ALL BLOG POSTS AND COMMENTS COPYRIGHT (C) 2003-2017 VOX DAY. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. REPRODUCTION WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION IS EXPRESSLY PROHIBITED.

Tuesday, December 06, 2016

Well, we certainly aren't submitting

This is a good interview with Dr. Jordan Peterson on hate speech and SJWs:
Do you believe that society should draw the line at all when it comes to limitations on hate speech?

No. Hate speech laws are wrong. The question – not a question, but THE question – is ‘who gets to define hate?” That’s not to say there’s no such thing as hate speech – clearly there is. Hate speech laws repress, and I mean that in the psycho-analytical sense. They drive [hate speech] underground. It’s not a good idea, because things get ugly when you drive them underground. They don’t disappear, they just fester, and they’re not subject to correction. I made these videos, and they have been subject to a tremendous amount of correction over the last six weeks. I don’t just mean from my public response, but also partly from the university’s response, partly from a group of friends who have been reviewing my videos and criticizing them to death. This is why free speech is so important. You can struggle to formulate some argument, but when you throw it out into the public, there’s a collective attempt to modify and improve that. So with the hate speech issue – say someone’s a Holocaust denier, because that’s the standard routine – we want those people out there in the public so you can tell them why they’re historically ignorant, and why their views are unfounded and dangerous. If you drive them underground, it’s not like they stop talking to each other, they just don’t talk to anyone who disagrees with them. That’s a really bad idea and that’s what’s happening in the United States right now. Half of the country doesn’t talk to the other half. Do you know what you call people you don’t talk to? Enemies.

If you have enemies, you have war.

If you stop talking to people, you either submit to them, or you go to war with them. Those are your options and those aren’t good options. It’s better to have a talk. If you put restrictions on speech, then you can’t actually talk about the difficult things that need to be talked about. I have about 20,000 hours of clinical practice and all I do for 20 hours a week is talk to people about difficult things – the worst things that are going on in their lives. These are hard conversations all the time. The conversations that are the most curative are simultaneously the ones that are most difficult and most dangerous. Most normal people will not have those conversations. That’s why so many marriages dissolve. People don’t like to have those conversations. Part of that too, is because – let’s say you have a little tiff with your wife, and you know there’s more to it than the little thing that’s bothering her, and you ask ‘what are you REALLY upset about’? Try peeling that back. You might find she’s upset about something her grandfather did to her grandmother two generations ago that hasn’t yet been resolved within the family, and that’s the determining element of her attitude at the present moment. If you unpack it though, then you don’t have to live it over and over again.

There’s also this idea that you shouldn’t say things that hurt people’s feelings – that’s the philosophy of the compassionate left. It’s so childish it’s beyond comprehension. What did Nietzsche say: ‘you can judge a man’s spirit by the amount of truth he can tolerate.’ I tell my students this too, you can tell when you’re being educated because you’re horrified. So if its pleasant and safe, it’s like you’re not learning anything. People learn things the hard way.
People learn things the hard way because MPAI. The reason why the mainstream media and the Left hate the Alt-Right so much is that unlike the conservatives and moderates, they understand that we will never submit to them. And the reason they fear us is that they know we will utilize every tactic they use against us. Especially because every time they deny us a platform, we simply build a replacement, and moreover, one that is actually superior to the original platform.

I don't have a problem with hate speech laws. After all, there are so many kinds of hate speech that need to be banned.
  • Feminism is hate speech.
  • Equality is hate speech.
  • Globalism is hate speech.
  • Diversity is hate speech.
  • Inclusivity is hate speech.
Don't learn the hard way. Learn the smart way.

Labels: ,

103 Comments:

Anonymous Fran December 06, 2016 11:11 AM  

Like the man says, Who gets to define hate speech? I think I like your definition better than the one in the mainstream narrative.

Blogger Johnny December 06, 2016 11:12 AM  

Really there are two reasons why they "fear us." One is cognitive dissonance. Deep down inside they know they are full of BS, and that produces a sense of weakness which in turn produces hostility. The other is that heavy duty propaganda needs recipients who think they are alone in their opinions. Let them know that others agree and the BS propaganda starts breaking down. That is why the breakdown so often takes the form of a blow up, the snowball rolling down the hill.

Blogger Keef December 06, 2016 11:19 AM  

Jordan Peterson was on the Joe Rogan Experience recently and it was incredible.

I highly suggest all who frequent this blog to check it out.

Blogger pyrrhus December 06, 2016 11:19 AM  

The First Amendment is intended to protect unpopular speech, and particularly political speech. As many have observed, then and later on, popular speech doesn't need protection....Needless to say, the notion that speech hurting someone's feelings could be banned was too juvenile to be taken seriously....

Anonymous Deplorable S E Delenda December 06, 2016 11:20 AM  

Professor Peterson also profiled here.

http://www.crisismagazine.com/2016/canadas-boldest-professor-defies-gender-police

Anonymous Deplorable S E Delenda December 06, 2016 11:36 AM  

@2

"Really there are two reasons why they "fear us." One is cognitive dissonance. Deep down inside they know they are full of BS, and that produces a sense of weakness which in turn produces hostility."

Absolutely. To be at war with one's nature, one must be at war with nature and its Author, and no matter how much one commits oneself to such a conflict where the opposition will prevail, one must foment a mountain of ferocity, because any sane and sober assessment would require one to surrender since the costs are too high, and victory impossible. Only ferocity and irrationality, projected at a proxy enemy (those of us who accept the inescapable mandate that there is an order of design that produces only males and females-absent extraordinary birth defects) will sustain one through such a futile conflict.

Anonymous daddynichol December 06, 2016 11:37 AM  

From the article:

How do you define social justice warriors?

They’re the ones who weaponize compassion.

That alone is worth remembering.

