians are dumbest too. I dont mean it in a derogatory way. If i used any other words to describe them it would still seem derogatory.

But i still am sorry if i offended you or others here.

Clark discovered evidence that for centuries the wealthier British had left significantly more surviving children than their poorer compatriots, thus leading their descendents to constitute an ever larger share of each generation.

Adam Smith noted the same effect of wealth versus poverty on success in raising children to maturity almost 250 years ago:

But poverty, though it does not prevent the generation, is extremely unfavourable to the rearing of children. The tender plant is produced, but in so cold a soil and so severe a climate, soon withers and dies. It is not uncommon, I have been frequently told, in the Highlands of Scotland for a mother who has borne twenty children not to have two alive. Several officers of great experience have assured me, that so far from recruiting their regiment, they have never been able to supply it with drums and fifes from all the soldiers’ children that were born in it. A greater number of fine children, however, is seldom seen anywhere than about a barrack of soldiers. Very few of them, it seems, arrive at the age of thirteen or fourteen. In some places one half the children born die before they are four years of age; in many places before they are seven; and in almost all places before they are nine or ten. This great mortality, however, will everywhere be found chiefly among the children of the common people, who cannot afford to tend them with the same care as those of better station. Though their marriages are generally more fruitful than those of people of fashion, a smaller proportion of their children arrive at maturity. In foundling hospitals, and among the children brought up by parish charities, the mortality is still greater than among those of the common people.

But such an effect can hardly explain the extraordinary current economic success of the Chinese today, since (a) it didn’t have much effect in china under a variety of political arrangements for centuries prior to the Deng economic “reforms,” and (b) the people of every nation on earth have been subject to similar selective pressures.

What seems more interesting, is the flat-lining of the Western economies as China’s economy soars. While this cannot be attributed solely or even, perhaps, largely to genetics, it is clear that the Western nations have adopted a dysgenic population policy, under which intelligent women are encouraged to pursue financially rewarding childless careers, while ignorant, idle and generally stupid women are paid welfare to produce children most of whom will never know their father. The implication is that intellectual rot now permeates the Western elites to the point they are incapable of defining a viable national policy.

Oh please, we traded our prosperity for their poverty.

““Maoist China was far less economically successful than Dengist China”? Not so.
Mao grew China’s economy at an average annual rate of 6.2% during his tenure, despite the crippling economic, technological and social sanctions placed on it by the U.S.”

Thank you. Saved me from having to make that point.

It’s so nasty call people, specially poor and really oppressed people ”dumber”, as if black death was a blessing for ”europeans”, and remember that most europeans were very poor in that period specially if compared with modern hygiene standards.

There are only ones who can be called in less weight in consciousness as ”dumber”, leftist [or any moron] ideologues, those who defend ideas that they have even the basic understanding… and even the idea of ”dumber” is a human thing while in the true we are talking about ”decisive mental disorders” and or highest levels of instinctiveness that is in true so called ”dumb[er]”.

Just like how due to higher upward and downward mobility (simply put) china evolved higher IQ what if….the absolute opposite situation…is responsible for low india’s IQ?

The caste system ‘prevented’ a lot of upward and down-ward mobility. A bright lower caste person couldnt move up the ranks, while the system also prevented downward mobility for a dumber upper caste person. A dumb brahmin could still be a brahmin while a smart cobbler remained a cobbler.

Many societies had some down-to-up and up-to-down mobility….while india had the least.

Also pandemics. The black death ravaged europe killing more likely the bottom 30-40 % of the population (more likely the dumber) of the populations. Black death also ravaged china (if i remember it correctly) while no pandemic on such a large affected india.

What if factors like these also affected india’s IQ?

@JBH:
Only a western liberal moron would think China, a country of 1.3 BILLION people, needs more people. They print this crap all the time in The Economist, always the same old claptrap, “China will grow old before it grows rich”, pure hogwash. Economists are brain dead theorists who have completely lost touch with the real world. Anyone with eyes and a brain can see that China’s population is a burden and a liability, not an asset. Same goes for India, Bangladesh, Pakistan, Nigeria, Indonesia, Philippines, Mexico, Central America and all those overcrowded, povery stricken 3rd world countries.

The world’s resources are finite. Governments everywhere can’t create enough jobs to keep their own people employed, automation is constantly eating away more jobs. Already Bill Gates is calling for taxing of robots, despite the fact that his company Microsoft contributed plenty to all the job losses we see today as a result of automation enabled by Microsoft software. The last thing this world needs is more people. Unfortunately it is the smart, well educated who are not having children, while the poor and uneducated continue to have more. And the dumb liberals in the west with their open borders lunacy ensure that the poor and uneducated will continue to migrate to the rich world in drove, while they make more at home.

If people are upset with Jews today it’s because they dominate the media, academia, Wall Street, Silicon Valley and Hollywood, are overwhelmingly liberal yet simultaneously money hungry and power hungry, which leads to a lot of hypocrisy. From their position of power, they are forcing on the western world a New World Order that entails non-stop migration from the 3rd world that will eventually subsume the west, completely destroying western civilization from within. It’s as if they are exacting their 2000 year revenge on Christian whites, except it will bring about their own demise because of high muslim migration to the west and their high birth rate.

Liberals are people who are dogmatic to the point where they have lost all common sense, and consequently all instincts for self preservation.

Appear to be, but exception proves the rule.

I am saying some european jews too are against immigration from third world countries into europe.

I dont think people ‘have’ to support grandparents. Culturally you might have to support your parents but not grandparents i think. Sure some might have to. Also china is a high savings society so most of those grandparents have savings of their own. Same with parents to some extent. Also you can have meaning/satisfaction by having a single child too.

Also imagine….what if china wouldnt have followed the one-china policy? It took tons of factory jobs from many other parts of the world to keep the chinese employed. If they had much more pop, it would have been more job loss for the rest of the world. (Not blaming the chinese ofcourse, it was the leaders of those countries themselves that took those jobs to china from their countries.)

I completely agree that east Asia would be foolish to follow the Western model! But they still need massive cultural changes to embrace larger families. They need to celebrate having children. Driving a nicer car is more prestigious than having a second child. How short sigthed and ridiuculous is that? Having one child (or, far worse, none) needs to be at least somewhat embarrassing. Of course, some people sadly can’t have children, but they should be encouraged and given first priority for adoption.

