“I’d be shocked,” he said, “if a correction guard was involved in this.” he said of an incident were a couple of female guard now faces the music for enabling the escape of a couple of prisoners that they had been having sex with.
This is an example of “not getting the joke” “or generational loss of hypocrisy”
One generation pretends, and the next generation actually believes. When I was young everyone politely pretended women were not like this, but everyone knew women were like this. Back in those days no one would ever allow female guards contact with male prisoners for glaringly obvious reasons.
This is a general problem with pretending to believe stuff so as not to hurt people’s feelings. After a while, people start actually believing it. Expect aids infested blood to be back in the blood supply real soon now.
As predicted, moving left faster and faster. All my life, we have been moving left, and the rate of movement left has been accelerating.
Harvard University was founded in 1637 by radical leftists plotting to conquer the world, though it was at the time a very minor part of the left wing conspiracy. The main action took place in England. When Cromwell halted the left singularity in England in 1648, Harvard became the primary center of the conspiracy.
And they have been getting crazier and more powerful ever since.
The latest developments:
1. Baltimore, Ferguson, and the supreme court case on disparate impact in housing amount to a resumption of the 1950s Warren Court program of ethnically cleansing whites out of what they have built. Difference is that due to the mass importation of illegal immigrants to live on crime, welfare, affirmative action jobs and government jobs, they now have the votes to sustain that policy all the way to its logical conclusion. Baltimore was our Kristallnacht.
2. Finishing off marriage, not that there was enough left to be worth preserving.
4. Lowering the Confederate battleflag, and raising the butthole sex flag. Not only is what is left of marriage to be destroyed, but all must enthusiastically applaud its destruction, and you don’t want to be the first one to stop applauding. So that I am not going to be first to stop applauding, will be leaving this flag on my blog permanently.
Radix observes the panic on the left when Rachel Dolezal was revealed as transracial, wearing chocolate covered makeup over her naturally fair skin, dieing her blond straight hair black and curling it into tiny tight curls.
Melissa Harris-Perry, once called “America’s foremost public intellectual” by one of her fellow affirmative action scholars, had real terror in her eyes as she desperately tried to reconcile “transracial” people with “transgenders” without an inadvertent faux pas
… none of the brave independent thinkers rebelling against social norms have been told what the “right” side is yet, and so they remain paralyzed with fear and indecision.
Two conclusions are obvious from his review: Poverty is not caused by lack of money, you can be poor while having a host of luxuries at taxpayer expense, and that this woman should never have been allowed to make her own sexual choices. She should have been forced to sleep with one man, that man able and willing to support her and her children, forbidden to sleep with any other, and subject to corporal punishment if she failed to sleep with her owner, or slept with some other man.
I know some high IQ high income upperclass women whose emotional maturity is no better than that of Tina Nash, and who made a pile of choices equally bad, but somehow avoided similar consequences – such as pregnancy and violence resulting in lasting injury. Since they demonstrably had the ability to think about the future, I suppose they should have been given a limited choice of men willing and able to support them and their children, and having made their choice once and forever, thereafter forced to sleep with and only with their husbands. And some women, like Tina Nash and her mother, cannot be trusted with even that much choice.
There are a great many people who just are not capable of making the choices needed to navigate the modern world, most of them female or black. They should be under the control of someone else.
I know a high IQ high socioeconomic status woman who from age eleven to age thirty slept with a parade of low lifes, some them as or more dangerous as anyone Tina Nash slept with. Then getting older, when being a total slut starts to look disgusting rather than alluring, cleaned up her act, revirginated, started pursuing nice guys with good careers ahead of them, married a nice high IQ engineer with a good future ahead of him, and proceeded to pump out lots of lovely children. But what she was from preteen to the age when the clicking of her biological clock started to get ominous was disgusting and should not have been permitted. The marriage seems happy enough, but really, should he have to have a wife that has been reamed by a long parade of dicks bigger than his dick, wielded by men who are, as women measure manliness, much more manly than he is?
I see another high IQ high socioeconomic status woman who at age thirty failed to clean up her act, slowly transitioned from alluring slut to disgusting slut, and is now transitioning to cat lady.
I know lots of high IQ career women who, when they see their children growing up, when the years that were most important to spend with their children have passed, then lean back from their jobs to spend time with their children.
Women just do not make good choices, and need to have their choices restrained and controlled by fathers and husbands. Females grow up faster than males, but they stop growing up at age eighteen. Women are never adults and should never be treated like adults or allowed to make adult choices, though when the hormones drop in menopause, they stop acting so crazy.