Blogger sysadmn December 06, 2016 12:05 PM  

Hilarious! I had to look up MPAI. First google hit:
The Mayo-Portland Adaptability Inventory (MPAI) was primarily designed: to assist in the clinical evaluation of people during the postacute (posthospital) period following acquired brain injury (ABI), and
to assist in the evaluation of rehabilitation programs designed to serve these people.
.

That definition is just as apt as "Most People Are Idiots".

Blogger James Dixon December 06, 2016 12:06 PM  

His comment about the US election is also spot on: "The Democrats decided in the 1970s that they were going to abandon the working class and play identity politics, and the working class bit them."

Blogger James Dixon December 06, 2016 12:08 PM  

> How do you define social justice warriors? ... They’re the ones who weaponize compassion.

Which is why the phrase "We don't care" terrifies them so.

Blogger VFM6974 December 06, 2016 12:10 PM  

Just found out about Canada's Bill C-16. That stuff is pure SJW weaponized evil.

Anonymous Pony1 December 06, 2016 12:13 PM  

Vox is Atheism compatible with western civilization?

It seems like it always leads towards to totalitarianism and it directly effects your identity and your place within culture.

Blogger VD December 06, 2016 12:22 PM  

Vox is Atheism compatible with western civilization?

I am uncertain on that question.

Blogger Boko Harambe December 06, 2016 12:28 PM  

@12...this is even a question? No. The West is Christian. Christianity is the West. It's been covered here before.

What always leads to totalitarianism? Atheism? Atheism, yes, leads to totalitarianism, history says so.

Anonymous Vermithrax Pejorative December 06, 2016 12:35 PM  

Jordan Peterson is brilliant. I recommend his university lectures on his youtube channel. He teaches a course on personality, and another on religion and mythology. Both are outstanding.

Blogger Boko Harambe December 06, 2016 12:36 PM  

Uncertain...I suppose I am too, because it atheists have their own religion but most are not self-aware enough to admit it as such.

Would the West as it was in its developmental stages and colonial expansion be what it was without any sort of belief in anything beyond the mortal coil? The mortal coil wouldn't even mean anything without some notion of life beyond, without a guiding moral principle.

Atheists can be moral (which morals, whose?) but I find most of them deny God because they seek justification for their baser behaviors and non-Christian beliefs. Mostly, when someone tells me he is an atheist, I really just hear non-Christian or Christian hater, because it always boils down to Hindus, dindus, and muzzies are a-OK but you believe in Sky Daddy and His Son Hay-soos so you're totes deluded.

Blogger William Hudson December 06, 2016 12:37 PM  

@Vox (OP)
Faggotry is hate speech. At least, I think so.

Anonymous fop December 06, 2016 12:38 PM  

is Atheism compatible with western civilization?

No.

Try Asia.

Blogger slarrow December 06, 2016 12:39 PM  

I read that article and then went on a "who the heck is this guy?" viewing binge: the Rubin report, his debate with a feminist law professor and a professional lesbian, and now Joe Rogan's podcast. His speaking style doesn't seem all that impressive (and I use "seem" on purpose--not slipping into Gamma): his voice is a bit reedy, and he's a bit aspie. But he is actually very, very adept at mixing dialectic and rhetoric in his work. He's very effective. Fascinating cat.

And yes, "they're the ones who weaponize compassion" is a great line, as is that section on growth coming from confronting hard things and having those hard conversations. I used both of those in a conversation with my 13-year-old son last night.

Blogger James Dixon December 06, 2016 12:39 PM  

My wife sent me this link which folks here may also like: https://quadrant.org.au/magazine/2016/12/letter-america-watching-left-face-reality/

The sign discrepancy was obvious in Ohio when we had to drive to Cincinnati and back.

Blogger Jed Mask December 06, 2016 12:40 PM  

The "Alt-Right" Movement in the world as it's called needs to get a grip on some of it's members' "racist overtones"; it ain't helpin' the cause any good anytime soon.

Other than that, Alt-Right has a lot of good things going for it so it seems but it's a worldly, secular movement of this world.

No *CHRIST* in it; it's ultimately doomed to *FAILURE*.

Get on board *TEAM JESUS CHRIST*. Amen.

~ Bro. Jed

Anonymous Vermithrax Pejorative December 06, 2016 12:41 PM  

Also:

"White privilege" is hate speech.

The SPLC is a hate group.

Blogger Jack Ward December 06, 2016 12:42 PM  

@13 Tough question on the face of it. The quick answer is no. That said, my answer it depends. If the atheist in question is a solid citizen, aware fully of the Constitution, willing to die for its principals, primarily freedom of religion and free speech, then I say Yes.

Anonymous Elijah Rhodes December 06, 2016 12:43 PM  

One of Peterson’s ideas that I’ve enjoyed listening to him articulate is the idea of openness vs. conscientiousness. Liberals score higher on openness to new experience, and lower on conscientiousness. Conservatives score in reverse. They value conscientiousness and are less open to new experiences.

Openness means you crave novelty, variety, and diversity. You are open to non-traditional viewpoints, ideas, or beliefs.

Conscientiousness means you strive for dependability, and safety. You like society to be orderly and predictable. You like to abide by the rules and adhere to traditional societal constraints and tradition.

It’s pretty obvious that those two values--openness and conscientiousness--are at odds with each other. But it's less obvious that both of those things are necessary for society to function.

If you eliminate conscientiousness you’ll destroy the underpinnings of civilization because it is the framework for a coherent society. If all you have is openness your society will rapidly devolve into chaos. On the other hand if you eliminate openness you end up with rigidity and authoritarianism.

Since the 60s, western civilization has been running at breakneck speed toward openness (what Jonathan Haidt calls the elimination of the disgust mechanism) while simultaneously attempting to eliminate conscientiousness. Everything traditional has been branded to be immoral while everything novel has been made moral. There’s a moral inversion that has taken place.

The rise of the Alt Right is a predictable byproduct of that movement. But, the solution isn’t to remove liberals from society, it’s to restrain their power. We don’t want an authoritarian right anymore than we want a totalitarian left.

