Fun to read but wrong is still wrong. And I'm hoping that disparate impact, at least at the Federal level will pass with the demise of Chevron. And if your tongue isn't in your cheek, you should put it there.
There is no question that Neanderthal DNA is the secret sauce for Caucasoid and EastAsian ability. I suspect that a lot of the instinctive side of some ethnic conflicts is to some degree a consequence of the contrasting tendencies that emerge from the influence of archaic hominid DNA. In my own experience have always been struck by the marked aversion and suspicion that high IQ whites or Asians provoke amongst some people with ancestry in rival groups (no names no pack drill). It is visceral and I do not think it is explicable in terms of culture alone. Would love to speak to Hakan Rotmwrt one day.
How much of the Eurasian ability advantage is due to neanderthal admixture boosting the H. sapiens baseline, and how much of it is due to ghost hominid admixture severely degrading the African H. sapiens baseline?
Quota Meritocracy as you describe it is not far off what happens in South Africa and Malaysia, to name just two places. And of course, per Briggs, it's simply what happens in every DEI-whipped organisation, scaled up to the national and constitutional level. As you say it puts an upper bound on incompetence and (as you didn't quite say) a similar bound on straight white male erasure. One possibly relevant observation from SA and Malaysia is that it leads to a thriving free market in minority-mercenaries who are paid to do nothing other than meet quotas. This is not an outcome desired or anticipated by legislation (probably) but is itself a "great compromise" reached by owners and managers who must balance meeting the quotas with operating their enterprise efficiently. Emergently, it has been discovered that is more efficient to hire and pay workers to do nothing, than it is to attempt to integrate underperforming workers with overinflated self-regard into a productive enterprise. At finer grained detail, these workers are selected by hiring managers strongly for their propensity to shut up and stay out of the way, except to come in and tap their keyboards (etc) on the annual quota inspection day or for the annual report diversity photoshoot. I suppose it's not unlike a carbon emissions trading marketplace for diversity quotas? It has often been proposed to price that market in terms of negative energy generated.
South Africa occurred to me too, as I was writing. Of course the quota system in SA has been an unmitigated disaster, but this is because their population is dominated by blacks. I'm reasonably confident that the white percentage in America is high enough to forestall South African levels of collapse should open racial quotas be adopted.
Singapore also occurred to me. I don't think they have racial quotas in hiring, but their society is in general a delicate balance between the interests of very different ethnic groups, which they are quite frank about.
Malaysia is a mess too. Everyone hates it and the Chinese Malays flee because they know they are getting a shitty deal. Wherever these quota system get implemented the good demographics leave as soon as they get the opportunity.
Singapore doesn’t have anything resembling a quota system. It’s the purest meritocracy in the world. They have quotas on public housing to try and break up ethnic ghettos, but they don’t let dumb Malays pretend to be doctors or whatever.
They also gerrymander the political system so that the PAP (Chinese) stay on top.
Chinese Malays have been leaving for Singapore for a long time.
There is no way anyone is going to have open racial quotas except in a situation where there is an electoral majority that shoves it down the market dominant minorities throat despite them hating it. Can you imagine someone saying “yes, I would like to be treated by the black doctor that we all acknowledge is incompetent, it’s just the kind of price we have to pay for racial compromise!”
Besides being half baked, this whole idea amounts to “Asians 40% merit, 5% population, problem solved (add Jews in that too”. Oh you don’t want an Asian quota but do want to give black and spics a majority of spots based on population? Well that means whites and zero bro.
Just go with LKY and tell blacks they are worthless trash and you don’t give a fuck about what they want.
"Can you imagine someone saying “yes, I would like to be treated by the black doctor that we all acknowledge is incompetent, it’s just the kind of price we have to pay for racial compromise!”'
I don't have to imagine this. I see people saying this, on a massive scale, every day.
Everything you say is absolutely correct (and thanks for confirming my guess about Singapore was basically right). This proposal isn't intended to be a "good" one. It's a thought experiment: a (barely) functioning compromise that is repugnant to all, yet still more fair than what we do now.
People don’t say it every day. Harvard doesn’t say its black candidates are unqualified. Hospitals don’t say their black doctors are unqualified.
You might say “but it’s so obvious!”
And yet it matters that they don’t say it. The ideological deniability, however ridiculous to one who thinks it through, is critical to the function of the system. Both those receiving and those giving need a story to tell themselves that is more then “I am afraid and therefore unquestionably obedient.”
The current system couldn’t survive as an explicit quota system, people would rebel.
And practically, the lack of a quota system has allowed us to keep incompetents out of some really important areas. Blacks aren’t 14% of doctors. They aren’t 14% of startup engineers, etc.
Part of the whole DEI shtick was to try and establish those numbers in areas previously walled off from such. It’s fine for blacks to be 14% of academia because none of that shit matters, but their numbers were kept down, however imperfectly, in important places. If we are going to have quotas it’s going to increase the number of diversity hires doing important stuff they aren’t good at.
