ALL BLOG POSTS AND COMMENTS COPYRIGHT (C) 2003-2016 VOX DAY. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. REPRODUCTION WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION IS EXPRESSLY PROHIBITED.

Monday, April 13, 2015

Mailvox: refuting the rhetorical

JD has a suggestion which makes superficial sense, although I tend to doubt it will accomplish anything given the inability of rhetorical minds to change based on information:
I got an idea reading your latest post about George R. R. Martin baiting the hook. Martin just reiterates the same litany of labels/misrepresentations that people love to affix to you but I seriously doubt he has spent any time on your blog or twitter feed looking for the relevant posts and quotes to read for himself- so maybe it would be useful to put them all together in one convenient place for all to read. I am suggesting you put together a FAQ relating to Sad/Rabid Puppies and yourself in general that you put front and center on your blog. I think it could serve a variety of purposes. (It would be a fun little museum of SJW's lies and misrepresentations about you and would be more fun to browse than a freak show at the circus.) 

I have spent a fair amount of time lately around the web and social media reading what your detractors say about you and Sad/Rabid puppies. Whether it is blog, Reddit, Twitter, etc., they trot out the same accusations: "he said black people are savages, he thinks it's okay to throw acid in women's faces, he got kicked out of the SFWA because he used the SFWA communication channels to spread racism, he is a white-supremacist, he is a Christian dominionist, he has said that he hates women, he is trying to destroy the Hugos, he gamed the Hugos..."

I know you have addressed these kinds of things as you have encountered them, but I think it would be helpful to put them all in one place, especially now that the mainstream media is taking notice of the Hugo situation. Quote the SJW's accusation, link to the relevant blog entries if applicable, define yourself in your own words, and most importantly- make people accountable for twisting your words and misrepresenting you. I'm sure the Ilk wouldn't mind helping you collect and catalogue the slanders against you.
As I said, I'm skeptical, but it can't hurt. To address the specific accusations:
  1. I did not say black people are savages. I said one black individual, N.K. Jemisin, was a half-savage. I was wrong. She is, we are reliably informed by Ms Jemisin herself, a full savage. In addition to falsely claiming that I am "a self-described misogynist, racist, anti-Semite, and a few other flavors of asshole", the charming Ms Jemisin has also claimed "a) that Heinlein was racist as *fuck*, and b) most of science fiction fandom was too." It's mildly amusing to see science fiction fandom fall all over itself to call me racist in defense of the woman who has openly, and repeatedly, declared that they are racists.
  2. I do not think it is okay to throw acid in women's faces for any reason. I do think the Taliban are rational and that their policy of mutilating and murdering those who threaten their way of life reflects their objectives and their ruthlessness rather than an inability to think rationally. The fact that they have successively defeated the Red Army and NATO in Afghanistan tends to support my case.
  3. I was not kicked out of SFWA for any reason. The SFWA Board voted to expel me, but the membership never followed suit as required by the bylaws at the time. And no reason was given by the SFWA Board for its vote. The real reason was that Patrick Nielsen Hayden and John Scalzi refused to pay their dues to SFWA and presented the board with choice between me and a Senior Editor at Tor Books as well as its three-time former president.
  4. I am not a white supremacist. I am a Native American with considerable Mexican heritage. Mexican Revolutionary heritage to be precise. I am not a supremacist of any kind, but I would be better described as an East Asian supremacist. I tend to prefer Western European culture, specifically Italian culture, but I am an East Asian Studies major, I lived and studied in Japan, and I still speak some Japanese.
  5. I could not unreasonably be described as a small-d Christian dominionist, but I am more accurately described as a Western Civilizationist. I believe that any civilized Western society will be a Christian one or it will cease to be civilized... if it manages to survive at all. The explosion of Christianity throughout Asia versus Western postchristianity is one reason I think the future favors Asian civilization in the long term. I think Europe is in the process of going back to being the historical sideshow it was prior to the 1500s.
  6. I am not trying to destroy the Hugo Awards. I am indifferent to their fate.
  7. I did not game the 2014 Hugo Awards. After being falsely accused of doing so by numerous parties, I decided to demonstrate the absurdity of the accusation by gaming the 2015 Awards. I trust my innocence with regards to the 2014 Awards is now clear and I look forward to receiving apologies from those who falsely accused me.
Anything else? I tend to doubt knowing the relevant facts will affect many opinions, for the obvious reason that if you are inclined to write someone off completely because you heard they once called someone a "half-savage", you are providing a very strong indication that your mind is limited to the rhetorical level.

Indeed, the fact that the same ungrammatical excerpt chopped out of the middle of a sentence keeps being trotted out again and again should alert the dialectical mind to the probability that there simply isn't very much, if any, there there. The complete sentence, which for obvious reasons is almost never quoted, much less quoted in context, is this:

"Being an educated, but ignorant half-savage, with little more understanding of what it took to build a new literature by "a bunch of beardy old middle-class middle-American guys" than an illiterate Igbotu tribesman has of how to build a jet engine, Jemisin clearly does not understand that her dishonest call for "reconciliation" and even more diversity within SF/F is tantamount to a call for its decline into irrelevance."

But it is entirely obvious that we're not dealing with dialectical minds capable of logic, we're dealing with rhetorical minds that are swayed solely by emotion. Such minds can be changed, but not by facts and reason. The more successful we are, and the more staunchly we stand, the more of them that will come over to our side for a whole host of "reasons" that will neither make sense to us nor withstand logical scrutiny.

Especially when this is what passes for the honest dialogue and debate from the other side when they come to comment here:
What does a right-wing fundamentalist southern Baptist do that's "civilized"? - fuck his sister? Sodomize pigs and goats? Masturbate with his own gun? Beat his wife with a copy of the Bible? Dress in white sheets while spewing the kind of racist garbage that Hitler would be proud of? Too bad your mum didn't abort you. At least you're an old fuck who will die before me, so I can laugh over how few people come to your funeral.

Labels:

107 Comments:

Anonymous 204 April 13, 2015 4:33 AM  

"I am not a white supremacist. I am a Native American with considerable Mexican heritage."
Why can't a naive American with considerable Mexican heritage be a white supremacist? I don't think the second half is necessary.

Anonymous Anonymous April 13, 2015 4:48 AM  

"What you have done is beyond evaluation."

Ex-pat in Oz

This victory is immeasurably vital.

Garlands for the victor,

Blogger Vox April 13, 2015 5:04 AM  

Why can't a naive American with considerable Mexican heritage be a white supremacist? I don't think the second half is necessary.

Because the rhetorical identitarians don't believe it's possible. You're wrong, because you are thinking with your mind, not your feelings.

Anonymous PhillipGeorge(c)2015 April 13, 2015 5:10 AM  

Confirmation bias means there will always be "awards for the most highly awarded" awards. I got that while watching the "We are the world" stunt - the one that ended African poverty and made celebrities out of ordinary famous rich people, Likewise I believe its time we have a national fund raiser's awareness week, and show solidarity with fundraisers everywhere by raising funds for them. Everyone could wear a black rainbow to show solidarity for famous rich fundraisers and empathize with their struggles; rich people struggle!. Oprah Winfrey might cry and confess her struggles with being a rich famous fundraiser.
Perhaps the answer to being misunderstood is to distort their reality beyond breaking point. Once broken they might have some pieces that can be glued together into something useful - a back scratcher for example.
In conclusion - we win - its how Truth is its own award/reward system.

faint praise is damning. Hence the golf claps burying pretenders.

Anonymous Strange Aeons April 13, 2015 5:36 AM  

"Distort their reality beyond breaking point"
Will definitely add that to the appropriate chore list.
1. ^
2. Buy blue spray paint to touch up the sky
3. Install irrigation system in the ocean
4. Bury packets of dessicant in Sahara Desert.
5. Install air conditioners in Antarctica.