Blogger Noah B The MacroAggressor December 06, 2016 12:44 PM  

@21 Wrong. If it's the truth, then there is Christ in it, whether Christ is explicitly mentioned or not.

Anonymous serious December 06, 2016 12:45 PM  

re 21 at 12:40 PM

Amen

couldn't have said it better myself

Blogger Lazarus December 06, 2016 12:46 PM  

Jed Mask wrote:Other than that, Alt-Right has a lot of good things going for it so it seems but it's a worldly, secular movement of this world.

No *CHRIST* in it; it's ultimately doomed to *FAILURE*.


Point #4 of the 16 Points:

The Alt Right believes Western civilization is the pinnacle of human achievement and supports its three foundational pillars: Christianity, the European nations, and the Graeco-Roman legacy.

Not good enough, Bro. Jed?

Blogger VD December 06, 2016 12:49 PM  

The "Alt-Right" Movement in the world as it's called needs to get a grip on some of it's members' "racist overtones"; it ain't helpin' the cause any good anytime soon.

That's ridiculous. Christians need to get a strong grip on the anti-racist nonsense of their Churchians, and then strangle it. God CREATED the nations. Babelism is neither of Jesus Christ nor of God.

Blogger Fenris Wulf December 06, 2016 12:50 PM  

Pony1 wrote:Vox is Atheism compatible with western civilization?


So far, only Christianity has demonstrated the ability to develop a logically consistent world view, bring abstract philosophical and ethical concepts down to the common people, and create a lasting community. Other movements had one or two of these elements, but never all three. They can be part of a culture, but not the basis of a culture. That's my view even though I'm not a Christian.

I got a kick out of that South Park episode about warring sects of atheists. The funniest part was that real-life atheists were offended by it.

Anonymous Pony1 December 06, 2016 12:50 PM  

(subject of Atheism)

The 16pts and history lead me towards the negative but I wasn't sure if there is something I was overlooking which is why I asked. There are some reasonable atheists out there (usually on the libertarian side) but they seem to be more the exception than the rule. (I am thinking of Molyneux here).

Anonymous Serious December 06, 2016 12:50 PM  

re 25:

If Christ is in it then racist overtones run the risk of booting Christ out of it.

Jesus Christ was and is not a racist, He loved and healed the Samaritans, The NT also talks about how He admired how they were very greatful to Him for what He would do for them

Anonymous BrerFox December 06, 2016 12:53 PM  

I wish that wasn't the case but it typically is. I'm an atheist, but I'm under no illusion that my moral character isn't the result of my parents raising me in a Christian household.

I think you're right, without its Christian heart the West we know it wouldn't exist.

Anonymous fop December 06, 2016 12:56 PM  

I got a kick out of that South Park episode about warring sects of atheists. The funniest part was that real-life atheists were offended by it.

Is that the one where Richard Dawkins gets buggered by a tranny?

Blogger Mr.MantraMan December 06, 2016 12:56 PM  

Ol' Jed can't resist scolding Right, never in his life will he scold Left.

Blogger Orville December 06, 2016 12:57 PM  

And hath made of one blood all nations of men for to dwell on all the face of the earth, and hath determined the times before appointed, and the bounds of their habitation; Acts 17:26

So Somalians belong in Somali, not in Minnesota.

Blogger Noah B The MacroAggressor December 06, 2016 12:58 PM  

@21 You're falsely equating racism (the acknowledgment of the existence of significant biological difference in human subspecies and their correlation with observable physical characteristics) with hatred.

Albert Schweizer loved and healed Africans, yet was a white supremacist.

I love my dog, but I don't want him voting on matters of public policy.

Blogger James Dixon December 06, 2016 1:11 PM  

> We don’t want an authoritarian right anymore than we want a totalitarian left.

Speak for yourself. The authoritarian right has a much better track record than the authoritarian left. If I have to choose between them I'll take the authoritarian right every time.

The above ignores the fact that this is a false choice, of course. Those aren't the only options available.

Anonymous Serious December 06, 2016 1:11 PM  

In my view, if racial differences were significant racial inter-breeding would not be possible.

The fact that white and black can make babies together convinces me that the differences are not significant.

They are minimal and they add variety to life, and I wold go so far as to argue it better equips and benefits the human race biologically, for example melanin in the skin provides protection from sun burn,... God is good.

Blogger Boko Harambe December 06, 2016 1:21 PM  

yes, yes, hybrid vigor theory. Nevermind that when you cross a bloodhound with a chihuahua you get neither. maybe some of the favored characteristics of each comes through in the offspring, but the animal is neither a good bloodhound or a nervous yipping lap dog. It's different.

You might argue that crossing the two is beneficial, depending on your view of good and bad qualities. But it doesn't take away from the fact that the children are no longer of the stock of the parents. In a pack or herd (tribe, group, NATION), they'd be perhaps tolerated but incapable of functioning as one with the pack/tribe/NATION because they are NOT of it and not able to support it in the way it expects to continue.

Blogger allyn71 December 06, 2016 1:21 PM  

@38 Serious

We don't care

Blogger dc.sunsets December 06, 2016 1:24 PM  

Hate Speech exists, I know because it I'm forced to constantly rein in my almost uncontrollable urge to rip someone's face off.

What incites such rage in me?
Calling me a racist, or a homophobe, or some other epithet simply because I notice a fact someone doesn't like.
Also, telling me obervable facts are lies I must embrace.

Yes, these two suffice. They are hate-speech. Those who hurl "you racist!" at people like me should be punished. Let's start with caning, although whipping would suffice.

Blogger James Dixon December 06, 2016 1:25 PM  

> In my view, if racial differences were significant racial inter-breeding would not be possible.

So in your view a wolf and a dog can't interbreed? Or a donkey and a horse?

Blogger dc.sunsets December 06, 2016 1:27 PM  

The fact that white and black can make babies together convinces me that the differences are not significant.


That's hilarious! Funniest comment I've seen in weeks, akin to saying that because Poodles and Coon Hounds can produce puppies together there's no significant difference between them.