Graduate training programs across the country have been busily watering down their level of rigour, while aggressively lowering admissions standards on behalf of minorities, for years; particularly since Floyd. Many advocates are on record as saying that meritocracy is racist. We haven't yet seen the effects of this in the professional world, but soon will.
Long term America appears to be eveloping its own blend of racialised crony caplitalism with various carve-outs to accommodate the needs of key corporations and industries. Washington expects to maintain global competitiveness in high tech by poaching talent from East Asia and the Subcontinent while doing nothing to develop native talent. This would require educational reform on a grand scale and there is no interest in this.
Singapore is as close to paradise as it gets. Super meritocratic but plenty of opportunities all round. And zero bullshit. I often tell friends our best hope is to declare war on Singapore and follow this up with immediate, unconditional, surrender. They are light years ahead of the Anglosphere. Maximum respect.
Its neglect of and contempt for the native population is going to be the regime’s undoing. Their immigration economy could actually work, and be broadly accepted, if they didn't also insist on abusing the home population at the expense of foreigners.
Malaysia is a mess too. Everyone hates it and the Chinese Malays flee because they know they are getting a shitty deal. Wherever these quota system get implemented the good demographics leave as soon as they get the opportunity.
Singapore doesn’t have anything resembling a quota system. It’s the purest meritocracy in the world. They have quotas on public housing to try and break up ethnic ghettos, but they don’t let dumb Malays pretend to be doctors or whatever.
They also gerrymander the political system so that the PAP (Chinese) stay on top.
Chinese Malays have been leaving for Singapore for a long time.
There is no way anyone is going to have open racial quotas except in a situation where there is an electoral majority that shoves it down the market dominant minorities throat despite them hating it. Can you imagine someone saying “yes, I would like to be treated by the black doctor that we all acknowledge is incompetent, it’s just the kind of price we have to pay for racial compromise!”
Besides being half baked, this whole idea amounts to “Asians 40% merit, 5% population, problem solved (add Jews in that too”. Oh you don’t want an Asian quota but do want to give black and spics a majority of spots based on population? Well that means whites and zero bro.
I grew up in South Africa. Can attest to what you said. Saw it on a daily basis. It’s way worse there though because the (unproductive) beneficiaries of DEI make up 80% of the population.
Interesting thing about Asians is that they actually did support affirmative action even though they acknowledged it was unfair and led to incompetency. According to one poll, Two thirds of Non-black democrats explicitly stated support for AA when told it disadvantaged Whites, this support dropped below 40% when told it harmed Asians.
That's revealing. A great deal of support for these policies emerges directly from resentment against whites. Which whites are now on the cusp of realizing, en masse.
It's frustrating Asians act this way, they seem to be very respectful people most of the time and act like model citizens, everybody would be fine with them if they just accepted they needed to culturally assimilate in societies that are majority White. Call me over-optimistic but I think this behavior might be the product of woke cultural dominance since Asians are famously conformist, if we had a more pro-White culture they might become more pro-White as well.
I guess I disagree about self-interest, I think they are mostly behaving against their own self-interest because on an individual level the best situation for them is to be successful minorities living in a society of slightly lower IQ but very tolerant people, white replacement does not benefit them.
You'd think so, but people are generally terrible at connecting self interest to societal self interest.
An example:
It is easier to litter, but if everyone litters, you live in a dump; it is therefore actually in your self interest not to litter, but only if other people don't litter.
White replacement benefits them because they are genetically more agreeable than Whites. In a society that is becoming increasingly conformist, they are primed to replace the native population in the majority of (previously) White countries.
I work with lots of Chinese immigrants, they are 100% "model citizens" and most of them seem open to cultural assimilation. On the other hand, third-generation Asians can be obnoxious because they often buy into the whole woke ideology without any good reason (it doesn't benefit them at all).
They’ve always been this way to be honest. They were staunch leftists (like they are today) when America was, as you say, “pro white”. They understand they aren’t white and that our interests as white people are at odds with their own. I’ll never forget that one poll that shows how Asians in America have a stronger affinity towards blacks than whites, and this is despite the fact they are often victims of black violence. Even during the “Stop Asian hate” movement it wasn’t blacks who were being criticized and blamed for anti-Asian hate crimes - it was whites.
i lived in NYC for many years. black violence against asians was almost as reliable a thing as every jewish owned fabric store being closed most of october
It would be interesting to see how different Asian groups feel about blacks and vice versa - I think some of the Asians, particularly second or third generation ones may be in for a bit of a wake up call.
Don't necessarily disagree, but asians ought to keep in mind too that the targets will shift their focus once the whites are quashed to other "successful" groups - this may just be them.
I'm sure I am not imagining things when I am led to believe that certain other "minority groups" already have a disdain or dislike for asians, this would only grow if the asians became more successful under a regime change.