I happen to believe that nothing is as satisfying and meaningful as being a parent, but I guess many feel differently.

Chinese fertility rates are even lower in areas without the “one-child” policy (which has been phased out). It’s going to be really hard to create jobs that support two parents and four grandparents. Overpopulation is a big problem. We’re going to find out that underpopulation can be even worse.

Low fertility is the greatest challenge for advanced peoples. Every other subject is trivial in comparison.

I’ve been saying often that Islam has the best plan, its true.

In a world of unstoppable migration and welfare, the best meme for having 3+ children is the winning meme.

Where they are**

Are they zionists**

JBH,

Its a good thing isnt it. Too many people…means having to provide more and more jobs. I wish countries like india too followed a one-child policy. In todays world with a slowing global economy creating jobs is harder than it was say ten years ago.

Chosen,

There are also jews that are against immigration to europe.

The conceptual basis of neo leftism is just right. The problem is in the development of its ideas and thinking lines. Become contradictory and not is. Other reason why neo leftism is hopeless is the true or final intentions of its preciousss elit… The ends “justify” the means… The ends are different from means.

The Chinese government decided that their country was already overcrowded and had a larger population than all high-IQ nations combined. I don’t think it was a dumb policy to slow down and eventually halt or even reverse population growth. Certainly much smarter than the American or European policy of increasing the population through mass immigration of dumb immigrants and subsidized high birthrates of the dumbest immigrant groups, all the while encouraging their hostility toward the native cultures, and indoctrinating the population (both natives and immigrants) in the inferiority of the native culture relative to any cultures, especially the immigrants’ cultures.

Words can’t describe how idiotic our ruling ideology is. It’s basically a suicide cult with bizarre beliefs and assumptions which are contrary to all experience and common sense, and are absolutely in contradiction to the emerging body of scientific findings.

It’s a good article.

I never worship, i contempt absolutely… in the same people contempt diseases.

If we’re “precious,” it’s because people like you essentially worship us. Have fun.

When jews stop to be malignantly stupid, people maybe will stop to talk about your precious people.

Yes, talk about jews is boring but extremely necessary, isn’t*
it’s just talk about human Story, the same bullshit since ancient times.

In general, East Asians have more foresight. Both for our individuals, and our nations. China operates on a 100 year plan. The US operates on a 4 year plan.

So many Chinese people prefer traveling around the world and buying fancy luxury items over having a second child. You don’t need to be a math major to realize that’s a really bad 100 year plan.

Here are some East Asian fertility rate rankings and figures, according to the World Bank:

164 China 1.6
184 Japan 1.4
196 Singapore 1.3
197 Macau (China) 1.2
198 Hong Kong (China) 1.2
200 South Korea 1.2

Taiwan isn’t included but it’s around 1.2.

I’m afraid Muslims have a much better 100 year (or 1000 year) plan.

Before this post, a ctrl-F search on this page for “Jews” yielded 59 results. The subject could be about geological formations on the outer Saturn moons and the discussion would eventually focus on Jews. It never gets boring?

@weaver:

I agree with much of what you said w/ regards to the Jews and whites, especially this part:

“Jewish identity relies on “Never Forget” emphasis on the Holocaust. This encourages Jews to focus on survival, but it also encourages them to be wary of nationalist Europeans.”

However the Jews have gone too far in their fear of European nationalism. Their relentless push for open borders and multiculturalism in the form of unlimited third world immigration is resulting in large number of muslims coming into the west, and the #1 targets of muslims are Jews. ie. the Jews are engineering their own future persecution and possible demise, this time in the hands of Muslims, and it will be much worse than the last because there will be no Christian whites left to come to their rescue.

It’s seems true, religion would be a ”deep culture” while they tend to be more ”culturally supersticious”.

Unlike other major ethnic groups (Negroes, Semitics, and Caucasians ) Orientals aren’t permanently mired in mind-numbing religious superstitions.

Everything.

What great thing has been accomplished without necessary sacrifices?

And Mao’s tenure was responsible for socially rehabilitating the Chinese spirit and national morality, while Deng’s damaged it.

Yes via ”necessary sacrifices”

“Maoist China was far less economically successful than Dengist China”? Not so.

Mao grew China’s economy at an average annual rate of 6.2% during his tenure, despite the crippling economic, technological and social sanctions placed on it by the U.S.

And Mao’s tenure was responsible for socially rehabilitating the Chinese spirit and national morality, while Deng’s damaged it.

Was Aristotle’s IQ high? Possibly. But he looked to history. He pursued truth. And the pagans of the time are said to at times respect their enemies, to not view them as “evil” as do Abrahamic religions. Modern secular society today also likes to divide things into “good” vs. “evil”.

The justice of the powerful*

”Modern ”secular” society” relativize conservative religion while strengthen their cult. Good and evil exist, as well a spectrum between them, of course.

”Whites who lack complexity just need to read more conservative books, learn to think outside the box. Needless to say I am not a classical liberal, though I believe less government can be good for some polities. In the US, we would benefit from less government combined with trade protections.”

If they lack complexity so ”we” need teach practical things for them and not ”read more books”, that tend to be boring for ”men of action”.

”Oh, trade protectionism is another complicated topic! And as one would expect: Only conservatives understand that topic. Too complicated for others! Protectionist trade *can be* beneficial. It can also be harmful. Yikes.”

Everything can be beneficial, only if wisdom or ”generalization of intelligence” is accessed and well used.

Pat Buchanan said (quoting someone else) that “prudence is the mark of the conservative”. So maybe I’m just conservative. Conservatives never know what the heck they want. Conservatives reject ideology, put “first things first”, and look to tradition and history: Things get complicated. Every choice has a positive, a negative, a risk, so forth.

Conservatism is a naturalistic ideology, the secular or non-metaphysical conservatism but even this part is also more ”naturalistic-leaning”.

Aristotle wrote of there being 6 forms of government, 3 of them good (roughly: monarchy, aristocracy, democracy). And Aristotle taught how these forms can blend, though you tend to have one faction that’s dominant. And revolutions from one form can lead to a different form, not some determined next stage. And what’s ideal for one society will not necessarily be ideal for another. So, there are no simple answers. Complicated!

