Your Most Controversial Opinions

[Vlerchan]

Inspired by the raucous the veganism thread created I decided to pioneer this thread. People can list their more controversial opinions.

If mods want to integrate this post into this thread (http://www.virtualteen.org/forums/showthread.php?t=120195) I have no issue.

Ethos.
The role of a liberal constitution is not to foster freedom and equality for all. It is to allow for excellence - great minds - to mature and come to fruition. That is - the ultimate aim of liberalism is material progress.
Administration.
The Executive should be a technocratic body and not democratically elected.
Civil suits should be heard in private courts. The appellate court should be government-run.
Economics.
Free Trade.
The agriculture sector should be allowed to finally die.
The optimal taxation rate for corporations is 0 percent. For revenue-raising purposes though I can abide to 5 - 10 percent.
Income taxation should be levied on the basis of there being a broad base and with little progression. It's optimal to source from elsewhere.
Elsewhere means a tiered consumption tax and taxes on land-ownership.
The federal minimum wage should be scrapped. In the long-run their should be a shift towards combating poverty through tax credits - or:
Even better we'd consolidate all our welfare programmes into a single minimum basic income accessible to all citizens above a certain age.
Government welfare should bolster social aims through being reserved for healthy foods and rent.
Tuition Fees should not be subsidised. There should be a British-modelled system of lending. However maintenance should (probably) be subsidised.
There is a question as to whether certain courses - such as philosophy - pose certain positive externalities and should be subsidised.
Social Issues and Culture.
Foreign-aid expenditure should be channelled into providing for free healthcare in developing countries - with each increase in a developing countries real revenue being in-part used to relieve that burden on developed countries.
Drug use should be decriminalised and Drug abuse should be dealt with through the Department of Healthcare.
Individuals that leave school and are unable to attend college or find a job should be conscripted into a non-combat role in the armed-forces for 12 months.
True separation of church and state requires the state be unable to define what a religion is. This results in all particular rights being awarded to religious groups as voiding that clause.
The current prevalence of casual sex is pretty suboptimal.
Pornography viewer-ship probably does more harm than good.
I'll add more if I remember them.

[Porpoise101]

Economics.

Free Trade.
Even better we'd consolidate all our welfare programmes into a single minimum basic income accessible to all citizens above a certain age.
Government welfare should bolster social aims through being reserved for healthy foods and rent.
Tuition Fees should not be subsidised. There should be a British-modelled system of lending. However maintenance should (probably) be subsidised.

Social Issues and Culture.

Individuals that leave school and are unable to attend college or find a job should be conscripted into a non-combat role in the armed-forces for 12 months.
Pornography viewer-ship probably does more harm than good.

I'll add more if I remember them.
These I all share.

I'll add a few of mine:
Pakistan and India are one nation

Some modern art has merit

Public universities should be administered directly by the state

Immigration is good in general

We need to expedite the process for the death sentence

Abolish mandatory minimum sentences

We should stop depending so much on fossil fuels

We should set aside at least a quarter of our ocean waters as marine reserves

America should have dropped the A-bomb on the Soviet Union not Japan

[Vlerchan]

Pakistan and India are one nation
Looking for clarification here. The understanding I have is that India sees itself as a multiethnic and multinational state - i.e. it's not a nation-state like Pakistan.

Is the phrasing here supposed to implicate Pakistan as part of a singular nation of India - in which case India is mononational: a nation-state - or that Pakistan should come under the territorial bounds of the Indian state.

America should have dropped the A-bomb on the Soviet Union not Japan
Whenabouts during the course of the war?

---

People are free to question the controversial opinions I hold.

[dxcxdzv]

Looking for clarification here. The understanding I have is that India sees itself as a multiethnic and multinational state - i.e. it's not a nation-state like Pakistan.

Is the phrasing here supposed to implicate Pakistan as part of a singular nation of India - in which case India is mononational: a nation-state - or that Pakistan should come under the territorial bounds of the Indian state.

The only reason that could lead to think that Pakistan and India are one-nation was the British colonial mandate but even there the Crown tried to separate Muslims from Hindus by creating Pakistan.
They are culturally way to different now to think they could be united.

The Executive should be a technocratic body and not democratically elected.
Are you talking about all the Executive?

[everlong]

All that "Bigender" and "Agender" stuff is nonsense. You're either male or female.

[Vlerchan]

Are you talking about all the Executive?
Yes. In-line with the proposals I made in this thread (http://www.virtualteen.org/forums/showthread.php?t=2021682).

---

I also agree that Pakistan and India are different nations. It's a different question as to whether Pakistanis and Indians can exist under one multi-national state. I come down on the side of partition there too though.

[phuckphace]

well let's see...


civil liberties are privileges, not rights, and both liberties and rights are subordinate to order and security in their degree of importance.


different racial groups have inherent, immutable differences in physiology, mean intelligence and other characteristics that render an egalitarian approach to social arrangements impractical and suboptimal.


Christianity should be defended by the state for practical reasons as an enforcer of morality and ethical behavior.


globalism and internationalism have been net negatives for humanity as a whole, and a return to ethnonationalism in the West is key to reversing much of the negative effects of the former.


Israel's policies against non-Jews and "problem groups" are a good model for the West to follow when implementing ethnonationalism of its own.


capitalism is like morphine - a small amount is useful, a huge amount becomes an addiction that spirals out of control until death (collapse). therefore its use must be strictly supervised by Dr. Phuckphace M.D.


abortion should be selectively used to combat hereditary or genetic intellectual disorders (Downs, autism, Aspergers, etc.) and against certain r-selected (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R/K_selection_theory) minorities, but restricted in most cases for the dominant group.


mass-deportations are not only feasible but considerably less morally repugnant than genocide (this is apparently controversial).


South African blacks are currently suffering measurably worse conditions in the present day than they did under White-ruled Apartheid. had the West not meddled in their affairs and left it as is, a White-ruled South Africa today would lack much of the violence and unrest that South Africans now suffer under their own black leaders.


pornography should be suppressed in the same manner as narcotics, with creation of pornography made a capital offense.


space exploration is a waste of money, and the sole focus of space-related programs should be on the development of asteroid impact avoidance technologies.

[Porpoise101]

Looking for clarification here.

Whenabouts during the course of the war?
I'm saying that Pakistan and also Bangladesh should be united under one secular government. Pakistan isn't a nation state though unless you call Muslims a nation. There are a ton of different ethnic groups like Pashtuns, Baloch, Sindhis, and Punjabis. It's ridiculous that India doesn't even touch the Indus river. When I meant Indian nation though I meant Indian state.

As for nuking USSR, probably a time after when they joined against Japan. Or when Japan surrendered.

[Vlerchan]

Pakistan isn't a nation state though unless you call Muslims a nation. There are a ton of different ethnic groups like Pashtuns, Baloch, Sindhis, and Punjabis.
It's not uncommon for nationhood to be superimposed on a number of different ethnic-groups. Pakistanis consider themselves a nation given there relative cultural homogeneity and common geostrategic orientation.

---

Oh yeah: Governments should invest-in - and facilitate investment-into - space exploration and life-extension.

[Porpoise101]

Pakistanis consider themselves a nation given there relative cultural homogeneity and common geostrategic orientation.
That is a more recent phenomenon. This happened because the Pakistanis started using Urdu as a collective and young people started abandoning their native languages. But seeing as Urdu itself is a variant of Hindi with a different script and also the native cultures of Pakistan survive in India, I think this idea of a nation can be disestablished. The exception is Baloch people and Pashtuns. They are different culturally. The Baloch are Iranian and the Pashtuns are Afghans.

I would argue that Indians also see each other as a nation buddies. When an Indian meets another Indian they don't know the first question is if they are Indian, the second is where they are from in India. They don't go around saying that they are Rajasthani or whatever unless it's to other Indians.

[TrillClinton]

All drug use should be legalized and monitored and controlled by the Dept. of Health. And I'm not talking about legalizing cannabis, I mean legalize it all. Legalize amphetamines, legalize heroin, legalize LSD, legalize ketamine, etc, etc.
Prohibition makes no sense economically or logically. With a legal drug market, you are now delivering a lethal blow to the underground drug trade. Under the supervision of a federal entity, they can make sure the product is safe for human consumption, which is one of the major problems of Prohibition today. It also makes them a shit ton of money. Just look at how much money the legal cannabis states have brought in. Now watch that money increase tremendously thanks to a new legal drug market.
We as a society are never gonna stop people from using drugs, it's jsut a given. So then why don't we capitalize on this drug use and not only make $$$$$ but keep our people safe.

"But if we make drugs legal that just means everybody's gonna be high off dope Shill Clinton!!!!"
Now ask yourself this: If heroin was legal would you suddenly become a heroin user? If meth was legal would you suddenly become a tweaker? Are Colorado and Washington overrun by potheads now that cannabis is legal?

[Vlerchan]

But seeing as Urdu itself is a variant of Hindi with a different script and also the native cultures of Pakistan survive in India, I think this idea of a nation can be disestablished.
Oh sure. I think it's possible to disestablish any nation. However - obviously - some are more difficult to disestablish than others.

But the working reality is still that Pakistanis consider themselves a separate nation and the likelihood is that will remain a constant throughout whatever occurs.

[Porpoise101]

[
We as a society are never gonna stop people from using drugs, it's jsut a given. So then why don't we capitalize on this drug use and not only make $$$$$ but keep our people safe.
Lol not true man. Any addictive substance can be cured theoretically if you are able to block the dopamine receptors enough so that the user doesn't feel anything. Alcoholism is curable, I imagine that heroine addiction will be cured within the next decade. If we wait and research cures for addiction, but decriminalise non addictive drugs like hallucinogens and marijuana, then people won't use drugs that are super harmful.

[TrillClinton]

Lol not true man. Any addictive substance can be cured theoretically if you are able to block the dopamine receptors enough so that the user doesn't feel anything. Alcoholism is curable, I imagine that heroine addiction will be cured within the next decade. If we wait and research cures for addiction, but decriminalise non addictive drugs like hallucinogens and marijuana, then people won't use drugs that are super harmful.Ah yes because dysphoria, depression, menstrual disorder, Parkinsonism, symptoms similar to ADHD and narcolepsy, and Galactorrhea are all much, much, better than addiction. Btw, those are all symptoms of dopamine antagonists, which block the dopamine receptors like you say.