Blogger Vox April 13, 2015 5:52 AM  

In light of the purpose of this post, I'm not going to permit defenses of any positions that anyone believes to be reasonable, whether or not I happen to hold them, on this thread. They will only serve as red herrings.

Anonymous grey enlightenment April 13, 2015 6:04 AM  

The left chooses their facts. And when all else fails, it's racism and sexism.

Blogger Cataline Sergius April 13, 2015 6:05 AM  

I suppose it is a handy list for us. The thing to remember when using it is you will be dealing with SJWs.

1. They will assume you are lying because they always do.

2. Facts are only a springboard for emotional impact because that is all they are for them.

3. Scoring points off of them is impossible because they (and only they), are allowed to move the goal posts, after you've scored a goal. Thus invalidating your score point.

Always remember the point of any debate, so far as they are concerned is to make the other guy feel bad about himself.

Blogger JP April 13, 2015 6:34 AM  

Between Scalzi and Martin, who's the alpha rabbit?

Anonymous x April 13, 2015 6:37 AM  

"Vox doesn't believr in a woman's right to vote!"

"Vox is a homphobe."

"Vox is a fascist"

Anonymous Giuseppe April 13, 2015 6:50 AM  

Vox,
I think you are underestimating the effect that rhetorical brainwashing has had on most humans, as well as how effective the simple understanding of the aristotelian method of proving the "fight rhetoric with rhetoric" efficiency is at giving a mind-shock sufficient to clarify the mind and make you a lot more immune to the daily dose of brainwashing we are all subjected to.

If you recal, my first contact with you was precisely to thank you for this very point. Now, you and others may disagree or disbelieve me, but I am also +3sd on IQ and fiercly dialectical in my outlook from birth. And yet, even I had been influenced to some degree, admittedly not much, but enough to reduce my natural instinct of nuking all rhetoric as soon as I saw it to merely using conventional warfare against it.

I for one think JD's idea is good and think this post is helpful and could be a reference, but a FAQ explaining your actual position on so-called racism, homophobia, baby-eating etc would be a very useful thing to have as a general reference to point the SJWs to and would save many ilk time when browbeating rabbits all over the blogosphere.

Blogger D. Lane April 13, 2015 6:52 AM  

This is perhaps the most useless post in the history of this blog. VD is none of the things he is accused of being. Why? Because VD isn't real.

Have any of you ever met VD? No. Have any of you ever seen him in the flesh? No. The only "proof" of VD's existence are old photos and some faceless audio, all of which could easily be faked.

VD isn't real. He is a villain invented by the SFWA to sucker naive Internet intellectuals into wasting their money on books and generating publicity for free.

Do you idiots understand now? Vox Day isn't a white supremacist, a misogynist, a Christian dominionist or a sexist: he's imaginary.

Blogger Vox April 13, 2015 6:55 AM  

Between Scalzi and Martin, who's the alpha rabbit?

No question. Martin. Scalzi hopped up and down and squeed when he saw Martin show up. Now, with an even BIGGER chief rabbit, surely the wolf would cower in fear.

Instead, the wolf licked his chops. All he saw was more meat.

Anonymous Sensei April 13, 2015 6:56 AM  

Between Scalzi and Martin, who's the alpha rabbit?

Martin is certainly the bigger name by far, but he seems to concern himself primarily with Westeros and his other writings. He's only a rabbit by ideological affiliation, and has weighed in merely because he is aware that his status gives him an automatic platform. Scalzi is more of an activist and would be warren-leader but only of his little patch of blighted meadow.

I'm not sure who might be considered a true alpha rabbit. Those who run the big SJW websites, perhaps.

OpenID cailcorishev April 13, 2015 6:57 AM  

No, this won't change any SJW minds. But it might be useful in dealing with the sort of conservative or moderate who is sympathetic to some of your positions, but has heard a couple horrible out-of-context things, but knows better than to jump to conclusions. Someone like Brad T., in other words, or the person GRRM was pretending to be..

So if you were willing to answer these accusations at all, it probably makes sense to put them in one FAQ for easy access.

Anonymous Steve April 13, 2015 7:06 AM  

D. Lane - I was going to scoff at your conspiracy theory, but...

the similarity between the Dark Lord and another great icon of evil genius is uncanny.

Keaton always said, "I don't believe in God, but I'm afraid of him." Well I believe in God, and the only thing that scares me is Vox Day.

Blogger Josh April 13, 2015 7:11 AM  

How many SJWs have crippled themselves doing normal activities?

PNH has RSI from typing and "mousing".

Now, the lesser chief rabbit is down:

It was not deep vein thrombosis. What it was, was a tear in my calf muscle, probably brought on by walking fairly strenuously for several hours straight the other day when I visited King’s Park in Perth.

Blogger Krul April 13, 2015 7:12 AM  

SJWs often resort to emotional bluster to silence and discredit their critics. I remember when the go-to hysterical accusation against Vox was "VD says he would kill toddlers in the name of God!" (usually coming from someone who was vocally pro choice).

Now it's "VD says black people are savages!"

Yeah, I'm sure that will be WAAAAAY more effective. If it doesn't work they'll probably follow it up with "VD is a bad tipper!" or something.

Anonymous Steve April 13, 2015 7:21 AM  

Josh - PNH has RSI from typing and "mousing".

Is that like gerbilling?

Is it a real mouse, or is Scalzi playing dress-up again?

Blogger Josh April 13, 2015 7:25 AM  

And like every practitioner of our brave modern lifestyle of staring at screens while idly mousing for hours at a time, I’ve had small bouts of RSI pain.

I know we've got a lot of programmers here. Anyone suffering from RSI?

Maybe we're just a more resilient bunch? Or just, maybe, not total weaklings?

Blogger Krul April 13, 2015 7:27 AM  

What does a right-wing fundamentalist southern Baptist do that's "civilized"? - fuck his sister? Sodomize pigs and goats? Masturbate with his own gun?

I've seen leftwing academics seriously advocate for incest, sodomy, beastiality, masturbation and worse. Not many fundamentalist southern Baptists advocating for those things though. If the commenter disapproves of them, s/he's on the wrong side.

It's telling that the worst accusations a leftist can throw at the right are things that the LEFT actually endorses and the RIGHT actually condemns.

Blogger James Dixon April 13, 2015 7:37 AM  

> I know we've got a lot of programmers here. Anyone suffering from RSI?

Not a programmer, but I usually spend more than 8 hours a day at the computer. No RSI, but then I swap hands when one gets tired and I use this: http://www.logitech.com/en-us/product/trackman-marble

Blogger Josh April 13, 2015 7:40 AM  

Not a programmer, but I usually spend more than 8 hours a day at the computer. No RSI

Wait, you mean an SJW lied about that?

No
Way

Anonymous Roundtine April 13, 2015 7:43 AM  

My favorite is when Scalzi wrote a misandrist post about men being "creeps" (creeps being men who women don't want to date, but who ask them for dates). Vox changed it to "stupid sluts" and left the rest intact to clearly show the argument was devoid of logic. Scalzi and the SJW horde decided to call Vox misogynist et al. Later, and within about a month or so later, Scalzi wrote a piece in which he claimed to be a rapist who was voting for Romney. Vox gave a perfect mirror image response, which was doubly funny because of other comments about how it's not OK to joke about rape, and started calling Scalzi McRapey, which continues to this day because they still don't get it. The absurd charges against Vox, if not wholly fabricated, are the result of stupidity. It's exactly like the "Men Kampf" site, which substitutes Jewish nouns in place of male nouns in feminist sayings and writings. Only a moron would read those quotes and think it was a white supremacist trying to curry favor with feminists against the Jews, but that's how stupid these SJWs are. In Brave New World, they make SJWs by adding alcohol.

Anonymous daddynichol April 13, 2015 7:52 AM  

No, this won't change any SJW minds.