I know government forms tend to be more hybrid than ”purified”, even most of them are very similar regards their hierarchical structures.

You are talking about parochial ideal, but there is a universal ideal. I think most people want, conscious or not, the best for themselves, and if they were more rational they would like the best for others as they do for themselves and family. In the end all human cultures have persecuted wisdom and all them failled because their incomplete path of social/existential evolution. I don’t think is ”complicated!”, indeed what is problematic among humans is that they love to complicate what is more simple to understand, seems because a life full of problems and stuff to have in mind is important to escape from final faith. Human modern behavior is escapist par excellence.

Jewish history praises Napoleon (gave them opportunities). European conservatives generally don’t like Napoleon (rise of Reason and ideologies). Jewish identity relies on “Never Forget” emphasis on the Holocaust. This encourages Jews to focus on survival, but it also encourages them to be wary of nationalist Europeans. Jews dislike how Christianity “stole their heritage”. So, Jews are grumpy at Christianity.

don’t like… what’s your nationality*

I don’t think ”jews” [many, most of them*] hate christianity because this doctrine usurped their heritage. Jews don’t seems hate islam in the same levels. I know holocaustianism has been used as a tool of unity. Indeed holocaust seems a continuity of tearful jewish story for both: jews and christians. To increase jewish hate against non-jews and to continue christian story, from Egypt to Poland.

I can certainly view things from multiple perspectives at ease. I’m also admittedly something of a post-modern who desperately wants to preserve sources of meaning, for meaning’s sake. I stared into the abyss and desired to murder it. (I also have a strange faith in God, which suggests I’m pre-modern too.)

I think when instinctive passion is in control we can look for all perspectives, and not only for the perspective of ”our tribe”. In what God* there are so many… My God is my optmism and my pride, at least in the intrapersonal sphere.

Jews have their Temples. They meet in groups which are separate from the rest of society.

Yes, i know.

Whites meet in churches which are part of society, open to all. White parents send their children to schools to learn society’s ways. Jews view themselves as separate, fear melting in.

So, whites are more readily hit by society’s propaganda.

Because before ”mainstream culture” was ”white culture”. Why empires fall* Because the hierarchical energy that flow from power-centers to the periphery becoming weaker. It’s logically easy control a little country than a big nation.

Also, whites are just not threatened. Jews are brought up fearing whites are secretly conspiring against them. No one threatens Jews, but they aren’t raised like that.

Whites are not threatened**

Because they are completely dependent on majority, as well all elites, so they expect that their mental slaves will work fine.

The most interesting blow against secular white racialist IQ and genetic obsession I’ve seen is in the book “Bad Samaritans” by Ha-Joon Chang (fairly left-wing, though he could be a closet Korean nationalist). Likely there are better books to reference, but this was interesting to me. In the book Ha-Joon writes how the Germans and Japanese had been seen one way (explained as culture & race at the time), then they became successful and were perceived in another way (same cultures and races but explained differently). This isn’t to say culture and genetics don’t matter but that they’re complicated. Everything has to fit together.

Because humans are very self-deluded and usually subconscious liars [aka, stupid]. It’s also happen because balance of power: for example rightists today are seeing as victims, and indeed, they are, specially the regular rightist guy or girl, but in the recent past they were, on avg, the thugs. People are not like blank slate but they also are not totally pre-determined, we have a limited but existent behavioral plasticity.

Also i believe because average joey’s tend to share a lot of similar psychological features, so they tend to behave more similar as well react in similar ways in different situations, just like the fly of bird flocks.

keep in mind that powerful whites should be able to take control of our societies still, if they wished to. And a component of our society’s problems are due to powerful whites and how our society (due to the managerial state structure) empowers the wrong whites.

It’s not a western problem, it’s universal. Politics attract greedy and extroverted people. They are elected by subjective value: popularity, good looking, appear to be dominant, say what masses want to hear [by now] and not by the singular big feature: wisdom to govern.

You’re likely aware TS Eliot wrote, “Reasons of race and religion combine to make any large number of free-thinking Jews undesirable.”

No, i’m not, thank you for that. Indeed one of two toxic and wrongly interpreted stuff many if not most jews seems too much obsessed.

What he meant is they don’t identify as being from Europe and are not from our Christian or Europagan faith traditions. So, an atheist Jew is going to lack those ties.

A kind of taqyya practices.

A religious Jew however might be of little threat. Or, alternatively, a Jew who has closely integrated might come to see himself as just another European.

I doubt. Religious jews are the basis of judaism, its nuclei, as well in any other cult. Rabbis work hand on hand with ”secular’ ones. Because this capacity to think and even accept different and invariably or pseudo-contradictory thinking/acting lines many [if not most] of them can have double identity and without weight in their consciousness.

I think you overestimate how rational man is. Why do the Irish and Ulster Scots still fight though they allow in immigrants?

Completely otherwise, very rational people seems very rare, even because rationality tend to be otherwise than competition and most people born with that impetus to compete one each other while rationality mean ”the end of food chain”.

Santoculto,

keep in mind that powerful whites should be able to take control of our societies still, if they wished to. And a component of our society’s problems are due to powerful whites and how our society (due to the managerial state structure) empowers the wrong whites.

—

You’re likely aware TS Eliot wrote, “Reasons of race and religion combine to make any large number of free-thinking Jews undesirable.”

What he meant is they don’t identify as being from Europe and are not from our Christian or Europagan faith traditions. So, an atheist Jew is going to lack those ties.

A religious Jew however might be of little threat. Or, alternatively, a Jew who has closely integrated might come to see himself as just another European.

I think you overestimate how rational man is. Why do the Irish and Ulster Scots still fight though they allow in immigrants?

Jewish history praises Napoleon (gave them opportunities). European conservatives generally don’t like Napoleon (rise of Reason and ideologies). Jewish identity relies on “Never Forget” emphasis on the Holocaust. This encourages Jews to focus on survival, but it also encourages them to be wary of nationalist Europeans. Jews dislike how Christianity “stole their heritage”. So, Jews are grumpy at Christianity.

-

Regarding “white [left] illibs”: Whites are just fat and lazy. We’ve been spoiled by success and easy living. Also, the schools are bad (not only propaganda but taught not to questions), other reasons. Everything is not IQ. IQ matters. Other components matter also.

