Thursday, July 3, 2014
Wednesday, June 4, 2014
On the White Man and the Injuns
Benjamin Franklin talked about this. “When an Indian Child has been brought up among us, taught our language and habituated to our Customs, yet if he goes to see his relations and makes one Indian Ramble with them, there is no perswading him ever to return. [But] when white persons of either sex have been taken prisoners young by the Indians, and lived a while among them, tho’ ransomed by their Friends, and treated with all imaginable tenderness to prevail with them to stay among the English, yet in a Short time they become disgusted with our manner of life, and the care and pains that are necessary to support it, and take the first good Opportunity of escaping again into the Woods, from whence there is no reclaiming them.”
Ben Franklin: The Indian Men when young are Hunters and Warriors; when old, Counsellors; for all their Government is by Counsel of the Sages; there is no Force there are no Prisons, no Officers to compel Obedience, or inflict Punishment.—Hence they generally study Oratory; the best Speaker having the most Influence. The Indian Women till the Ground, dress the Food, nurse and bring up the Children, & preserve & hand down to Posterity the Memory of public Transactions. These Employments of Men and Women are accounted natural & honorable, Having few artificial Wants, they have abundance of Leisure for Improvement by Conversation. Our laborious Manner of Life compar’d with theirs, they esteem slavish & base; and the Learning on which we value ourselves, they regard as frivolous & useless. An Instance of this occurr’d at the Treaty of Lancaster in Pensilvania, anno 1744, between the Government of Virginia and the Six Nations. After the principal Business was settled, the Commissioners from Virginia acquainted the Indians by a Speech, that there was at Williamsburg a College, with a Fund for Educating Indian youth; and that if the Six Nations would send down half a dozen of their young Lads to that College, the Government would take Care that they should be well provided for, and instructed in all the Learning of the White People...their Speaker began by expressing their deep Sense of the Kindness of the Virginia Government in making them that Offer, for we know, says he, that you highly esteem the kind of Learning taught in those Colleges, and that the Maintenance of our young Men while with you, would be very expensive to you. We are convinc’d therefore that you mean to do us Good by your Proposal, and we thank you heartily. But you who are wise must know, that different Nations have different Conceptions of Things, and you will therefore not take it amiss if our Ideas of this kind of Education happen not to be the same with yours. We have had some Experience of it: Several of our young People were formerly brought up at the Colleges of the Northern Provinces; they were instructed in all your Sciences; but when they came back to us they were bad Runners ignorant of every means of living in the Woods, unable to bear either Cold or Hunger, knew neither how to build a Cabin, take a Deer or kill an Enemy, spoke our Language imperfectly, were therefore neither fit for Hunters Warriors, or Counsellors, they were totally good for nothing. We are however not the less oblig’d by your kind Offer tho’ we decline accepting it; and to show our grateful Sense of it, if the Gentlemen of Virginia will send us a Dozen of their Sons, we will take great Care of their Education, instruct them in all we know, and make Men of them.
