RSS
How can a heretic safely and openly discuss taboo topics? Not easy, particularly on today’s intolerant university campuses, but history shows multiple tactics to overcome censorship. It’s just a question of being creative and knowing the limits. Familiar examples have included using non-human parables—think Animal Farm— substituting the neutral sounding euphemisms such as “at-risk youngster” for black thugs, or even punctuation ((( me))). Years ago Medical textbooks defeated anti-obscenity laws by slipping into Latin for the “hot stuff.” Religious dissidents sometimes wrote in such convoluted, jargon-filled writing that only the most trusted fellow-believers were able to decipher the real message.
Let me now suggest a tactic useful to those wanting to confront today’s Mother of All Taboos: race-related biological-based differences, especially in cognitive ability, a topic that grows more treacherous by the day. This is not about defending science against the Philistines; this is a survival guide for those who might run afoul of social justice warriors out for your scalp.
This escape route became apparent to me following the Middlebury College dust-up when Charles Murray was prevented from speaking about Coming Apart. Recall that his intended speech had nothing to do with his infamous Bell Curve (Coming Apart only concerns whites). Nevertheless, his opponents seemed obsessed by the Bell Curve—the signs and shouting overwhelmingly falsely accused Murray of racism and support for eugenics.
My Eureka moment came when I noticed that Murray’s defenders typically employed the safe harbor content-free constitutionally protected free speech argument. Then, to disassociate themselves from Murray’s noxious “controversial” views, defenders might add some glib and inaccurate condemnation of Murray’s research absent any details.
In other words, it was okay to mention the Bell Curve, an act normally impermissible in the academy (textbook writers and publishers know that even citing Murray can kill sales and so he is ignored, not even refuted) provided this mentioning was accompanied by an attack, no matter how weak, on Murray’s research. Moreover, the strongest denunciations were reserved for the most scientifically solid fact, for example, IQ tests don’t measure anything. And to further escape the agitated snowflakes, just pepper the assault on Murray with bold-faced lies that absolutely certify one as a practitioner of Orwellian “Goodthink.”
To illustrate this defensive strategy, consider a hypothetical dialogue regarding racial differences in IQ between two crafty but outwardly politically correct professors.
Prof. Heckle: My dear Professor Jeckle, have you ever read that pile of manure, the pseudo-scientific screed, the Bell Curve?
Prof. Jeckle: Indeed yes, and I was especially taken with the statistical chicanery in Chapter 13 allegedly showing that the IQ of African Americans was, on average, 15 points below the white average. Disgusting! Something that Hitler would surely say.
Prof. Heckle: Actually, this racist research continues to get worse though it is plain to see that African Americans are now making remarkable academic progress despite the legacy of slavery and decades of under-funded schools lacking teachers who can serve as role models.
Prof. Jeckle: What about the dubious claim that IQ differences just reflect evolutionary adaptation to diverse environments and that black/white differences are especially large when these differences are strongly inheritable? Can you believe that these racists insist that low IQ explains crime and other alleged black pathologies? Who in their right mind would utter such blatant nonsense? We should boycott the publisher!
And so on, perhaps for hours on end, with the savvy Professors denouncing the Bell Curve’s findings at every possible point. Happily for Professors Heckle and Jeckle, their heresies will likely be celebrated by Social Justice Warriors and, conceivably, lead to paid speaking engagements, salary increases and, best of all, a book deal with an academic press.
The beauty of this deception is that it is scalable. (Recall the joke about Democrats reading smut in the privacy of their homes while Republicans form censorship committees to peruse it in groups.) Books and ideas currently verboten on today’s campus could easily be presented in the following university course:
Sociology 200: The History of Pseudo-Science Racial Theories. This course surveys the development of “scientific racism” in the writings of Madison Grant, Han Eysenck, J. Philippe Ruston, Richard Lynn and others. Special emphasis will be given to the alleged scientific basis of their work and why this research is hateful.
In fact, with a little bit of luck the school’s administration may make Sociology 200 a required course that fulfills the diversity/multiculturalism sequence so hundreds of students will now read the once-forbidden Bell Curve and see for themselves the hateful detailed statistical data on racial differences in IQ. Better yet, they might watch their instructor try to explain why such differences are “obviously” not true, as anybody can see why just looking around the campus. An ambitious professor might encourage students to visit racist websites like VDARE or American Renaissance. Will David Duke be invited to lecture to a student audience that will pay rapt attention since his talk will almost certainly be part of the upcoming mid-term exam?