Asian kids are mostly first gen and they are recent to the US. They dont have parents telingm them what things were like in the 80s, 50s, 20s, etc. So theyve lived their whole lives in the leftist captured education system, which really accelerated from 1970-2020 but is now facing breakdown/backlash
The Devil is in the details. Who adjudicates categories? White, black, Hispanic. The power lives then with the adjudicators. Current Canadian federal rules allow self identification which is a hilarious shit show. And here is the an indigenous Australian https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.abc.net.au/article/11794194
So yes, I totally support this for the utter shit show it will immediately become. At least it's explicit and people will be fighting over a real proposal. Much better than the covert back handed nonsense that has crept in.
It wouldnt sabotage anything. The best NBA players right now are either: White europeans, or those who play like white guys (passing the ball), or stars supported by white guy role players (Celtics). Passing the ball actually works really well in basketball, and thats something that white guys do much more frequently. The quality of play in NBA would go up with more white guys
"The official narrative is built upon the foundational lie that we are all the same under the skin, and that any difference in group-level socioeconomic outcome can only be the result of bigotry, racism, systemic racism, implicit bias, and the historical consequences of slavery or colonialism. "
The "black" group is as ill-defined as Hispanic. Humanity essentially consists of white, Asian, and say 11 or so races of "black" people. The tallest people in the world (Tutsi) and shortest (Pygmy) are both "black" but wildly different genetically. Essentially all marathon winners are Kenyan and all winning sprinters have West African ancestry. The Igbo eat the lunch of pretty much all other blacks in academic fields, and routinely outscore Asians at top schools.
Beyond nature and nurture are social networks, as Jews and Armenians almost instinctively put to use to promote their own. You touched on this, but I think it's as important as genetics in explaining group differences in "accomplishment". Racial genetics are real and significant, but it's always much easier to accomplish when you have a big team on your side that knows all the tricks of the game, has big resources to help their own, and is not too worried about fairness to other groups. So while I'm strongly in favor of pure meritocracy, I don't think it can ever really exist. I learned this lesson when I scored in the top 0.1% of standardized and objective college admissions tests, but just didn't know enough about how the game is played to get into any Ivy League schools. I went to Notre Dame, but I suspect my Irish name and background were a significant factor in my admission there.
The whole DIE scam is resentful underachievers discovering this power of social networks to promote their own, independent of true merit. Good for them, but now you can't trust doctors to be competent and have to watch for plane parts falling out of the sky.
Genetic diversity is certainly huge in Africa, but not so relevant in practice in the US, where it's all long since scrambled. Not too many pygmies got taken in the slave ships, either.
My high school English teacher would have loved to be able to do that.
He was a stern Dutch Calvinist guy whose father was a minister. He kept the window shades down so we could not look out, and would throw his keys at anyone not paying attention.
On the other hand, if resentful underachievers have found a way to get one over on their supposed betters, that's just evolution in action.
Survival of the fittest, in effect.
Because in today's society, the power of social networks and how to manipulate those is far more important than any other ability, and people from clan-based cultures excel at that already.
Look at any EUropean nation and odds are you'll find several "let's be kind to the poor gypsies"-projects, run by gypsies (all from the same clan) and always finding yet another thing to be upset about, said thing needing immediate financial redress.
In real politik-terms, gypsies are powerless and could be wiped out inside a week in any industrial nation - but with the power of social networks? The police cannot even clear away gypsies creating a shanty town and living by committing crimes.
Meanwhile, when the very same shanty town was occupied by indigenous former asylum patients, the police and the county sent bulldozers to clear the camp.
We, the westerners, need to stick to thinking and speaking in real politik-terms only. If we don't, we adopt the enmy's language and therefore his values.
Only in swedish I'm afraid, and most articles are paywalled. This one is not, I'll sum it up for you:
Gypsy ("rom" being the current politically correct term) clan chief suspected of embezzling tens of millions via rom special interest groups of various kinds, using faked membership lists (certain groups may receive tax funding which is membership dependent).
The clan chief has been notorious as a favoured token "good gypsy" by swedish media, by then-PM Stefan löfven, and has even been endorsed by the king.
Samnytt is one of few news outlets here that will include correct labelling of people's origins in their news reporting; otherwise, the norm is to use "swede" for everyone even if it's a gambian or an arab. As such, Samnytt has been labelled "right-wing" and is subject to regular perescution by our authorities.
This is an absurd idea that explicitly condones, say, 12% black aerospace engineers, and opens the door to 50% female representation on all positions.
Also, it smacks of snatching defeat from the jaws of victory. Imagine suggesting this in Ireland right now.
The number one purpose of a country is to enable the natives to live in peace without outsiders. It’s easy to forget that nowadays but a nation should be able to offer that at the very least. The USA is a special case because it’s a federation, not a proper country, but there are enough states that such problems can be solved on a local level.
The other side would never accept this, because at root they are animated by hatred of White people. In that sense the proposal is a sort of rhetorical device: here's a compromise that they should be fine with, which can keep the peace in a multiracial system. But they won't, so.