http://i.imgur.com/UdsF9WH.jpg
Ben Franklin: The Indian Men when young are Hunters and Warriors; when old, Counsellors; for all their Government is by Counsel of the Sages; there is no Force there are no Prisons, no Officers to compel Obedience, or inflict Punishment.—Hence they generally study Oratory; the best Speaker having the most Influence. The Indian Women till the Ground, dress the Food, nurse and bring up the Children, & preserve & hand down to Posterity the Memory of public Transactions. These Employments of Men and Women are accounted natural & honorable, Having few artificial Wants, they have abundance of Leisure for Improvement by Conversation. Our laborious Manner of Life compar’d with theirs, they esteem slavish & base; and the Learning on which we value ourselves, they regard as frivolous & useless. An Instance of this occurr’d at the Treaty of Lancaster in Pensilvania, anno 1744, between the Government of Virginia and the Six Nations. After the principal Business was settled, the Commissioners from Virginia acquainted the Indians by a Speech, that there was at Williamsburg a College, with a Fund for Educating Indian youth; and that if the Six Nations would send down half a dozen of their young Lads to that College, the Government would take Care that they should be well provided for, and instructed in all the Learning of the White People...their Speaker began by expressing their deep Sense of the Kindness of the Virginia Government in making them that Offer, for we know, says he, that you highly esteem the kind of Learning taught in those Colleges, and that the Maintenance of our young Men while with you, would be very expensive to you. We are convinc’d therefore that you mean to do us Good by your Proposal, and we thank you heartily. But you who are wise must know, that different Nations have different Conceptions of Things, and you will therefore not take it amiss if our Ideas of this kind of Education happen not to be the same with yours. We have had some Experience of it: Several of our young People were formerly brought up at the Colleges of the Northern Provinces; they were instructed in all your Sciences; but when they came back to us they were bad Runners ignorant of every means of living in the Woods, unable to bear either Cold or Hunger, knew neither how to build a Cabin, take a Deer or kill an Enemy, spoke our Language imperfectly, were therefore neither fit for Hunters Warriors, or Counsellors, they were totally good for nothing. We are however not the less oblig’d by your kind Offer tho’ we decline accepting it; and to show our grateful Sense of it, if the Gentlemen of Virginia will send us a Dozen of their Sons, we will take great Care of their Education, instruct them in all we know, and make Men of them.
http://i.imgur.com/UdsF9WH.jpg
Friday, May 16, 2014
On 1984 and Brave New World
"What Orwell feared were those who would ban books. What Huxley feared was that there would be no reason to ban a book, for there would be no one who wanted to read one." - Neil Postman
The witch hunters are banning books; a drugged-up, hyper-entertained Idiocracy will render them unwanted.
The witch hunters are banning books; a drugged-up, hyper-entertained Idiocracy will render them unwanted.
Monday, May 12, 2014
A Nice Takedown
http://takimag.com/article/the_solipsism_of_john_edgar_wideman/print#axzz31O0o0ueE
Of course, Obama was in the same line of work as this professional whiner. It suited him.
An especially good line: "The unexamined life is, we are told, not worth living. If, like Mr. Wideman, you are one of modern liberalism’s pampered pets with a plush affirmative-action sinecure teaching a made-up pseudo-discipline so that some university can darken up its brochures to the degree required by federal regs, the over-examined life is worth a neat 200 grand a year, plus tenure."
Of course, Obama was in the same line of work as this professional whiner. It suited him.
An especially good line: "The unexamined life is, we are told, not worth living. If, like Mr. Wideman, you are one of modern liberalism’s pampered pets with a plush affirmative-action sinecure teaching a made-up pseudo-discipline so that some university can darken up its brochures to the degree required by federal regs, the over-examined life is worth a neat 200 grand a year, plus tenure."
Tuesday, May 6, 2014
On Leftist Socio-Moral Incenctives
http://www.iea.org.uk/blog/the-economics-of-political-correctness
This is rather an old notion on the Right: Leftism is driven largely by social status competition among its leaders, success being determined by achieved and sustained moral superiority. The moral nirvana toward which they strive is to out-Christian Jesus and out-communize Marx. The internal logic of Leftism drives it toward total insanity (for example, Mao's Cultural Revolution). Some Rightists have dubbed the culmination of this process the Left Singularity.
Jim has done considerable analysis of this crucial phenomenon: http://blog.jim.com/tag/left-singularity
This is rather an old notion on the Right: Leftism is driven largely by social status competition among its leaders, success being determined by achieved and sustained moral superiority. The moral nirvana toward which they strive is to out-Christian Jesus and out-communize Marx. The internal logic of Leftism drives it toward total insanity (for example, Mao's Cultural Revolution). Some Rightists have dubbed the culmination of this process the Left Singularity.
Jim has done considerable analysis of this crucial phenomenon: http://blog.jim.com/tag/left-singularity
Thursday, May 1, 2014
Surrealism
Also special: http://www.theatlantic.com/education/archive/2014/04/traditional-college-debate-white-privilege/360746/
A development like this marks a small decline in civilization itself. A running tally of such declines, which in these days come ever thicker and faster, would be instructive, I've no doubt. Those who think the utter dominance of Leftism in American discourse is a mere nuisance do not understand how culture evolves. The resentful hordes and the egalitarians, two mainly separate groups, are religious fanatics in action. Inferior people and groups are naturally resentful--what has changed is the increasing unwillingness of the naturally superior to defend their privileges--because the superior have mostly succumbed to the ideology of egalitarianism.