Hint: one can be trained to run on a treadmill. The other, not a chance.

Blogger dc.sunsets December 06, 2016 1:30 PM  

Why is it that someone has to suggest that black/white differences don't matter? Are they suggesting that they wouldn't care if their white daughter with an average IQ (100) married a black man with an average IQ (85)? That they don't really care if their grandkids are dull?

Or are we back to "IQ isn't inherited," or "IQ means for the races are an artifact of testing, lead paint, etc.," or "IQ doesn't matter," or "There's no such thing as reversion to the mean with IQ."

I mean, pick one. Every fallacy ground under the heel of modern genetic studies is as good as the next.

Anonymous Serious December 06, 2016 1:37 PM  

re 44:

But since you have seen Alan Keyes and people like him you would/ should know better. If you haven't then youtube him.

Blogger Boko Harambe December 06, 2016 1:40 PM  

Great Googly-Moogly, Serious Wins the Internet today! Outliers set the standard for average Joes!

Blogger bosscauser December 06, 2016 1:49 PM  

I like my response to: your just lazy!!!
Yes, so?

Works in all situations!

Let's go #PresidentTrump and hurry!

Blogger Blackbody December 06, 2016 1:50 PM  

@12 @13 I've been following Jordan Peterson since the whole gender pronoun debacle in Canada got started. I watched his 2015 lecture course on personality (which contains a fantastic distillation of several ideas from Nietzsche and Dostoevsky in particular) and in the lecture series he discusses why totalitarian regimes started popping up everywhere in the 20th century. He related it back to Nietzsche's line that Peterson summarised 'God is dead and we killed him and we'll never wash the blood off our hands'.

Coming through university I can see that the higher IQ portions of the population that are godless fall into either the trap of totalitarian ideology (read communism), or a sickly type of moral relativism (which I think always boils down to nihilism in the end). Then the majority of the people I see that are not in university are just nihilistically hedonistic. The latter two mindsets leave people undefended against the first type which translates to escalating communism from the inside and creeping Islam from the outside.

Given all that, and speaking as a someone who has called themselves an atheist for most of my life, I think that Western civilisation cannot function long without a Christian centre. Even if it can, I think that there would have to be an America 2.0-style fresh start on which to build with some true founding fathers type genius' providing the framework.

I'd be interested if anyone seriously thought that Western civilisation was definetly sustainable without Christianity, because not even Molyneux seems to be entirely certain of that opinion anymore.

Blogger dc.sunsets December 06, 2016 1:53 PM  

@45, quoting Nate: "You're too short for this ride."

Numerically, there are more stupid white people in the USA than there are black people in their entirety.

SO. WHAT.

There are (statistically) thousands of blacks in the USA with IQ's higher than mine.

Also. So. What.

The average black in America has an IQ of 85, about the cut off the Army considers, below which people literally can't be trained to do much more than sweep floors. Keep in mind, that leaves half of American blacks too dull to join the Army.

"Seriously," please don't respond to a comment about statistical figures with anecdote, unless you intend to do so in an "exception to the rule" fashion.

I'm familiar with Alan Keyes. Since you chose to instruct me, let me return the favor. Read up a little here:
https://www1.udel.edu/educ/gottfredson/reprints/index.html
or better, just this one paper:
https://www1.udel.edu/educ/gottfredson/reprints/2004socialconsequences.pdf
For brevity, you can skip to the last page for the chart. A picture is worth a thousand words.

Blogger VD December 06, 2016 1:59 PM  

In my view, if racial differences were significant racial inter-breeding would not be possible.

That's because you're stupid.

The fact that white and black can make babies together convinces me that the differences are not significant.

You don't think there are differences between lions and tigers?

Blogger Duke Norfolk December 06, 2016 2:02 PM  

dc.sunsets wrote:quoting Nate: "You're too short for this ride."

LOL, that says it all. Dunning-Kruger

It never ceases to amaze me.

Blogger Aeoli Pera December 06, 2016 2:03 PM  

That was an excellent demonstration of plainstyle.

Anonymous Elijah Rhodes December 06, 2016 2:05 PM  

Or donkeys and horses...

Blogger Aeoli Pera December 06, 2016 2:06 PM  

A psychologist with brains? I need to read everything this dude has ever written.

Blogger Aeoli Pera December 06, 2016 2:07 PM  

I wish sensible intellectuals would spend more time writing introductory textbooks. (ref. C.S. Lewis)

Blogger Aeoli Pera December 06, 2016 2:08 PM  

*Cough* (vox) *cough*

Blogger Cynic In Chief December 06, 2016 2:09 PM  

Freedom of Speech isn't a protection of minority opinions as much as it is a ceasefire between both sides. If the left breaks the ceasefire, then we have every right to destroy them with it. Mutually assured destruction only works if your enemy is smart enough to realize that he can be destroyed by the weapon he wants to use.

Blogger James Dixon December 06, 2016 2:12 PM  

> *Cough* (vox) *cough*

Hey, the publisher he works for published an Astronomy course. He can only do so much. :)

Blogger Robert What? December 06, 2016 2:15 PM  

SJWs really have no choice but to suppress dissenting speech, because the SJWs' ideas are mainly unsupportable by that annoying thing called reality.

Blogger dc.sunsets December 06, 2016 2:24 PM  

For anyone interested in a VERY high level discussion of the aversion for truth exhibited in mainstream science, Linda Gottfredson's 2007 column in Cato Unbound is outstanding.
https://www.cato-unbound.org/2007/11/26/linda-s-gottfredson/flynn-ceci-turkheimer-race-intelligence-opening-moves

In the court of moral judgment, defending the scientific validity of an unwelcome conclusion amounts to confessing moral guilt. Scientific strengths are rendered moral flaws (objectivity becomes insensitivity; integrity under fire, a taste for controversy). The innocuous is made suspicious (dedication is depicted as a fetish, collaboration as cabal). Scientific conclusions on what “is” (racial differences in IQ) are construed as personal preferences for what “ought to be.” Appeals to academic freedom are derogated as self-serving attempts to escape accountability or well-deserved opprobrium. Thus, while all our commentators defend rights to academic freedom and free speech, they impugn the characters of opponents to make them seem less credible.

