A Question of Emphasis

I planned to do something else today (and still might, it’s early), but Reality Doug wrote a post in which my response to the HBD kertuffle over at Next Level Up.  I’ve no idea if he considers my post or my comments over there to be part of the “hysterics” regarding the issue, and he addresses none of my points specifically, but his respose is intelligent and inspires a reply.  Parts of this post he would agree with, parts he wouldn’t, and this is by no means a point-by-point response to his post.  Read it yourself.

First, although I agree with Rick’s (who wrote the NLU post ) overall rejection of HBD, I disagree with this approach, which I should have made more clear.  First, his guilt/shame assessment applies to many of the movement’s adherents, but not necessarily all of them.  I know not enough about the movement to properly assess whether or not the movement is a cult, but his bold declaration that it is one, if not ad hominem, comes dangerously close to it.  Furthermore, even if you can back up an ad hominem attack (which he does fairly well in his comment responses), to begin with one is a markedly ineffective way to make your case.

After posting, I have investigated some of the recommended links.  I’ve learned that there is more to HBD than I knew, but those aspects that I judged do exist, and I continue to disagree with many of its themes, staunchly.  However, first and foremost I reject or adopt ideas; I only reject their adherents after being persuaded that their ideas are connected to a psychological defficiency.

Nevertheless, Rick is correct that although many HBD adherents may not be racist, enough of them are to tarnish the movement.  To some, HBD may be an interesting way to study the dynamics of human nature; to others it is in fact a means to “[c]onvince themselves and others that despite their unremarkable, mundane daily lives, they are in fact remarkable, superior people who are only out for fairness and justice.”  “Blacks Behaving Badly” posts don’t do it any favors.

Doug writes that “[t]he unequal distribution of results by races is on record for anyone not a coward to see.”  Perhaps.  I also know that such distributions have varied with time and place.  Would IQ’s in North Korea mirror those in South Korea if we could acurately assess them?  How did IQ’s of northern blacks during WWI exceed those of southern whites?  (I know I cite that column repeatedly.  Sowell goes into great detail on this issue in Black Rednecks, White Liberals and other books, none of which I have access to at the moment.)  Is IQ alone a valid way to determine superiority or lack thereof?  After all, most humanities professors are exceptionally intelligent, but a great mind clouded by faulty premises with warped values can cause far more harm than a clinical moron with decency and common sense.

So, I don’t doubt that today, here in America in 2013, that the IQ of the average white would probably exceed that of the average black.  I suppose I could be persuaded that this is more the result of evolution than pre-natal nutrition, educational standards, or child-rearing techniques, but it would take a lot of time, and it’s time that would be wasted.

I”m not one to deny facts, but facts have relative degrees of importance.  I could learn every baseball statistic imaginable from the 1960’s, and everything I learn would be true, but it would not change any aspect of my life in the slightest unless I happen to run into some sports nut at a bar and want to waste my time discussing the merits of Al Kaline.

Likewise, whatever the relative distribution of IQ among the races, it has no bearing on my philosophy whatsoever.  It means nothing to my political views, nor to how I would interact with any person I encounter of whatever racial background.   “Exceptions are not the general rule.”  True enough, but the important “general rule” is that individuals are individuals.  We all have innate talents, struggles, advantages, and hindrances.  If I judge individuals based on their group, whatever that group’s tendencies may be, I do both myself and them a disservice.

(That said, I’m not a fool.  If I’m walking down a dark street and I hear the steps behind me growing louder, I will react differently if the person behind me is dressed like a thug than if he appears respectable.  A black with his pants around his ass will inspire a different reaction than an Asian in khakis.  However, a black in a suit will inspire less of a sense of dread than a white in a stained wife-beater.)

This is why I’ve differentiated between The Red Pill and The Red Placebo.  The Red Pill has altered my interactions with women and improved them substantially; the “rules” of the Red Pill are rules you can follow that will rarely steer you wrong.  How will an increased awareness of the predisposition for Amerindians to become alcoholics change anything I do?  NAWALT is violated incredibly rarely, NABALT (not all blacks are like that) much more often, often enough that whatever “rules” there may be regarding blacks I can safely ignore (save those that I can just as easily attribute to culture).