Interestingly, in mattress girl’s porn video, the male playing the rapist or abusive lover has his face blurred out, but mattress girl’s face is fully visible. Yet the man playing the abusive lover is a well known professional porn actor, who is presumably drawing pay for this role. He is an actor. No one is likely to confuse him with his role, for he has played so many roles, usually undignified roles with fat chicks. He cannot be embarrassed being seen putting his dick into a slut’s asshole. Is he embarrassed to be seen putting his dick into crazy?
I, you, and a couple of friends discover that a railroad bridge has been crucially weakened, and if a train goes over it, the train will fall. A train with a thousand people in it, a thousand strangers none of us have ever met, is rattling down the line to bridge.
One among us has his dog with him. If he ties his dog to the tracks the dog will be killed, but the train will stop to investigate the incident, thus saving a thousand lives.
I know human nature. If he ties his dog to the tracks to save a thousand strangers whose deaths he will not see, he will tie his dog to the tracks to gain a dollar, and if he ties his dog to the tracks to gain a dollar, he will tie me to the tracks to gain a dime.
The fatal flaw of utilitarianism is not the difficulty in comparing interpersonal utility. It is that there are in fact no utilitarians. Only evil people with overly clever stories justifying evil acts. Thus utilitarians always wind up killing a million innocent people to make an omelet, and wind up with no omelet.
The definition of psychopathy combines traits that are unlikely to be correlated, for example
1: the ability to endure stress and danger calmly, and the propensity to lie casually without regard to the long term consequences.
2: the propensity to act vigorously and competently in pursuit of goals and the lack of realistic, long-term goals
The concept of psychopathy defines manliness as bad, and men as irresponsible and childlike.
A psychopath is defined as someone who is not a reliable friend, yet I am pretty sure that calmness under stress and danger is a good indication of a reliable friend.
The word “psychopath”, like “racist” is a twentieth century invention. If there were such natural kinds as “racist” or “psychopath”, there would have been words for them in biblical times. Such twentieth century coinages do not cut reality at the joints, but are intended to manipulate and destroy.
For example Pinker complacently observes that the Victorians were shocked and horrified by a crime wave, but neglects to observe that this crime wave consisted of one mugging in London every few months – which crime wave never went away, but instead people got used to it, and then it got vastly worse, and people got used to it again, and then it got vastly worse still, and people attempted to abandon much of their cities to savages, and then the crime wave followed them, and there is now no safe area in London. The idea of the inner city as some kind of jungle is new, starting in the late nineteen forties, early fifties. Early in the twentieth century, the idea that the affluent and respectable might have to abandon vast expanses of wealth and property, of huge, beautiful and high status buildings where once the wealthy and fashionable lived, to the vandalism and depravity of savages would have been as unimaginable as wolves and bears prowling the streets of London to devour passers by.
My criticism of his argument on war is that war is a bursty phenomenon, sometimes there are a lot of mighty big wars, and sometimes, when one hegemon has the upper hand, or several hegemons remember the last big war too well, not many wars. This peace lasts until the dominant hegemon weakens, or people forget how bad the last big war was, forget how easy it is to start wars, and how hard it is to stop them, whereupon they go at it again. And the generation that remembers the last big war is now mostly dead.
Taleb, arguably the worlds leading expert on the statistics of bursty phenomena, makes the same argument in a more scientific fashion backed by statistics. War follows a power law with an exponent substantially less than one and substantially greater than zero, rather than a normal distribution, meaning that risk is dominated by large rare events – the risk of losing life and property in a big war is far greater than the risk of losing life and property in a small war, even though small wars are common and big wars are rare.
Pinker tells us.
wars between great powers and developed nations have fallen to historically unprecedented levels. This empirical fact has been repeatedly noted with astonishment by many military historians and international relations scholars…
Taleb tells us that because war follows a power law rather than a normal distribution, if one analyzes the level of warfare using statistics appropriate to a normal distribution, at any given time, chances are it has either fallen to historically unprecedented levels, or a great war has broken out and one is too busy trying to stay alive to do statistics.
With a power law phenomenon, recent experience almost always massively under estimates the risk of large rare events, recent experience is almost always nicer than experience over a longer period. Until it is not.
Twenty two out of twenty three Harvard grads could not explain why the earth gets hotter in summer and cooler in winter.
So I asked my cleaning lady, who has received no science education whatsoever, and very little education. She replied that the days were longer in summer and shorter in winter. I then prompted her “Why are they longer in summer and shorter in winter?”, to which she correctly replied that the earth is tilted with respect to its orbit around the sun.
To be strictly correct she should have said the earth’s axis is tilted with respect to the earth’s orbit, but since she already got “days” correct, unlike the Harvard grads, axis is implied.