I can certainly view things from multiple perspectives at ease. I’m also admittedly something of a post-modern who desperately wants to preserve sources of meaning, for meaning’s sake. I stared into the abyss and desired to murder it. (I also have a strange faith in God, which suggests I’m pre-modern too.)

-

Jews have their Temples. They meet in groups which are separate from the rest of society.

Whites meet in churches which are part of society, open to all. White parents send their children to schools to learn society’s ways. Jews view themselves as separate, fear melting in.

So, whites are more readily hit by society’s propaganda.

Also, whites are just not threatened. Jews are brought up fearing whites are secretly conspiring against them. No one threatens Jews, but they aren’t raised like that.

-

The most interesting blow against secular white racialist IQ and genetic obsession I’ve seen is in the book “Bad Samaritans” by Ha-Joon Chang (fairly left-wing, though he could be a closet Korean nationalist). Likely there are better books to reference, but this was interesting to me. In the book Ha-Joon writes how the Germans and Japanese had been seen one way (explained as culture & race at the time), then they became successful and were perceived in another way (same cultures and races but explained differently). This isn’t to say culture and genetics don’t matter but that they’re complicated. Everything has to fit together.

I might just be post modern though. I tend to make things over complicated. And often my answer is that each choice in a situation has positives and negatives.

Pat Buchanan said (quoting someone else) that “prudence is the mark of the conservative”. So maybe I’m just conservative. Conservatives never know what the heck they want. Conservatives reject ideology, put “first things first”, and look to tradition and history: Things get complicated. Every choice has a positive, a negative, a risk, so forth.

Aristotle wrote of there being 6 forms of government, 3 of them good (roughly: monarchy, aristocracy, democracy). And Aristotle taught how these forms can blend, though you tend to have one faction that’s dominant. And revolutions from one form can lead to a different form, not some determined next stage. And what’s ideal for one society will not necessarily be ideal for another. So, there are no simple answers. Complicated!

Was Aristotle’s IQ high? Possibly. But he looked to history. He pursued truth. And the pagans of the time are said to at times respect their enemies, to not view them as “evil” as do Abrahamic religions. Modern secular society today also likes to divide things into “good” vs. “evil”.

Whites who lack complexity just need to read more conservative books, learn to think outside the box. Needless to say I am not a classical liberal, though I believe less government can be good for some polities. In the US, we would benefit from less government combined with trade protections.

Oh, trade protectionism is another complicated topic! And as one would expect: Only conservatives understand that topic. Too complicated for others! Protectionist trade *can be* beneficial. It can also be harmful. Yikes.

If only if it was merely “top-down.” Its so pervasive that its easier to assume that everything is pozzed these days.

The U.S. and the West are in a state of temporary insanity which may lead to real decline. I don’t know what will happen, but the U.S. and the West didn’t rise because of a lack of foresight, nationalism, cohesion or intelligent and driven people. The insanity in the West is top-down at the moment, so I don’t know what to make of it.

Note: When I say “Jews” I mean the general trend of the Jewish organism.

That’s one of the fundamental question, what is % of them who are at least: ”completely” unaware about what’s going [so called innocents] just like so many people on the goym masses and/or at least don’t condone, specially with their elites long term attitudes [so called cautious, disgusted but self-perceived as impotent to fight against this gigantic big trends, erstwhile little ones]. Based on some statistics, seems, at least 60% of jewish americans are very liberal, mainly in their political attitudes, but also very concerned about Israel, whatever how monstruous this little country/and jewish connections in the diaspora has been specially with ”no-land” palestinians*

The simple incapacity for most of them to think at least one second about white people and its possibly problematic future seems bizarre if most of them are just like any other illib or a sign of coldness about white people, specially people on the middle and working classes.

I think different elites in the power create different evolutionary strategies.

I have impression because their ”psychopathic-leaning” ‘they’ or many them can think in ”multiple perspectives”, a very powerful capacity that make people potentially astute, while because white/european caucasian trends to the binnary thinking mode, they seems vulnerable to become as a ”abstract prisoner”, for example, for most white [left] illibs ”racism and white pride” become two irreconciliable things, a false dichotomy of course.

Santoculto,

I appreciate the reply.

Jews are certainly better organized, more group-oriented, more self-aware than are whites.

Partly why whites are not self-aware is our history in Europe. The Church strove to tear down divides in Europe, and Christianity wants to spread to all of humanity. And the UK advanced in productivity when it tore down its monasteries, focused more on profit rather than on honouring its God and ancestors.

Jews have a different history. They didn’t entirely shape their culture. They’re also reacting to their historical experiences. Those reactions and adaptations created a successful organism which today has successfully acquired great power in European societies. What’s important to notice about Jews is they do honour their ancestors and God, even if not believing in Him.

One advantage Jews have is they are a minority obsessed with the idea that others are wanting to destroy the Jewish organism. So, they band together to resist destruction. Another advantage is Jews have a tribe of priests whom they somewhat obey. Also they remember their history. Jews don’t focus on merely a few events as do Anglos.

—

I dislike how Jews desire to destroy all other human groups. They’re clearly focused on global domination. I do not believe it will succeed, because they’re destroying their servants who are the Europeans.

And I wish more Anglos were more honest about what we truly are: Anglos especially are the servants of Jews. At least we are today. We fight for them, work for them, otherwise enrich them; and our only taboo is around WWII events. Jews seem to be breeding us into a slave class, encouraging us to amalgamate with other races, thus making us easier to control.

Anglos though are lost in delusions of grandeur. We identify with the state, proclaiming the state to be “ours”, proclaiming that others are melting in to become like us. In truth, the state is not us. But it’s more comfortable to tell ourselves that we’re wonderful and dominant.

—

Note: When I say “Jews” I mean the general trend of the Jewish organism.

Clearly there are many noteworthy “good Jews” today. At the least, some Jews are concerned by the destruction of their servants, since Muslims might not be so useful.

Man is not rational, so most Jews, as well as most Anglos etc, have no idea what’s going on. We often irrationally act in our individual and group interests. So, it’s possible to impose one’s interests without intending so.