As to Ireland - and the rest of Europe - I would not advise this there. In the European case the only possible solution is mass deportations.
Some of our most diverse states are in the south and yet they are solid red. The issue is a lack of white solidarity outside the south. Whites just need to show the same racial solidarity that Chinese show in Singapore.
As difficult as you think it is for whites to be racist again, it’s probably a more workable solution then what your proposing. Blacks are a minority and losers, it’s only inter-white squabbling that makes the concerns relevant.
One way or the other, whites are going to learn to be racist again. This is inevitable. The taboo is already looking rather threadbare. Another decade and it will be considered positively quaint.
I'd personally say that, more precisely, coming back to overt and unapologetic racism will be the knock on effect. Rather, whites in the US will, generally, begin to sympathize with and cherish their in-group above others again; a return to folkdom in a way that hasn't been seen in over 120 years. A healthy self acceptance "equilibrium" will eventually be achieved thanks to the ongoing crucible of this cultural push-pull with the flood of the 'foreign' and their institutional advocates. These new people groups ultimately compete on a collective ethnic and racial paradigm that many western people of Anglo-Germanic heritage still refuse to act within, and anthropologically speaking, this variety of self-defeat doesn't last forever.
You're right, it's a terrible idea, but I see why you propose it. Namely, it is better than the current system.
Certain social pressures would keep the categories relatively coarse, for reasons stated towards the end of your essay. White Hispanics are insanely advantaged by the catch-all grouping (a fact I took advantage of, or was forced to take advantage of by cynical mentors, for a long time before I started to feel guilty about it and began checking "white" on all the forms). Jews do not gain anything by being confined to a 2% slice of the pie, so the question of Schroedinger's White would be resolved once and for all.
The whole proposal could never become a reality, for the reasons you hint at: the DEI game cannot be exposed for what it is, it must always exist in a penumbra that allows it to remain in constant public awareness without its detailed outlines ever being discovered. The beneficiaries of DEI cannot be forced to admit that they want to replace Whites.
Jews would hate this system more than anyone. It would permanently break the back of their institutional power.
The DIEtards will never go for this compromise. It's too honest for them. Moreover, it would take their power away - things would no longer depend on the caprice of Single Woke Females in HR.
Here we have a classic attempt at compromise and fairness, which will be roundly scorned by the liberals in power. They have no interest in compromise, and why should they? A mild threat of slaughter perhaps, but they hold the keys to that threat, as well. Don’t drone me, bro.
When you boil the Anglosphere's 'Race' problem down to something that can fit on a comment thread, it's really a White-on-White thing. If the tertiary sheep-dipped whites would stop beating their fellow whites with their virtue-signal lightsaber sticks, any other Race problems would be pretty manageable.
I think it won’t work quite so well. For one thing, who decides, and how, who is in which racial group? Right now, it’s self-ID, with only social pressure keeping most whites from claiming to be POC. But if the stakes are raised and explicit, then there will need to be some more serious gatekeeping. And it will have to be the government that does that (who else can?). And if you are mixed race (as so many are), what group do you go into? There will need to be detailed rules, and there will be huge and never-ending fights over those rules.
The current system keeps everything on the down low, and that might actually be more palatable and socially cohesive.
Fun to read but wrong is still wrong. And I'm hoping that disparate impact, at least at the Federal level will pass with the demise of Chevron. And if your tongue isn't in your cheek, you should put it there.
I agree - it is deeply wrong.
Most compromises are.
Their aim should be to mix right with wrong. Without wrong in them, they wouldn't be a compromise.
What about Neaderthals? I apparently have above average neanderthal genealogy. I demand representation and reparation. Ooga booga, sapiens racist!
Yes this is important question
There is no question that Neanderthal DNA is the secret sauce for Caucasoid and EastAsian ability. I suspect that a lot of the instinctive side of some ethnic conflicts is to some degree a consequence of the contrasting tendencies that emerge from the influence of archaic hominid DNA. In my own experience have always been struck by the marked aversion and suspicion that high IQ whites or Asians provoke amongst some people with ancestry in rival groups (no names no pack drill). It is visceral and I do not think it is explicable in terms of culture alone. Would love to speak to Hakan Rotmwrt one day.
How much of the Eurasian ability advantage is due to neanderthal admixture boosting the H. sapiens baseline, and how much of it is due to ghost hominid admixture severely degrading the African H. sapiens baseline?
Me too! Them Homo Saps owe us 35 000 years back rent, for starters! Cro Mags go home!