This “study of hate” approach can also be readily expanded to welcome almost any topic taboo on today’s PC dominated campuses. Ideas once considered beyond the pale now easily enter the classroom. How about seminars on various conspiracies theories, for example, on who “really” runs American foreign policy or controls the mass media? After decades of hibernation, tales of the Trilateral Commission and C. Wright Mill’s The Power Elite will make a comeback. Again, what is impermissible as fact becomes acceptable for study once it is classified as “hate” (think of this as intellectual pathology).
To be sure, the approach of safety via condemnation is an open invitation to every crackpot who wants to get paid for teaching college students no matter how loony the ideas but such is the price for genuine intellectual diversity. The secret is to build on a recent Harvard English Department course covering authors who have been variously marginalized because, for example, of their gender or sexual orientation. The course also fulfills the diversity requirement.
In short, despite decades of repression, the university will finally be a place where a thousand flowers might bloom albeit they will have to be called noxious weeds.
English
Arabic
Chinese (Simplified)
Dutch
French
German
Hebrew
Hindi
Italian
Japanese
Korean
Persian
Polish
Portuguese
Russian
Spanish
Swedish
Turkish
Vietnamese
I keep hearing that Spring is coming; that there are fissures in the ice; that people are exhausted by the charade and speaking out. That even in the University people tire of burning witches.
The omnipresent Hillel thought controllers on campuses sees to it that preferential treatment afforded Jews stays that way.
And the ultimate taboo is any debate on the absurd impossibility of the so called ‘holocau$t’ …. the easily debunked ‘6M Jews, 5M others, and gas chambers’.
see the ‘holocaust’ scam debunked here:
http://codoh.com
No name calling, level playing field debate here:
http://forum.codoh.com
There must come a time when the world we have to negotiate no longer meshes at all with the paradigms we are forced to believe. When do we have to say, with Galileo, “And yet it moves.” I have no idea just when this will happen but happen it will. No self hating, irrational society can function indefinitely.
Sometimes I imagine a collapse of the Paris Commune with the American dysfunctional overclass as the communards, and the still functioning population settling their hash in desperation. Wishful thinking probably.
Using Latin terms sounds like a good idea. Hardly anyone seems to be literate in Latin anymore and it’s a European language so most leftists SJWs won’t be interested in learning it.
QUOTE: a thousand flowers might bloom albeit they will have to be called noxious weeds.
Or in Chinese: 百草爭艷
If you wanna open up discussion of racial differences, dwell on differences that are visible and obvious, indeed incontestable.
Even though there seems to be IQ differences among races, intelligence CANNOT BE SEEN. It can be demonstrated in test and tasks, but the differences can be attributed to lack of academic culture, bad teachers, poverty, lack of motivation, and etc.
For this reason, the anti-race-ists can always cook up some excuse to deny that there are innate IQ differences among races. They can blame culture, society, economics, lack of nutrition, etc.
But there are racial differences are visible. Some races are TALLER than others. Some races are more muscular than others due to more fast-twitch muscles. Some races generally have longer limbs. Some races have bigger butts, boobs, or dongs. All these can be seen with the naked eye. Some races have louder voices, and this can be heard with ears.
So, even as anti-race-ists can go on denying racial differences in IQ, they cannot do so on matters of muscle, height, voice, and butts/boobs/dongs. Furthermore, anti-race-ists actually indulge in these differences and find pleasure from it. Even white Lib anti-race-ists will admit blacks run faster, jump higher, have bouncier butts, got bigger dongs, and tougher muscles. And they like to listen black women singing AHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH with them wailing voices.
After all, the preferences of Lib anti-race-ists in matters of sports, sex, music, and residence(away from tougher black thugs) only illustrate how they too are mindful of racial differences. Also, their cultural life indulges in those differences, which is why some races are favored over others in American Culture and sports. My guess is Milo and Andrew Sullivan went for black homos cuz they liked long black dongs up their bungs.