But, there is no equality either between individuals or between groups. Even the ancient philosophers knew that the only way to approach human equality is to level down. Considering just how far down certain groups are, that way lies civilizational collapse. Black Africa has never manifested the capacity for civilization; neither has Black America nor the Black Caribbean. Native Americans (including Mestizos) have demonstrated very little capacity for civilization. Neither race knows what achievements of civilizational consequence are. Neither race has ever produced a significant philosopher, theologian, prophet, composer, painter, architect, novelist, poet, playwright, inventor, scientist, engineer, mathematician, general, king, president, explorer. Not even one. Consider that the wheel had to be brought to them--neither of these peoples invented it themselves, no one in all the vastness of the Americas and Sub-Saharan Africa could conceive it, though Asia and Europe had had it for at least 5,000 years. Both the climate and the presence of civilization alter human evolutionary paths--and in both respects aboriginal Americans and Blacks are disadvantaged. Their lack of any meaningful achievements as peoples is unsurprising: consider how far they lag Europeans and East Asians in evolutionary adaptation to the requirements and the opportunities of civilization. I do not believe America can survive intact the psychological and ethnic shift currently underway toward Mestizos and Blacks. Technology and democracy-limiting political structures (such as we have already in abundance) might well suffice to contain effects of the ethnic decline. But, the psychological side of the game, political correctness (egalitarianism interpreted resentfully), assures ruin.
Friday, April 11, 2014
Fortune's Formula
This is an investment strategy founded upon rigorous mathematical proof. I think if you read the "statement" section, you will find the basics comprehensible.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kelly_criterion
An automatic calculator for investing on the Kelly Criterion:
http://rldinvestments.com/Kelly%20Calculator/js/Money%20Management.html
Of course, the catch is still and always maximizing one's accuracy in determining the probability of winning.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kelly_criterion
An automatic calculator for investing on the Kelly Criterion:
http://rldinvestments.com/Kelly%20Calculator/js/Money%20Management.html
Of course, the catch is still and always maximizing one's accuracy in determining the probability of winning.
Sunday, March 23, 2014
America's Great Adversary
Sometimes our most dangerous enemies are wearing our uniforms. In the case of America over the last 100 years, I would modify that to most of the time. Wilson, FDR, LBJ, Nixon, Bush II, Obama, taking them as both men and as symbols of the elites of their times, did more harm than even our most powerful international foes could manage. America has been spoiled by the absence of serious threats since 1783. Such security has been a rare privilege in national histories, perhaps shared with ancient Rome and certain periods of Chinese history--all of which examples succumbed to the same decadence we see around us, ever-increasing self-destruction and self-indulgence. The Americans, Romans and Chinese all indulged in unnecessary wars. And their elites detached themselves ever more complacently from reality, a detachment which in our case takes the form of the religion of cultural Marxism.
Basic Numbers in Education
Note that this is a remedial education post--those who understand racial IQ disparities should skip it.
http://phys.org/news/2014-03-men-high-academic-success.html
This study shows 5% of blacks/Hispanics take certificates or associates degrees within 3 years at community colleges--and 32% of whites achieve the same. The initial racial differences in academic capacity on the ACT: the test shows that 15% of blacks, 29.5% of Hispanics, and 54% of whites at community colleges are prepared for college. This is the only hard predictive data--the percentage of each race that meets ACT college readiness benchmarks. But, this disparity is exacerbated by the fact that "equally capable" students of different races have far different levels of achievement. It shows 17% of hispanics, 33% of blacks, and 59% of whites who meet ACT college readiness benchmarks (equally capable in theory) get certs/degrees within 3 years. But, the blacks/hispanics claim to be more "motivated and committed"? This might be related to the races having different definitions of "motivated and committed." There might also be some lying involved in the claims.