Anonymous Serious December 06, 2016 2:28 PM  

I believe that right now in 2017 white people still have on average higher IQs then black people. But I think its more environmental then genetic if not completely environmental.

Anonymous Serious December 06, 2016 2:29 PM  

oops wrong year, make that 2016

Blogger Boko Harambe December 06, 2016 2:37 PM  

well, yes. Environmental pressure to survive ice ages, grand minima, short summers, long winters, plagues, and still develop a culture that knows how to dig wells for clean water and vault stones, tones, and voices to the sky in praise of God almighty means higher IQ since the weak were culled and intelligence was carried on by the survivors.

Pressure makes diamonds.

I don't think you understand your subject of discussion all that well.

Blogger VFM #7191 December 06, 2016 2:44 PM  

Serious wrote:In my view, if racial differences were significant racial inter-breeding would not be possible.

The fact that white and black can make babies together convinces me that the differences are not significant.


Brothers and sisters can make babies together, too. So can fathers and daughters, mothers and sons. I guess differences in first degree consanguinity aren't significant either.

Churchian moron.

Blogger bulbasaur December 06, 2016 2:45 PM  

"Diversity is hate speech."

I actually agree that pro-invasion speech should be banned. Aiding and abetting invasion (and invasion is exactly what "diversity" and "multiculturalism" stand for in practice) is clearly an act of treason. In a sane society (as opposed to the gaslighted, ethnomasochist Western societies) this should be obvious.

Here's to hoping that based Visegrad countries, such as Hungary, would enact such anti-treason speech laws. Just imagine what a Gordian knot cut this would be. We could immediately prosecute all pro-"multiculturalism" Soros-funded NGOs and pro-"diversity" professors for being pro-invasion traitors.

On a more general note, I find it somewhat disheartening that despite the nationalist achievements of The Current Year of 2016, no major Western leader has yet pointed out the elephant in the room, which is the ongoing population replacement and its clearly treasonous nature. I think Orban has come pretty close in his speeches (saying that Western leaders have no popular mandate for population replacement, and pointing out that leftists are doing it for the votes), but these are totally silenced in Western media. I hope that in The Coming Current Year of 2017 we would see such shift in Overton window.

Anonymous A.B. Prosper December 06, 2016 2:46 PM  

Serious wrote:In my view, if racial differences were significant racial inter-breeding would not be possible.

The fact that white and black can make babies together convinces me that the differences are not significant.
SNIP God is good.


I assume you do know its actually easier for a wolf and a dog to have healthy offspring than a black human and a white human .

Mixed race couples, Black and White at least have 2x the fertility problems of single race couples not to mention considerable organ transplant and other health related issues

As far as the more outre groups, I suspect pygmies and the like are rather low fertility when mixed with other groups , likely the same as when idiots try to crossbreed Chihuahuas with larger breeds.

There is a lot of genetic differences with human graces, far more than skin color.

Blogger Noah B The MacroAggressor December 06, 2016 2:48 PM  

@38 The fact that white and black can make babies together convinces me that the differences are not significant.

The people who say this are inevitably the same ones who love their miniature dogs and think people who would own Pit Bulls & Rottweilers are crazy.

@61 But I think its more environmental then genetic if not completely environmental.

All the evidence at this point says otherwise, but don't let that change your opinion. Sub-Saharan Africans never even managed to invent the wheel. In the US, blacks from the wealthiest families (those earning $200k+/yr) have SAT scores comparable to the poorest whites.

Anonymous Serious December 06, 2016 2:54 PM  

re 63: yeah I'm having a hard time understanding what people are saying and following where the argument is going. I am not all that smart. I put some thought into the theories I put out there, but not that much.... but I stand by what I was saying about Jesus and the Samaritans,.. the other stuff is me getting in over my head.... one last point though, I am pretty sure my record in chess is better against white people than it is against black people. I recall playing this black guy in Chess somewhat regularly for a while back in 2010 and the score was something like 20-6 in the Black guy's favor. There was also a white guy there and I beat him almost every time, If I recall correctly the score was about 8-1 in my favor. Of course these are just isolated incidents and it would absolutely foolhardy to construct broad theories based on them.

peace

Blogger Boko Harambe December 06, 2016 2:56 PM  

tl;dr, black guy wants to fuck white girls.

news at 11

Anonymous Deplorable S E Delenda December 06, 2016 3:30 PM  

@24

"Liberals score higher on openness to new experience"

Of course they do, because they make personality traits into mental illness.

The reason leftists accept arguments buttressed with vacuities like "right side of history" is that are neomaniacs. Everything new or novel is good or at least an improvement, so it must be sought and accepted without question.

The second aspect of their mental illness is xenomania (which has the counterpart of oikophobia as coined by Roger Scruton), where everything foreign or different is good, has good components or is an improvement. This is why they are so enthralled with Islam.

Like anything else, a little open-mindedness is a good thing; but with the left the mind is so open it is empty. The rational people must keep them in check; less they tell us the cool new drink is Hemlock.

Anonymous Mark Auld December 06, 2016 3:30 PM  

Thank you for that straight and honest answer, as one in the same boat.

Anonymous #8601 December 06, 2016 4:21 PM  

Is cyberbullying hate speech?

Even though cyberbullying is a serious issue that has led to many suicides, I'm not sure it's hate speech. Harassment, maybe. Hate speech, no.

But even "harassment" is tricky. You may recall the case of Gregory Alan Elliott. The judge ruled that GAE was not harassing even though the woman "felt" harassed.

Blogger Boko Harambe December 06, 2016 4:24 PM  

Yeah, and Dharun Ravi had to be repatriated to India because Tyler Clementi plunged off a bridge.