The listing of references and facts are not to sway the hard core SJWs, but to influence those who are on the fence or just wondering "Who is Vox Day?".

Since Wiki will never permit an accurate portrayal, then it's up to Vox to lay out an accurate defense (for lack of a better word), and should he decide to do so, there will be a definite uptick in traffic by curious internet onlookers. One Twitter post that his position paper is now posted will set the servers on fire.

Blogger Mr.MantraMan April 13, 2015 8:09 AM  

I think its a good idea, mainly for the squishy modcons who greatly fear the rhetoric of the rabid rabbits (probably just easier to disqualify the words they shriek, but that seems beyond them)

I've long thought any of the wannabe wolves who convince themselves to be paraded about on the left's media to constantly refer listeners or viewers back to their websites for a deeper intellectual discussion of what is the topic. But no, every conservative goes on a left media outlet and then tailgates the discussion trying to explain in 5000 words when only 50 are allowed.

Blogger Salt April 13, 2015 8:10 AM  

A bibliography of Vox could be useful in working with fence-sitters. Won't help with the SJWs, because Aristotle.

I remembered one specific incident that demonstrates the kind of mind Vox, the puppies, and even Gamergate is dealing with. Remember back when, when Vox did his piece at WND pointing out that deportation is totally viable? All he did was point out the historical, the observable, but it was his invoking the dreaded Hitler that did it in with these people. It could not have been more obvious and blatant on the part of Vox's detractors.

The social justice warrior is intellectually, and purposefully, dishonest. They lie.

Anonymous Bz April 13, 2015 8:15 AM  

Surely "Red" Martin shall deliver us from this evil, thought the rabbits: http://archive.delmarvanow.com/article/20131120/ESN01/311200070/New-farmers-history-draw-from

Blogger valiance. April 13, 2015 8:17 AM  

1. Strikes me as a bit disingenuous given that you then go on to explain you don't think a society of Africans could build or maintain an advanced civilization. If you're not calling black people savages, you're coming pretty close. In any case the misunderstanding by your foes is more than understandable, I--like others in the last thread--think it's intentional on your part. You like to play these games; mixing rhetoric and dialectic, double-talking and back-talking, causing offense in the easily-offended simply because you enjoy their consternation. All well and good, but then you can't complain you're being misinterpreted or misunderstood. I think you've acknowledged this in the past.

Heck you're playing those games right now in this very post.

2. You played this one completely straight. Pure and simple case of people not reading or not understanding what you wrote because their outrage got in the way.

4. Is, like 1. slightly disingenuous, which you yourself admit in your response to 204, and a prime example of the game-playing. Every time you bring up your race and heritage it looks like a disqualification of the racist charges against you--which it is not--while also simultaneously acting as a refutation of the whole identitarian concept of using race as a bludgeon.

Sorry don't mean to ruin the joke by trying to explain it. But I've been wanting to comment on the weird, disingenuous, double-layered meaning of your statements for a while now.

OpenID cailcorishev April 13, 2015 8:26 AM  

I was starting to get carpal tunnel (I guess that's what we used to call it before it got this nifty acronym) about 20 years ago. A chiropractor adjusted my wrist and elbow and explained what was causing it so I could adjust it myself. No problems since. Of course, while I still spend several hours a day at it, I don't just sit at a keyboard anymore. If you also do other, heavier things with your hands that keep your muscles strong, I doubt it's a problem.

Blogger Salt April 13, 2015 8:29 AM  

Heck you're playing those games right now in this very post.

Vox separates the wheat from the chaff. This is observable, and the Ilk are growing.

Blogger wrf3 April 13, 2015 8:35 AM  

Vox wrote: You're wrong, because you are thinking with your mind, not your feelings.

But we're supposed to trust our feelings! To let the hate flow through us!

It's doubly delicious that your detractors, supposedly the cream of the SF crowd, never learned that this approach didn't work, at least according to the best known mythos of our time.

Anonymous Joseph Dooley April 13, 2015 8:37 AM  

Hey, Vox, I'm about 1/3 of the way through The Programmed Mind. Great characters and pacing so far. Thanks for the free download.

Blogger LP 999/Eliza April 13, 2015 8:38 AM  

Again I am in major disapproval and disappointment towards Martin, the man is wrong for all the uninformed reasons.

"Martin just reiterates the same litany of labels/misrepresentations that people love to affix to you but I seriously doubt he has spent any time on your blog or twitter feed looking for the relevant posts and quotes to read for himself-"

Agreed.

Which is how the SJW handles things, misinfo, dysinfo, bringing them to the truth is like placing a hook in a feminists nose, tough sell, mostly impossible. How many times has Vox explained 1 thru 7?

Blogger Vox April 13, 2015 8:42 AM  

Strikes me as a bit disingenuous given that you then go on to explain you don't think a society of Africans could build or maintain an advanced civilization.

Do you? If so, on the basis of what evidence? It's not disingenuous at all. It is absolutely factual. There are entirely civilized Africans. There are entirely uncivilized Africans. And there are those in between the two extremes, such as Jemisin. Jemisin doesn't even grasp how or why science fiction was created by beardy middle-aged Middle Americans, she's an intellectual cargo cultist.

Every time you bring up your race and heritage it looks like a disqualification of the racist charges against you--which it is not--while also simultaneously acting as a refutation of the whole identitarian concept of using race as a bludgeon.

That's not disingenuous either. I am refuting their argument on two levels, dialectical and rhetorical.

I--like others in the last thread--think it's intentional on your part. You like to play these games; mixing rhetoric and dialectic, double-talking and back-talking, causing offense in the easily-offended simply because you enjoy their consternation.

Non sono giochi. I am speaking the absolute truth dialectically, while varnishing it with a layer of rhetoric. The dialectic is my language, but they cannot understand or follow it. They only respond, predictably, to the superficial rhetoric, which they will of course do in any event because they are monolingual in that regard. The rhetoric is there both to demonstrate my contempt for them as well as to inform me of the nature of my opponents.

If someone responds to the dialectic, I know he is to be taken seriously. If someone responds to the rhetoric, I know him to be my intellectual inferior, with whom I need not bother.

Now, this may not make sense to someone who does not have at least a thousand people going ever everything he says with a microscope to find something at which to be offended, but believe me, the entire purpose is very utilitarian and is an approach that I have refined over a decade. It allows me to instantly identify, expose and publicly discredit the skim-until-offended crowd rather than repeatedly waste hours engaging them only to discover they have nothing but rhetoric.

Do I enjoy it? I used to. These days that "weird, disingenuous, double-layered meaning" is simply how I write. I would describe it as a dialectic spiked with rhetorical triggers. Can you spot the rhetorical triggers in this comment?

Blogger Josh April 13, 2015 8:47 AM  

Rhetoric is a tool. It's not inherently immoral. People complaining about rhetoric like it's a dirty trick sound like the bitter nice guys complaining that game tactics are dirty tricks to mislead women.

Blogger Joshua Dyal April 13, 2015 9:07 AM  

Between Scalzi and Martin, who's the alpha rabbit?

Rabbits don't have alphas.

Blogger James Dixon April 13, 2015 9:16 AM  

> Strikes me as a bit disingenuous given that you then go on to explain you don't think a society of Africans could build or maintain an advanced civilization.

Would you care to provide an example of where they have done so? Is even South Africa being successfully maintained?

Blogger Josh April 13, 2015 9:17 AM  

Would you care to provide an example of where they have done so? Is even South Africa being successfully maintained?

Sir, have you forgotten about the old Negro space program?

Blogger Student in Blue April 13, 2015 9:18 AM  

Rabbits don't have alphas.

Maybe the better question would be, "who's the top rabbit?"

Blogger Mr.MantraMan April 13, 2015 9:24 AM  

I'll bet that black woman "writer" is racist as fuck, I'll bet her whole pathetic life revolves around her racism. Ask her and let her say in her own words her race hate.