As a society we need to stop trying to control people's personal freedoms. If they want to do drugs then let them do drugs. Give them non-biased and scientific-based drug education. Inform them on drug interactions so we won't have as many accidental overdoses.
Legalizing drugs and adopting a policy of harm reduction are all better solutions than current prohibition.

[Ragle]

I think that we all are the dumbest animals ever who existed on this planet so far.

[TrillClinton]

I think that we all are the dumbest animals ever who existed on this planet so far.

Depends on your definition of dumb. If we were the dumbest animals on this planet we wouldn't be the dominant species we are today.
Do we make many dumb choices? Yes. But to say that we are the dumbest species to ever exist on this planet is dumb.

[Vlerchan]

As a society we need to stop trying to control people's personal freedoms. If they want to do drugs then let them do drugs.
I'm for the legalisation drugs because controlling the substances through current best-practices isn't working.

But Drug-use poses considerable externalities. Freedom! is an entirely unsatisfactory approach to something with society-wide ramifications.

[TrillClinton]

I'm for the legalisation drugs because controlling the substances through current best-practices isn't working.

But Drug-use poses considerable externalities. Freedom! is an entirely unsatisfactory approach to something with society-wide ramifications.

I'm all for legalization to combat the public health problem that drug abuse brings. Decrim only does so much to combat the problem. We can decriminalize it all we want, but it's not going to stop the dirty needles or the drugs cut with other potentially lethal substances. And that's not even considering the dangers that can come purchasing drugs either.
With legalization the government can finally step in and regulate the drug trade. That means people will finally know the exact dose they are getting, as well as knowing how pure it is. Most drugs on the market nowadays are insanely cut. You'll be lucky if you can find a substance over 50% purity.

The "freedom" approach isn't much a concern for me. Whether drugs stay legal or not, people are still gonna do them. And everyone can deny it all they want but it's a guarantee.

[Vlerchan]

We can decriminalize it all we want, but it's not going to stop the dirty needles or the drugs cut with other potentially lethal substances.
I should add that I tend towards legalisation. I listed decriminalisation in the opening-post because I consider it imprudent to shift straight from prohibition to legalisation:

The issue I see is the potentially-debilitating input of Big Pharma - Big Cocaine: Big Heroine - into the policy-making process and whether a situation where that is introduced is repairable. I'd much rather see the impact of decriminalisation inside a controllable environment and then decide whether legalisation is worthwhile.

You'll be lucky if you can find a substance over 50% purity.
I can also agree with all the issues listed.

[TrillClinton]

I'd much rather see the impact of decriminalisation inside a controllable environment and then decide whether legalisation is worthwhile.


Portugal has completely decriminalized all drugs since the early 2000's I believe, and maybe a few other countries as well I think.

[Porpoise101]

But the working reality is still that Pakistanis consider themselves a separate nation and the likelihood is that will remain a constant throughout whatever occurs.
It's irrelevant they consider themselves a nation anyways. India is an empire. Each group in India is a nation to an extent. India is just a coalition of ethnicities who have a lingua franca and a common past. They are grouped together because they need each other also. Pakistan's government is failed. To me this is a signal that they can't govern themselves effectively and need to be apart of something bigger.

Of course as long as things stay the same it will settle into place and people will become separate in time. It's why Portugal and Spain are different after all.

Edit: This thread is really hectic. It's also weird that drug use and India are more contentious than apartheid and racial superiority.

[sqishy]

Well, we haven't had a thread quite like this :P .
I'm going to put down some things for now, there may be more I remember later.

_______________

Democracy as officially talked about, is almost universally not being practiced. It is a large-scale illusion.

At least some terrorism events are not done by who is officially blamed; some events have probably been done by the govts closest to you, not far away in the Middle East or whatever.

Money's use has gone too far, and is so much in the realm of capitalism and industrialism now, that most of your life is attempted at being controlled by companies, banks and so on.

You are mostly trapped if you are thinking of dropping off the grid, so to speak. Surveillance permeates a lot of our world, and I'm skeptical that the anti-surveillance laws brought in since Snowden are actually more than a showpiece.

A big and bloody war could happen at any time - don't think that because it's been relatively a while since the global wars and first cold war, that you're safe.

I said first cold war before, because I think we are in a second one now.

If we don't make serious moves to reverse current pollution and the effects of pollution in the past, don't be surprised when your backyard goes up in wildfire by the end of the century. Human-based climate change for our world is parallel to the White Walkers in Game of Thrones for the realm of men, however benign it seems now.

The USA is one of the worst countries in the world politically, at the least.

Israel is not far behind.
_______________


This thread is really hectic.

We should have more quickfire-style ROTW threads like this. :D

_______________


abortion should be selectively used to combat hereditary or genetic intellectual disorders (Downs, autism, Aspergers, etc.) and against certain r-selected (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R/K_selection_theory) minorities, but restricted in most cases for the dominant group.


Despite my diagnosis of Aspergers (plot twist maybe), I'm arguing that it is an outlying phenomenon which certainly has its drawbacks, but has some unexpected upshots regarding certain intellectual abilities and/or specific tasks being done.

In other words, I'm not seeing much benefit in truncating off the edges of the bell curve here.

As a side note, autistic traits are also seen as everyone existing on a spectrum of how many of these traits they have, and what intensity they 'are at' (similar to neuroticism and psychopathic tendencies), so you've got some truncating to do if you want to remove it, and also where to draw the line.

[Porpoise101]

Portugal has completely decriminalized all drugs since the early 2000's I believe, and maybe a few other countries as well I think.
It's probably better to try it within a US state because Europe is different.

[TrillClinton]

It's probably better to try it within a US state because Europe is different.

Then you're in luck, since Hawaii may decriminalize all drugs in 2017 (http://theantimedia.org/hawaii-may-become-first-state-in-us-to-decriminalize-all-drugs/)

[Vlerchan]

different racial groups have inherent, immutable differences in physiology, mean intelligence and other characteristics that render an egalitarian approach to social arrangements impractical and suboptimal.
How would you feel about introducing IQ testing for incoming immigrants? Part of the reason that Neoreaction ideologues also favour capitalism is there belief that low-IQ groups will slip to the bottom and over time be erased.

I also remain sceptical that differences in IQ can be explained with respect to Race.

It's irrelevant they consider themselves a nation anyways. India is an empire. Each group in India is a nation to an extent.
It's actually the most important point of the conversation. The core of their identity is opposition towards India for being multinational and their presumption that Muslim identities can't be integrated into that. Kashmir is a sticking point because if Pakistan cede it to India then it undermines the entire ideological basis of that identity.

It's also weird that drug use and India are more contentious than apartheid and racial superiority.
I've spent so long on the internet that positions like that are starting to lose that controversy.

It's sort of disturbing when you think about it really.

[...] that most of your life is attempted at being controlled by companies, banks and so on.
For most of the existence the life of the common man has been determined by forces outside his control.

You're just referring to different faces behind this control - and probably more benevolent ones.

[B]ut has come unexpected upshots regarding certain intellectual abilities and/or specific tasks being done.
This is worth emphasising. People with aspergers make up a significantly disproportionate amount of economics PhDs. I wouldn't be surprised if that was common across mathematical-orientated disciplines.

---

We should have more quickfire-style ROTW threads like this.
I agree.

---

Edit:

Then you're in luck, since Hawaii may decriminalize all drugs in 2017
Hawaii has widely different demographics to the rest of the U.S. - is my understanding. I'm not sure that's too good either.

The issue I was going to raise with Portugal is that it has a pretty homogeneous population.

[sqishy]

For most of the existence the life of the common man has been determined by forces outside his control.

You're just referring to different faces behind this control - and probably more benevolent ones.

I am aware, yes. Perhaps a pessimistic aspect of myself came in to generalise that to just economics. I rephrase that companies, for example, do have a benevolent appearance, if not benevolent actions. However, some carry the skill of changing what you want in alignment with their product or service. Overall they seem nice all the way, but you have been changed by the end of it, without you consciously being aware of it.



This is worth emphasising. People with aspergers make up a significantly disproportionate amount of economics PhDs. I wouldn't be surprised if that was common across mathematical-orientated disciplines.

Well, I'm certainly not going to be involved in economics, but I do like my numbers (and other things too, of course!).

[Porpoise101]

presumption that Muslim identities can't be integrated into that

Hawaii has widely different demographics to the rest of the U.S. - is my understanding. I'm not sure that's too good either.
The idea that Muslims can't integrate into Indian societies is ridiculous though. Muslims have long served important roles as rulers, philosophers, artists, and traders. Sure some dogmatic Hindus make them feel unwelcome and incite violence, but I think all religions are welcome in India. That is one of the greatest things about it. India has Hindus, Sikhs, Jains, Buddhists, atheists, animists, Christians, Jews, Zoroastrians, so the idea that Indians can't tolerate Muslims is dumb. I think they forget that Hindu nationalism (which is horrible and causes some alienation) is a reaction to Pakistan also. And it's not like Pakistan can handle multi ethnic situations well. Look at Balochistan insurgents or the Taliban.

As for the drug thing I think it's best to do it in a big state like Texas or California. That way you get a taste for how diverse, urban areas are affected and how rural, whiter areas get affected.

[Vlerchan]

The idea that Muslims can't integrate into Indian societies is ridiculous though.
I'm not arguing for or against a Pakistania national identity. The point I'm making is that's as it is and outside some exogenous shock to the process odds are that's how it'll remain.

I'm sure - like all concepts of nationhood - the Pakistani view is built on falsehoods and exaggerations.

Balochistan insurgents[.]
I presume though that tensions were inherent being as the Baloch were in-part a conquered nation and thus - at least part - never agreed to become a part of the nation of Pakistan.

That's pretty much the depth of my understanding here.

the Taliban[.]
Can that truly be considered an ethnic conflict?

As for the drug thing I think it's best to do it in a big state like Texas or California. That way you get a taste for how diverse, urban areas are affected and how rural, whiter areas get affected.
Basically this.

[Porpoise101]

I presume though that tensions were inherent being as the Baloch were in-part a conquered nation and thus - at least part - never agreed to become a part of the nation of Pakistan.

Can that truly be considered an ethnic conflict?
The Baloch people were pretty much passed around by a bunch of powers and have been consistently screwed over. By the Iranians, Arabs, Afghans, British, even Oman took from them. But each time they go back and try to revert back to their tribal ways. They are a conquered and repressed people and they only got put into Pakistan because they are almost completely Muslim. But since they are South Asians who are Muslim, the Pakistani identity was supposed to satiate them. Evidently it didn't (nor did it keep the Bangladeshis in line).