A fair telling of Anglos harming others during the British and American empires would paint us terribly. So, I’m not suggesting that Jews are some terrible race. They’re human, and man is fallen.

Too much pragmatism = ”psychopathic-leaning” and pseudo-rationality.

The Chinese eat dogs and cockroaches:

Anonymous,

Seems like you havent been to china. Its now very prosperous. The infrastructure…buildings, trains (there is train that runs from beijing to shanghai at more than 300 km per hour, without shaking

Beijing/shanghai are now better than hongkong/singapore in most aspects. People’s per-capita income has increased a lot too.

The thing that’s notable about the prosperous jewels Singapore and Hong Kong isn’t that they’re Chinese, its that they were colonies where the Chinese had been ruled by and adopted the principles of the British. If we’re looking at the Chinese themselves, no better place to look than China itself, which has been nowhere remotely as prosperous, lawful, organized, free.

I agree with the gist of your comment. As an Indian immigrant, when I observe Chinese immigrants, I can attempt to distinguish traits which come from merely having an immigrant background, to traits which are probably more Chinese in origin.

Indian immigrants work hard, but Chinese work harder. Chinese have an edge in IQ, but Indians have an edge in verbosity and extroversion (Ashkenazis seem to have an edge over whites in all these traits).

I also agree that Chinese seem less emotional. Whether this comes from less emotion per se or if it is just an artifact of them not being very expressive, I cannot say. But given that Chinese immigrants seem overall less invested in SJW rackets and other ideologies, I guess they really are less emotional and more pragmatic.

”Tradition” no have wisdom, not in its complete view. Exactly what is predating western vital energy is what is necessary to complete that essential knowledge: Existentialism, this hidden ”disease’ within west. Indeed it’s not a disease, only for people who can’t think in multiple perspectives and even without a true sense to live, still live, even with many good arguments against fertility [put a innocent creature in the world, even without any of human stupid problems, itself is a crime] do it. Even without most of massive distraction systems we tend to engage in spontaneous way, scaping from ”hard” reality, still resist and continue to do as if reproductive instinct still there and find new ways to survive in the world with existential depression.

Pragmatism all the time it’s not healthy. Even when they are in easy times seems the pragmatism don’t cease.

Cultural is also or fundamentally ”collectively organizational”. Jews seems are on control of their invented creature: ”culture”, while whites are otherwise, just like Frankenstein start to command its creator. Whites, as well other groups tend to put culture as their commander, while jews put their culture to work for them. Jews also seems more organized via collective levels and self-aware about it while whites, at collective levels, are not self-aware about themselves in very deep ways.

If Western culture was so superior in every way, it wouldn’t be turning onto gaytopia while trying to invite its own destruction.I think its worthwhile to consider cultures as processes rather than an endpoint, and the West is right about processing themselves out of existence; maybe they’ll take all the rest of us down with them, too.

But yeah, mainlanders are pretty harsh, but what do you expect after the Cultural Revolution?

One major reason why the Chinese and its diaspora are so successful is because of their pragmatism. Their pragmatism ensures their survival in difficult times, through political turmoil and all forms of discrimination outside China, yet it also makes Chinese societies the ultimate every man for himself, dog-eat-dog societies that are really unpleasant to live in, and give the image of Chinese being ruthless, selfish, greedy and untrustworthy. That’s why so many immediately try to emigrate out of those societies as soon as they are able to, usually after they become rich by being ruthless, selfish, greedy and corrupt.

I have never been to China but growing up as a Chinese minority in a multicultural society in Southeast Asia has taught me that there are always 2 things you can count on in a multicultural society:
1) Every man for himself, there is no concept of country (due to lack of shared culture and history), and
2) Because of #1, everybody hates everybody

That’s why I think it is a mistake for the US to try to become more multicultural. We need to slow down immigration and focus on assimilation. Having lived here for over 3 decades since I was a teen, I know first hand it takes decades for someone to become fully assimilated. It goes beyond speaking fluent English, to me assimilation means understanding western culture(incl. western history, literature, religion, philosophy, music, art), accepting America as your one and only home country, loving it wholeheartedly and be loyal to no other country. The multiculturalism and globalism espoused by the left are idiotic and dangerous. The reason western societies are a magnet for people all over the world is precisely because they are western, not Eastern or African or Muslim.

All around me I am seeing an alarming increase in number of mainland Chinese buying up properties and immigrating here in drove. Many do not even bother speaking English and arrogantly speak Chinese to any stranger who even looks remotely Asian and expect you to understand them. Many are probably corrupt businessmen and politicians escaping to greener pastures with their ill gotten gains before they get thrown in jail. Even as someone of Chinese descent I find 99% of newly arrived mainland Chinese rude, abrasive, untrustworthy and unbearable. The only reason they are here is because they want a better place to raise their children and are uncertain about the future of China, not because they love western culture or America, i.e. it is all about them, what’s in it for them, not about their host country or culture. It’s why mainland Chinese are today hated throughout Southeast Asia, even in Singapore where there’s a large Chinese diaspora. In fact, many of these people disdain western culture as decadent and want to supplant it with their own, which begs the question if their culture is so superior, why are they here in the first place? Unfortunately now there are so many of them here they are practically transforming the US into another China. The larger the immigrant group the slower the assimilation. The US needs a 20 year moratorium on immigration to absorb and assimilate those who are already here before we turn into another corrupt, dog-eat-dog third world hell hole like China, in fact, much of non-western societies.

Mar 22, 2017 A Brief History of Communism

On the 100th Anniversary of the Bolshevik Revolution, China Uncensored takes a look back at communist history and its unbelievable death toll.

“Let`s be honest, China is only successful because they stole the Science that took the West centuries to develop.”

I hear you, but I’d take it one step further… I’m not so sure they are such a great success story. The meteoric rise of recent decades is from an extremely low starting point of profound poverty by Western standards. And as you say, its by copying the West. Look for their prosperity to plateau off as they approach Western levels of prosperity, as it is much harder to innovate than to copy. In other words, they won’t be pushing such high GDP end over end when they have to reach for the sky standing on their own two feet instead of standing on the shoulders of giants.