So, THAT is the place to start. Hell with IQ for the time being. Besides, the direst threat to the white race is the fact that stronger black guys are kicking white male butt and colonizing the wombs of white women with jungle fever. That is the real danger. Also, racial differences in sports, crime, and sex can easily be demonstrated since so much of Pop Culture(dominated by Libs) celebrate the dominance of certain races over others in various cultural and sports fields.
Go easy on IQ. Begin the debate with muscle, boobs, butts, dongs, and voice.
Indeed, ask white Lib anti-race-ists why they would rather listen to some black ho singer like Beyonce than some Mexican singer or Japanese singer. Ask them why they’d watch blacks in sports than Hindus or Chinese. Ask them why interracial violence is so black on non-black. Ask why white women go to Cuba and Africa for sex with black men while white guys go to Asia and Mexico for sex with locals.
Confront the anti-race-ists with all these facts and factors, and watch them wilt.
And then, we can introduce the issue of IQ.
Begin with the tangibles and then move to the intangibles.
I think many white nationalist types prefer to discuss IQ since it makes them feel better cuz whites are smarter. But they’d rather not talk about black advantages in sports, sex, and voice.
This won’t work. Curriculum committees will understand the trick.
Bad idea anyway. Better to let academia continue with PURE falsehood. A student who later encounters truth through personal experience can then easily reject EVERYTHING he heard in college. If any truth at all is presented in college, the student will be stuck in a position of partial doubt.
The reality is quite different. I’m sure some – perhaps even many – White women have sexual fantasies about being raped by hulking Negro males with enormous, throbbing erections. But in reality the vast majority of Negro men are repulsively ugly by White standards and have a body odor that Whites find extremely offensive. (If you doubt this latter fact, start traveling on an urban mass transit system and notice how many of your fellow Negro riders douse themselves in aftershave, cologne, or perfume.) In addition, the average Negro male is a feckless and untrustworthy mate. Most inter-racial couples that I notice on the street reflect this reality. These couplings obviously involve some kind of status trade-off. Most typically a Negro male will be associating with a grossly over-weight and not terribly attractive White woman.
This reality is not reflected in the MSM and entertainment industries of course. These venues focus on high status, alpha males and females of whatever race. These folks get to pick their sexual partners pretty much at will. Thus O J Simpson snagged Nicole Brown, some of the the Kardashian children sure look mixed-race, etc. But such situations are relatively rare. The bottom line is that Negroes in this country are out-breeding with Whites at a glacial pace. Recent research into the genomes of different American racial groups confers that this has been the case since Negroes were first arrived in the Americas. http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2014/12/genetic-study-reveals-surprising-ancestry-many-americans
Sadly, even after 10,000 years people show no signs of tiring.
Academia is lost. Ruined by student loans. Just don’t go there. Cast not your pearls before swine.
I keep hearing the same thing. Although I haven’t been able to see it anywhere.
I see that you are anonymous. Is this why you wish to focus on penis length and sex? Let’s looks at the reality. Yes, blacks be running’, jumping’, an making’ noz betta than honky. But, penis length and sex? You wish to focus on anecdotal evidence. What is the reality?
“Many cultures have a persistent urban legend that the penis size of some minority groups is larger than the norm. In the United States, the minority group chosen is African-American. This appears not to be supported by anything other than anecdote. Fanon covers this subject in some detail in “Black Skin, White Masks”, and tends to agree that this is a myth — a conclusion that he backs up with statistics. On the other hand, Philippe Rushton has published statistics claiming otherwise (Race, Evolution, and Behavior: A Life History Perspective, 1995).”
“The only reliable penis-size studies commonly quoted in the literature are the Kinsey study, the UCSF study, and an Italian study, none of which even attempted to correlate size with race. There is an ongoing government study in India, as well, commissioned with the goal of helping reduce the high condom failure rate there. This study is not likely to answer the question either. There have been many other studies with claims of varying rigor – for example, the LifeStyles condoms study — but they are generally flawed by selection bias.”