Another problem is that most blacks who make the college readiness cutoff barely make it, whereas most whites who make it are comfortably above the minimum. In other words, the average ACT scores of "college ready" whites and blacks are different, with the white average markedly higher. This is unavoidable due to the large racial IQ gaps. Average IQs for the major races in America are 110 for Jews, 105 for Asians, 100 for whites, 92 for Hispanics, 85 for blacks. The black-white IQ gap has been in the 13-18 point range for 100 years. That is, it is nature consequent upon evolution in different environments, which different environments produced different characteristics, including different intelligence levels. In the general population 75% of Jews, 60% of Asians and 50% of whites have 100+ IQs--but only 31% of Hispanics and 14% of blacks have 100+ IQs. Note that this statistical difference in IQs is almost exactly the same as found above in the percentage of each race that is college ready. Also, if you calculate the average IQs of whites, blacks, Hispanics who make the 100+ IQ cutoff you find that the averages are approximately 114 for whites, 109 for Hispanics, and 106 for blacks. Whatever IQ cutoff is specified (whether 90, 100, 110, etc.) this difference in averages above the cutoff persists. The college ready whites are therefore smarter on average than the college ready blacks/Hispanics, just as college ready Asians and Jews are smarter on average than college ready whites. Another way to look at this is to consider what the minimum IQ of each graduate (5% of blacks/Hispanics, 32% of whites) would be if only the smartest of each group could graduate, which would give a general idea of how much the graduation rates are based on pure intelligence and how much on other factors like effort. This is in the nature of a thought experiment, since the smartest of each race do not attend community colleges. The underlying principles of analysis are about the same though--only there would be an IQ ceiling for each race in reality. If the smartest 5% of blacks/Hispanics and the smartest 32% of whites graduated, the minimum IQs for each race would be the following: black IQ: 106, Hispanic IQ: 116, white IQ: 107. This shows that if all blacks and whites with IQs above 107 graduated, the graduation rates would be almost exactly what the study found in reality: 4% for blacks, 32% for whites. This implies roughly equal effort and equal treatment among blacks and whites, though the 32% of whites with 107+ IQs still have higher average IQs than the blacks with 107+ IQs (which means in reality slightly better effort or treatment for the blacks). Hispanics in the 107-115 IQ range are not graduating as blacks and whites in that range are. The lack of effort therefore seems to be primarily an Hispanic problem. To get black numbers up to 32% you would have to arrange for blacks with minimum IQs of 91 to graduate. Moreover if Hispanic effort levels improved to match black/white levels, their graduation rate would rise from 5% to 13%.
Because the authors are politically correct socialist cowards, none of this IQ-based analysis finds its way into the 36 page report, even though my analysis explains everything very clearly. In particular, my analysis specifies the most correctable problem: lack of effort among Hispanics. Beyond that, only much lower academic standards across the board or, in the long run, differential eugenics would have much impact. And this study does not get close to the real problem, which is the huge disparities in the number of blacks/Hispanics capable of doing high level work, people at the 135+ IQ level. About 5% of Jews, 2% of Asians, 1% of whites, 0.2% of Hispanics, and 0.01% of blacks make this cutoff. Whites outnumber Hispanics 5 to 1 and blacks 100 to 1 at this level. Virtually all of the best scientists and inventors have IQs of at least 135. Many are 145+ where the ratios are 7 to 1 and 280 to 1. Without science and invention progress stops or, as in Sub-Saharan Africa, it never starts, or, as in "Idiocracy," progress turns into regress.
http://phys.org/news/2014-03-men-high-academic-success.html
This study shows 5% of blacks/Hispanics take certificates or associates degrees within 3 years at community colleges--and 32% of whites achieve the same. The initial racial differences in academic capacity on the ACT: the test shows that 15% of blacks, 29.5% of Hispanics, and 54% of whites at community colleges are prepared for college. This is the only hard predictive data--the percentage of each race that meets ACT college readiness benchmarks. But, this disparity is exacerbated by the fact that "equally capable" students of different races have far different levels of achievement. It shows 17% of hispanics, 33% of blacks, and 59% of whites who meet ACT college readiness benchmarks (equally capable in theory) get certs/degrees within 3 years. But, the blacks/hispanics claim to be more "motivated and committed"? This might be related to the races having different definitions of "motivated and committed." There might also be some lying involved in the claims.