Of course the propaganda has trained conservatives to think "racist" = White and nothing more, but in their own words the SJWs are racist as fuck, hell they advocate for genocide. And yet conservatives won't even bother to ask a person like the black hack of bad fiction about explaining her "racism", everyday is instead a grovel, because segregation, slavery, bad test results, Trayvons following their natural life arc, ect., ect.

OpenID malcolmthecynic April 13, 2015 9:25 AM  

For the record, this whole thing with Martin just increases my respect for Harlan Ellison, who claimed that he wanted to hear your side of the story and then actually listened to it.

In light of this bullshit from Martin he looks positively heroic. Of course, in reality he's just doing what you're supposed to when you hear unsubstantiated rumors about somebody, but even so it speaks well to his character.

Blogger Titus Quinctius Cincinnatus April 13, 2015 9:27 AM  

You know, it really isn't much of a stretch to not feel sad that people like N.K. Jemison die of AIDS much more frequently than anyone else.

Anonymous Slowpoke April 13, 2015 9:36 AM  

Anyone else find all this ironic coming from the "pro slavery" " white supremecist" Martin?


http://fatpinkcast.com/post/52687194306/critics-reactions-to-the-final-season-3-scene-in

http://smokeandstir.org/2013/06/22/game-of-thrones-racism-and-white-saviors/

He best be careful as he falls into the Badthink side of Social justice bullies.

Anonymous suggestion April 13, 2015 9:36 AM  

Vox:

I wonder if you have dumb a FAQ down even more, use it to flip the SJWs positions against them.

For example:

Q: Is Vox Day a racist?
A: No, Vay believes in science

Here might be a few biggie questions to answer:
Are you a racist?
Are you a homophobe?
Do you hate black people?
Do you hate gay people?
Do you hate women?
Do you want to take away women's right to vote?
Are you a fundementalist?
Do you hate science?
Are you agaist People of Color reading SFF?

I'm sure you can answer all of a above in a way that will send the rabbits into a tizzy.

Blogger bob k. mando April 13, 2015 9:44 AM  

Krul April 13, 2015 7:12 AM
they'll probably follow it up with "VD is a bad tipper!" or something.



*confuszled*

when has Vox ever claimed Negro heritage?

Anonymous Alexander April 13, 2015 9:46 AM  

Valiance,

An objective measure. since our leftist friends are so hip with that.

This study , found in a ten second google search, shows the following countries that have gone from net food exporters to net food importers in the 2000s.

Benin, Burundi, Chad, Cuba, Dominican Republic, El Salvador, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Madagascar, Mali, Mauritius, Mongolia, Saint Vincent & Grenadines, Solomon Islands, Somalia, Sudan, Srian [sic] Arab Republic, Tajikstan, Turkmenistan, Zimbabwe.

So basically, former USSR states and satellites, and Africa. One notes that none of these countries are making up for their food shortages by being large industrial powerhouses. One also notes that Africa only avoids larger representation by the fact that most of the remainder of the continent was in this position priorto the time period examined.

So tell me, how in the hell can a country not feed itself and even be considered theoretically capable of maintaining an advanced civilization.

Anonymous Giuseppe April 13, 2015 9:54 AM  

Vox,
Your reply to valiance should be part of the FAQ, if you decide to do it. It clears up a LOT of misconceptions.

Won't change the rabbits, but rhere are more than a few wolves raised as rabbits that would benefit greatly from it.

Blogger Josh April 13, 2015 9:58 AM  

So tell me, how in the hell can a country not feed itself and even be considered theoretically capable of maintaining an advanced civilization.

Obviously the culprit is racism and colonialism.

Anonymous Jon Bromfield April 13, 2015 10:13 AM  

Slightly OT but relevant: Here's how the Seattle Public Schools District defines "Racism." Source:

http://www.fourmilab.ch/fourmilog/archives/seattle_schools_racism_2006-05-29/searace.htm

“Those aspects of society that overtly and covertly attribute value and normality to white people and Whiteness, and devalue, stereotype, and label people of color as “other”, different, less than, or render them invisible. Examples of these norms include defining white skin tones as nude or flesh colored, HAVING A FUTURE TIME ORIENTATION, EMPHASIZING INDIVIDUALISM as opposed to a more collective ideology, defining one form of English as standard.” (emphasis mine).

So Vox acknowledging racial differences in time preferences and valuation of individuality is racist but the Seattle Public Schools doing the same is not?

I am so confused.

Anonymous Joe Doakes April 13, 2015 10:28 AM  

I deplore the modern mis-use of the word "debate" to mean "recite talking points past each other." I prefered the classical style of argument and rebuttal through evidence.

For your debate with GRRM: "Resolved: the Hugo is awarded to the best Science Fiction book." For the Pro, GRRM; for the Con, Vox Day.

Blogger valiance. April 13, 2015 10:31 AM  

I will try to keep your bits bolded
Do you? If so, on the basis of what evidence?
I’m not sure. I don’t think the current dismal state of much of the continent is determinative of its future potential. War is declining. GDP/capita is rising. Foreign aid over the last few decades will take time to produce results. My major concern is genetically hardwired IQ limitations, irreparable except by eugenics programs (with or without genetic engineering). But for various reasons I am less bullish on the genetic evidence than some.
It's not disingenuous at all. It is absolutely factual. There are entirely civilized Africans. There are entirely uncivilized Africans. And there are those in between the two extremes, such as Jemisin. Jemisin doesn't even grasp how or why science fiction was created by beardy middle-aged Middle Americans, she's an intellectual cargo cultist.
I read savage as an uncivilized human being and an inability to build or maintain an advanced civilization as indicative of savagery. A roundabout way of saying Africans are savages. Not all, but most. Or enough to prevent advanced civilization from developing and flourishing in SSA. Which is why I thought it disingenuous for you to deny you said Africans were savages.

That's not disingenuous either. I am refuting their argument on two levels, dialectical and rhetorical.
Hrmm. I guess I read appearing to buy into their argument on the rhetorical level—even to refute it—while running a countervailing dialectical argument on top of that to be pretending to buy into something you clearly don’t. Just including the rhetorical argument feels like a lie when the entire structure that makes up your rhetorical refutation not only doesn’t even apply, but is itself obliterated by the dialectical layer.
Non sono giochi. I am speaking the absolute truth dialectically, while varnishing it with a layer of rhetoric. The dialectic is my language, but they cannot understand or follow it. They only respond, predictably, to the superficial rhetoric, which they will of course do in any event because they are monolingual in that regard. The rhetoric is there both to demonstrate my contempt for them as well as to inform me of the nature of my opponents.

If someone responds to the dialectic, I know he is to be taken seriously. If someone responds to the rhetoric, I know him to be my intellectual inferior, with whom I need not bother.

Now, this may not make sense to someone who does not have at least a thousand people going ever everything he says with a microscope to find something at which to be offended, but believe me, the entire purpose is very utilitarian and is an approach that I have refined over a decade. It allows me to instantly identify, expose and publicly discredit the skim-until-offended crowd rather than repeatedly waste hours engaging them only to discover they have nothing but rhetoric.

Do I enjoy it? I used to. These days that "weird, disingenuous, double-layered meaning" is simply how I write. I would describe it as a dialectic spiked with rhetorical triggers. Can you spot the rhetorical triggers in this comment?


Use of rhetoric as a filtering method make sense. I think I’m reacting to triggers I am supposed to ignore. They’re traps meant for other people. Not sure why their presence bugs me. I wanna go “who does Vox think he’s fooling?” But obviously hordes of people are fooled by it.

Anonymous FP April 13, 2015 10:41 AM  

"Do you idiots understand now? Vox Day isn't a white supremacist, a misogynist, a Christian dominionist or a sexist: he's imaginary."

