The mod understands the value of piñatas.

Maybe "long walk" is code for giving hand jobs?

I'd have to think that, unless the random pedestrian in Federal Way, WA is entirely careless about Hamiltons and Jacksons

We should beat the sweet tarts out of WM for making stupid comments re AIDS and lesser genetics, but the subject Masque brings up is interesting and sad because it can easily point thoughts down that path. It shows how sometimes what we believe is intuitionally morally right at face value can really be wrong in practice.

[QUOTE=masque de Z;41127044]Superficially stupidly designed philanthropy is a dangerous thing too you know. In fact i will now say something that will look out of character for me but it really isnt at all. If you help hunger in Africa or elsewhere people breed like rabbits, like there is no tomorrow and fed everyone nicely and treated their diseases, reduced infant mortality etc, all great things, and still did little to improve education and culture and local economies and remove corruption (and exploitation from the west of course) and civil wars and overall misery that is worse than disease, the damage you will create to the world is much more severe than if you let people die now, as cruel as this may sound. A world full of countries with ridiculously huge populations and terrible culture and ideals and lack of education and stupid religions, but who are capable of high technology selectively (in key population subgroups) and advanced weapons or terrorism delivery tools, proves a much more undesirable outcome. It is in fact a severely unethical place for all now.

/QUOTE]

I just cite the above and imagine it as any given global future X...I have no faith in humanity to be better than Africa circa now. History is on my cynical side. (Also don't mean to insinuate that we're any better...but we just happen to have better)

Can Palo Alto relocate to Lagos?

The subject is brought up in the book Ishmael. His belief is the only hope is for humanity to go back to living like animals. Otherwise Mother Earth will chew us up and shyt us out.

"A world full of countries with ridiculously huge populations and terrible culture and ideals and lack of education and stupid religions, but who are capable of high technology selectively (in key population subgroups) and advanced weapons or terrorism delivery tools, proves a much more undesirable outcome."

I assume the person who posted this would not include the USA in his list of countries with 1) ridiculously huge populations; 2) terrible culture and ideals; 3) lack of education; 4) stupid religion. But it's the only country who ever used atomic weapons, and one can make an argument that, in general, it's been the #1 provider of terrorism (and tools for terrorism) that the world has ever seen.

1) meh, we're pretty well under control and can pretty well take care of ourselves
2) maybe, but it's our primary export
3) only if you compare us to all those snooty other UN countries
4) hey, nobody's perfect (but jehovah)
Et al) Cops gotta cop

The people starving atop fertile lands aren't starving because of political arrangements. I realize that's the hedge narrative, Guns, Germs, Steel and what not, but it doesn't withstand any scruitiny.

The great Darwinian scouring pad did its work on humanity until we started trying to counteract it in the name of 'help'. AIDS was just the turbo charger.

Conversations should flow logically, not flail in 20 different directions at once. Also, you seem to gibber a lot but apparently believe it's coming out as profound insight.

1) "Social Darwinism" isn't the same thing as macro-genetic darwinism.
2) We agree that different groups of people have very different temperaments when it comes to consumption of resources. I theorize cold weather peoples had such an enormous selection bias that favored 'resource hoarding' it resulted in some sort of hereditary, cognitive trait.
3) Where's the 'psuedo-science', yo?
4) Whatever follows in this conversation between you and I will be disjointed and aesthetically hard to read, totally pointless and a waste of both of our time.

Good luck 'beating' down those ideas.

You can make a moral case for maintaining the delusion of human equality- it's particularly easy now that the full consequences of global overpopulation haven't arrived on our doorstep- but there will be a day when this discussion is had a lot more breathlessly, with much more urgency. We probably won't live to see the full force of it, our kids-kids definitely will.

"Racism" may be the ultimate social taboo in the year 2013 but as our understanding of certain 'science'y stuff' increases, we're going to be forced to confront some awfully hard questions that directly clash with the idea that 100 African babies raised on an island with 100 Japanese babies and subject to precisely the same upbringing will yield no measurable cognitive difference.

Of course, those who hate that fact will call it 'psuedo-science' and develop elaborate counter-studies that claim otherwise. Idealism turns academia into an intellectual wasteland.

... and just to clarify, since I can already hear the baboons howling.

Most of what I'm saying is reflective of my own personal misanthropy rather than specific hatred for any one group, although I must admit that if I were forced by the hand of lawdy Jesus himself to make a list of what people to eliminate from the face of the earth on a race by race basis, I probably wouldn't struggle very hard to make that list, so yeah. Sieg-Holla.

Anyone who acknowledges this stuff on an objective basis is going to be outside the boundaries of current social protocols no different than Geocentrics burning Heliocentrics at the stake, but in terms of intellectual consistency and not needing to base anything on fantastic contortions of reason, I'm perfectly cool with that.

WM, before we get into responding to each of your rather edgy claims - and I think we should, rather than simply writing you off as a bigot which would be the lazy route - could you please promise your gimmick isn't one of the SMP regulars? I don't want that knocking around my head this entire conversation.

Who voted you to speak on behalf of 'we' ?

He was speaking on my behalf as he knew that I'd step in. He knows that the published research I did in grad school was mostly on psychometric testing of different ethnic groups.

I'll save you both the trouble and also do a small experiment to test the Monkey Banana hypothesis of mod behavior against the BrianTheMick2 hypothesis of mod behavior:

Racists, classists and the like have been scientifically proven to be what the psychometric professionals call dumb as a brick

Politics creates far more starvation than lack of brains. First "famine" I remember was Bangladesh. The government was a net exporter of food at the time. Worst case in my lifetime was China under Mao. Virtually nobody starves there now (unless the government puts them into a gulag). The hundreds of thousands of children who died in Iraq during the sanctions . . . I could list dozens of examples.

I'm not Jesus, but would be immensely entertained if you would list the top two races, with your reasons why, especially since it wouldn't be much of a struggle to make the list. Thanks.

In an earlier post you talked about "less valuable" people. Wonder if you can elaborate on the details of the evaluation. IQ? Skin color? Religious affiliation?

Subgroups are best judged by their own native civilizations, (including their ability to manage themselves in such a way that they maintain their own sovereignty without dimebag dictators marching in and stealing their gold, or their ability/inability to develop systemic protocols that results in functional governance of the people and the resources)


No, of course I won't go ahead and 'make you a list'. It's a moronic trap question that will just lead to predictable whinging, squealing and 'Guns, Germs and Steel' ing. It's not stupid of you to ask that, but it's stupid of you to expect a response.

You speak in broad generalities without providing examples or evidence. "subgroups"; "dimebag dictators 'marching in'." If we're going to blame the victims, we should name them. I gave a few examples of political tragedies, why not point out some counter-examples?

[QUOTE=WM2;41189459]Subgroups are best judged by their own native civilizations . . . QUOTE]

Who is best to do the judging?

Also, would you agree or disagree with the statement that we throw away enough food in the west to feed all the hungry people in the world?

People tend to judge things within the ambit of their own interests... and yes, we are incredibly, appallingly wasteful.

So there's enough food to go around were our political arrangements different.

People judging things within the ambit of their own interests is awfully dangerous. Hitler decided Jews were "less valuable." Millions died.

I think he was looking to troll someone. We can safely let draftdodger and other more easily trolled people fill his need.

It's not always 'political arrangements' that causes food inequality.
Any given farmer in the West is apt to fit this general archetype.