I also believe the Taliban insurgency is an ethno religious conflict. Mostly it is an uprising driven by middle class disenfranchised Pashtuns who can't change their broken state since it's so corrupt. They turn to the Taliban because they think fundamentalist religion will clean out the government. It's not a movement popular in the more normal regions of Sindh and Punjab.

[phuckphace]

How would you feel about introducing IQ testing for incoming immigrants? Part of the reason that Neoreaction ideologues also favour capitalism is there belief that low-IQ groups will slip to the bottom and over time be erased.

it isn't just a problem of low-IQ groups. there's also the phenomenon of high-IQ groups that tend to form middleman minorities that capture a significant portion of the nation's wealth (paging TonyMontana - the "Jewish conspiracy" explained!)

I find obsessing over exact IQ scores like neoreaction does to be a waste of time, though. I'd rather just restrict immigration to "White Europeans" with vetted backgrounds, and deport everyone else back to where they came from.

This is worth emphasising. People with aspergers make up a significantly disproportionate amount of economics PhDs.

*evil laugh* I know.

we'd be significantly better off if those afflicted with an unnatural lack of empathy for their countrymen weren't in positions of influence over our future.

[Porpoise101]

high-IQ groups that tend to form middleman minorities that capture a significant portion of the nation's wealth (paging TonyMontana - the "Jewish conspiracy" explained!)
Lol this sounds like something that came from Stormfront. The tonymontana reference was a nice touch though. First, why do you think they capture the wealth and not pass it up? The 1% is white dominated. Second, what are your racial groups?

[phuckphace]

Lol this sounds like something that came from Stormfront.

no, it really doesn't. SF will tell you that these "conspiracies" are conscious - that is, that there's supposedly a secret Jew summit where they get together behind closed doors, rub their hands together and cackle while plotting a world takeover. it's actually just a phenomenon of groups acting in their own collective self-interest - which why I put "conspiracy" in sneer quotes - and it's not limited to Jews either. Asians, Indians, and yes, whites, also comprise middleman minority groups in various places where their average intelligence is higher than the native mean.

the problem here thus isn't the existence of the groups themselves, it's only an issue that naturally arises in multicultural/multiethnic societies. it's also a fact that globalism has made these "winner take all" outcomes much easier to come by. a problem easily solved by reverting back to a monoethnic arrangement in each country.

The tonymontana reference was a nice touch though. First, why do you think they capture the wealth and not pass it up?

collective self-interest. everybody does it, thus it's best that everybody keeps to their own Lebensraum to maximize the benefits without stepping on everyone else's toes in the process.

[Porpoise101]

no, it really doesn't. SF will tell you that these "conspiracies" are conscious - that is, that there's supposedly a secret Jew summit where they get together behind closed doors, rub their hands together and cackle while plotting a world takeover. it's actually just a phenomenon of groups acting in their own collective self-interest - which why I put "conspiracy" in sneer quotes - and it's not limited to Jews either. Asians, Indians, and yes, whites, also comprise middleman minority groups in various places where their average intelligence is higher than the native mean.

the problem here thus isn't the existence of the groups themselves, it's only an issue that naturally arises in multicultural/multiethnic societies. it's also a fact that globalism has made these "winner take all" outcomes much easier to come by. a problem easily solved by reverting back to a monoethnic arrangement in each country.
Sorry for fitting you in with those nuts. I figured you were talking about Asians though since once I read this white supremacist article basically saying "the yellow man is the Great Evil" because they supposedly were super intelligent God-men. But how could a white person be a middleman minority while also being the majority?

Also, how would you even revert a nation like the US to a monoethnic system? Multiculturalism is in the fabric of the country from the importation of white servants, to importation of slaves, to importation of temp workers. How can you undo 200+ years feasibly without massive bloodshed or a civil war?

[TheFlyer]

Canada and the United States are not democracies. They are republics, or with Canada, it is technically constitutional monarchy under Queen Elizabeth.

Abortion and euthanasia should be illegal.

You are born with a dick, or not. You don't get to change it later.

The United Nations is the worst non terrorist organization. They put their soldiers through hell. Troops for the U.N have to basically have a soldier shot before they can do anything. That means they have to watch atrocities happen to other people.

Gay people should not marry. This is coming from a bisexual man. It is not right. If you want to put it down on paper for tax reason, go crazy. Don't ruin what marriage means,

Those are my very far right views. Conservative for life.

[Porpoise101]

Abortion and euthanasia should be illegal.
Hey I'm just wondering why euthanasia should be illegal. At least for abortion you could say that you are killing a baby, but euthanasia is just your personal self when you are too sick to do anything.

[phuckphace]

Sorry for fitting you in with those nuts.

heh, no worries, it happens all the time. you know I once considered joining SF for the fun of it but after skimming a few threads and posts I just couldn't do it - that place is unbelievably boring and humorless. maybe the Jews stole their funny bones or something.

I figured you were talking about Asians though since once I read this white supremacist article basically saying "the yellow man is the Great Evil" because they supposedly were super intelligent God-men.

ironically enough, most "white supremacists" I've encountered actually make an exception for Asians because of their IQs (lmao) and some will even go so far as to claim that Asian women are superior to white women (they're sluts, ugh!)

But how could a white person be a middleman minority while also being the majority?

I meant as in outside of the West.

Also, how would you even revert a nation like the US to a monoethnic system?

mass deportation in stages. I'm not talking about the "one-drop-rule" where someone with even a tiny degree of mixing is kicked out. I'm thinking first and second generation immigrants.

maybe "monoethnic" is the wrong term. my goal is 90% white - we did pretty okay with that figure.

Multiculturalism is in the fabric of the country from the importation of white servants, to importation of slaves, to importation of temp workers. How can you undo 200+ years feasibly without massive bloodshed or a civil war?

nobody needs servants, and I guess Microsoft will have to make do with hiring natives, as they managed just fine throughout their formative years. the fact that worker exploitation in the name of profits is part of the fabric of the country is the exact reason it needs to be reversed - the modern temp worker is the 21st century version of African slavery and I still don't think "muh GDP" is a good enough reason to continue.

I think you have a bright future in India, bro, you seem pretty concerned about its politics. maybe I'll hire you as a diplomat :D

[yeehaw]

Euthanasia should be legalized.

Every country should have a national health service.

Cosmetic surgery should be illegal unless you have a medical problem.

Abortion should be legalized everywhere.

Countries should have 2 or 3 child policy.

Immigrants and drug addicts shouldn't be able to reap off of the UK's benefits system.

Dog fighting / dog racing shouldn't be condoned.

People in poverty should not be having sex / giving birth. They pass on diseases to their children, and they are unable to feed themselves, so why should they pass the burden of starvation onto the children? If they are using prostitution for money, they should be given contraceptives through charities instead of being given money to look after the child that they probably didn't want in the first place.

EDIT: I also forgot to add... LGBTQ people are seen as heroes when they are just normal people and they should be treated as such, not like the second coming of Christ or whatever.

[Ragle]

to say that we are the dumbest species to ever exist on this planet is dumb.


Thanks for confirming my theory.

[HououinKiyoma]

I would argue that Indians also see each other as a nation buddies. When an Indian meets another Indian they don't know the first question is if they are Indian, the second is where they are from in India. They don't go around saying that they are Rajasthani or whatever unless it's to other Indians.

Good point! Unless you directly ask someone which country they belong to, I don't think you could differentiate between an Indian, Pakistani and a Bangladeshi. It's only the politicians who make us believe that we hate each other.

[Vlerchan]

Mostly it is an uprising driven by middle class disenfranchised Pashtuns who can't change their broken state since it's so corrupt. They turn to the Taliban because they think fundamentalist religion will clean out the government. It's not a movement popular in the more normal regions of Sindh and Punjab.
Has it's primary expression as a movement not been in Southern Afghanistan and it's primary victims other Pushtans. That - and it has made significant inroads amongst those in Northern Afghanistan the last number of years - has me considering the expression nowhere near ethnicised enough to consider labelling it a belligerent in a broader ethno-conflict.

Though I might be shifting the goal-posts with a concentration on the Afghanistans here.

*evil laugh* I know.
The truth is different. Carlyle called 'economics the dismal science' not because of its pessimism but because he objected to its humanitarian optimism Carlyle did not in fact direct his remarks at Ricardo or Malthus, or even at Adam Smith. He was writing a rebuttal of ideas expressed by John Stewart Mill, whose Principles of Political Economy was published in 1848. Mill had advanced the notion that all peoples on Earth, from all races and colours, were basically the same. Blackmen and women were not born to slavery; they were forced into it. Carlyle absolutely disagreed with Mill's humanistic notion. He expresses in his pamphlet the most offensive justification of slavery, denied explicitly that Africans were of the same species at Europeans (the very idea incensed Carlyle — as it did his friends and colleagues, among whom we find John Ruskin and Charles Dickens), and he lambasted J. S. Mill, an economist and former close friend for claiming the contrary view.

http://www.victorianweb.org/authors/carlyle/kennedy1.html

Wouldn't be the first time.

The 1% is white dominated.
Jews are considered white within this statistic far as I'm aware.

we'd be significantly better off if those afflicted with an unnatural lack of empathy for their countrymen weren't in positions of influence over our future.
That some economists have aspergers shouldn't affect their researching and reporting of events. You can claim this with regards to normative reporting but it sure doesn't hold in a situation where the aim is to detach emotion from observation.

ironically enough, most "white supremacists" I've encountered actually make an exception for Asians because of their IQs (lmao) and some will even go so far as to claim that Asian women are superior to white women (they're sluts, ugh!)
I can confirm this.

However if I was a white nationalist and drew from the same sources I would probably support this view.

maybe "monoethnic" is the wrong term. my goal is 90% white - we did pretty okay with that figure.
The race riots were actually pretty nasty.

---

Those are my very far right views.
I guessed Canadian before reading the location descriptor.

[Porpoise101]

Has it's primary expression as a movement not been in Southern Afghanistan and it's primary victims other Pushtans.