Its a trick! Get an axe.

Nice find Jon on Seattle public schools. This would be the same city that banned "brown bag" lunches because you know, those bags are racist as fuck.

Anonymous p-dawg April 13, 2015 10:54 AM  

@Alexander: The United States became a net importer of food in August of 2004. Why isn't it on your list?

Anonymous Viking April 13, 2015 11:00 AM  

Sometimes the argument is made for the benefit of the bystanders rather than the opponent.

Blogger James Dixon April 13, 2015 11:01 AM  

> Foreign aid over the last few decades will take time to produce results.

Really? What about the foreign aid for decades before that? In short, don't hold your breath.

> Not all, but most. Or enough to prevent advanced civilization from developing and flourishing in SSA.

Not all Africans are sub-saharan. Even some that are have proven capable of maintaining an advanced civilization. Of course, a good chunk of the subset were a minority and are no longer in power.

Anonymous MrGreenMan April 13, 2015 11:06 AM  

@valiance

"I read savage as an uncivilized human being and an inability to build or maintain an advanced civilization as indicative of savagery."

Here you've gone and slipped "advanced' in there, which will take this in the direction of a personal definition.

What is advanced? If they have rudimentary technology, but are just the nicest, kindest, hardest working, well-mannered people, would that get a hypothetical group marked as savage? Are the Amish savages then?

Anonymous Alexander April 13, 2015 11:06 AM  

Well p-dawg,

That would be because as I clearly explained, I used the google, found a study, and copied a table from it.

However, I note a few difference between the United States and, say, Somalia and Chad, the most relevant being that:

In 2014, the United States produced over 14 billion gallons of ethanol. So while I think it's incredibly stupid that we are burning massive quantities of perfectly good foodstuff to chase the energy equivalent of unicorn farts, it's not a problem of actually producing the food . In fact, wikipedia notes that we became the world leader in ethanol production in 2005, which fits nicely with the 2004 data, don't you think?

That being said, if your argument is that the United States was a civilized country and is in the process of becoming an uncivilized one... fair enough, dawg.

Blogger James Dixon April 13, 2015 11:14 AM  

Oh, and I think it probably goes without saying, but just in case, JD wasn't me.

Blogger James Dixon April 13, 2015 11:16 AM  

> if your argument is that the United States was a civilized country and is in the process of becoming an uncivilized one...

I don't know about uncivilized. But a "banana republic" where there is no rule of law, definitely.

Blogger Vox April 13, 2015 11:48 AM  

I’m not sure.

Then how can you possibly even begin to claim that I am wrong?

Foreign aid over the last few decades will take time to produce results.

It doesn't work like that.

I read savage as an uncivilized human being and an inability to build or maintain an advanced civilization as indicative of savagery. A roundabout way of saying Africans are savages. Not all, but most. Or enough to prevent advanced civilization from developing and flourishing in SSA.

Enough. And if you're familiar with my Time to Civilization argument, you'll understand why there are still enough who lack the basic skills required to maintain, let alone build, a civilization without outside assistance, to prevent those who have them from doing so. The English didn't do it in less than 1,000 years. The Germans and the Scandinavians required similar time frames.

Why do you think Africans are going to go from zero to full civilization in less than half that time? Especially when they now have considerably farther to go technologically. Does that make any sense at all?

Blogger Russell April 13, 2015 11:51 AM  

"I know we've got a lot of programmers here. Anyone suffering from RSI?"

I'm 42, and have been programming for 18 years now, and no, not at all.

Of course, what has helped me was getting off my butt and getting to the gym a few years ago, due in no small part to our host's influence.

My last major injury is when I tweaked my back by half-sneezing to the side in the middle of a deadlift. Lesson learned, I'll drop the bar first then sneeze.

Blogger rcocean April 13, 2015 12:01 PM  

People need to grasp the fact that SJW are "Results orientated". Like the Communists, words are used as weapons to achieve the desired outcome. Vox is the enemy, he was attacked before he did anything to them, because they didn't like him. The names and labels were the result of the dislike - they didn't dislike Vox because of what he said. I will bet George Martin disliked Vox - simply because he was "Right-wing" before he even knew about any Vox comments about whats-her-name.

Blogger rcocean April 13, 2015 12:05 PM  

If you read history of the Russian Revolution you'll see that the "Bourgeoisie" not only couldn't grasp what Lenin and Stalin were trying to do and what they were capable of, they REFUSED to grasp it even when told by ex-communists. They literally had to learn by experience. Its the old problem with the Right-wing. The constant projection of Our values onto the Left combined with dislike of conflict and desire to think well of others.

Blogger Engineer-Poet April 13, 2015 12:08 PM  

"how in the hell can a country not feed itself and even be considered theoretically capable of maintaining an advanced civilization."

If it's Japan.

Arguably, there's no relationship between the adequacy of a country's agricultural resources for its population and its civilization (though it requires a civilization, either its own or someone else's, to maintain a deficit for long).  Also, those who've been watching* have noticed that Japan is on track toward self-sufficiency again.

* (mostly yelling that immigrants are required to make Japan less Japanese and maintain self-insufficiency.)

Anonymous Thidran April 13, 2015 12:14 PM  

Hey there Vox, not much of a talker on these blogs because I'm focused more on Gamergate. Figured I'd give a bit of a hand here though to point out the weaknesses of the argument in your blogpost.

1. This one is golden, just need to cite the specific argument if able to so you can rub it in those idiot's faces.

2. Also good, was curious about that particular quote myself, and could see why they fell into emotional rhetoric. http://slatestarcodex.com/2014/12/17/the-toxoplasma-of-rage/ They're just taking advantage of this.

3. Straightforward, no weakpoints here.

4. Here's where a chink in the armor is. Counterargument: You can be a white supremecist even if you aren't white(See: Boomerang Bigots, also see all the white people spouting anti-white speech for the opposite, as you may have noticed.) Deflecting to differing supremacy isn't much better either.

5. Disagree on this, primarily due to using identity politics as an argument. Rather than simply apply the label of christianity, why not focus on which particular branch applies? I'd prefer that because while your constituents would understand the meaning, your opposition would equate it to the Westboro Baptist Church side of things and take advantage of the ambiguity. See this http://theden.tv/2013/08/12/thedes-and-exosemantic-gang-signs/ for why that might help you more.

6. Having fun with the resulting controversy? I know I am. I'd look further into it though if I were you. Especially the likes of Arthur Chu for a good starting point.

7. I disagree in that I don't believe you've "gamed" the 2015 awards anymore than the opposition has done for ages. Playing by their rules to me is not "gaming".

Oh yes, one other bit: http://i.imgur.com/bokLjv9.jpg Most of the people involved in this likely aren't aware of what they're up against, give this image a look, and maybe share it if you agree.

Anyways, if you'd like to reach me, I'm on Rizon's IRC.

~Thidran, current owner of the Cathedral of Misogyny, #BurgersandFries

Blogger Corvinus April 13, 2015 12:14 PM  

Rabbits don't have alphas.

@Joshua Dyal
It's all relative. Martin's a Delta, and Scalzi's a Gamma. Between just those two, Martin's the alpha.

Just looked at Martin's not-a-blog. He had a long, sympathetic response to Correia, but... he mentions Vox Day several times (Correia didn't at all), and is, yet again, trying the "divide and conquer" strategy by suggesting that Correia's refusal to denounce Vox makes SJWs suspicious and not wanting to give him any Brownie Points.

Blogger valiance. April 13, 2015 12:25 PM  

@MrGreenMan I don't know much about The Amish but from what I understand they are *capable* of creating/maintaining an advanced civilization, they just *choose* not to. If they lacked this capability, I think they'd be savage by Vox's definition at least. See below.