“Going strictly by the Kinsey data, which still remains one of the most exhaustive studies on penis size to date, the average white male has a penis measuring 6.2 inches long and 3.7 inches around, whereas the average black male has a penis 6.3 by 3.8 inches, for a difference of 0.1 inches–not what you’d call statistically significant. When it came to flaccid length, however, blacks fared a little better: 4.3 inches long, versus 4.0 inches for white males. So it may be, therefore, that while those of African heritage appear larger initially, under actual working conditions things tend to even out. You should consider this a tentative hypothesis rather than a scientific fact, as there were only 59 black respondents to the survey, versus 2,500 for whites.”
Basically, you are promoting anecdotal evidence which is supposed to take the place of actual measurement.
I like the “Give this one to Clemenza” tactic, i.e., break their legs, arms, and/or other bones. Or, flogging.
http://www.chronicle.com/article/In-Defense-of-Flogging/127208/
If we lived in a more sober nation, what you say would be legit.
But we are not living in a sober nation. IF anything, kids are urged to act like wild sexual creatures as early as possible. They are to see their own virginity as a disease to be gotten rid of as fast as possible. Girls are to talk about sex like guys in ANIMAL HOUSE.
So, even though white women may eventually realize that black men are not trustworthy or reliable, that only comes with experience. Everything in our culture urges them to Go-Negro, and as they grow up on rap music and black sports and a mainstream culture that is hard to tell apart from pornography, more and more white girls will turn Negro. Even if they don’t marry Negro eventually, they will have been taken by Negroes and even have mulatto kids as single mother.
Look at the evidence all around.
Do comparative religion courses in the modern academy result in an increase in religious belief among students?
We just have to be more manipulative and underhanded than they are. I’m taking this as parody.
The problems begin in government child care factories, deceptively named “Day Care”, and continue through government school indoctrination prisons deceptively named “public schools”.
There isn’t anything basic in the Bell Curve that can’t be understood by a five year old. That is: pre-school. If we’re waiting to college to explain that dumber people commit more crimes then we lost the battle looooong before.
College is the new pre-school. High School diplomas lost their value long ago. The Special Ed kids (the term used in my day) get a diploma just the same as the class valedictorian. One can’t spell his own name and the other can do multivariate calculus.
We have this pretense at egalitarianism, that all our resources should be thrown at the stupidest while our best are left to languish in a sea of anti-intellectualism and envy. If only pro football were to be run the same way: all our resources into weak, slow, and crippled. Everyone gets to be a pro lineman.
So can we predict the result that the 92 pound weakling on the line is going to require a rule that you can’t hit hard?
So now we have ostensibly intelligent people demanding the same thing with college. Everyone gets a college degree, but most especially the stupid people.
The stupider you are, the more important that society grant you a college degree. A PhD, even. What I don’t understand is why we waste all the resources. We should just grant PhD’s at birth and make it illegal for people to learn reading, writing, and arithmetic. That solves everything. All people will have equivalent diplomas, and the bad people – the ones who study and learn – will be in prison where they belong.
Of course not. His entire next paragraph would also be impossible for a professor to carry out without getting targeted by the SJW mobs. This argument is based on the school administration having a commitment to promoting academic inquiry and wanting students to engage with ideas that challenge their world view.
Even if this worked, the number of students who changed their views would be minuscule. The peer pressure to engage in groupthink among the generation currently in school is so strong none of this would help. We are better off as a society having fewer young people go to college in the first place and removing barriers to employment for people without four year degrees.
What I’m saying is this. Stick it to the Libs where they themselves cannot deny it.
Libs hate talking about racial differences in IQ because blacks are shown to be inferior. Now, if IQ results showed blacks to be smarter, Libs would have no problem. Anyway, Libs say No, No, and No on IQ. So, they won’t listen on this issue.
But look at Salon, Huffington Post, Slate, and Ken Burns. They will often talk about how blacks are faster and better in sports and got bouncy butts and big dongs. They will write about cuckold culture among urban hipsters. So, ON THOSE ISSUES, they are the ones who notice racial differences. Since they’ve made so much fuss about this, they cannot deny racial differences in these areas. And THAT should be the starting point of discussion on race.
Libs say THERE ARE NO RACIAL DIFFERENCES, SO THERE IS NO IQ DIFFERENCES.
But we cay say BUT YOU LIBBERS WRITE ABOUT RACIAL DIFFERENCES IN SPORTS, SEX, DANCE, MUSIC, AND ETC all the time.