I guessed Canadian before reading the location descriptor.
Well Pashtunistan is Southern Afghanistan plus the tribal areas in northern Pakistan. The Taliban is a movement calling for a revival of Pashtun law and freedom from Western imperialism. Obviously many of their own don't like it, so they are suppressed. They are their own greatest victim since the movement is most popular amongst themselves. It's not purely ethnic, but it calls for a way of life that only Pashtuns and similar peoples have followed. The fact that only Afghan peoples like Pashtuns identify more with the Taliban also shows that they think themselves less Paki but more Afghan.

Also in introductions he said he likes politics and I told him to check this out.

[Vlerchan]

he Taliban is a movement calling for a revival of Pashtun law and freedom from Western imperialism.
Is this explicit in the rhetoric. That is - are the Taliban explicit in their calls for Pashtun law or is that being inferred from their speeches.

The fact that only Afghan peoples like Pashtuns identify more with the Taliban also shows that they think themselves less Paki but more Afghan.
Might the greater likelihood not be that Pakistani-Pashtuns have more exposure to the Taliban through networks formed with Afghan-Pashtun?

I don't see a necessary reason that the claim made here should be taken for granted.

Also in introductions he said he likes politics and I told him to check this out.
For clarity I was just commenting that his views wouldn't be considered too far-right in a state with an actual far-right. Though nothing serious was meant by it:

I'm always glad to have more posters here. Especially as the tables seemed to have turned in favour of liberals again.

[Ragle]

It's only the politicians who make us believe that we hate each other.


Do Indians still believe what politicians say?

In Europe, no one cares anymore what they say. But Politicians just benefit from the lethargy of European citizens. Anyway, if we wake up one day, then certainly every day one politicians will be burn at stake in public.


http://y85.imgup.net/burned-at-70f2.jpg

[Porpoise101]

Is this explicit in the rhetoric. That is - are the Taliban explicit in their calls for Pashtun law or is that being inferred from their speeches.

For clarity I was just commenting that his views wouldn't be considered too far-right in a state with an actual far-right. Though nothing serious was meant by it:

I'm always glad to have more posters here. Especially as the tables seemed to have turned in favour of liberals again.
Here is an early speech. It calls for the protection of "our people" and stresses they are non interventionist nor pan Islamic. They are only interested in freeing the Pashtun world.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/1341010/Taliban-speech-in-full.html

Here is another one, written as a response to Malala. It is written by a member of the Taliban in Pakistan. The speech calls for the implementation of an Islamic system, denouncement of "die Juden!!!!", denouncement of the British, and finally he appeals to the Pashtun culture and way of life.
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2013/07/17/the-taliban-s-letter-to-malalayousafzai.html

As an add on, the denouncements of British education and colonialism sound much like the Hindu nationalists who try to say the Vedic people invented flight and other crazy things. A common theme between two is the idea that ancient or pre colonial India was perfect.

Also, I understand the joke. I figured he was rightist so I am interested to hear what he has to say. As for the dominance of the left here, it's been mostly because esteemed conservatives have been taking a break/leaving.

[Stronk Serb]

Democracy and inalienable rights are two largest piles of crap ever.
The culture of victimhood which the western society is showing is a large sign of weakness.
Multiculturalism, or at least what some people claim is multiculturalism equates to ethbic and cultural suicide.
Free market caused more bad than good.
Massive scale immigration does more bad than good.
Students used to have balls.
https://scontent.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/fr/cp0/e15/q65/12993456_1708561142694157_421113160803920997_n.jpg?efg=eyJpIjoidCJ9&oh=881ad2d0f1c06246b74d0a9d0d184f8f&oe=57BB867B
Kosovo de jure belongs to Serbia, so it should de facto.
The Serbian people in Vukovar should be allowed to have signs written in their own language.
For Serbia, the EU's more trouble than it's worth.
Greater Albania is the only idea of a greater nation that can succeed thanks to them breeding like rabbits in FYR of Macedonia, Kosovo and Montenegro.

[Vlerchan]

Here is an early speech. It calls for the protection of "our people" and stresses they are non interventionist nor pan Islamic.
The 'our innocent people' (my emphasis) is interesting. In the context thought it's possible to attribute it to a government referring to it's subjects. It's reference in both the opening and closing to Islamic law - which is transnational if my understanding of Islamic jurisprudence is correct - hints at acceptance of a higher idea than Pashtun nationhood.

It would seem that the Taliban at the least non-supportive of a global caliph at that time - non-interventionist might be a stretch.

Would you mind quoting the supposed rejection of pan-Islamism in that text?

The speech calls for the implementation of an Islamic system, denouncement of "die Juden!!!!", denouncement of the British, and finally he appeals to the Pashtun culture and way of life.
His continues appeals to all Muslims indicates some incarnation of pan-Islamism is present in his ideological thinking.

His reference to reintegrating into 'Islamic and Pushtoon [sic]' (my emphasis) culture is interesting because it can be taken as to mean equivalence, dual-requirement, or accepting both as individual endowments. I'm leaning towards the last interpretation because Malala is Pashtun. That there is emphasis on the Pashtun culture at all is interesting nonetheless.

---

Those sources are encouraging but I don't find them convincing. Odds are that the Taliban's ideological leanings hold some indebtedness to Pashtun nationalism but it would seem that this persists beneath significant subordination to pan-Islamism.

As for the dominance of the left here, it's been mostly because esteemed conservatives have been taking a break/leaving.
True. Though I'd rather this place didn't go back to being dominated by the hard left again.

[sqishy]

we'd be significantly better off if those afflicted with an unnatural lack of empathy for their countrymen weren't in positions of influence over our future.

I'm not sure if you mean that such people have a lack of patriotism or national spirit, or just a lack of empathy in general. I'm taking you mean the former.

[Porpoise101]

Would you mind quoting the supposed rejection of pan-Islamism in that text?

His reference to reintegrating into 'Islamic and Pushtoon [sic]' (my emphasis) culture is interesting because it can be taken as to mean equivalence, dual-requirement, or accepting both as individual endowments. I'm leaning towards the last interpretation because Malala is Pashtun. That there is emphasis on the Pashtun culture at all is interesting nonetheless.
Well I interpreted this as a rejection of the greater Islamic community to appeal to nationalist pride: "Our system is the true example of an Islamic system. For the enemies of religion and our country, this system is like a thorn in their eyes"
It's important to note that this was published to Pashtuns in Pakistan even though the message came from Afghanistan. I also admit that the Taliban here does look at the Islamic community (the Ummah) as something greater. But they think that community has degenerated and is no longer guided correctly.

As for the speech to Malala, of course he submits himself to the greater Islamic ideal of a united community. He submits to Islam because by now, that is part of the Pashtun identity. Pashtun tribal law and their previous beliefs have kind of mixed with Islam to make Pashtunwali. Here is a little primer: http://uwf.edu/atcdev/afghanistan/people/Lesson6Pastunwali.html

Edit: I also thought that since this speech was written for an international Muslim audience, he would try to appeal to them, especially Arabs. That is why he mentioned Israel and America as imperialists. He then jumped over to India and casted the British as invaders similar to the Israelis. Instead of saying that the two communities aught to be united politically, he said they should be united in their struggle since their problems (Israel for Arabs, USA+puppets for Pashtuns) are really the same.

I can't think of a great analogue to Western culture, but pretty much they believe in nation, then religion even though they say they prioritize Islam. That's one reason why many normal Muslims denounce the Taliban because it seems perverted and un Islamic.

[phuckphace]

That some economists have aspergers shouldn't affect their researching and reporting of events. You can claim this with regards to normative reporting but it sure doesn't hold in a situation where the aim is to detach emotion from observation.

while I accept Econ 101 as empirically sound (believe it or not) the 170 IQ Krew likes to draw excessively rigid and mechanistic prescriptions from it. there absolutely must be a empathetic balance to the bleep-blooping if we're not to end up as ultra-serfs slaving away for 0.00000001 BTC a week. cue Bryan Caplan: "bleep bloop calculations indicate optimal efficiency" (the fact that this guy is anywhere but facedown in a ditch is proof that we've got a lot of fixing to do).

I can confirm this.

However if I was a white nationalist and drew from the same sources I would probably support this view.

personally I find it bizarre. Asians as a minority group, despite their apparent intelligence, always form an ethnic bloc that votes along with the other groups against the interests of the majority, and when they gain enough of a foothold in the host nation's politics, it's more of the usual grievance-peddling and immigration shilling, demanding we let in the entire clan from Bumfuck China. their higher average intelligence also puts them in direct competition with whites for STEM jobs. all that would seem to be strikes against them from a nationalist's perspective, but unfortunately the alt-right is infested with waifu hunters (cough tonymontana cough).

The race riots were actually pretty nasty.


not as nasty as the gorillion intraracial murders we've had in the last few decades.

[Porpoise101]

always form an ethnic bloc that votes along with the other groups against the interests of the majority, and when they gain enough of a foothold in the host nation's politics, it's more of the usual grievance-peddling and immigration shilling, demanding we let in the entire clan from Bumfuck China.
Half true. They tend to be pro immigration, but the poorer Asians are divided in interest from the wealthier ones.

[StoppingTom]

All aboard the Hot Take Train™, because this one is gonna sear your eyebrows off:

...

People should treat other people LIKE people, regardless of race, orientation, whatever, and be accepting of others as long as whatever they're doing doesn't hurt or affect the wellbeing of other people.

[Porpoise101]

All aboard the Hot Take Train™, because this one is gonna sear your eyebrows off:

...

People should treat other people LIKE people, regardless of race, orientation, whatever, and be accepting of others as long as whatever they're doing doesn't hurt or affect the wellbeing of other people.
Then how should people be treated? Should they be treated equally good or equally bad?

[StoppingTom]

Then how should people be treated? Should they be treated equally good or equally bad?

I believe all people are inherently good unless some outside force changes them (sorry Legalism!) ((Not looking to make this about the nature of man)) so I think all people should be treated equally good until they are responsible for an act that harms another person/group of people.

[Vlerchan]

while I accept Econ 101 as empirically sound (believe it or not) the 170 IQ Krew likes to draw excessively rigid and mechanistic prescriptions from it.
I would need to see examples here.

Caplan isn't a good one because he's an austrian with no substantial research agenda to speak of. The work of economists tends to - in general - deviate a considerable amount from the prescriptions of Econ101 and be considerably more nuanced than the soundbites that crop-up in the media.

(the fact that this guy is anywhere but facedown in a ditch is proof that we've got a lot of fixing to do).
Being quite honest he'd probably have more policy-influence there.