A belief in the Individual is intrinsic to Western Civilization.  America has adhered to this belief more than Europe, and America has thrived compared to Europe as a result.  All of us are potential “outliers”, exceptions to the “rules” of our race and class.  As Doug says, “If you want the general rule of your racial group to define you, or if you accept that it does, that’s your problem.”  Unfortunately, Americans (especially minorities) do this far more than they should, and it’s part of what’s ruining our country.

Therefore, I’m naturally suspicious of any movement that emphasizes the “rules” over the exceptions that any of us in a free society can become.  I believe that we should accurately assess our instincts and circumstances, but to emphasize what happens to us or how we are born over what we can do about it implies that our chains are stronger than they are.  Statistically, I am an outlier in that I’m not dead or in jail.  I’ve had many strikes against me (no father figure, raised below the poverty level) and many advantages (decent head on my shoulders, pretty eyes), but the more I emphasize what I can’t control, the less I take advantage of what I can do about it.

Doug’s correct that they’re related, but wrong in believing that “[t}he nature vs. nurture argument is stupid in the absolute.”  Nuture can be controlled; nature can not.  When we ascribe to nuture what we should ascribe to nature (gender), we call for the Gods of the Copybook headings to return for more slaughter.  When we do the reverse, we surrender our autonomy and stagnate.  Nature/nuture is a balance we must forever strive to find.

However, the central debate is Freewill versus Determinism, and both nature and nuture are deterministic influences on the Individual.  Obviously, if you’re born in North Korea, you’re fucked, but in a free country, you’re free.  Maybe not free to change your IQ, but free to study harder to overcome it.  Perhaps not free to slam dunk ’cause you’re too damn short, but free to master ball-handling and free throws, or maybe play baseball instead.

Hence, my suspicion of HBD, regardless of its statistical merits.  To simply state that “GENERALLY SPEAKING, blacks are more athletic than whites” is harmless; to repeat it ad infinitum, to harp on it, to hijack otherwise phenomenal forums so that nobody can make a point about music, politics, or Game without constantly referring to race is not.  Athletically inferior me can destroy any black with superior athletic genes who sits on the couch eating Cheetos all day every day, and that’s what matters.

Certain HBD adherents (most of those I’ve encountered) remind me of MSNBC’s Toure.  Every issue is fundamentally about race, every argument to the contrary is racist, his group and what others do to it is the prism through which he views everything.  Determinism and its evil twin, collectivism, all the fucking time.

Multiculturalsim (with plenty of help from every other aspect of leftism) is destroying the West.  The reason for this isn’t just that we’re degrading whites, we’re degrading the Individual and the principles He adopted to create the greatest nation humanity has ever known.  HBD may defend whites, but it does nothing for Individualism.

Tribalism is a powerful instinct, and we don’t fight it by promoting our own tribe.  Whites degraded blacks, put them in chains, and when forced to release them ensured they remained disarmed and unequal before the law.  The white tribe kept down the black tribe.  In response, the Left worked to punish the white tribe to pay back the black tribe through affirmative action, cultural conditioning, and massive wealth redistribution.  The black tribe trying to pay back the white tribe, and neither tribe benefits (how are blacks doing under Obama?).

We’ve done so well compared to other countries, but we’ve yet to exemplify our founding principle that we are all equal before the Law and before God.  The exploitative racism of the slaveholder has been replaced by the paternalistic racism of the Left, and I don’t want it replaced by the “scientific” racism of HBD.  At no point have all of us simply been judged as individuals by the “content of our character.”

I’m sick of the pendulum, and the only way to stop the perpetual war between the collectives is to declare our independence as individuals, both for ourselves and our countrymen.

I don’t see how HBD can get us there.

This entry was posted in Politics, Race. Bookmark the permalink.

12 Responses to A Question of Emphasis

  1. Objectivity means a bias for The Truth we reasonably assume exists. Politicized science is not science at all. Politicized HBD holds no credence for me, as anthropological global warming holds no credence for me. I think human biodiversity can be studied objectively, not that it necessarily is. Science is not perfect, but it gets better through challenges and explorations. Game is proof the Manosphere’s peer review without government funding is effective.