There are other definitions of savage (rude, boorish, brutal, cruel) which have nothing to do with technological civilization whatsoever. In which case of course many of The Amish qualify, as do many Africans and people from all around the world.

@Vox

Never claimed you were wrong on that point. My contention was you were calling Africans savage by saying they could not build or maintain an advanced civilization. I didn't say you were wrong to do so. I just said denying that you called Africans savage was disingenuous. Going by your definitions of savage and civilized here I don't see how I'm misinterpreting you: http://voxday.blogspot.com/2013/06/mailvox-time-preferences-and.html

wrt foreign aid I don't know enough to argue the point. Conceded.

Africans have farther to go but nothing to stop them vaulting the intermediate steps. They can adopt cell phones and the internet now, and they are doing so. Does that rise to the level of being able to develop such things yourself de novo? Of course not, that's a much higher bar to clear. But I think being able to use what's already been developed by The West could be a civilizational accelerant. No need to reinvent the wheel. But as I said I'm on the fence on this issue. Genetic capacity--in intelligence and time preference mostly-- would be the key determinant at the end of the day, or at least until genetic engineering becomes widespread. But do I think this civilizing process could potentially happen much faster than a thousand years? Yeah, much faster. If it takes that long its likely to get lapped by genetic engineering or God knows what else. Thousand years is a long time.

Blogger Raoul Duke April 13, 2015 12:30 PM  

"Why can't a naive American with considerable Mexican heritage be a white supremacist?"

Example #838381 of "Inclusiveness" Gone Horribly Wrong.

Anonymous Crusader Corim April 13, 2015 12:38 PM  

Vox,

When would you say the Anglo-Saxons were civilized? You give a 1000 year time period, but they were obviously civilized well before 1000 AD, but weren't occupied by the Romans at all (Saxony remained beyond even the furthest bounds of the Empire).

Tacitus even calls the Chauci (the Roman name for the inhabitants of Saxony) "peaceful, calm and levelheaded".

Anonymous Alexander April 13, 2015 12:39 PM  

If it's Japan.

Arguably, there's no relationship between the adequacy of a country's agricultural resources for its population and its civilization (though it requires a civilization, either its own or someone else's, to maintain a deficit for long). Also, those who've been watching* have noticed that Japan is on track toward self-sufficiency again.


I knew someone would take it here.

Yes, Japan is a net food importer. So is Britain. So is Singapore...

But one notes that I did point out that the list of countries lacked an industrial base to make up the difference . There is a difference I trust we can all see between a country that is agrarian, yet still has to import agricultural products, compared to a non-agrarian one that trades industrial products for its food supplies.

In short, Africans are failing in the very sectors they have the natural comparative advantage. And they've yet to show a sign of turning that around.

Now, I will concede that there is not an absolute correlation between the primary producer of one's food supply and being a civilized nation (though in the long run, I predict that is indeed the case if the study hasn't already been done). The idea that there is 'no correlation' is absurd.

Anyway, your point leads me to a second useful metric: if your civilization is dependent on a foreign civilization for your survival, that civilization is more advanced than yours. That applies as much to grains market in central africa as it does to the EBT economy in Detroit.

Blogger Marc DuQuesne April 13, 2015 12:41 PM  

Is there a particular source for the "a self-described misogynist, racist, anti-Semite, and a few other flavors of asshole" claim?

Anonymous p-dawg April 13, 2015 12:43 PM  

@Alexander" as I clearly explained, I used the google, found a study, and copied a table from it. "

So you used a flawed study, then. The point remains that you clearly didn't want the US to be associated with the countries you named even though it met the same requirements. But hey, that's fine. I found my information in a 10-second google search as well.

"it's not a problem of actually producing the food "

And as Rhodesia and South Africa showed, it's not a problem of actually producing the food in Africa, either. Starvation is almost always a political problem, not a resource problem.

"That being said, if your argument is that the United States was a civilized country and is in the process of becoming an uncivilized one... fair enough, dawg."

That wasn't my argument, but I agree with this statement.

Blogger Vox April 13, 2015 12:44 PM  

Is there a particular source for the "a self-described misogynist, racist, anti-Semite, and a few other flavors of asshole" claim?

NK Jemisin's imagination.

I just said denying that you called Africans savage was disingenuous. Going by your definitions of savage and civilized here I don't see how I'm misinterpreting you:

I did not call ALL Africans savage. I called some Africans savage. Do you deny that some Africans are savage?

Anonymous Alexander April 13, 2015 12:45 PM  

/golf clap.

Exactly my point.

Africa, when run by Dutch and Englishman, results in civilization on par with what one expects from Holland and England.

When Rhodesia and South Africa are not, they are not.

Thank you for pointing that out. You have strengthened my point that food production is a strong indicator of civilization advancement.

Blogger Vox April 13, 2015 12:47 PM  

When would you say the Anglo-Saxons were civilized?

I don't have a precise date. But in light of the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle and the Magna Carta, I'd say sometime between 850 and 1250 AD is a not-unreasonable date.

Anonymous Alexander April 13, 2015 12:52 PM  

If your best rebuttal of me is that a major industrial power imports food because it is (stupidly) producing much more food than it needs but turning it into happy gas, and that somehow is the same as Chad, which produces nothing, and does nothing with it... then I am happy to stand by my assertion than the ability to feed oneself is a good metric for determining one's level of advancement. That would also show us that advanced civilization is no stand in for common sense, but I don't think anyone was arguing that it was.

Blogger Vox April 13, 2015 12:55 PM  

Does that rise to the level of being able to develop such things yourself de novo? Of course not, that's a much higher bar to clear. But I think being able to use what's already been developed by The West could be a civilizational accelerant.

And that much higher bar is the one under discussion. You can take a primitive out of an Amazon tribe and put him in a t-shirt, Adidas, and teach him how to use a mobile phone. But he can't fix it when it stops working. Hence my specific choice of the terms "maintain or build".

No African society can do it today. Not one.

Americans are very innocent in this regard. The African-Americans are genetically around 20 percent European on average. Until you see a pair of proper sub-Sarahan Africans spend seven minutes trying to figure out the concept of a roundabout, including getting out of the car to investigate this mysterious thing, then getting back in the car, GOING THE WRONG WAY, and nearly causing a head-on collision, you will probably never understand the full extent of the challenges involved.

I wish every equalitarian could have witnessed it. It was truly eye-opening. These weren't bad people. They were functioning adults successfully operating high technology. They had mobile phones and a car. But they literally could not figure out how a roundabout operated by watching cars navigate it.

Blogger Corvinus April 13, 2015 2:23 PM  

I believe that any civilized Western society will be a Christian one or it will cease to be civilized... if it manages to survive at all.

The explosion of Christianity throughout Asia versus Western postchristianity is one reason I think the future favors Asian civilization in the long term.

Maybe. It's rather shocking if you consider that Asian countries probably have about as many Christian believers per capita as European ones do now.

My personal take is that both Asian and European civilization will suffer a short-term implosion and then become Christian, sort of like with the collapse of the Roman Empire. Buddhism will collapse and become extinct, followed by Hinduism.

In St. John's Apocalypse, I have tentatively identified the smoke coming out of the pit and obscuring the sun as post-Christianity, and the plague coming out of the Tigris/Euphrates just afterwords as Islam. (Thanks, ISIL. You've made it very obvious to me.)

Blogger luagha April 13, 2015 2:33 PM  

This touches on my earlier commentary about Saudi Arabia buying nuclear weapons.

They can buy them, but can they keep and maintain them in a state of readiness? Without having a tragic accident?

It takes a lot of smart, competent people up and down a long chain to keep a nuclear weapon in proper working order. From what I hear about American workers who maintain Saudi-purchased American-made fighter aircraft, I don't think they have it.

Anonymous Heh April 13, 2015 2:33 PM  

Do you deny that some Africans are savage?