... always form an ethnic bloc that votes along with the other groups against the interests of the majority, and when they gain enough of a foothold in the host nation's politics ...
I would presume - in your opinion - that the entire nation (more-or-less) votes against it's interests. Nonetheless - as a race that conquered most of the world at one state or another: faulting the asians for interfering in a host-nations politics doesn't seem a fair reflection.

it's more of the usual grievance-peddling and immigration shilling, demanding we let in the entire clan from Bumfuck China.
From an outsiders perspective this doesn't seem to prominent at all.

their higher average intelligence also puts them in direct competition with whites for STEM jobs.
For reference - the original claim I made was that given the evidence I have seen white nationalists flog around: asians are superior.

not as nasty as the gorillion intraracial murders we've had in the last few decades.
Highly sceptical this is a product of minorities expanding as a proportion of the population.

[phuckphace]

Being quite honest he'd probably have more policy-influence there.

given that he's a professor at George Mason U (ironically, public) I'd say his influence while indirect is certainly non-zero. I have to wonder, how many minds has he filled with his Austrian horseshit? the social ramifications of listening to people like Caplan must be pretty dire in the long run.

Nonetheless - as a race that conquered most of the world at one state or another: faulting the asians for interfering in a host-nations politics doesn't seem a fair reflection.

white guilt redux?

I view history as being "what it is" - actions of previous generations shouldn't be relevant insofar as policy formation in the present. that my ancestors rained on somebody's parade in the distant past isn't a good enough reason to throw out policy that benefits the current generations.

also, I'd just like to point out that I'm only referring to American whites in this context - I don't view all whites (or any race for that matter) as being some continuous homogeneity that transcends borders. my primary concern is for my own ethno-nationality (white Americans) first.

From an outsiders perspective this doesn't seem to prominent at all.

I believe they voted as a majority for Obama along with all other minorities.

For reference - the original claim I made was that given the evidence I have seen white nationalists flog around: asians are superior.

I don't think any of their evidence is very compelling.

Highly sceptical this is a product of minorities expanding as a proportion of the population.

that wasn't my claim, I just felt like pointing out that a few race riots here and there were nothing compared to the violence and unrest of today, which is only barely contained by handouts and entertainment media consumption.

before it's mentioned - while I'm aware that apparent rates of violent crime have been dropping for several decades, this isn't a sign of any social improvement. it's owed to increasing rates of mass-incarceration, which is hardly an ideal.

[Vlerchan]

given that he's a professor at George Mason U (ironically, public) I'd say his influence while indirect is certainly non-zero.
I'm sure he might have produced some austrian students but none of these are close to the ear of political authorities.

Libertarians themselves make up a negligible portion of the electorate - the ones with priors as strong as Caplans are more negligible.

white guilt redux?
Nah. I'm rather pointing out that berating Easterners for holding traits that Westerners hold is bizarre.

I feel I should emphasise here that this doesn't mean that white-nationalist Vlerchan feels it's a good idea to invite Easterners into our state en-masse. He's an ethnonationalist: not an ethnopluralist.

The argument being put forward is that Easterners are superior. But that doesn't entail adopting them.

I believe they voted as a majority for Obama along with all other minorities.
This is in-large because Asian-Americans find it difficult to relate to Republican candidates - the nativists sentiment dominant amongst them ensures Asian-American participation is limited.

Otherwise there priorities are aligned better than with Whites.

I don't think any of their evidence is very compelling.
The same literature documenting IQ differences indicates higher levels amongst Asians.

Their woman are less promiscuous and more orientated towards their traditional support-role. Their culture is more authoritarian and less hedonistic. Their values are non-universalist.

I just felt like pointing out that a few race riots here and there were nothing compared to the violence and unrest of today, which is only barely contained by handouts and entertainment media consumption.
The race riots undermined local infrastructure and promoted white flight - the flight of human capital. There's little debate that the conditions of Blacks in the U.S. would be far superior had those not occured.

I also imagine socioeconomic advancement would have hampered the development of the current criminal trends that are being highlighted.

it's owed to increasing rates of mass-incarceration, which is hardly an ideal
similar pattern emerges for men, who compose a much larger share of the prison population. The rate of imprisonment among African-American men remains very high, but nonetheless it has tumbled 22 percent since 2000. The rate for white men in contrast is 4 percent higher than it was in 2000. As a result, the racial disparity has shrunk by nearly one quarter.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2016/02/10/almost-nobody-is-paying-attention-to-this-massive-change-in-criminal-justice/?postshare=9901460949794178&tid=ss_tw

It has also decreased 47% for Black woman and increased 56% for White woman.

[Porpoise101]

Their woman are less promiscuous and more orientated towards their traditional support-role. Their culture is more authoritarian and less hedonistic. Their values are non-universalist.

The race riots undermined local infrastructure and promoted white flight - the flight of human capital. There's little debate that the conditions of Blacks in the U.S. would be far superior had those not occured.
"Easterners"
We are so different from each other that a term like that is almost insulting. The only commonality between Asians is that they are often foreign. These values seem to be held by most immigrant families though. All of the Albanian families I know are very conservative and success-minded. Some people call them wannabe Asians. They focus on success and survival, not pleasure. But if you look at Asian communities who have fully adopted the poor, black and Hispanic cultures, you see a similar fate to their hosts. These Asians are poor and are treated badly by everyone. That's why Hmong people are the poorest ethnic group in the country.

As for white flight, it's bad. I live near Detroit so I can tell you that it destroyed the city. Population loss has destroyed countries though, so I'm thankful that the whites didn't lemming themselves into the Pacific.

[Vlerchan]

"Easterners"
We are so different from each other that a term like that is almost insulting. The only commonality between Asians is that they are often foreign.
It probably should be insulting. It seemed to be used to emphasise otherness.

I'm using it because I find it not uncommon amongst racialists to refer to the races in asia as some big homogenous blob. If you actually find it offensive though I can switch to a more neutral 'Asians' though there's such immense differences separating some of those that it's as useless a descriptor with regards to the topic of the discussion.

[Judean Zealot]

1) Suffrage in a well regulated Republic ought to be limited to the most intellectually advanced and virtuous citizens.

2) Politicians who are convicted of breaching the public trust should be executed.

2) I support the institution of a Rousseau based civic religion, which attaches public service and patriotism to a broadly Deist/Philosophical Theist belief structure, as a necessary condition for holding public office.

4) Unenlightened religion is a worse blasphemy than atheism.

5) Cheating on taxes is worse than mugging an old lady.

6) Nothing bad can possibly occur to the virtuous man.

7) I do not deny the existence of certain genetic racial traits. However, the existence thereof in no way lessens the inherent human dignity of said race.

[Porpoise101]

7) I do not deny the existence of certain genetic racial traits. However, the existence thereof in no way lessens the inherent human dignity of said race.
What are all of these racial traits that people keep talking about? Not to pick on you, but why do people think they exist? Genetic traits are extremely diverse across each so called race. So to say that each race has different traits/capabilities seems ridiculous considering that the traits are evenly spread out.

Otherwise you get a thumbs up!😀
================
Ironically, the race that often gets simplified the most (black) is the most genetically diverse. Africa is also one of the most culturally diverse areas in the world, yet it gets simplified into Arab-Berbers in the North and shirtless Shaka Zulu savages everywhere else. And the savages are governed by the "third world dictator", a despot who has lots of medals and got power through a coup. As annoying as it is to me that Americans are ignorant about Asia, it must be worse for African-Americans. (By African Americans I mean the Africans who live in America who have retained their culture)

[Judean Zealot]

What are all of these racial traits that people keep talking about? Not to pick on you, but why do people think they exist? Genetic traits are extremely diverse across each so called race. So to say that each race has different traits/capabilities seems ridiculous considering that the traits are evenly spread out.


I obviously don't mean race in the sense that identity politicians do. Not all black or brown or yellow people are of the same gene pool. However, if we approach a subset, say Ashkenazi Jews, we do find prevalent genetic traits.

[Vlerchan]

Genetic traits are extremely diverse across each so called race.
There's measurable genetic distance between different ethnic groups (classified as Haleogroups): this is because bounded mobility and language barriers caused genetic clusters. You're correct though that there's much more intragroup difference than intergroup difference - and overall variation is at about 0.1% regardless.

I feel it's a different question as to whether these genetic differences prompt calculable and meaningful differences in the endowment in traits. It's clear with regards to some traits - eg: Lactose intolerance - though this is something that needs to be approached on a case-by-case basis. I'm of the opinion that the pronouncements of the alt-right are gross exaggerations.

---

I also agree on blacks. There's more genetic difference between some black-skinned groups than there is between the same black-skinned groups and whites.

...say Ashkenazi Jews...
Question:

Was there social barriers to entrance to Jewishness. Like in order to enter one must be literate and thus be able to grapple with the central texts. In others I'm asking whether historical Jewishness selected for a certain sort of individual and this caused certain endowments in traits to persist to the present.

[Judean Zealot]

Question:

Was there social barriers to entrance to Jewishness. Like in order to enter one must be literate and thus be able to grapple with the central texts. In others I'm asking whether historical Jewishness selected for a certain sort of individual and this caused certain endowments in traits to persist to the present.

Yes. In order to prevent insincere conversions the individual was generally required to be not only literate, but highly proficient in the law. That's changed now, but only due to the secular Zionist goal of redefining Judaism from a creed to an identity.

[Porpoise101]

Lactose intolerance
In our global vegan society, there won't be a problem with dairy.

[Vlerchan]

Yes. In order to prevent insincere conversions the individual was generally required to be not only literate, but highly proficient in the law.
Interesting. That seems to more-or-less confirm the unstated hypothesis I had that Jews over-representation amongst intellectual elites is a result of their group self-selecting for high-IQ participants.

... our global vegan society ...
You've got nothing to lose but your chains.

[Judean Zealot]

Vlerchan

I've been saying that for a while. Also, medieval Jews had a tremendously high literacy rate, which helped matters.

[Vlerchan]

I've been saying that for a while.
I'm sure it seems obvious to anyone with an idea of Jewish history.

But I'm a gentile - and so far amongst gentiles this has seemed very insightful.

[sqishy]

I don't want to be difficult with my response here, just saying as a disclaimer.

1) Suffrage in a well regulated Republic ought to be limited to the most intellectually advanced and virtuous citizens.

How will this intellectual advancement and virtuousness be defined in a workable way?



2) Politicians who are convicted of breaching the public trust should be executed.