Hey, that's the in, thinking on it.

Nah.

Won't catch on.

Blogger Scott Rassbach December 06, 2016 4:30 PM  

I don't think Atheism is incompatible with Western Civilization, for two reasons:

1) It has been around since the inception of Western Civilization. The Greeks struggled with it, and yet we still have western civilization.

2) It serves as a contrast to the devout. The ancient Greeks had devout believers just as Christianity does now. They pointed to the 'foolish atheist' as an object lesson for why the sacrifices to the gods were both proper and necessary.

In thinking about that tension between openness and conscientiousness, I think a tension between devotion and disbelief is also valuable for a society. Atheism acts as a check to the excesses to which religion can be brought or moved.

That said, I think Atheism ascendant has proven to be a disastrous thing for a society. That doesn't mean atheism per se is incompatible, simply that too much is a bad thing. Theism, faith, belief, even knowledge of God is no guarantee of right behavior: the devil knows God exists, after all.

Anonymous Shy Guy December 06, 2016 4:31 PM  

Serious wrote:In my view, if racial differences were significant racial inter-breeding would not be possible.

The fact that white and black can make babies together convinces me that the differences are not significant.



This dolt has clearly spent too much time watching the Hollywood propaganda box if he thinks white women don't notice any significant difference between black and white men.

Blogger dc.sunsets December 06, 2016 4:35 PM  

"Serious" has celebrity bedfellows, including James R. Flynn (of the Flynn Effect.) He, too, believes that if the environment is fiddled with enough, the mean IQ difference between whites and blacks will disappear. (Maybe what Flynn has in mind is that all whites will simply hand all their wealth to blacks, like that BLM fellow believes.)

To me, this is tantamount to denying the reality of African superiority in certain sports, as well as distance running and sprinting. Even within Africa there are enormous mean differences between East Africans and West Africans in the latter.

It is simply not tenable to believe such nonsense. Kids of the highest income cohort and of the best educated cohort of African Americans take the SAT and do no better, on average, than white kids raised in poverty or by parents with only high school educations.

The notion that some environmental variable is "holding blacks back" is simply grasping at straws. When Kansas City schools reaped a HUGE windfall in tax revenues and per-pupil spending skyrocketed, black student performance went NOWHERE.

Spend more money? No effect.
Raised in wealthier home? No effect.
Raised by parents with college degrees? No effect.

Every Single Variable cited by blank slatists has been tried and studied. What happened? THE DATA WAS BURIED. The College Board stopped allowing outsiders to see SAT data broken down by race/wealth/parental education/etc by 1997 because it revealed a truth that is NOT ALLOWED.

I'm too sick to describe of the contortions people undergo to explain away what our eyes inform us if we drive into Chicago along the Eisenhower Expressway.

Anonymous Long time reader / umptheenth time poster December 06, 2016 4:36 PM  

Vox,

I thought that you would find what Mr. Peterson had to say of interest. Mr. Peterson academic work centers around profile of authoritarianism in both the left and right. He seems to give both sides a fair shake in his work, but what I have found most interesting is his work on the left side of the equation because such work is so few and far between.

Godspeed.

Anonymous Gen. Kong December 06, 2016 4:43 PM  

The time for talk with our enemies is past. We must prepare and await the time of killing and dying which approaches. Not interested in anything any SJW, cuck, churchian or their darkey foot soldiers have to say about any issue whatsoever. They merely repeat the same lies over and oiver. Any attempt to 'talk' on their part is merely deception. I seriously doubt this is being walked back.

Blogger James Dixon December 06, 2016 5:18 PM  

> I believe that right now in 2017 white people still have on average higher IQs then black people. But I think its more environmental then genetic if not completely environmental.

That's nice. I believe you're delusional.

> re 63: yeah I'm having a hard time understanding what people are saying and following where the argument is going. I am not all that smart

No kidding.

> I don't think Atheism is incompatible with Western Civilization,

At the individual level it's not. At the societal level it almost certainly is.

Anonymous Elijah Rhodes December 06, 2016 5:31 PM  

Vox, when is your appearance on Spencer's podcast being released?

Blogger Noah B The MacroAggressor December 06, 2016 5:32 PM  

@76 From the last data available there's a positive correlation between parental income and SAT scores across all races. I don't believe it's anything directly to do with household wealth, but more a result of highly educated/motivated/disciplined parents passing on those habits to their children.

Leftists look at the income/standardized test performance correlation and see wealth redistribution as a solution, but they're confusing cause and effect. If we had better data, I feel confident that we'd find a negative correlation between gibs and test performance/educational attainment.

Anonymous Mr. Rational December 06, 2016 5:48 PM  

Boko Harambe wrote:Atheists can be moral (which morals, whose?) but I find most of them deny God because they seek justification for their baser behaviors and non-Christian beliefs.
In at least some cases, you have this exactly backwards.  Someone who is driven by truth and finds that the world isn't at all as their religion teaches them is likely to reject the religion.  The ever-more ludicrous attempts by YECs to create a cosmology which looks anything like what we see is the flip side of this.

Christians have themselves to blame for this situation.  They keep trying to find all of science in a rather small book, when creation itself would be their guide if they took their theology seriously.

Mostly, when someone tells me he is an atheist, I really just hear non-Christian or Christian hater
So instead of hearing them out, you substitute your straw man.  Can't be any mystery why things go downhill from there.

because it always boils down to Hindus, dindus, and muzzies are a-OK but you believe in Sky Daddy and His Son Hay-soos so you're totes deluded.
Some of the most well-grounded atheists are ex-muslims (e.g. Ayaan Hirsi Ali and Ibn Warraq).  I've known a bunch of humanists who have drunk the leftist Kool-Aid regarding brown people in general but I've never heard one defend Hinduism.  Then again, it's not the kind of subject that comes up in casual conversation.