    I was not labeling anything specific as hysterics, just noting that we have it in society. I’ve had my fill and wrote my mind. I prefer the free market of ideas and emperical results of a significantly adequate sample size and Socratic philosophy that demands interpretive consistency. That is what I love about the Manosphere. I welcome intellectual dialectic (real progress, not orchestrated Hegelian dialectic). The emotions that short circuit intellectual exploration by group interaction, not so much.

    I’m not married to racial HBD, but I’m not dismissing it on account of hurt feelings or racist zealots either. I don’t know why HBD is necessarily a political movement or necessarily racial HBD. I have not studied that ‘field’, if it is one. Game is designed on the fact of sexed HBD. Why HBD can not vary by race as well I can’t imagine. How much race might define culture I don’t know, and as far as it does it is in flux, mixing, evolving, looking for the next big thing. We never will learn about human nature we don’t yet understand if we are afraid to ask the questions and propose explanations, or if we choose rationaization over reasoning. I’m glad we can have free discussion here and elsewhere. Nice post. However, as I wrote in my post, we are going to have to live our lives, make choices, and face our pressing political problems without knowing all the answers to how humans are. I hope the Manosphere is a movement but with clear thinking. That is the part that interests me.

  2. Martel says:

    “I don’t know why HBD is necessarily a political movement or necessarily racial HBD.”

    It’s not inherently political, but the obsession some folks have with it indicates that they wish for it to be used for political purposes; some folks are incredibly emotionally invested in this stuff. Leftist wealth redistribution schemes are a tribalist response to the tribalism of Jim Crow, and HBD strikes me as the tribalist way to put the right tribe back on top. We’re flipping the coin again instead of getting rid of it.

    I suppose that many of these folks hope that HBD can be used as a weapon against policies like affirmative action. However, such policies can be just as easily opposed without HBD. Also, HBD could easily be used by the Left to promote their policies. After all, if blacks are biologically predisposed to be less prosperous than whites, then don’t we owe them a decent living? (I’m aware of the many ways to refute this, but it won’t be easy to make the case with a feminized electorate.)

    I know that Game could be described as sexual HBD, but gender is far less fluid than race, and like I described, Game-awareness has practical, real-world applications that racial HBD does not.

    “We never will learn about human nature we don’t yet understand if we are afraid to ask the questions and propose explanations”

    True, and this is why I oppose how the left screams RACIST if anyone quotes so much as an unfavorable crime statistic. I’ve no issue with exploring the topic, but the way you’ll get ripped to shreds by some people for opposing their conclusions leads me to believe that there’s more at work here than the quest for Truth.

  3. Mucius scaevola says:

    I know you probably didn’t like the comment I wrote last about your last post, but it’s really the key to understanding this whole thing. I used to be an HBD denialist until someone asked me that same question. The people that care the most about HBD in a racial sense are the ones who have spent the most time around black people and have been burned for it. My best friend growing up was black and I love black people on a case by case basis. The difference is being the only or one of few white people in a place dominated by blacks. It is tribalism at its worst. You will be under threat of imminent violence in a way blacks as minority in majority white areas are not. You probably won’t believe me until you experience first hand.

    • Martel says:

      I’m not sure what comment you mean (the only one I saw about the Blood-Red Pill I liked), so I’m not sure about “that same question”, but I’ll address what I can.

      First, I’ve lived in all-black neighborhoods twice: both poor, one crime-ridden, one not. I’ve been chased out of neighborhoods for being white, and a hispanic NCO in the Army totally set me up for failure by putting me in charge of a mission as an inexperienced white in charge of almost all blacks. (I out-ranked the blacks, but two of them knew the job more than I did.) I haven’t faced the tribalism you describe at its harshest, but I have seen it, and I know it exists. I’ve had long conversations about this with South Africans, and if anybody knows about tribalism at its worst, it’s a South African.

      To deny that you can totally get burned for being white in the wrong place at the wrong time is to deny reality. “You will be under threat of imminent violence in a way blacks as minority in majority white areas are not.” Predominantly correct; although there are some towns down here in Florida I would NEVER go near if I were black.