I suggest that, from a punishment POV, would execution not rule out any chance of punishing the convicted any more? They die, and so cannot suffer.



2) I support the institution of a Rousseau based civic religion, which attaches public service and patriotism to a broadly Deist/Philosophical Theist belief structure, as a necessary condition for holding public office.

I don't know enough about Rousseau, so I to ask if this is theocratic.



4) Unenlightened religion is a worse blasphemy than atheism.

Sure, I use analogy of someone being vaguely knowledgeable with chemistry being the most dangerous with use of chemicals, compared to an expert and someone not knowing enough to even try. Over-confidence peaks with moderate knowledge (sort of).



5) Cheating on taxes is worse than mugging an old lady.

OK.



6) Nothing bad can possibly occur to the virtuous man.

Do you mean this by that the world will not harm those who are virtuous, or that from the person's view nothing is really harmful?



7) I do not deny the existence of certain genetic racial traits. However, the existence thereof in no way lessens the inherent human dignity of said race.

So inherent human dignity is not affected by race - alright.

[Judean Zealot]

How will this intellectual advancement and virtuousness be defined in a workable way?

The virtue is approached via a record of positive participation in civic affairs, as well as dedication to equity in more personal matters (family, business etc). Convicted felons are obviously excluded.

Education is to be determined by standardised testing on a wide array of governance related matters.


I suggest that, from a punishment POV, would execution not rule out any chance of punishing the convicted any more? They die, and so cannot suffer.

My goal isn't to exact revenge or make them suffer; it is to improve society. This is achieved both by the shock value of the death penalty as well as the unambiguous statement that such a policy would make.


I don't know enough about Rousseau, so I to ask if this is theocratic.

Only in the broadest possible sense, in which the duties of and towards the state are grounded in the Supreme Being. I imagine a system of Deity--> duty--> rights--> law, underscored by a low level of ritual. Something like what Robespierre (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cult_of_the_Supreme_Being) tried.

Do you mean this by that the world will not harm those who are virtuous, or that from the person's view nothing is really harmful?

The first. I refer to the Stoic doctrine that the world cannot, in principle, harm the virtuous, as any material discomfort they undergo will necessarily spur them to a higher level of personal and/or civic virtue, which the only meaningful quantifier of 'good' and 'bad'.


So inherent human dignity is not affected by race - alright.

Despite some races being genetically inferior, yes.

[Porpoise101]

Despite some races being genetically inferior, yes.
Which are inferior?

[Judean Zealot]

Which are inferior?

The wise man knows when to keep silent.

[phuckphace]

Nah. I'm rather pointing out that berating Easterners for holding traits that Westerners hold is bizarre.

it's an issue with multiculuralism/ethnopluralism only. I couldn't care less what Asians do or don't do if they stay in Asia.

Their woman are less promiscuous and more orientated towards their traditional support-role. Their culture is more authoritarian and less hedonistic. Their values are non-universalist.

re: less promiscuous - this is a meme. any Westerner can visit Thailand or wherever and immediately be swarmed with women willing to have sex with them - I know at least two guys who have done this. loose women are everywhere, the only notable difference being that the Asian slut will cook you a nice meal afterwards.

Asian cultures tend to be superstitious in particularly goofy ways (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fan_death), and are obsessed with fate and luck. personally I've found Asian males to be neurotic and prone to petty jealousy. I once made the mistake of trying to bum a ride home from an Asian girl I work with, but her 20 year old manlet husband (who is gripped with existential fear that she'll sleep with every guy she encounters) keeps her on a leash and doesn't allow her to have guys in her car or to have male friends. this is a very common theme with this crew and not the first time I've come across it.

my overall point being that raw IQ and an authoritarian streak in the culture doesn't make it compatible with ours - their cultures and worldviews developed well isolated from ours and remain alien.

[...]overall variation is at about 0.1% regardless.

I'm of the opinion that the pronouncements of the alt-right are gross exaggerations.

I suspect that at least some of them believe the genetic gulf is such that the racial groups ought to be classified as separate species entirely, but aren't currently so because of political correctness or something. it's obvious to me that the differences that do exist aren't quite that extreme - if they were, interracial unions couldn't produce fertile offspring - but I take the more moderate view that the 0.1% variation may have more of a differentiating effect than the politics is willing to acknowledge.

we also know, for example, that there's extremely low distance between H. sapiens sapiens and chimps, but that this otherwise tiny difference gives a massive disparity in behavioral traits and cognitive ability between the two species.

Interesting. That seems to more-or-less confirm the unstated hypothesis I had that Jews over-representation amongst intellectual elites is a result of their group self-selecting for high-IQ participants.

I've also been saying this. it only looks like a conspiracy if you haven't brushed up on your Darwin.

[Porpoise101]

re: less promiscuous - this is a meme. any Westerner can visit Thailand or wherever and immediately be swarmed with women willing to have sex with them - I know at least two guys who have done this. loose women are everywhere, the only notable difference being that the Asian slut will cook you a nice meal afterwards.
The difference is that those women are prostitutes and they have nothing to lose. They won't get shut down by the laws and they have already abandoned their family. Most likely they were trafficked to the cities from the countryside. It's pretty terrible and sex tourism is a true scourge of Asia and South America.

Immigrant-community Asians are different. The upper class ones (Indians, Chinese, Japanese) will get shunned by their communities and families if they are 'loose'. They are expected to be respectable (meaning: educated, decent job, nothing embarrassing, good family background). Having sex with lesser men (poorer, different ethnic group, different race) has only negative consequences, so there is no point. Instead, many are more than willing to practically attach themselves to those of a higher status (read: bigger bank account). Of course, once they raise their children away from this community, the offspring are effectively Americans who are slightly more concerned for their future.

[sqishy]

The virtue is approached via a record of positive participation in civic affairs, as well as dedication to equity in more personal matters (family, business etc). Convicted felons are obviously excluded.

Is positive participation just a lack of negative/deviant behaviour/participation in the civil realm, or more of involving one who goes beyond expected responsibilities such as volunteering and the like?



Education is to be determined by standardised testing on a wide array of governance related matters.

I assume this to be involved with mathematics, economics and sociology/psychology/related. Is this testing to be done primarily on just the level of knowledge one has in the relevant fields, or rather on the level of intelligence/capacity for learning?



My goal isn't to exact revenge or make them suffer; it is to improve society. This is achieved both by the shock value of the death penalty as well as the unambiguous statement that such a policy would make.

Alright, I get you.



Only in the broadest possible sense, in which the duties of and towards the state are grounded in the Supreme Being. I imagine a system of Deity--> duty--> rights--> law, underscored by a low level of ritual. Something like what Robespierre (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cult_of_the_Supreme_Being) tried.

I get where you're at now.
(Interesting that the Cult has a goddess involved, something different.)



The first. I refer to the Stoic doctrine that the world cannot, in principle, harm the virtuous, as any material discomfort they undergo will necessarily spur them to a higher level of personal and/or civic virtue, which the only meaningful quantifier of 'good' and 'bad'.

Everything is a lesson which leads one to the greater good - hope I read this right.



Despite some races being genetically inferior, yes.

What is this genetic inferiority? (Only wondering.)

[Judean Zealot]

Is positive participation just a lack of negative/deviant behaviour/participation in the civil realm, or more of involving one who goes beyond expected responsibilities such as volunteering and the like?

Probably a mild form of the latter, although admittedly I haven't worked out a precise formulation.

I assume this to be involved with mathematics, economics and sociology/psychology/related. Is this testing to be done primarily on just the level of knowledge one has in the relevant fields, or rather on the level of intelligence/capacity for learning?

Allowing an intelligent person who hasn't bothered to study the material would defeat the entire purpose of my proposition, no?

What is this genetic inferiority? (Only wondering.)

Anything. Some races are generally genetically shorter, weaker, uglier, or dumber than others.

[phuckphace]

The difference is that those women are prostitutes and they have nothing to lose. They won't get shut down by the laws and they have already abandoned their family. Most likely they were trafficked to the cities from the countryside. It's pretty terrible and sex tourism is a true scourge of Asia and South America.

I wasn't talking about hookers. these women that my friend banged were just interested in casual sex that they offered for free, no doubt in the hopes that he'd waifu them and give them much dorrah later.

[sqishy]

Probably a mild form of the latter, although admittedly I haven't worked out a precise formulation.

Alright.


Allowing an intelligent person who hasn't bothered to study the material would defeat the entire purpose of my proposition, no?

I was wondering if the testing would be done earlier in one's life as a sort of predictor for their ability at the material later on, i.e. have the material be studied by those with a better frame of mind.


Anything. Some races are generally genetically shorter, weaker, uglier, or dumber than others.

Everything has its disadvantages.

[Porpoise101]

Anything. Some races are generally genetically shorter, weaker, uglier, or dumber than others.
Beauty is subjective bigot.😀

But seriously, I'd say that height is more epigenetic than hardcoded into our genes. Strength is genetic, but training is more important. As for intelligence, I'm very sceptical there is a real difference between the people of the world. There is no evolutionary advantage to being stupid, and since every species has genetic variation, I don't think intelligence would be bred out. Like height, intelligence has been shown to be epigenetic to an extent also.

[Judean Zealot]

Beauty is subjective bigot.😀

But seriously, I'd say that height is more epigenetic than hardcoded into our genes. Strength is genetic, but training is more important. As for intelligence, I'm very sceptical there is a real difference between the people of the world. There is no evolutionary advantage to being stupid, and since every species has genetic variation, I don't think intelligence would be bred out. Like height, intelligence has been shown to be epigenetic to an extent also.

I'm not denying this. Although I would venture that certain races do compete for resources, and although there are many variables, raw intelligence does seem to be a large factor at play.

[Vlerchan]

less promiscuous - this is a meme. any Westerner can visit Thailand or wherever and immediately be swarmed with women willing to have sex with them.
There's going to be obvious selection bias there. Least I'm doubtful most people go on a night out seeking to interact with more conservative woman - and thus frequent places with less of a likelihood of coming across him. If these people are propositioned themselves then the selection bias strikes harder. I'm not in denial that promiscuous woman can be found in all places. But rather: the median woman in East-Asia is less promiscuous.

Furthermore Thailand is a poor example. There's a considerable number of poor woman are trafficked into it's capitals of tourism. It doesn't matter whether these woman are acting as prostitutes or not. These are - nonetheless - detached from their cultures and thus breaking societal conventions poses a much lower relative cost - and a much higher relative benefit: potential marriage*.