Quota Meritocracy as you describe it is not far off what happens in South Africa and Malaysia, to name just two places. And of course, per Briggs, it's simply what happens in every DEI-whipped organisation, scaled up to the national and constitutional level. As you say it puts an upper bound on incompetence and (as you didn't quite say) a similar bound on straight white male erasure. One possibly relevant observation from SA and Malaysia is that it leads to a thriving free market in minority-mercenaries who are paid to do nothing other than meet quotas. This is not an outcome desired or anticipated by legislation (probably) but is itself a "great compromise" reached by owners and managers who must balance meeting the quotas with operating their enterprise efficiently. Emergently, it has been discovered that is more efficient to hire and pay workers to do nothing, than it is to attempt to integrate underperforming workers with overinflated self-regard into a productive enterprise. At finer grained detail, these workers are selected by hiring managers strongly for their propensity to shut up and stay out of the way, except to come in and tap their keyboards (etc) on the annual quota inspection day or for the annual report diversity photoshoot. I suppose it's not unlike a carbon emissions trading marketplace for diversity quotas? It has often been proposed to price that market in terms of negative energy generated.
South Africa occurred to me too, as I was writing. Of course the quota system in SA has been an unmitigated disaster, but this is because their population is dominated by blacks. I'm reasonably confident that the white percentage in America is high enough to forestall South African levels of collapse should open racial quotas be adopted.
Singapore also occurred to me. I don't think they have racial quotas in hiring, but their society is in general a delicate balance between the interests of very different ethnic groups, which they are quite frank about.
White percentage in America won't be high enough in another generation to forestall South African levels of anything.
White people need to make babies, stat.
Malaysia is a mess too. Everyone hates it and the Chinese Malays flee because they know they are getting a shitty deal. Wherever these quota system get implemented the good demographics leave as soon as they get the opportunity.
Singapore doesn’t have anything resembling a quota system. It’s the purest meritocracy in the world. They have quotas on public housing to try and break up ethnic ghettos, but they don’t let dumb Malays pretend to be doctors or whatever.
They also gerrymander the political system so that the PAP (Chinese) stay on top.
Chinese Malays have been leaving for Singapore for a long time.
There is no way anyone is going to have open racial quotas except in a situation where there is an electoral majority that shoves it down the market dominant minorities throat despite them hating it. Can you imagine someone saying “yes, I would like to be treated by the black doctor that we all acknowledge is incompetent, it’s just the kind of price we have to pay for racial compromise!”
Besides being half baked, this whole idea amounts to “Asians 40% merit, 5% population, problem solved (add Jews in that too”. Oh you don’t want an Asian quota but do want to give black and spics a majority of spots based on population? Well that means whites and zero bro.
Just go with LKY and tell blacks they are worthless trash and you don’t give a fuck about what they want.
"Can you imagine someone saying “yes, I would like to be treated by the black doctor that we all acknowledge is incompetent, it’s just the kind of price we have to pay for racial compromise!”'
I don't have to imagine this. I see people saying this, on a massive scale, every day.
Everything you say is absolutely correct (and thanks for confirming my guess about Singapore was basically right). This proposal isn't intended to be a "good" one. It's a thought experiment: a (barely) functioning compromise that is repugnant to all, yet still more fair than what we do now.
https://hac.bard.edu/amor-mundi/the-power-of-the-powerless-vaclav-havel-2011-12-23
People don’t say it every day. Harvard doesn’t say its black candidates are unqualified. Hospitals don’t say their black doctors are unqualified.
You might say “but it’s so obvious!”
And yet it matters that they don’t say it. The ideological deniability, however ridiculous to one who thinks it through, is critical to the function of the system. Both those receiving and those giving need a story to tell themselves that is more then “I am afraid and therefore unquestionably obedient.”
The current system couldn’t survive as an explicit quota system, people would rebel.
And practically, the lack of a quota system has allowed us to keep incompetents out of some really important areas. Blacks aren’t 14% of doctors. They aren’t 14% of startup engineers, etc.
Part of the whole DEI shtick was to try and establish those numbers in areas previously walled off from such. It’s fine for blacks to be 14% of academia because none of that shit matters, but their numbers were kept down, however imperfectly, in important places. If we are going to have quotas it’s going to increase the number of diversity hires doing important stuff they aren’t good at.
People do like to fool themselves.
Graduate training programs across the country have been busily watering down their level of rigour, while aggressively lowering admissions standards on behalf of minorities, for years; particularly since Floyd. Many advocates are on record as saying that meritocracy is racist. We haven't yet seen the effects of this in the professional world, but soon will.
'Many advocates are on record as saying that meritocracy is racist.'
They are right but not necessarily in the way they think they are.
Long term America appears to be eveloping its own blend of racialised crony caplitalism with various carve-outs to accommodate the needs of key corporations and industries. Washington expects to maintain global competitiveness in high tech by poaching talent from East Asia and the Subcontinent while doing nothing to develop native talent. This would require educational reform on a grand scale and there is no interest in this.
Singapore is as close to paradise as it gets. Super meritocratic but plenty of opportunities all round. And zero bullshit. I often tell friends our best hope is to declare war on Singapore and follow this up with immediate, unconditional, surrender. They are light years ahead of the Anglosphere. Maximum respect.
Now if Singapore can just fix its fertility…
Its neglect of and contempt for the native population is going to be the regime’s undoing. Their immigration economy could actually work, and be broadly accepted, if they didn't also insist on abusing the home population at the expense of foreigners.