Anonymous BGKB December 06, 2016 5:52 PM  

The "Alt-Right" Movement in the world as it's called needs to get a grip on some of it's members' "racist overtones"

Everyone should be happy that their taxes support Latrina's 21 crack baby niglets.

The fact that white and black can make babies together convinces me that the differences are not significant

Just like a horse and a zebra, but every didndu-horse on (((TV))) is smarter than Mr Ed.

DC SunsetsThere are (statistically) thousands of blacks in the USA with IQ's higher than mine.

I thought you were smarter than that.

believe that right now in 2017 white people still have on average higher IQs...I think its more environmental then genetic if not completely environmental

Its the current year. Evolution didn't stop at the neck in humans.

Dharun Ravi had to be repatriated to India because Tyler Clementi plunged off a bridge

I am tempted to make a "one down one to go" joke but that would be mean.

Spend more money? No effect.

Cato found spending more money actuly got lower scores, but it might have just been less Atlanta School Board style cheating. https://www.cato.org/publications/policy-analysis/money-school-performance-lessons-kansas-city-desegregation-experiment

From the last data available there's a positive correlation between parental income and SAT scores across all races. I don't believe it's anything directly to do with household wealth, but more a result of highly educated/motivated/disciplined parents passing on

Its actually both if you look at it blacks from the richest families($200,000+/yr) score 3 average SAT points away from whites from the poorest(less than $20,000) but poorer blacks score worse and whites out of poverty score better.

Anonymous Eric the Red December 06, 2016 6:05 PM  

The parable of the good Samaritan does NOT mean that you are supposed to deliberately import foreigners to the detriment of your already-existing neighbors.

You pretend that your self-righteous virtue signalling about the former allows you to force the same on the latter.

Anonymous BGKB December 06, 2016 6:31 PM  

OT: But something we don't want to happen, home health electroshock. http://healthimpactnews.com/2016/forced-psychiatric-treatments-expanded-under-fast-track-bill-before-senate/

Anonymous Charles Asimakopoulos December 06, 2016 7:40 PM  

I don't think hate speech laws would be necessary to curtail actual hate speech. Look at how well SJWs have been able to control the discourse in the United States, where all speech is still protected, using things like (((Hollywood))). With the declining quality of hollywood movies, such as The Diversity Awakens, There is no reason why the Alt-right couldn't create Alt-Films to fill the empty void just as we have created Alt-News and Alt-Tech.

Anonymous Avalanche December 06, 2016 8:09 PM  

@65 "'Diversity is hate speech.'
I actually agree that pro-invasion speech should be banned. Aiding and abetting invasion (and invasion is exactly what "diversity" and "multiculturalism" stand for in practice) is clearly an act of treason."

I don't agree.

The things we are 'not allowed to say' are best dealt with BY saying them, and letting discussion either clarify and prove or disprove and dismiss.

Since we all agree invasion is destruction, outlawing DISCUSSION of immigration means the truth isn't heard and heard and heard by everyone all the time.

Outlawing words (that equal treason) means we don't/can't DISCUSS treason, which means the 'boundaries' of acceptable (not legal: acceptable!) thought end up not teaching and reinforcing that important boundary.

(Now, "Diversity is hate ACTION" -- yeah, I can get on-board with that!)

Blogger Daniel December 06, 2016 8:09 PM  

Every militant atheist i know are not people you can trust. The ones that define themselves as "atheist but i really don't want to talk about that" are fine. I think you lose the high trust society with the retarded militant atheist. And with it western values. Unfortunately there are more and more of those

Blogger Daniel December 06, 2016 8:13 PM  

Atheist <> agnostic. You sound agnostic

Blogger Daniel December 06, 2016 8:15 PM  

I still have to find a trustable militant atheist

Blogger Daniel December 06, 2016 8:17 PM  

r/K selection. If you did not read yet at anonymous conservative do it asap

Blogger Daniel December 06, 2016 8:27 PM  

You forgot a"there are six more types of intelligence u know"?

Blogger Daniel December 06, 2016 8:40 PM  

And the asians high results also prove genetics determine IQ

Anonymous Avalanche December 06, 2016 9:57 PM  

@76 "From the last data available there's a positive correlation between parental income and SAT scores across all races. I don't believe it's anything directly to do with household wealth, but more a result of highly educated/motivated/disciplined parents passing on those habits to their children."

You're correct that it has nothing to do with wealth. (It also has little to do directly with parental education, motivation, or discipline.)

Remember when "they said" that parents who read to their young children have children who do better in school? So (big surprise) the govt started throwing money at trying to get all parents to read to their children...

When this idea was finally, actually tested, the result was: intelligent parents tend to have books in the house, tend to read to their children -- and tend to birth intelligent children. And INTELLIGENT CHILDREN tend to do well in school!

(A different)"They" are beginning to locate the genes related to intelligence and learning. A huge proportion of children's smarts -- and inborn temperament -- come from Nature, not nurture. You can damage the child's intelligence (nurture / and possibly fetal injury/deficiency) but you can't do much-if-anything to increase it beyond the parents-provided genetic 'original equipment.' (After-market gear is never as good!)

Anonymous Avalanche December 06, 2016 10:02 PM  

@88 "Every militant atheist i know are not people you can trust. The ones that define themselves as "atheist but i really don't want to talk about that" are fine."

It's not the atheism then. When I was younger and ... brasher (and a horrid shrill feminist, for which I apologize to all (real) men) ... I grabbed onto a 'guide for behavior' that I really really needed to remember and act on:

"Those who prefer 'brutal honesty" are usually more interested in brutality than honesty."

Anonymous Noah Baudie December 06, 2016 11:08 PM  

@66
>Mixed race couples, Black and White at least have 2x the fertility problems of single race couples not to mention considerable organ transplant and other health related issues

That seems plausible to me, but I must ask, do you have documentation or a citation for that? I'd like to use it, and someone will surely ask.

@76
>Every Single Variable cited by blank slatists has been tried and studied. What happened? THE DATA WAS BURIED. The College Board stopped allowing outsiders to see SAT data broken down by race/wealth/parental education/etc by 1997 because it revealed a truth that is NOT ALLOWED.