Regardless whilst I find self-reported data awful: it's still clear from it at the least Asian countries frown more on promiscuity from the skewness of responses**.

It can probably be taken from Schmitt (2005) (http://www.unl.edu/rhames/courses/current/readings/Schmitt-ocr.pdf) that woman living in East-Asia also tend to be less promiscuous.

---

* On this note I will add that the best test here is to examine the sexual histories of upper-middle class Western woman and upper-middle class Asian woman. Impoverishment has the likelihood of acting as a severe distortion to all results. Of course a sensible approach - that no-one in socio-sexual research seems to utilise as far as I could find - is get people to report the promiscuousness of their peers too.

** Though the likelihood is that more conservative social environments downward bias results - the extent of downward bias is useful in itself.

I once made the mistake of trying to bum a ride home from an Asian girl I work with, but her 20 year old manlet husband (who is gripped with existential fear that she'll sleep with every guy she encounters) keeps her on a leash and doesn't allow her to have guys in her car or to have male friends. this is a very common theme with this crew and not the first time I've come across it.
I don't believe it was too common for Western men to let their wives interact to too great an extent with other men that weren't family*. I'll need to read into that though since I'm inferring from elsewhere.

Nonetheless I'm not seeing it as a certain negative that men keep their wives close in hand. In minimises extramarital affairs which come at a significant cost in cultures where divorce is frowned upon. There's quite considerable fixed costs in needing to raise someone else's offspring.

---

* In societies with a properly strict gendered division of labour (and interests) I'm confused about what men and woman might have in common that isn't relating to a. breeding or b. familial matters.

my overall point being that raw IQ and an authoritarian streak in the culture doesn't make it compatible with ours - their cultures and worldviews developed well isolated from ours and remain alien.
Of course it doesn't. Though whether it's a good idea to have our cultures work hand-in-hand is another question altogether. If Asians possess the intelligence and discipline we lack then importing some number of them might help us maintain out socio-economic advantage.

---

Western society is also characterised by a permissive streak a mile wide. I used to find this questionable - though since I started considering it's interactions a dominating entrepreneurial spirit: it seems a net boon to me.

---

I also figure I in fact misinterpreted post #36. I was originally attempting to document Asian supremacism from a new-right lens. I believe though the post claims that the far-right feel it's OK to accept Asian immigrants. Because I find this discussion interesting though I might just precede with that argument in mind.

we also know, for example, that there's extremely low distance between H. sapiens sapiens and chimps, but that this otherwise tiny difference gives a massive disparity in behavioral traits and cognitive ability between the two species.
The difference is about 5.0% if I remember correct.

Though I should add as clarification that the concentration of these differences is what matters. There's obviously significant cognitive difference between Chimps and human-beings but there's no reason to presume that genetic variation between haleogroups holds for the same reason.

[sqishy]

I have nothing to say for now other than that this thread is on fire

[Vlerchan]

I have nothing to say for now other than that this thread is on fire
I'll see if I can help.

Democracy as officially talked about, is almost universally not being practiced. It is a large-scale illusion.
In what sense is it an illusion?

Money's use has gone too far [...]
I would appreciate an expansion here too.

If money is just claim on a recourse, then in what sense can it go too far?

---

Social Issues and Culture

Identity politics is a product of liberals desire to maintain a collective identity within a culture of overwhelmingly vapid individualism.
Victimhood-politics dominates the discourse of both social liberals and social conservatives.
African-Americans are a major confounding factor in gun-violence research that needs to be controlled for. So are Scotch-Irish - but that's less controversial.

[Porpoise101]

Social Issues and Culture


Identity politics is a product of liberals desire to maintain a collective identity within a culture of overwhelmingly vapid individualism.
Victimhood-politics dominates the discourse of both social liberals and social conservatives.
African-Americans are a major confounding factor in gun-violence research that needs to be controlled for. So are Scotch-Irish - but that's less controversial.

I think that identity politics is more of a way for minorities to coalition together as a bloc and have their issues addressed. In the US, the elites of the Democratic Party has chosen to take up these issues and the minorities have followed. The same thing has happened to evangelicals to the GOP.

Second point I agree with

Third point I disagree with. African Americans are going to confound every public health, well-being, education, and safety study. This is because they are minorities who are big enough to affect the data and live a completely different standard of living compared to the majority. If you control for them and not include them, then their problems will be ignored. And you won't be able to tell if their problems are getting better or worse. If you are going to control for them, then whites should also be controlled for so that you have three sets of data to represent the black, white, and total population.

I think it's also important that the CDC should be able to even conduct research on gun violence.

[Vlerchan]

In the US, the elites of the Democratic Party has chosen to take up these issues and the minorities have followed.
I agree with this. Nonetheless the view I proposed is supposed to explain their penetration of the social discourse of non-minority which should have neither an ideological not a electoral reason to be as preoccupied with these issues.

African Americans are going to confound every public health, well-being, education, and safety study. This is because they are minorities who are big enough to affect the data and live a completely different standard of living compared to the majority.
That is confounds 'every public health, well-being, education, and safety study' is the reason we control for it.

Of course the impact of some African-American dummy-variable is also going to be endogenous to their living standards. These should also be controlled for - and further the specific interaction of standards of living and different races should be controlled for. The point I'm making is that once significant variables that correlate with gun-violence and the living-standards of African-Americans are controlled for - we should still see the African-American variable* highlighted as being statistically significant.

---

* The hope here is that this isolates culture.

If you control for them and not include them, then their problems will be ignored. And you won't be able to tell if their problems are getting better or worse. If you are going to control for them, then whites should also be controlled for so that you have three sets of data to represent the black, white, and total population.
I think you're misinterpreting what I mean by 'control for'.

I mean that if one runs a linear regression there should be a specific dummy-variable for African-Americans. That is gun-violence is regressed to some X + proportionAfricanAmericans + relevant correlates. That should demonstrate the impact that the proportion of African Americans has on gun violence independent of all those other variables that might matter (gun prevalence, proportion below the poverty line, etc.).

You can run separate regressions then to see the impact of gun violence on difference communities - and for the impact of living standards on propensity to engage in gun-violence.

(It also does).

[sqishy]

I'll see if I can help.

I meant it in a good way, maybe you meant this as adding fuel to it.



In what sense is it an illusion?

The majority of decisions taken in 'democratic' governments are not done through referendums or some other form of just asking the population what they want to do, rather actions are taken and sometimes the govt then justifies it through some reasoning through the media.

Elections seem fine, but we don't choose who runs for the election. I know that sounds like being extremely demanding, but we're free to choose from what is presented to us. I suggest that candidates are found through a process that involves more than just desire and means to get through.

We also had the Lisbon Referendum events which us two remember better than most others here. Apparently the first one was 'un-democratic' or something.

I also heard indirectly from other people who didn't like how some people saw the same-sex marriage referendum here as not being as democratic as if it were passed through the courts 'behind doors' in its process. I only say this as an example of some double-standard stuff going around with views democracy. You have it or not, which still applies if one wants to divide the processes of the country into those which are democratic in nature, not the thing as a whole. If the same-sex marriage laws went through without popular vote would have been fine with it, but it would not be democratic.

I'm not okay with the illusion of democracy as I see it, I'm only pointing out what I see as double standards of wanting it every way, and then not seeing it as actually being an illusion.



I would appreciate an expansion here too.

If money is just claim on a recourse, then in what sense can it go too far?


Healthcare would be an example, education another. It goes too far when it enters the territory of what I see to be given as a right to everyone as an equal base in living. It's more complex than that I know, but I'll say this for now.

[That's the Spirit]

The extent of the holocaust was exaggerated.
The acts of the Soviet Union were just as heinous as Hitler's Germany. >see https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holodomor#
There is no such thing as white privilege.
Probably a generic one - political correctness has gone too far.
Nigel Farage is a hero.
Vikings is superior to Game of Thrones.
You may view yourself as a different gender, but to me you'll always be what you were born as.
Following on from that, after consulting with my relative who's a psychiatrist, I believe that transgenderism(?) etc are mental illnesses.
Multi-Culturalism can never truly succeed.
Migrant boats should be fired at to act as a deterrent to stop the migrants making the perilous journey and prevent more people falling victim to Poseidon.

[Judean Zealot]

The extent of the holocaust was exaggerated.

So what exactly happened to the 9,000,000 European Jews? Did the Rothschild/Freemason syndicate hide two thirds of them away on Jupiter?

Migrant boats should be fired at to act as a deterrent to stop the migrants making the perilous journey and prevent more people falling victim to Poseidon.

How humane (http://api.viglink.com/api/click?format=go&jsonp=vglnk_146179651614211&key=64faf3df2afdc25161776bb805edbea2&libId=injfv8kn01000rwc000MAqdhn7ssm&loc=http%3A%2F%2Fclassicaltheism.boardhost.com%2Fviewtopic.php%3Fid%3D504&v=1&out=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.stoa.org.uk%2Ftopics%2Fbullshit%2Fpdf%2Fon-bullshit.pdf&ref=http%3A%2F%2Fclassicaltheism.boardhost.com%2Fviewforum.php%3Fid%3D14&title=Classical%20Theism%2C%20Philosophy%2C%20and%20Religion%20Forum%20%C2%BB%20 On%20Bullshit&txt=%3Cem%3EOn%20Bullshit%3C%2Fem%3E).

[That's the Spirit]

So what exactly happened to the 9,000,000 European Jews? Did the Rothschild/Freemason syndicate hide two thirds of them away on Jupiter?
Oy vey goyim.
http://www.rense.com/general61/zzi.htm



How humane (http://api.viglink.com/api/click?format=go&jsonp=vglnk_146179651614211&key=64faf3df2afdc25161776bb805edbea2&libId=injfv8kn01000rwc000MAqdhn7ssm&loc=http%3A%2F%2Fclassicaltheism.boardhost.com%2Fviewtopic.php%3Fid%3D504&v=1&out=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.stoa.org.uk%2Ftopics%2Fbullshit%2Fpdf%2Fon-bullshit.pdf&ref=http%3A%2F%2Fclassicaltheism.boardhost.com%2Fviewforum.php%3Fid%3D14&title=Classical%20Theism%2C%20Philosophy%2C%20and%20Religion%20Forum%20%C2%BB%20 On%20Bullshit&txt=%3Cem%3EOn%20Bullshit%3C%2Fem%3E).