So, that means there are racial differences in tangibles such as muscles, booty, voice, dong, sports, and etc. And if that is true, it is possible there are differences in IQ and temperament.
Begin with the obvious and tangible, and then move to other things.
Yes. At the very least, we (taxpayers) shouldn’t be subsidizing unsecured loans to fund the insanity.
Excellent points.
The brain is an organ like all the others we have, and very few people argue against organ functions being influenced by genetics.
Do you actually know any White women? Or is your knowledge of White women derived from the mixed race porn you watch every spare moment?
So, Soviet Times are Hot Again?
Comrade, let us criticize!!
Douthat of jewyorktimes offers a way, maybe…Call it Clinical Cleanliness/plausible deniability.
I think it is all too late, but we keep on talking rationality, like Ralph (was it) in Lord of the Flies, in which finally the adults show up. Who are the adults today? Since his column does not show up here, I think, what he does is show how the Austrian Hapsburgs kept the lid on for hundreds of years…dealing with all the Diverse folks. Of course, they were all White, small detail I guess.
———-
To: Joe Webb
Sent: Wednesday, April 5, 2017 9:02 AM
Subject: Fw: NYTimes.com: In Search of a Good Emperor (why Douthat is often worth reading, this time for its avoidance of the very reality its text suggests )
“A new paper from the economists Oded Galor and Marc Klemp finds a strong correlation between diversity and autocracy in pre-colonial societies, with a legacy that extends to today’s institutions as well. The authors suggest that authoritarianism emerges from both bottom-up and top-down pressures: A diverse society seeks strong central institutions for the sake of cohesion and productivity, and internal division, stratification and mistrust increase “the scope for domination” by powerful elites.”
Since there are two ways of dealing with a problem, 1, avoidance, or 2, head-on confrontation, it would seem , after all in the interests of social and world peace, that avoidance is the better option.
In the case of mixed populations, as the nervous like to put it…”populations,” not races…why not learn from History, instead of dreaming Fantasies of Universalism?
We……” might learn something from an earlier age’s custodians of diverse, fragmented societies — from monarchies like that of the Austrian Hapsburgs, in particular, that worked to contain and balance religious and ethnic divisions, to prevent disintegration and forestall totalitarianism, and might have succeeded longer absent the folly of 1914.”
Yup, and all these Europeans were White, thus keeping the thing going for centuries until nationalism got the upper hand. Now Douthat sees what is happening but takes the Moonbeam option instead of head-on, Prevention…like Arabs and Muslims out of Europe, or Mexers out of the US, or, God forbid, resegregation of darkies in the US. We still have Prevention as Possible, with repatriation and self-deportation as something that can be a accomplished in a decade or so, thus saving lives and killing liberalism off and saving White Western Civilization. Such a Deal.
But no, the Douthat calls for King Trump to kick some ass and discipline the various racialisms. Love your Neighbor, or Else.
Trump is the King of Whites. It is that simple, and he and his Dispossessed Majority are not going along with Rainbow Insanity. Of course, limited as his options are, we are probably not simply going to Avoid totally the Problem. It is going to be war. That is what the libs want anyway, judging by current behaviors, especially by white liberals and jews. They do not, like most ruling classes, know what is coming.
We will clean up the white gene pool while we are at it….removing the nonassimilables.
Joe Webb
Does that mean Asians and Ashkenazis are smarter than whites?
That’s how Steve Pinker, with his drive to be a real, honest scientist coupled with sharp awarenness of the limits, proceeds when he wants to hint at forbidden truths.
Speaking of Murray, and how painstakingly he worked and twitted against Trump to achieve pardon, it’s sad he hasn’t been forgiven yet for his sins…
He’ll never be forgiven. Just as Stephen Jay Gould will never be repudiated.
Not even close This is a generational thing. There is too much power and too much plunder at stake and it all stinks of ethnic revanchism. Its going to get far worse before it improves. And it may only improve because one side completely vanquishes the other.
…lest they trample them under their feet, turn again and rend you.
Thanks for that quote. God****, you gotta love the King James Bible.
“Stephen Jay Gould”
The ICON of the Progressives.
Others have taken his place in the gravy train.
The funding will stop eventually.
What will the Eloi do when the Morlocks come.