Apropos of which...

http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2015/04/09/with-violence-against-albinos-rising-malawi-orders-police-to-shoot-ruthless-attackers/

"Albinos in Malawi have long faced the threat of abduction, attacks and even death, with criminals seeking to sell albino body parts for witchcraft. Now, a fresh wave of violence has prompted a new government order: shoot anyone caught attacking albinos."

Anonymous Alexander April 13, 2015 2:36 PM  

I predict the old standby: It's different when THEY do it.

Anonymous Donn April 13, 2015 2:39 PM  

Vox - South Africa used to have a space program! What does it have now? Witch doctors who advocate disgusting circumcision and raping infants to cure AIDS. Perhaps they need outreach from NASA to raise awareness of their accomplishments as well.

Anonymous A.B. Prosper April 13, 2015 3:11 PM  

I'd argue the Celts were civilized even with a few customs we find barbarous. The Romans certainly were and they were also pretty awful by our standards, Also non Christian societies can be perfectly civilized and even if you don't accept the Celts as such the Pagan Greeks and aforementioned Romans were.

They were arguably more civilized than Christian Europe in many respects.

That said I don't think Neo-Hellenic Reconstruction can be the basis for a modern Western civilization nor any of the other Pagan strains like Asatru are for that matter though. This is not a weakness of Paganism per se as much as a heavy memetic overlay for Christianity. People aren't Christian but the concepts and cultures make up so much of the underlying organizational structures, we don't know how to operate without them and will probably do exactly as Vox said, become a backwater.

I don't think this is bad though, the European diaspora as a good thing for us in many ways but the mess we are in was also caused by our inability to leave well enough alone. Its understandable, European Elite have much ambition and little land .

A little historical "corner time" might be good for us.

Buddhism and Hinduism are doing fine and even if the locals do grow more Christian, they'll hybridize. Christ as Krishna is something I could see happening .

However the future does not belong to East Asia , it is as sick as the West , equal to or lower birth rates, devastated ecologys in many and a fundamentally low trust culture that isn't going to miraculously to change.

Africa to is becoming heavily Christian and its unlikely to be the next big thing,

My guess is the future belong to barbarians for a few centuries as the big brawl over resources goes on . Guessing who get to the top of the dung heap is beyond me though.

Blogger Russell April 13, 2015 3:12 PM  

"But they literally could not figure out how a roundabout operated by watching cars navigate it."

Vox, didn't you propose a thought experiment wherein for one to use a common technology, one would have to solve a complex calculus problem before using it?

The roundabout is a great example of that challenge.

Anonymous p-dawg April 13, 2015 3:38 PM  

@Alexander: "Thank you for pointing that out. You have strengthened my point that food production is a strong indicator of civilization advancement."

You're welcome. It looked like you could use some help. Also, stop your double-standard when it comes to the US. Africa COULD produce all of its own food. Just like the US *COULD*. But the observable fact is that neither DOES. Which makes, as I've said all along, starvation a POLITICAL problem. And it doesn't exempt the US from being a net food importer, because it doesn't matter WHY the US is a net food importer, the fact remains that it is. And it's a political problem, not a problem of resources or population. The US will end up just like Rhodesia if we follow the same political course. Which we are doing.

Anonymous Alexander April 13, 2015 3:41 PM  

No it couldn't. The Africans are no more capable of producing enough food to feed themselves at current population levels as they are landing on the moon.

Likewise, tomorrow we could stop burning our corn and boom, we have the corn. The only thing Africa is burning tomorrow is ebola-ridden corpses and/or albinos.

If you look at Rhodesia compared to Zimbabwe and conclude that it's just politics, you're more a fool than I take you for.

Anonymous Alexander April 13, 2015 3:43 PM  

But if you want to continue to argue that there is no material difference between a country that produces lots of corn, turns most of it into a non-food product, and then imports other foods, as opposed to countries that can't produce anything, then that's your business.

Blogger Corvinus April 13, 2015 3:43 PM  

Likewise, tomorrow we could stop burning our corn and boom, we have the corn. The only thing Africa is burning tomorrow is ebola-ridden corpses and/or albinos.


Actually, we should completely get rid of corn subsidies. It's why we have HFCS sweetening everything and making us fat.

Anonymous Alexander April 13, 2015 3:46 PM  

fb.org: n 2010, $115 billion worth of American agricultural products were exported around the world. The United States sells more food and fiber to world markets than we import, creating a positive agricultural trade balance.

usda.gov: American farmers export 45 percent of their wheat, 34 percent of their soybeans, 71 percent of their almonds, and more than 60 percent of their sunflower oil.

I maintain my position: Anglo-Saxons can feed themselves, Bantu cannot.

Anonymous Alexander April 13, 2015 3:51 PM  

Cornivus, you are right.

It's pretty telling though, that our mistake is subsidies that result in too much food. P-dawg won't see that though.

Anonymous BigGaySteve April 13, 2015 3:51 PM  

"HAVING A FUTURE TIME ORIENTATION, EMPHASIZING INDIVIDUALISM "

Are you kidding me they actually put future time orientation as being racist? That's simply a function of having enough IQ for abstract thought. If I heard someone say that non Asian minorities don't have future time orientation I would think they are a realist.

"Foreign aid over the last few decades will take time to produce results"

Foreign aid actually hurts low IQ black nations more than it helps. Ever since whitey shared malaria meds with Africa AID only creates more Africans who evolved to outbreed disease while there was always enough low hanging fruit for a single mom to feed all the kids that survived. Ethiopia has had famine for 40+ years and population growth faster than any civilized people, while Ireland still has not reached the pre potato famine population. Sending food and meds to Africa only gets more Africans and more diseases Whitey can't cure. Gays will rue the repeal of the HIV travel ban when stupid Africans screw up the drug cocktails to allow a drug resistant AIDS to be spread by their biological weapons grade stupidity.

"mostly yelling that immigrants are required to make Japan less Japanese and maintain self-insufficiency"

Yea japs you need more low IQ savages that will never positively contribute to society, that's how you get self sufficient.

"In short, Africans are failing in the very sectors they have the natural comparative advantage"

The only advantage they have is in short distance runs and resisting malaria with sickle cell. Even Warren Buffets son gaye up trying to train them at crop rotation that the Romans had mastered.

Vox - South Africa used to have a space program!~ The US used to have a space program as well, the last time man walked on the moon was the same year NASA created a Diversity officer. Last year NASA had 2 failures to get out of the atmosphere.

Scalzi and Martin, who's the alpha rabbit? Scalzi would scurry away if he was standing in front of an all you can eat buffet &saw GRRM

"earlier commentary about Saudi Arabia buying nuclear weapons" There is no moslem nation that would have running water if not for oil. Moslems have to import nurses, oil workers & all jobs requiring counting to 10 while holding something in your hand. You would think they would want their own people in control of the oil jobs.

Anonymous T April 13, 2015 4:00 PM  

Mentioning the Westboro Baptist Church as an argument against Christianity is a strong indicator that a person is a moron.

The WBC is a bunch of Democrats, and I'd be willing to bet a C-bill that it's largely donated to by Democrats.

Think about it: Who does the WBC benefit most? A single, tiny church only attended by essentially one family, and it's used as the 'exception that proves the rule' by lefties, constantly.

OpenID cailcorishev April 13, 2015 4:01 PM  

I wish every equalitarian could have witnessed it.

For those who haven't, it still should stand to reason. Average sub-Saharan African IQ is somewhere around 70, maybe lower. If you've ever spent time with people that slow, you know they're not going to be inventing or fixing things. In the US, they'd qualify for government assistance and likely be living in a home where someone can make sure they don't get lost or hurt themselves. Some may be sweet, caring individuals, but they aren't engineers or mathematicians, and no amount of foreign aid or encouragement will make them so.