Thanks for a nice, good old fashioned response. I'm glad I succeeded in the point of this thread - to provide my controversial opinion.

[Porpoise101]

The extent of the holocaust was exaggerated.
The acts of the Soviet Union were just as heinous as Hitler's Germany. >see https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holodomor#
There is no such thing as white privilege.
Probably a generic one - political correctness has gone too far.
Nigel Farage is a hero.
Vikings is superior to Game of Thrones.
You may view yourself as a different gender, but to me you'll always be what you were born as.
Following on from that, after consulting with my relative who's a psychiatrist, I believe that transgenderism(?) etc are mental illnesses.
Multi-Culturalism can never truly succeed.
Migrant boats should be fired at to act as a deterrent to stop the migrants making the perilous journey and prevent more people falling victim to Poseidon.
Nice! We found another tonymontana! And he's a UKIPer too! You will enjoy life here, welcome!
Edit: Apparently you are older than I am on the forum. Nice to meet you sensei.

Let's start with the only thing I agree with. I agree with the characterisation of Stalin's USSR as being as terrible as Hitler's Reich. We probably should have drove the Red Army out of Europe and threatened him with The Bomb whilst we had the upper hand.

One more thing: in your opinion, has there ever been a successful culture?

[Judean Zealot]

Oy vey goyim.
http://www.rense.com/general61/zzi.htm


Talk about a glorious non sequitur. I challenge your absurd revisionism and you provide me with a rambling rant about why people hate Jews.


Thanks for a nice, good old fashioned response. I'm glad I succeeded in the point of this thread - to provide my controversial opinion.

And I'm glad I provided the controversy. :)

[Vlerchan]

Nigel Farage is a hero.
What has Nigel Farage done to deserve such an honour?

[sqishy]

What has Nigel Farage done to deserve such an honour?

Grace our media temporarily with unintended humour I guess, or something like that.

[StoppingTom]

I gotta say I love reading Vlerchan's posts, but I never want to get into an argument with him.

Is that controversial?

[Vlerchan]

I gotta say I love reading Vlerchan's posts, but I never want to get into an argument with him.
I was incredibly tempted to argue with this.

But thank you.

[phuckphace]

Vlerchan - the main point that I was driving at was that promiscuity isn't a state of nature, and that various social upheavals have led to a breakdown of traditional values in all cultures. I've no doubt that in traveling to Bumfuck Vietnam you'd be more likely to encounter the traditional women in much the same way you would in traveling to Bumfuck Georgia. I suspect that white males who complain about overly promiscuous white women are just using it as a cover for their exotic waifu fetishes (because again - modernity hasn't left Asia untouched any more than the West, and traditional Asian families will complain about teenage promiscuity at least as loudly as a conservative White family would).

in any case I don't have anything against Asian women in particular - all the ones I've met IRL have been more or less normal if a little on the quiet side. it's this desire by white guys to procreate with them and produce bizarre-looking hybrids that I find very strange, especially so because it seems to proceed mainly from an idealized fetish rather than the normal desire to start a family. it's a particular and specific type of white guy who seeks them out intentionally, while others somehow still manage to settle down with conservative minded White women, yes, even in the current year. the enormous cultural divide between the two families is never taken into account, nor the fact that the resulting Mischling will be trapped in limbo between the two and never be able to fully identify with either side (and of course, traditional Asian parents tend to also recoil at race-mixing). I knew a kid in elementary school who was half-white and half-Korean, and had brown hair and freckles but with half-formed epicanthic folds as if his genes gave up halfway through the process, making him look like he had Down syndrome. I wouldn't wish any of that on my kid.

[Vlerchan]

the main point that I was driving at was that promiscuity isn't a state of nature, and that various social upheavals have led to a breakdown of traditional values in all cultures.
Genetics explain about 40% of the variation of promiscuity and extra-martial affairs in woman and about 60% of the variation of the same behaviour in men (Garcia et al. 2010; Zaisch et al. 2014). It is - without a doubt - a state of nature.

I should add that there also hasn't been evidence presented that demonstrates this uptick in promiscuous sexual relations in Asia. Other than pointing to the acts of the desperate and impoverished. In developed countries - Japan; South Korea; Hong Kong - the average number of sexual partners is frequently cited as being quite low.

...never be able to fully identify with either side...
This might be the case in cultures where interbreeding is frowned upon. I'm not sure otherwise - and I feel if it ever was in Ireland there's been a considerable shift in the opposite direction.

...bizarre-looking hybrids...
I can point to an attractive Spanish-Chinese girl I know in counter to the one kid that might have been doomed from the beginning. I have seen no systematic deviation from the general trends in attractiveness typical to non-mixed offspring.

Though being as we both have different political priors about miscegenation I feel this isn't about to be a very productive conversation.

[Vlerchan]

Bumping:

Less radical institutional reform, for discussion.

The upper-house should be replaced with a series of committees, specialising in certain areas of governance, and consisting of PhD-graduates (or some better definition of, expert) of the desired fields, chosen through sortition. These committees will have 1. veto-powers over legislation relating to their area of interest and 2. the right to the initiation of legislation, which can be vetoed by a democratically elected lower-house.

[dxcxdzv]

Bumping:

Less radical institutional reform, for discussion.

The upper-house should be replaced with a series of committees, specialising in certain areas of governance, and consisting of PhD-graduates (or some better definition of, expert) of the desired fields, chosen through sortition. These committees will have 1. veto-powers over legislation relating to their area of interest and 2. the right to the initiation of legislation, which can be vetoed by a democratically elected lower-house.
This more or less joins your technocratic executive idea, nah?
In the end you want a whole technocracy?

[Vlerchan]

This more or less joins your technocratic executive idea, nah?
The original idea, the one I still prefer, is that technocratic committees form the executive and have the sole right of the initiation of legislation, whilst a democratic legislature retains the right to 1. veto legislation, and 2. censure the executive, with a supermajority.

What I proposed above is a compromise, where their is two executives and two parliaments, there is a dual-right to the initiation of legislation, and one body is capable of vetoing the other.

In the end you want a whole technocracy?
Nope. In the end, I want what's described. I still feel that a government should be accountable to those it rules.

The hope is that the electorates desires will be better incorporated through the reasoned-lens of a body of experts.

[dxcxdzv]

Wuh bruh ya gonna create a whole new constitution.

When you mean two parliaments you mean two congresses or two houses within the same congress?
And those two executives would be composed of groups of experts specialized in different fields of governance? Don't you think it'll become pretty difficult situation in case of divergent opinions or even to maintain a proper governance with so much people taking decisions that are usually made by one or two persons (initially)?
Although I'd assume you gonna tell me that there are still two coexisting structures and if one's fucked up the other is still there to clean the mess up but I'm not criticizing such a drift. I just wonder if such committees would be able to take adequate decisions due to their... "numerical" characteristics. I'm pretty sure there are studies on that, 'ma gonna search.

[Vlerchan]

Wuh bruh ya gonna create a whole new constitution.
Ireland recently had a referendum on the statues of our upper-house, and the decision was in implied-favour of reform. The house at the moment is undemocratic and a failed attempt to merge corporatist and epistocratic considerations, so it's not like this structure is alien to our political culture.

Though, I was more hoping that it would feature at a pan-European level, as what wouldn't be a massive reform to the commission. Given that Treaty revisions occur with considerable frequency, when compared to nation-states, that it would require a reform of the constitution, doesn't seem as if it might be an existential threat.

When you mean two parliaments you mean two congresses or two houses within the same congress?
Two houses, same Congress.

And those two executives would be composed of groups of experts specialized in different fields of governance? Don't you think it'll become pretty difficult situation in case of divergent opinions or even to maintain a proper governance with so much people taking decisions that are usually made by one or two persons (initially)?
One executive would be composed of the government as elected. That government would then need to rendezvous with the specified committee in order to pass legislation, the second executive being composed of committees with different and separate competences. This also occurs, vice-versa.

Thus, technocratic governance cannot occur with democratic consent - and democratic governance cannot occur without technocratic consent. That means there is more veto-players (one more, as the committee has its own voting procedures), which of course narrows the range of legislation that can be passed.

I just wonder if such committees would be able to take adequate decisions due to their... "numerical" characteristics. I'm pretty sure there are studies on that, 'ma gonna search.
I'm adding just one extra veto-player. The entire committee doesn't need to agree.

There's also a number of studies, stronger levels of bicarmalism make it more difficult to pass legislation, and lead to higher rates of government dissolution, are probably the most important findings.

[sqishy]

The hope is that the electorates desires will be better incorporated through the reasoned-lens of a body of experts.

I'm totally good with this, but the problem is that people good with rhetoric can make themselves look like 'your informative friendly expert' when they certainly are not.

(Past 100 posts! I like these large story-arc threads of sorts that come up now and then :D .)

[Vlerchan]

I'm totally good with this, but the problem is that people good with rhetoric can make themselves look like 'your informative friendly expert' when they certainly are not.
That's the reason that those seated on the committees will be chosen through sortition (lottery) from a pool of PhD-holders - and I'm considering narrowing that as PhD-holders graduating from top- to mid-ranked schools.

I agree it's too easy for people to posture as experts.

[sqishy]

That's the reason that those seated on the committees will be chosen through sortition (lottery) from a pool of PhD-holders - and I'm considering narrowing that as PhD-holders graduating from top- to mid-ranked schools.

I agree it's too easy for people to posture as experts.

Alright, I get you.

[Ragle]

Depends on your definition of dumb.

Agreed.

Do we make many dumb choices? Yes. But to say that we are the dumbest species to ever exist on this planet is dumb.

My definition is, just because we are so smart, we are the dumbest.

I thought this is obvious.

[Vlerchan]

Bumping for new users.

I have also decided that it is developing states that would be best served by a minimum basic income project. In large because these states suffer the largest from bureaucratic inefficiency.

[Stronk Serb]

Bumping for new users.

I have also decided that it is developing states that would be best served by a minimum basic income project. In large because these states suffer the largest from bureaucratic inefficiency.

Yeah. Our and I guess most former socialist countries have a legislative nightmare when it comes to laws, as in not being striclty defined, being able to take them in different contexts and having sets of laws contradicting eachother and no legally defined jurisdiction of executors of the law. That is what makes so much room for corruption and innefficiency. You pay a judge to stand by your side, enforcing your version of the law.