Wasn't the mid-late 1990s around the time they started seriously dumbing down the SATs, doing stupid statistical tricks like cutting test scores in half then adding 800 so as to be able to print bogus "students of color are on the march, closing the achievement gap in YT's rayciss SAT" headlines, and giving extra points out by a racial quota system, so that li'l Shitavious could get an extra 150 points on his SAT by not having any felony arrests this week? Then, because imposing penalties for violent behavior has a "disparate impact," just for showing up with plenty of melanin?

@89
Once upon a time I was active in some online "atheist" communities. One of the things I noticed immediately after the 9/11 attacks was that people who had, the week before, declared their contemptuous disbelief in all religions were all tripping over their enormous clown shoes running to defend Islam from "Islamophobic" accusations that it was a bloodthirsty Iron Age death-cult that had been at war with the rest of the human race for 1300 years. Not in Tehran, nor in Islamabad, nor the most hardcore Salafist madrassa in Saudi Arabia, could you find defenders of Islam as eager for a fight and as ready to split rhetorical hairs and outright lie to "win" an argument as you could have found in an atheism-related IRC channel in October of 2001. Now, some of us who visited such places came by our beliefs by applying the Null Hypothesis to religious claims and awaiting proof. We saw no conflict between political conservatism and personally held irreligion--isn't capitalism all about becoming the Ubermensch?--wasn't Jesus basically an Iron Age Marxist?--doesn't the lack of supernatural influences mean that we have to grow up and accept responsibility for our actions, because there's no one to save us from ourselves or fix our nation if we break it?--we could only shake our heads at the behavior we saw. My own opinions and beliefs have not changed, but I have not been back.

@94
Exactly. Correlation is not causation. There have been similar "studies" that concluded that children who learned to play a musical instrument were more intelligent than those who did not. Vast sums of money were spent on "inner city" school music programs. Guess what stuffing a violin under li'l Shitavious's chin accomplished, this despite his kind's long-proclaimed "rhythm in de blood." Go on, guess.

Anonymous Discard December 07, 2016 2:21 AM  

93. Daniel: The academic success of Orientals in America has less to do with the innate genetic superiority of Yellow People than with the selection process. They don't come to America from the rice paddies. We have no idea what their average intelligence is, since we have not tested a large random sample. And China is not about to let us do that testing, or to tell us that their average IQ is the same as Mexico's.

Anonymous Mr. Rational December 07, 2016 4:19 AM  

FYI, BGKB is referring to this plot of SAT scores:

http://www.lagriffedulion.f2s.com/testf0%7Bimage7%7D.gif

It's used in this article:

http://www.lagriffedulion.f2s.com/testing.htm

This is the educational/"gap" red pill.

So happy to see other SBPDL readers commenting here.  Yup, it's me!

Anonymous Bukulu December 07, 2016 11:05 AM  

[NOT] Serious @38,

"In my view, if racial differences were significant racial inter-breeding would not be possible."

Says someone who, in all likelihood, has a detectable percentage of Neanderthal ancestry.

Anonymous Discard December 07, 2016 12:48 PM  

98. Mr Rational: Hello, from another SBPDL graduate.

Blogger Jed Mask December 07, 2016 1:44 PM  

@27

"The Alt Right believes Western civilization is the pinnacle of human achievement and supports its three foundational pillars: Christianity, the European nations, and the Graeco-Roman legacy.

Not good enough, Bro. Jed?"

No, not "good enough" "Lazarus" but a decent attempt of "effort" I give it that.

@25

"Wrong. If it's the truth, then there is Christ in it, whether Christ is explicitly mentioned or not."

*WRONG* again Mr. "Noah", Christ is *THE TRUTH*. Period. You don't start a movement and "tack in The Truth". The Truth starts the movement. Not the other way around.

@28

"That's ridiculous. Christians need to get a strong grip on the anti-racist nonsense of their Churchians, and then strangle it. God CREATED the nations. Babelism is neither of Jesus Christ nor of God."

True, true. That'll happen over patient reproof and understanding. Yep.

@34

"Ol' Jed can't resist scolding Right, never in his life will he scold Left."

Hey, HEY Mr. Mantra Man I practically "scold the Left" every day of the week for it's wicked, ungodly imaginations and besides I ain't "scolding the "Right" here as you're referring.

I'm talkin' 'bout this "Alt-Right" movement; it's not part of the mainstream "Right" as it's called, right? Well then. Amen.

@50

"You don't think there are differences between lions and tigers?"

There are but they can make "ligers" lol. :P


Blogger Jed Mask December 07, 2016 1:52 PM  

@83 BGKB

"Everyone should be happy that their taxes support Latrina's 21 crack baby niglets."

Understand where you're coming from and no need to slip in a thinly-veiled strawman insult attack to "dodge" facing the subject at hand.

No need to say "niglets" as a *racist overtone* proving my original point.

Would you like it if I addressed you as "crackah" or "honkey"? No, I don't think so, really.

Thus, I get the point, hope you do as well.

I'm against the wicked federal government welfare system that leech off the taxes of citizens that end up supporting "leeches of society" who don't try to take care of themselves but use other people for their benefit.

I don't support nor encourage black folks to "live off" welfare as the stereotypical fashion goes; I preach against it. I preach self-sufficiency and self-reliance for taking care of one's own self as well as providing for others' needs; not to "live off" the System.

No need to go there sir... You don't seem to mean well by it. Amen.

~ Bro. Jed

Blogger Jed Mask December 07, 2016 1:55 PM  

@84

"The parable of the good Samaritan does NOT mean that you are supposed to deliberately import foreigners to the detriment of your already-existing neighbors."

That's right. The moral of the Story is to *LOVE EVERYONE AS YOURSELF* no matter their race, sex, class, nationality, etc. Good deal. Amen.

Post a Comment

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

<< Home

Newer Posts Older Posts