They also seem to have some staggering flaws that might cause a serious collapse. They are building a housing bubble that dwarfs anything the West has seen. Energy developments of the West, such as discovering massive natural gas deposits, encourage businesses to come back here, where costs for production are driven down. The Chinese lack transparency, pollute their environment, and corruption, lies and cheating are national pastimes that won’t be going away any time soon- these are a huge drag on development of a prosperous capitalistic society. As an example, their own people would rather take their chances on buying Western vitamins, medicine, baby products, etc at great personal expense rather than buying the local Chinese variety.

The Chinese people assume that the government won’t allow a collapse in housing or economy, and to some extent, they’ve been right, the government has been artificially propping things up, but whatever goes up must come down, they can only do it so much, and when it does, interfering so much with the natural order of things economic usually gets you a far worse state than you would’ve been in, had you let things just proceed on their own. The fact that they are still a Communist state, and the government has far greater reach/power over the economy than a Western country, means they can kick the can further down the road, with the end result being a far worse mess than what would be seen in a Western recession.

The evidence suggests this sort of thing happened in Europe as well. Studies suggest that it was the wealthy who tended to have kids, not the peasants, so for example, most people of English ancestry have disproportionately more of their ancestors as lords and much fewer as serfs, than one might think.

Let`s be honest, China is only successful because they stole the Science that took the West centuries to develop.

People make these sorts of errors in thinking about Indian success as well. Just because a group does well here, it doesn’t mean that the group as a whole is exceptionally brilliant. Unlike those who share a border with us, usually, only the best and brightest from China and India have had the wherewithal to get here. If we took the valedictorians of America and their kids and compared them against Asians in Asia, they’d tend to excel as well.

Jason Liu,

I like much of what you say. I would like to reply that: Europe (and colonies) have been industrialised for longer than the East Asian states you mention. We are fat and vain. Europe is also very old like China, just with a different history.

You are younger in entering the modern world. Modernism will kill you just the same if you allow it. Success can be dangerous.

It’s well to argue as you do, but I’d be cautious of believing in it too strongly. Look at the Anglos: Overconfidence and vanity kills. You’re right to denounce ideology. Ideology has driven Anglos into madness. We’re all insane, secular classical liberals who reject the wisdom and structure of tradition. Anglos refuse to ask questions, though we insist we are “scientific”. I don’t see much hope for us. Just pray you don’t get infected by our ideas.

Anon,

you’re using cheap shots.

The US was the last standing economy post-WWII, and we’ve enjoyed an ideal geographic position.

Post-Mao China, Japan, S. Korea have all protected their industry to gain advantage. The US, however, has refused to act in its interests. So, yes, the Chinese have been planning ahead. US economic growth more recently has been based on flooding the US with immigrants. China has focused on developing its industry. The US wants to expand low-skill labour intensive industry; China wants high-skill industry. We’re starting from different positions, but you can see the trend.

Japan developed with almost no natural resources; S. Korea was extremely impoverished.

China has major economic problems, but it is correct to say China pursues its interests better.

China spends a relatively small amount on its military, gets more for its money. China doesn’t fight senseless wars for Israel in the ME. China is cracking down on Muslims. China doesn’t flood itself with immigrants.

This isn’t a matter of needing to “win”. It’s important to acknowledge reality. The US and Europe need to correct course. If changing course now, then the future will be ours.

Our leaders seem to have set us up for a planned economic reset in the US. Currently we live beyond our means. Each president just “kicks the can”. We focus on each 2 yr federal election year, wanting the best results in the near term. This is a problem. Also, we have massive affirmative action in the US. I don’t believe China gives many advantages to minorities.

Karma is ridiculous. Culture exists, however. I don’t know what “connections” you mean.

I agree the biological explanations are often overly simplistic. Whites like to insist on one-on-one fair competition. Others just laugh and cheat. So, even if the particular noble white is truly “superior” in whatever the tested traits, he’s going to lose. And I’m well aware how the Anglos mistreated the Chinese; I just say, some Anglos love that ideal of honest, free market competition among individuals.

Another factor: “Even biology knows that habitual, extreme safety and well-being are not advantageous for a living organism.” – Solzhenitsyn

Ha-Joon Chang wrote some amusing attacks on the culture/race focus in his book, “Bad Samaritans”. Confucianism had previously been condemned as causing failure. Now it is praised. The Germans and Japanese had previously been perceived in one way. Now they are perceived in another.

So, you’re correct to be wary. The groupthink here is palpable at times. Dare to venture outside the box!

Usually when Anglo whites use the term “Social Darwinism”, they mean via the free market. China of course has not solely used the free market.

I just point this out, bc Anglo whites, dim and arrogant as we are, won’t notice the difference otherwise.

We see in modern market economies how small groups prosper at the expense of individuals. And we see how corruption and individual-profit-at-the-expense-of-society lead to success.

So, Anglos pursuing their free market Social Darwinism would be expected to breed a race of extremely corrupt and anti-national people.

Rural areas might be more eugenic; but urban areas do not at all appear to be.

Few races are dying out like the Anglos, so my conclusion is our current customs are some of the worst adapted for modern life.

Jews thrive and like to believe they thrive due to their superiority. But I’d say that advantage is partly cultural, not solely genetic.

http://www.unz.com/freed/in-search-of-the-super-race/#comment-1798116

what do you think of this?

http://www.unz.com/freed/in-search-of-the-super-race/#comment-1798116

check that comment out.

Dec 19, 2015 Sesame Credit: China’s Creepy New Social Engineering Experiment

Coming soon to a New World Order near you: social credit! Earn points by behaving like the government wants you to behave! Get penalized if you don’t act like a doubleplusgood citizen! What could be more fun? Join me for today’s Thought For The Day as we discuss China’s new Sesame Credit system and the gamification of your enslavement.

Maybe because their ”smart traction” is abundant, it’s create the PARTIAL illusion that they are ”doing well” whatever it mean, and/or it’s mean they are, in the of day, superior.

The nature ”thanks” for China ”development”… Now, India is next gigantic human conglomerate that need follow ”step by step” the western/industrial recipe to reach ”higher’ levels of …

… development, aka, industrial ”development”.

Social darwinism is a stupid way to eugenize a population if you can select the ”smarter’, whatever the type of smarter you want, without unnecessary suffering or ”necessary sacrifice”, something that has been extremely abundant in Chinaland.