Granted, every bell curve has some smarter folks (and equal numbers dumber), but you need a critical mass of them. You need enough that guy A can have an idea for a tool that'll dig better at planting time, and then guy B sees it and thinks how he could improve on it with a different edge, and then guy C figures out how to pull it behind an ox. You're not going to get much ongoing progress from one 110-IQ guy in a village of sub-80s -- assuming they don't burn him as a witch for one of his inventions anyway.

Blogger valiance. April 13, 2015 4:28 PM  

I did not call ALL Africans savage. I called some Africans savage. Do you deny that some Africans are savage?

Course not, and I've said as much. I also explicitly mentioned I didn't think you said all Africans were savage.

But I don't think "I think Africans are incapable of building or maintaining an advanced civilization" is much different from "all Africans are savages" for the purposes of the accusation being made against you. There's very little daylight between those two positions, but a ton between both of those and the very individual specific attack you made against NK Jemisin--the one you're defending in 1. above.

Put another way, reading 1. above one might think "oh, Vox thinks this one lady is a savage" which is accurate but incomplete. Or "Vox thinks this one lady is a savage but on the whole black people are equally savage as white people" which is full on inaccurate. As a defense 1. seems like a lie by omission.

That's why I said it seems like game-playing. Everything you said in 1. is technically accurate, but it doesn't even hint at the fullness of your views.

The whole half-savage comment seems from the beginning to be calculated to get people to accuse you of being racist inaccurately. It seems like it would be just as easy to be clear.

re: the roundbout it's a funny and appalling anecdote, but it's just an anecdote. Since I already know about the genetic and psychometric data that doesn't shift my priors perceptibly either way.

Anonymous Truman Chipotle April 13, 2015 5:15 PM  

"Africa COULD produce all of its own food"

No, it could not. Unless of course Africa becomes filled with say Chinese people, instead of Africans. Which might happen. Who will the SJWs then call raciss? HINT: in a showdown between Africans and Chinese, SJWs will find a way to blame white Christian gentiles. Unexpected!

1) Africans overbreed at a positively maniacal rate, and they show no ability or inclination to curb their absurd population growth;
2) Africans lack the technological (or even conceptual) ability to upgrade to advanced agriculture on their own (viz. wifout weepy Western help) in order to address 1). For fuck's sake, they've been living there for over 100,000 years, but somehow they need US to go over there to teach them how to dig a well. A fucking WELL.
3) Africans seem unperturbed by these difficulties (unlike, say, the Japanese who witnessed Admiral Perry's ships and were shocked by them and spurred to action), and seem content to overbreed/starve/civil war/overbreed/starve/civil war etc. It's like a cycle of Cathay, except without the poetry and lacquerware.

No my dear, Africa CANNOT feed itself. Unless we isolate it, leave it alone, stop helping it, and let its population sink back into a natural level where their own methods can sustain their own people. That would not be a pretty sight though.

Anonymous BigGaySteve April 13, 2015 5:33 PM  

"No my dear, Africa CANNOT feed itself."

Africa could feed itself if we stop sending medical aid. They evolved to outbreed diseases so there was always more low hanging fruit than could be eaten by survivors. Its population would collapse down to pre colonial times numbers, but it would be able to feed itself.

"The whole half-savage comment seems from the beginning to be calculated" Blacks are actually more human than everyone else, because everyone but African blacks has some Neanderthal DNA. Seems like Neanderthal DNA helps everything but short distance runs.

Anonymous p-dawg April 13, 2015 5:54 PM  

@Truman Chipotle: Yes, it COULD, as in, the physical capability is there. There is soil. There is rain. There are nutrients. If one plants seeds in Africa, they will grow into plants. It's possible. That's what the word "could" means. What the hell did you think I meant?

Blogger Alexander April 13, 2015 6:04 PM  

Yes. Hence why Chinese or anglo-saxons could do it. Africans can't though.
Cripes, you are dense.

Anonymous Truman Chipotle April 13, 2015 6:53 PM  

"What the hell did you think I meant?"

I thought, quite naturally, that you meant "Africa" as a metonym for "the people of Africa", viz, Africans. A perfectly reasonable inference -- you compared "Africa" not to North America as a geographical entity, but to the US -- a political entity, not a continent.

Now toddle on back to the "I Can Haz Clearer Prose Style?" at your local remedial college/daycare center.

Anonymous Alexander April 13, 2015 7:24 PM  

Africa got no food, p-dawg got no chili.

Blogger Hrodgar April 13, 2015 7:29 PM  

Accepting for the moment that Europe was a sideshow prior to the 1500's, where was the main event prior to that time, and why did you choose that time to mark the change? Or was there any place that would not qualify as a sideshow prior to the 1500's?

Anonymous Alexander April 13, 2015 8:05 PM  

1500 is the New World, and Europeans circumnavigating Africa and so reducing the Muslims control on the east-west trade links. Prior to 1500, Europe was geographically a fringe and did not produce anything that anyone else particularly wanted. Following 1500, the Atlantic Europeans begin their long march to supremacy brought on by ocean-going shipping and suddenly having two continents worth of land to breed and conquer. The wealth which would, three centuries later, be enough to see Europeans stop trading with India and China and simply dominate them instead.

The main event up to that point would have been the surge of Islam (pushed out of Spain finally at the end of that even in the west, and pushing into Europe with the fall of Constantinople and the consolidation of the Balkans in the east), the Ming Dynasty, and the general raping and pillaging of everything in between the two by the various hoards.

Anonymous Truman Chipotle April 13, 2015 8:12 PM  

"Prior to 1500, Europe was geographically a fringe and did not produce anything that anyone else particularly wanted."

Ahem.

On the contrary, Europeans produced something which only Europeans, alone on the planet, possessed, and which EVERYBODY else, and I do mean everybody, wanted.

White wimmins.

"...the Ming Dynasty..."

The T'ang were more impressive, IMHO, but that of course messes with the chronology.....

(correction to the above. I don't think East Asians were all that obsessive about white wimmins, unlike everyone else...)

Anonymous Alexander April 13, 2015 8:20 PM  

On the contrary, Europeans produced something which only Europeans, alone on the planet, possessed, and which EVERYBODY else, and I do mean everybody, wanted.

White wimmins.


You are correct, I concede the point to the honorable gentleman.

Blogger Rocky April 14, 2015 2:56 PM  

Until you see a pair of proper sub-Sarahan Africans spend seven minutes trying to figure out the concept of a roundabout, including getting out of the car to investigate this mysterious thing, then getting back in the car, GOING THE WRONG WAY, and nearly causing a head-on collision, you will probably never understand the full extent of the challenges involved.

I witnessed a white European do something nearly identical.

Blogger Marc DuQuesne April 16, 2015 10:23 PM  

A good response to the racist charge:
I don’t have any reason to believe any one human population sub-group is intrinsically superior to any other population sub-group. That being said, both science and logic quite clearly indicate that no two population sub-groups are identical, and therefore every population sub-group is either superior or inferior to another sub-group on the basis of any chosen metric.

It makes no more difference that you like or dislike this fact than if you disapprove of the speed of light or the rate of Earth gravity.

I assert that an unborn female black child with a missing chromosome and an inclination to homosexuality is equal in human value and human dignity and unalienable, God-given rights to a straight white male in the prime of his life and a +4 SD IQ. How many of my dishonest critics will do the same?

That doesn’t mean that I think it is wise to ask that particular child, when she is grown, to design the next plane on which I intend to fly. Or even to work in the air traffic control tower.

I deal in reality as determined by history, science, and logic. And I care no more about what an equalitarian fantasist thinks about me or anything else than I do about the mentally deranged babbling in the psych ward. The world is as it is, not as we might wish it to be. If you can’t understand that, then I am among the least of your problems.”

Post a Comment

Rules of the blog
Please do not comment as "Anonymous". Comments by "Anonymous" will be spammed.

<< Home

Newer Posts Older Posts