Another problem is that most blacks who make the college readiness cutoff barely make it, whereas most whites who make it are comfortably above the minimum. In other words, the average ACT scores of "college ready" whites and blacks are different, with the white average markedly higher. This is unavoidable due to the large racial IQ gaps. Average IQs for the major races in America are 110 for Jews, 105 for Asians, 100 for whites, 92 for Hispanics, 85 for blacks. The black-white IQ gap has been in the 13-18 point range for 100 years. That is, it is nature consequent upon evolution in different environments, which different environments produced different characteristics, including different intelligence levels. In the general population 75% of Jews, 60% of Asians and 50% of whites have 100+ IQs--but only 31% of Hispanics and 14% of blacks have 100+ IQs. Note that this statistical difference in IQs is almost exactly the same as found above in the percentage of each race that is college ready. Also, if you calculate the average IQs of whites, blacks, Hispanics who make the 100+ IQ cutoff you find that the averages are approximately 114 for whites, 109 for Hispanics, and 106 for blacks. Whatever IQ cutoff is specified (whether 90, 100, 110, etc.) this difference in averages above the cutoff persists. The college ready whites are therefore smarter on average than the college ready blacks/Hispanics, just as college ready Asians and Jews are smarter on average than college ready whites. Another way to look at this is to consider what the minimum IQ of each graduate (5% of blacks/Hispanics, 32% of whites) would be if only the smartest of each group could graduate, which would give a general idea of how much the graduation rates are based on pure intelligence and how much on other factors like effort. This is in the nature of a thought experiment, since the smartest of each race do not attend community colleges. The underlying principles of analysis are about the same though--only there would be an IQ ceiling for each race in reality. If the smartest 5% of blacks/Hispanics and the smartest 32% of whites graduated, the minimum IQs for each race would be the following: black IQ: 106, Hispanic IQ: 116, white IQ: 107. This shows that if all blacks and whites with IQs above 107 graduated, the graduation rates would be almost exactly what the study found in reality: 4% for blacks, 32% for whites. This implies roughly equal effort and equal treatment among blacks and whites, though the 32% of whites with 107+ IQs still have higher average IQs than the blacks with 107+ IQs (which means in reality slightly better effort or treatment for the blacks). Hispanics in the 107-115 IQ range are not graduating as blacks and whites in that range are. The lack of effort therefore seems to be primarily an Hispanic problem. To get black numbers up to 32% you would have to arrange for blacks with minimum IQs of 91 to graduate. Moreover if Hispanic effort levels improved to match black/white levels, their graduation rate would rise from 5% to 13%.
Because the authors are politically correct socialist cowards, none of this IQ-based analysis finds its way into the 36 page report, even though my analysis explains everything very clearly. In particular, my analysis specifies the most correctable problem: lack of effort among Hispanics. Beyond that, only much lower academic standards across the board or, in the long run, differential eugenics would have much impact. And this study does not get close to the real problem, which is the huge disparities in the number of blacks/Hispanics capable of doing high level work, people at the 135+ IQ level. About 5% of Jews, 2% of Asians, 1% of whites, 0.2% of Hispanics, and 0.01% of blacks make this cutoff. Whites outnumber Hispanics 5 to 1 and blacks 100 to 1 at this level. Virtually all of the best scientists and inventors have IQs of at least 135. Many are 145+ where the ratios are 7 to 1 and 280 to 1. Without science and invention progress stops or, as in Sub-Saharan Africa, it never starts, or, as in "Idiocracy," progress turns into regress.