Obviously, the Soviet Union was the first to conquer space

This Is the First Picture Ever Taken From Space—and It Was Taken From a Nazi Rocket

fastest sustained rate of economic growth in human history

LOL

1. Have Communist Revolution, regress to the Neolithic
2. Recover part way back, therefore, technically have high growth rate
3. Profit

Pretty accurate, yeah. Probably mostly “unintentional” due to famines but also no one greatly was concerned when it happened, and when it went out of control, it was too late to do much about it anymore.

I highly doubt it was supposed to reduce population. That’s assuming that population had a cost, but that wasn’t really how the planners were thinking. They just assumed that their goals could be brought about and that death of some members was no different than the death of soldiers in battle to bring about victory.

May I ask you a question about China during communism.? In your opinion which estimates of human cost are correct? How many people died during implementation of the system and its maintenance due to intentional violent death via executions, in prisons and camp, etc. and how many due to mismanaged policies due to famines? Were there famines intentionally caused to reduce some population?

could you briefly describe what each book is about?

Cultural Revolution and Great Leap Forward ethics at work, rather. Vaguely amusing – and an interesting thought too, how bottlenecks can cause a lot of change, including genetic, in a very short period of time.

Confusion ethics at work:

Why drivers in China intentionally kill the pedestrians they hit

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/foreigners/2015/09/why_drivers_in_china_intentionally_kill_the_pedestrians_they_hit_china_s.html

It’s interesting to read the reports from the early European missionaries on the differing natures of Chinese and Japanese people.

http://s1.zetaboards.com/anthroscape/topic/5348678/1/

http://s1.zetaboards.com/anthroscape/topic/5161224/1/

I was living in Paris in the seventies and I recall a popular book “Quand la Chine s’éveillera… le monde tremblera” by Alain Peyrefitte which was very prescient about the future Chinese influence. The author followed up that book with “La Chine s’est éveillée” in the nineties.

This article has been very helpful in my research:

In China the explanation is likely this (the same selection pressures could have applied to the Jewish community/population). Article by Mr. Unz:

How Social Darwinism Made Modern China
[...]
But other personality factors besides intelligence could lead to fortune. One could even keep this with a psychological Darwinian orientation by suggesting that risk taking, or aggressiveness-both traits often claimed to have genetic bases-led to great profit. — Jews (2R 1.3%; 3R 62%) carry low-activity MAOA at much higher rates than Whites (2R 0.2%; 3R 36%) http://theunsilencedscience.blogspot.com/2013/01/monoamine-oxidase-bibliography.html
[...]
Genghis Khan very, very likely was a carrier of the low-activity MAOA allele, the “warrior gene.”

1 in 200 Men Direct Descendants of Genghis Khan

– http://www.unz.com/gnxp/1-in-200-men-direct-descendants-of-genghis-khan/

– http://www.unz.com/jthompson/iq-does-not-exist-lead-poisoning-aside/#comment-1835586

Because of the harsh conditions of day-to-day life in the Pale, some two million Jews emigrated from there between 1881 and 1914, mainly to the United States.[8] However, this exodus did not affect the stability of the Jewish population of the Pale, which remained at 5 million people due to its high birthrate.

– http://www.unz.com/jthompson/womens-brains/#comment-1852886

These differences in the allele frequencies of certain genes between Europeans and other cultures/races is likely due to the different cultural and environmental selection pressures on the different groups:

Worrier or Warrior? Explaining The COMT V158M Gene (rs4680)

The Worrier (A)…Lower COMT, Higher Dopamine. (Met)

AA is considered the ‘risk’ or ‘bad’ allele in part because people don’t do well with stress and because lower COMT can create issues with methylation and not breaking down estrogen byproducts (catechol estrogens).

AA’s get more pleasure out of life but also more misery (bigger high’s and low’s).

The Warrior (G)…Higher COMT, Lower Dopamine (Val)

Better handling of stress and pain.
[...]
Higher emotional resilience/able to handle negative events well.

Continental Differences

G allele frequencies: East Asians have 71% G’s, Africans 69% G’s Americans 61% G’s, Europeans 48% G’s (R). So East Asians are going to be more likely to have GG vs Europeans.

– https://selfhacked.com/2014/12/24/worrier-warrior-explaining-rs4680comt-v158m-gene/

About The Warrior Gene (MAOA) And What To Do If You Have It

Different Frequencies Among Racial Groups and Gender

The Warrior Gene was found to be more or less prevalent in different groups.

The 3R version, which produces less MAO-A, was found in 59% of Black men, 56% of Maori men (an aboriginal New Zealand group), 54% of Chinese men and 34% of Caucasian men.

The 2R version, which produces the least MAO-A, is found in 5.5% of Black men, 0.1% of Caucasian men, and 0.00067% of Asian men.

Women are less likely to have these genes.

– https://selfhacked.com/2014/12/07/about-mao-a-and-what-to-do-if-you-have-the-warrior-gene/

It seems that very harsh and “Social Darwinist” environments and cultures do not necessarily select for intelligence exclusively, or maybe not even predominately, but that they mostly select for risk taking, aggressiveness, ruthlessness, i.e., psychopathic and rather anti-social traits.

– http://www.unz.com/jthompson/iq-does-not-exist-lead-poisoning-aside/#comment-1836006

This male-heavy gender imbalance is not seen in some emerging nations, such as Thailand, Indonesia and the Philippines, partly because these countries have matriarchal cultures. However, the demographic changes in India, China and Vietnam, which account for about 60% of Asia’s population, have a big impact on the rest of the region.
[...]
It is difficult to change the deeply ingrained cultural preference for sons.

– http://www.unz.com/runz/chinas-rise-americas-fall/#comment-1864010

Secondly, I believe that female emancipation and feminism are highly eugenic and pacifying
[...]
[This is just speculation on my part so far, but I suspect and my research has led me to believe, that with greater emancipation of women selection for intelligence rather than aggressiveness, etc. actually increases. This could be another explanation for the Flynn Effect; greater emancipation and protection of women, which enables them to select their mates by traits they prefer and like, like intelligence and agreeableness rather than aggressiveness and violence/anti-social behavior.]
So the less chauvinistic/“macho” a race or culture is the more likely it is to select for intelligence and low(er) testosterone, i.e., lower aggressiveness, and against the “warrior gene,” i.e., psychopathy. – http://www.unz.com/jthompson/tomster-on-marriage/#comment-1838477

– http://www.unz.com/jthompson/womens-brains/#comment-1848017

The Japanese are at their core a collectivist people like no other. They are a people of almost childlike naivety and a capacity for faith and romanticism. The Chinese, contrary to belief otherwise, are raw cynics and individualists at heart, caring naught for what is beyond themselves and their immediate families.