Malaysia is a mess too. Everyone hates it and the Chinese Malays flee because they know they are getting a shitty deal. Wherever these quota system get implemented the good demographics leave as soon as they get the opportunity.
Singapore doesn’t have anything resembling a quota system. It’s the purest meritocracy in the world. They have quotas on public housing to try and break up ethnic ghettos, but they don’t let dumb Malays pretend to be doctors or whatever.
They also gerrymander the political system so that the PAP (Chinese) stay on top.
Chinese Malays have been leaving for Singapore for a long time.
There is no way anyone is going to have open racial quotas except in a situation where there is an electoral majority that shoves it down the market dominant minorities throat despite them hating it. Can you imagine someone saying “yes, I would like to be treated by the black doctor that we all acknowledge is incompetent, it’s just the kind of price we have to pay for racial compromise!”
Besides being half baked, this whole idea amounts to “Asians 40% merit, 5% population, problem solved (add Jews in that too”. Oh you don’t want an Asian quota but do want to give black and spics a majority of spots based on population? Well that means whites and zero bro.
I grew up in South Africa. Can attest to what you said. Saw it on a daily basis. It’s way worse there though because the (unproductive) beneficiaries of DEI make up 80% of the population.
Interesting thing about Asians is that they actually did support affirmative action even though they acknowledged it was unfair and led to incompetency. According to one poll, Two thirds of Non-black democrats explicitly stated support for AA when told it disadvantaged Whites, this support dropped below 40% when told it harmed Asians.
That's revealing. A great deal of support for these policies emerges directly from resentment against whites. Which whites are now on the cusp of realizing, en masse.
It's frustrating Asians act this way, they seem to be very respectful people most of the time and act like model citizens, everybody would be fine with them if they just accepted they needed to culturally assimilate in societies that are majority White. Call me over-optimistic but I think this behavior might be the product of woke cultural dominance since Asians are famously conformist, if we had a more pro-White culture they might become more pro-White as well.
Conformism is definitely the Asian vice, and a big factor in their adoption of anti-White attitudes. That, and self-interest.
I guess I disagree about self-interest, I think they are mostly behaving against their own self-interest because on an individual level the best situation for them is to be successful minorities living in a society of slightly lower IQ but very tolerant people, white replacement does not benefit them.
You'd think so, but people are generally terrible at connecting self interest to societal self interest.
An example:
It is easier to litter, but if everyone litters, you live in a dump; it is therefore actually in your self interest not to litter, but only if other people don't litter.
Very, very few cultures solve the litter problem.
White replacement benefits them because they are genetically more agreeable than Whites. In a society that is becoming increasingly conformist, they are primed to replace the native population in the majority of (previously) White countries.
The only country that might become majority Asian due to immigration is Australia.
I work with lots of Chinese immigrants, they are 100% "model citizens" and most of them seem open to cultural assimilation. On the other hand, third-generation Asians can be obnoxious because they often buy into the whole woke ideology without any good reason (it doesn't benefit them at all).
This is a whole other question - the relentless indoctrination of second+ gen immigrants with anti-White race communism.
Of course it benefits them. They are victims and entitled to special treatment.
They’ve always been this way to be honest. They were staunch leftists (like they are today) when America was, as you say, “pro white”. They understand they aren’t white and that our interests as white people are at odds with their own. I’ll never forget that one poll that shows how Asians in America have a stronger affinity towards blacks than whites, and this is despite the fact they are often victims of black violence. Even during the “Stop Asian hate” movement it wasn’t blacks who were being criticized and blamed for anti-Asian hate crimes - it was whites.
i lived in NYC for many years. black violence against asians was almost as reliable a thing as every jewish owned fabric store being closed most of october
It would be interesting to see how different Asian groups feel about blacks and vice versa - I think some of the Asians, particularly second or third generation ones may be in for a bit of a wake up call.
Don't necessarily disagree, but asians ought to keep in mind too that the targets will shift their focus once the whites are quashed to other "successful" groups - this may just be them.
I'm sure I am not imagining things when I am led to believe that certain other "minority groups" already have a disdain or dislike for asians, this would only grow if the asians became more successful under a regime change.
Asian kids are mostly first gen and they are recent to the US. They dont have parents telingm them what things were like in the 80s, 50s, 20s, etc. So theyve lived their whole lives in the leftist captured education system, which really accelerated from 1970-2020 but is now facing breakdown/backlash
Are you talking about South Asians? It seems to me that East Asians integrate quite well into our Society.
The Devil is in the details. Who adjudicates categories? White, black, Hispanic. The power lives then with the adjudicators. Current Canadian federal rules allow self identification which is a hilarious shit show. And here is the an indigenous Australian https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.abc.net.au/article/11794194
So yes, I totally support this for the utter shit show it will immediately become. At least it's explicit and people will be fighting over a real proposal. Much better than the covert back handed nonsense that has crept in.
The details would prove to be extremely devilish, as I described towards the end.