Sunday, March 2, 2014
Exponentializing Orwell
https://firstlook.org/theintercept/2014/02/24/jtrig-manipulation/
Our Inner Party is rather more clever and possessed also of rather more technological options than Oceania's Inner Party was. Though not very good qua novel, Orwell's conceptual apparatus strikes me more and more as an indispensable element of political education. Of course that evil and incompetent faggot, Hoover, commenced this subterranean war against the American citizenry back in the 20s. And to this day the FBI is far better at tracking down petty domestic threats than guarding against real threats, like the espionage programs run by major powers. The Farewell Dossier, hand delivered to Reagan via a top Soviet KGB agent in 1981, demonstrated that the Soviets had such a vast and comprehensive spy program in the West--especially in America--that the technology thus acquired had kept their economy and military afloat throughout the Cold War. Of course, before the Cold War we had simply given them our technological riches. In other words, their entire economy and most of their military was founded on exogenous innovation. Outside of modest contributions to pure science and a few military advances, there was no innovation in the Soviet bloc. It was a gigantic, truculent parasite. But, the FBI had detected virtually none of this activity. Apparently catching bank robbers and destroying the John Birch Society was more important in their provincial minds. Now the Chinese are the principal threat, yet no signs of savvy FBI countermeasures appear. Though their economy is more efficiently organized than the Soviet's was, they've yet to demonstrate a capacity for innovation. They are quite good at technology theft though. The FBI's primary role is to manufacture consent domestically. I suspect the DIA/NSA/CIA/NGA/NRO/OICI/TFI/INR/etc. nexus does little more than manufacture consent abroad. The "democracy" part of our polity is strictly for purposes of public entertainment, like the circuses, indeed very like the circuses, in old Rome. Whether this odd configuration of national defense can last one wonders. Against the Soviets, some success may be claimed. But, then, their economic system was so outrageously inefficient, it made us look good in comparison. Their capacity to utilize all the tech their spies stole was badly constrained by their economic system. The Chinese have a better--probably a much better--set up. And, their demographics look much more formidable numerically, and somewhat better qualitatively. Confining American espionage to manufacturing consent at home and abroad will next be measured by its effects on the two remaining great powers. Which will suffer more damage from the firehose of egalitarian propaganda issuing from NYC, LA, and DC?
Our Inner Party is rather more clever and possessed also of rather more technological options than Oceania's Inner Party was. Though not very good qua novel, Orwell's conceptual apparatus strikes me more and more as an indispensable element of political education. Of course that evil and incompetent faggot, Hoover, commenced this subterranean war against the American citizenry back in the 20s. And to this day the FBI is far better at tracking down petty domestic threats than guarding against real threats, like the espionage programs run by major powers. The Farewell Dossier, hand delivered to Reagan via a top Soviet KGB agent in 1981, demonstrated that the Soviets had such a vast and comprehensive spy program in the West--especially in America--that the technology thus acquired had kept their economy and military afloat throughout the Cold War. Of course, before the Cold War we had simply given them our technological riches. In other words, their entire economy and most of their military was founded on exogenous innovation. Outside of modest contributions to pure science and a few military advances, there was no innovation in the Soviet bloc. It was a gigantic, truculent parasite. But, the FBI had detected virtually none of this activity. Apparently catching bank robbers and destroying the John Birch Society was more important in their provincial minds. Now the Chinese are the principal threat, yet no signs of savvy FBI countermeasures appear. Though their economy is more efficiently organized than the Soviet's was, they've yet to demonstrate a capacity for innovation. They are quite good at technology theft though. The FBI's primary role is to manufacture consent domestically. I suspect the DIA/NSA/CIA/NGA/NRO/OICI/TFI/INR/etc. nexus does little more than manufacture consent abroad. The "democracy" part of our polity is strictly for purposes of public entertainment, like the circuses, indeed very like the circuses, in old Rome. Whether this odd configuration of national defense can last one wonders. Against the Soviets, some success may be claimed. But, then, their economic system was so outrageously inefficient, it made us look good in comparison. Their capacity to utilize all the tech their spies stole was badly constrained by their economic system. The Chinese have a better--probably a much better--set up. And, their demographics look much more formidable numerically, and somewhat better qualitatively. Confining American espionage to manufacturing consent at home and abroad will next be measured by its effects on the two remaining great powers. Which will suffer more damage from the firehose of egalitarian propaganda issuing from NYC, LA, and DC?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)