The author of this video suggests we need improved science education, but I think that no amount of education can turn a sow’s ear into a silk purse, that what we need is considerably less education, about as much education as my cleaning lady has.
Harvard does not, for the most part, teach anything that matters to anyone other than how to hate whitey. Universities have been dumbing down since 1870. They want to be more inclusive, and then adjust their course material to make those included feel more at home. Which makes them useless.
Ferguson looks at measured elite IQs, concludes that our ruling elite is around IQ 120, and that everyone above IQ 140 is pretty much toast. “inappropriately excluded”. It looks to me that the situation is worsening over time, that older members of our elite are generally substantially smarter than recent members of our elite, though all my evidence on this is anecdotal, and people dispute it.
Our elite is being stupidified by avoiding disparate impact. Anything that filters for smarts has disparate impact on women and blacks. Also, smart people tend to mansplain – give those affirmative actioned into jobs beyond their competence instructions and advice that they are incapable of following. Wasenlightened denies this. I accuse him of false consciousness. The level of fear at Google seems excessive if Wasenlightened perceptions are accurate. In an environment where one has a large number of female affirmative action employees, filtering for political correctness is going to filter for stupidity since smart people will be perceived as discriminating against the less smart.
Our universities have been dumbed down so that they no longer teach what high school used to teach.
Academic credentials are not indicators that one has learned anything useful, or indeed learned anything at all, rather they are filters for intelligence and diligence, and, due to degree inflation and the inclusion of women and blacks, very poor filters at the upper end.
Used to be that graduating high school proved you were pretty smart. Now, graduating Harvard does not show you are smart.
I propose degree deflation:
Smart kids can learn in high school maths to calculus and trig, science to special relativity, how to calculate pi from first principles, geography, history of western civilization, and can absorb the western culture and western civilization that university no longer teaches.
I propose that the lower two thirds, pretty much everyone below IQ 106, fails to get a school leaving certificate and leaves school at the start of puberty. The somewhat smarter and more diligent people, IQ 106 to IQ 120, about a quarter of the population, also leave school at the start of puberty, but with a school leaving certificate. The smart people, 120 and up, the top ten percent, graduate high school. Ten percent of that ten percent, the top one percent, people 135 and up, take a two year university course.
Attempting to use academic credentials to filter to smarter than the top one percent is unlikely to succeed, because of demand for lengthy recreational degrees. If we try to get an elite smarter than 135, going to need some new filtering mechanism. Also, using academic credentials as a filter means you are up against the bureaucratic imperative to expand. If one is supposedly in the business of educating people, one is naturally inclined to claim that the education is beneficial, and can benefit everyone, rather than acting as a filter. Thus academic institutions have an incentive to subvert their filter function, and thus an incentive to stupidify the elite.
We used to have a public service exam, a requirement for government employment in functions likely to exercise power, that was IQ heavy, though it also tested for diligence by requiring you to memorize a lot of useless nonsense. Unfortunately, this, of course, had disparate impact. Simply re-instituting the exam would dramatically improve elite function, and one could simply make it a substantially tougher exam for anyone in the system at a level likely to make policy. On the other hand, the Chinese mandarinate tried this and it worked extremely badly. The mandarins were not all that smart. It is hard to make a filter that works when everyone is trying to game the system. But it is not as hard as making a filter that works when you are trying to be inclusive.
Economic leftism, workers against capitalists, died with the Soviet Union. Now it is women and nonwhites against white heterosexual males.
American Hindus have extremely high incomes and are extremely reliable Democrat voters. Hindus are the opposite end of income and education spectrum to Mexicans, yet vote the same.
Old fashioned economic leftism doesn’t explain this.
And yet there is the sense that something is being redistributed.
The country itself is being redistributed from white heterosexual males to a coalition of almost everybody else. And it makes sense for any ambitious newcomer to try and get a piece of the action. Because they can.
Resentment isn’t required, but no one wants to consciously think he is just joining the looter coalition. So resentment is required, and is speedily manufactured.
And since each white wants to be last to be fed to the crocodiles, the whites in the ruling coalition will echo that resentment with double the enthusiasm, and will each be twice as keen on feeding other whites in the ruling coalition to the crocodiles. The situation of white heterosexual males in the ruling elite is similar to that of Jews in the Bolshevik party or intellectuals in the Khmer Rouge. The Bolshevik party was pretty much all Jewish, and the Khmer Rouge pretty much all intellectuals, but the climate of hostility and suspicion directed at Jews among the Bolsheviks, and at intellectuals amongst the Khmer Rouge, was such that they were busily purging each other, until none were left.
Parts of this post cheerfully stolen from Handle’s member’s only post. As usual, anything really horrifying is probably my revisions and not in Handle’s original.