Supporting the proposal for its inevitable comedic effects is the best possible reason.
Maybe it can be tied to reparations! California can beta test and all other states can watch and learn.
I'm all for reparations! Who do I invoice?
Great idea. Lets start with NFL and NBA Players.
Lets try that for a while and see how it goes.
Sabotaging sportsball is a feature, not a bug.
It wouldnt sabotage anything. The best NBA players right now are either: White europeans, or those who play like white guys (passing the ball), or stars supported by white guy role players (Celtics). Passing the ball actually works really well in basketball, and thats something that white guys do much more frequently. The quality of play in NBA would go up with more white guys
I'm advocating for height classes for basketball since years!
"The official narrative is built upon the foundational lie that we are all the same under the skin, and that any difference in group-level socioeconomic outcome can only be the result of bigotry, racism, systemic racism, implicit bias, and the historical consequences of slavery or colonialism. "
How do they explain the NBA?
Uh purely economic factors.
The "black" group is as ill-defined as Hispanic. Humanity essentially consists of white, Asian, and say 11 or so races of "black" people. The tallest people in the world (Tutsi) and shortest (Pygmy) are both "black" but wildly different genetically. Essentially all marathon winners are Kenyan and all winning sprinters have West African ancestry. The Igbo eat the lunch of pretty much all other blacks in academic fields, and routinely outscore Asians at top schools.
Beyond nature and nurture are social networks, as Jews and Armenians almost instinctively put to use to promote their own. You touched on this, but I think it's as important as genetics in explaining group differences in "accomplishment". Racial genetics are real and significant, but it's always much easier to accomplish when you have a big team on your side that knows all the tricks of the game, has big resources to help their own, and is not too worried about fairness to other groups. So while I'm strongly in favor of pure meritocracy, I don't think it can ever really exist. I learned this lesson when I scored in the top 0.1% of standardized and objective college admissions tests, but just didn't know enough about how the game is played to get into any Ivy League schools. I went to Notre Dame, but I suspect my Irish name and background were a significant factor in my admission there.
The whole DIE scam is resentful underachievers discovering this power of social networks to promote their own, independent of true merit. Good for them, but now you can't trust doctors to be competent and have to watch for plane parts falling out of the sky.
Well said.
Genetic diversity is certainly huge in Africa, but not so relevant in practice in the US, where it's all long since scrambled. Not too many pygmies got taken in the slave ships, either.
Yeah, the chains were too big for them. Slipped off.
Kek!
BTW, thank you for correctly using "he" as the default pronoun in your OP.
I cringe whenever I see "they" referring to the singular.
Usage of they as a singular pronoun should be corrected with immediate beatings.
My high school English teacher would have loved to be able to do that.
He was a stern Dutch Calvinist guy whose father was a minister. He kept the window shades down so we could not look out, and would throw his keys at anyone not paying attention.
OK, that's in poor taste, but seemed funny when I thought of it.
It seemed funny when I read it.
On the other hand, if resentful underachievers have found a way to get one over on their supposed betters, that's just evolution in action.
Survival of the fittest, in effect.
Because in today's society, the power of social networks and how to manipulate those is far more important than any other ability, and people from clan-based cultures excel at that already.
Look at any EUropean nation and odds are you'll find several "let's be kind to the poor gypsies"-projects, run by gypsies (all from the same clan) and always finding yet another thing to be upset about, said thing needing immediate financial redress.
In real politik-terms, gypsies are powerless and could be wiped out inside a week in any industrial nation - but with the power of social networks? The police cannot even clear away gypsies creating a shanty town and living by committing crimes.
Meanwhile, when the very same shanty town was occupied by indigenous former asylum patients, the police and the county sent bulldozers to clear the camp.
We, the westerners, need to stick to thinking and speaking in real politik-terms only. If we don't, we adopt the enmy's language and therefore his values.
Thanks!
"several "let's be kind to the poor gypsies"-projects, run by gypsies (all from the same clan)"
Do you have any links about this?
Only in swedish I'm afraid, and most articles are paywalled. This one is not, I'll sum it up for you:
Gypsy ("rom" being the current politically correct term) clan chief suspected of embezzling tens of millions via rom special interest groups of various kinds, using faked membership lists (certain groups may receive tax funding which is membership dependent).
The clan chief has been notorious as a favoured token "good gypsy" by swedish media, by then-PM Stefan löfven, and has even been endorsed by the king.
https://samnytt.se/romska-foreningar-i-harva-med-miljonbedragerier
Samnytt is one of few news outlets here that will include correct labelling of people's origins in their news reporting; otherwise, the norm is to use "swede" for everyone even if it's a gambian or an arab. As such, Samnytt has been labelled "right-wing" and is subject to regular perescution by our authorities.
Thanks, reposted to my own site:
https://patrick.net/post/1381571/2024-07-02-gypsies-steal-from-swedish-taxpayers
You mean the best kenyan marathon dopers hidden in the mountains only to show up to win?