This sounds very true.

And I find your discussion ridiculously childish – by which I mean it is what one might hope for from nice kindergarten teachers.
Not sorry.

My patience was overstressed when I read your advocacy of a new approach: “cooperation based on respect for every single person” [and what really boggled the mind] “irrespective of his/her abilities”!

A perfect illustration of pure humbug in the deployment of that contentless word “respect”. But of course I respect everyone’s right to be an idiotic, lazy, worthless scumbag and still be counted by the perpetrator of Unintelligent Design as one of his human creatures.

I don’t remember reading this comment when Ron’s article was first published. My male relative married to a Japanese would certainly confirm your criticism of Jadon Liu’s failure to distinguish Chinese and Japanese behaviour and habits of mind. And I remember being impressed nearly 30 years ago by another Greg Clark, fluent speaker of Chinese, married to a Japanese, President of a Japanese university, who attributed the then pre-crash Japanese economic supremacy to their feudal-tribal ways and attitudes. In contrast he saw Chinese, if not as much as Indians, as individualistic.

I wondered whether there might not have been less competition *before* that last 400 years because the much smaller population still had high rainfall and fertile land near big rivers into which to expand with their established efficient agriculture.

The conflict between Israel and Muslims is complicated. Both sides have strong arguments. They need an honest broker who would be interested in peace. But first US should leave them in peace.
I wonder what you would say about Iraq – Iran war in 1980th which did cost a couple of millions of lives. Guess who organized it. And who supplied Hussein with weapons?

what would you say about the Vietnamese, who by all accounts are just as culturally East Asian as the Japanese and Koreans?

I find this discussion ridiculously childish. Sorry.

It may actually be that Asians are genetically more endowed “upstairs” — nothing to do with Darwinism as proposed by the author of this blog.

But the triumphalism and arrogance that this seems to engender is short-sighted, unwise and utterly ugly.

Higher intelligence does not necessarily make a people great. Often it does not. As intelligence is not inherently good. It is merely a tool. (Jails are full of very intelligent people, who obviously were incapable of channeling it into productive and benign ways). But it would be true, that intelligence will invariably make them dominant over others. And I have yet to see a (large group of) people throughout this world’s history which have used their advantage in any form, intelligence included, for the betterment of all humans. Yes competition has been what has fueled humans’ endeavors for all of history. Wars have been the result.

It would be good to try another approach — cooperation based on respect for every single person, irrespective of his/her abilities. I think the world is starved for another paradigm for the progression of human consciousness.

[…] contrasts very interestingly with articles I read yesterday by the always excellent Steve Sailer which (among other things) covered the comparatively incredible levels, and longevity, of social […]

Hi Duke,

I think your criticism of Jason Liu is good. His analysis is too simple mind, such as conflating Japanese and Chinese personalities. However, I think that your thinking is too cynical. Some Chinese are pragmatic and cynical as you describe but many are not. You both miss that there are spiritual forces pushing nations toward certain directions. China, coming out of a period of poverty, its people are getting less materialistic and there is a push towards the arts and the spiritual. It is subtle but will be apparent over generations.

Jason,

I think that some of your observations have value but generally too simple. For example the Duke of Qin points out rightly that the Japanese character is very different from the Chinese.You need to go deeper. At your level you are almost on a par with many white racists. Sure genetics play a large part in our success but not an overwhelming part of our success. There are many other factors, such as luck, karma, connections, and spiritual forces. I hope that you don’t continue into this rigid belief of biological determinism that many whites accept.

Heinlein wrote about uberwanked China in a bunch of his novels. Arthur C Clarke in 2001 novelization as well

Sorry,
this is just tripe.

China plans for a 100 years, the US plans for 4?

China last 100 years – Lost Hong Kong and Macau to European imperialists. 2 revolutions. Japanese invasion. Civil war. Taiwan/Republic of China still separate. Great Leap Forward and resulting famine. Cultural Revolution. Gang of Four coup.

China Gdp per capita 10,000 USD

US – No invasions. No revolution. Became world superpower. Won 2 world wars. Made European powers decolonialise. Saw collapse of USSR. Made China change from communist to current system. Has 200 military bases on eery continent.

US Gdp per capita 50,000 USD

China hasn’t planned for the last 100 very well, what makes you think they’ll plan for the next? Case in point, massive stock market crash.

[…] type of patriotism would hardly be found among America’s New Elite (the Ashkenazis who have replaced the WASPs in  America’s elite institutions – Yale now is less than 20% WASP). In fact, the New Elite seem overwhelmingly to support open […]

[…] http://www.unz.com/runz/china-debating-the-clark-unz-model/ this explains the measured 105 iq of the country.

The problem with these kinds of arguments is that they are weak. They are pure speculation. The evidence used, when any evidence is used at all, is highly selective (e.g., cherrypicked).

One can speculate almost anything on little to no evidence. I’m not sure it is even worthy of calling them scientific hypotheses because they are at present nonfalsifiable. The mechanism that would make any of this possible is left unexplained and so there is no way to even know how to go about testing it.

These speculations can neither be proved nor disproved, and so they live on forever in the reactionary sphere. Then reactionaries complain that scientists don’t take seriously a non-scientific hypothesis.

[…] parents aren’t all to blame though. There’s of course the genetic reasons. Not to complicate it, but the very factors that make China the world’s oldest surviving […]

“during that same period, Singapore was governed by the tight hand of Lee Kuan Yew and his socialistic People’s Action Party, which built a one-party state with a large degree of government guidance and control.” – that’s nonsense. Singapore is much more free-market than US and EU. For years it has been the 2nd most free economy after Hong Kong. Lee Kuan Yew pretended in the 1950s to be a leftist but once he got to power he elbowed out the reds and returned to capitalism after years of British Labour Party mismanagement and leftist experiments.