This is an absurd idea that explicitly condones, say, 12% black aerospace engineers, and opens the door to 50% female representation on all positions.
Also, it smacks of snatching defeat from the jaws of victory. Imagine suggesting this in Ireland right now.
The number one purpose of a country is to enable the natives to live in peace without outsiders. It’s easy to forget that nowadays but a nation should be able to offer that at the very least. The USA is a special case because it’s a federation, not a proper country, but there are enough states that such problems can be solved on a local level.
The other side would never accept this, because at root they are animated by hatred of White people. In that sense the proposal is a sort of rhetorical device: here's a compromise that they should be fine with, which can keep the peace in a multiracial system. But they won't, so.
As to Ireland - and the rest of Europe - I would not advise this there. In the European case the only possible solution is mass deportations.
Some of our most diverse states are in the south and yet they are solid red. The issue is a lack of white solidarity outside the south. Whites just need to show the same racial solidarity that Chinese show in Singapore.
As difficult as you think it is for whites to be racist again, it’s probably a more workable solution then what your proposing. Blacks are a minority and losers, it’s only inter-white squabbling that makes the concerns relevant.
One way or the other, whites are going to learn to be racist again. This is inevitable. The taboo is already looking rather threadbare. Another decade and it will be considered positively quaint.
I'd personally say that, more precisely, coming back to overt and unapologetic racism will be the knock on effect. Rather, whites in the US will, generally, begin to sympathize with and cherish their in-group above others again; a return to folkdom in a way that hasn't been seen in over 120 years. A healthy self acceptance "equilibrium" will eventually be achieved thanks to the ongoing crucible of this cultural push-pull with the flood of the 'foreign' and their institutional advocates. These new people groups ultimately compete on a collective ethnic and racial paradigm that many western people of Anglo-Germanic heritage still refuse to act within, and anthropologically speaking, this variety of self-defeat doesn't last forever.
A darker state might implement it with some success.
If they have power, they'll never go for it.
If we have power, why would we go for it?
The time where compromise is a workable compromise is gone.
This is probably true.
You're right, it's a terrible idea, but I see why you propose it. Namely, it is better than the current system.
Certain social pressures would keep the categories relatively coarse, for reasons stated towards the end of your essay. White Hispanics are insanely advantaged by the catch-all grouping (a fact I took advantage of, or was forced to take advantage of by cynical mentors, for a long time before I started to feel guilty about it and began checking "white" on all the forms). Jews do not gain anything by being confined to a 2% slice of the pie, so the question of Schroedinger's White would be resolved once and for all.
The whole proposal could never become a reality, for the reasons you hint at: the DEI game cannot be exposed for what it is, it must always exist in a penumbra that allows it to remain in constant public awareness without its detailed outlines ever being discovered. The beneficiaries of DEI cannot be forced to admit that they want to replace Whites.
Jews would hate this system more than anyone. It would permanently break the back of their institutional power.
The DIEtards will never go for this compromise. It's too honest for them. Moreover, it would take their power away - things would no longer depend on the caprice of Single Woke Females in HR.
Hmmm
NFL would change drastically
Same with NBA but does it matter
Millionaires playing for billionaires but not as exciting as the Gladiators of Rome
Vi ses
Jon
Bringing back actual gladiatorial combat would be extremely based.
Most Def!
Different style of Meritocracy involved as half would be in Valhalla or severely injured
Selects for younger combatants as the Carnival continues.
Tusen Takk
Start with sports and see how that goes first
Here we have a classic attempt at compromise and fairness, which will be roundly scorned by the liberals in power. They have no interest in compromise, and why should they? A mild threat of slaughter perhaps, but they hold the keys to that threat, as well. Don’t drone me, bro.
When you boil the Anglosphere's 'Race' problem down to something that can fit on a comment thread, it's really a White-on-White thing. If the tertiary sheep-dipped whites would stop beating their fellow whites with their virtue-signal lightsaber sticks, any other Race problems would be pretty manageable.
Yep. It's basically a White civil war.
"...virtue-signal lightsaber sticks..."
Take a bow, man! Well put, given what "Lesbian Headlamp" has been up to the with "The Acolyte".
I think it won’t work quite so well. For one thing, who decides, and how, who is in which racial group? Right now, it’s self-ID, with only social pressure keeping most whites from claiming to be POC. But if the stakes are raised and explicit, then there will need to be some more serious gatekeeping. And it will have to be the government that does that (who else can?). And if you are mixed race (as so many are), what group do you go into? There will need to be detailed rules, and there will be huge and never-ending fights over those rules.
The current system keeps everything on the down low, and that might actually be more palatable and socially cohesive.
First question: 23&Me
I addressed the mixed race issue directly.
23&Me opens all sorts of interesting conversations at the dinner during Xmas.
how do you know 23 and me is legitimate? Wasn't there a similar company that decided everyone had (some), jewish, native american or black ancestry?
And what happens to those who refuse to take it?