      What I object to is the emphasis on the biological aspects of these differences. Are there differences? Yes. But is it our biology that distinguishes us more than our beliefs and cultures? (Sowell makes a great case that modern American black culture has stronger roots in northern England than Africa, and if you read Dalrymples “Life at the Bottom”, it’s easy to believe.) If somebody appears “destined” for a life of primitivity, is it because of his genes or because he’s had inadequate civilizing influences? It seems to me that people of all races in all eras have been wild and primitive when nothing has taught them to act otherwise. Perhaps I’m jumping to one conclusion, but HBD’s seem to jump to the other.

      That’s not to that there isn’t some sort of grouping instinct. (If I end up in prison, Aryan Nation, here I come.) We’re maybe wired to group ourselves based on outward appearance, but we’re also wired to smash somebody’s face in for looking at our woman the wrong way. I believe that our grouping instinct can be, should be, and often is, based on something more important than biology. An American soldier of German undoubtedly felt a lot closer to his hispanic fellow soldiers than with the Krauts on the other side of the line. This is the grouping I emphasize.

  4. Mucius scaevola says:

    It sounds like we mostly agree then. You’re right about those towns in southern Florida, totally been there. as for the first question I wrote, maybe I forgot to send it. I’d reply more, but I’m on an iTouch, which is why I do more reading than commenting. I agree with what you say about groupings for the most part. are you in favor of segregation or a white homeland? I also believe biology is not necessarily destiny. Sadly I feel it is often not a successful transition for most. I believe it’s largely fair to say demography is destiny, though. America is good for American blacks, but i also feel that american blacks are Usually not good for american whites.I’ve read studies that state blacks in America have seen their iq rise up to 20 points as a group compared to African blacks over time. I don’t doubt it. I’ve also read studies that say that black twins separated and raised in black/ white environment ( one in each) end up largely the same. Perhaps they require more help than we can give while simultaneously supporting western civ./institutions for the near future. My original point was something along the lines of ‘why are south Africa and Detroit so similar? A: because a maj. Black populAtion exists there in an area run by blacks’ you write a pretty tits blog bro I’m a fan. Keep it up I quit mine…regret it now.

  5. Martel says:

    I don’t agree in a homeland for whites, but demography is usually destiny. However, not necessarily in the racial sense. (As for the twins studies, much of it could be explained by pre-natal nutrition, altough I admit I haven’t looked into it.)

    The West no longer believes in itself. It was founded on three basic principles, all of which the Left assaults every day in every way (much detail on this shortly). Therefore, when immigrants come, they retain their own cultures as opposed to ours. After all, why should they try to be more like us when the Left continually tells them how awful we are? Hence, balkanism within our own borders, divisions according to race, class and interest group, no common culture or beliefs to hold us together.

    We need border controls (no nation is sovereign if it has no say over who enters it), but even if we had an electric Great Belin Wall of China it wouldn’t work if we denigrate every important aspect of our own culture. Yes, we’ve done lots of awful things, but compared to EVERY power that came before the West we’re an absolute godsend. We teach all the bad and ignore the good, and that’s a recipe for national suicide.

    Civilization is a gift, and it’s rare. Africa, like most areas throughout history, either lost it or never had it (depending on the historian), and nobody goes from swinging in trees to high culture overnight (not even Europeans).

    Detroit was one of the first American cities to wholeheartedly adopt progressive policies (starting in the 1950’s during the “Paris of the Midwest” days), and this planted the seeds that led to the riots of ’68 that chased out all the wealth. Leftism is anti-Western civ in every important respect, and Leftism ruled Detroit for about fifteen years before “Old King Coleman” came around.

    There’s been a massive brainwashing effort to convince us that Western Civ is nothing but colonialism, imperialism, economic exploitation, and slavery, and it’s been effective in the black community more than anywhere else. The average Detroiter has never even HEARD the other side of the story. You can’t civilize if you associate civilization with the bondage of your ancestors and nothing else.

    I can’t prove biology has nothing to do with it, but it’s perfectly easy to explain it through understanding human nature and how it applies to all of us.

  6. Mucius scaevola says:

    I’m pretty firmly convinced biology/DNA is most of it, but I vacillate between that and trying to figure out what makes the exceptions the exceptions. For me it’s just a fascinating subject for the most part. I dont necessarily have an ideological investment in it past not wanting to live in a predominantly black area. expand your thoughts on this in some posts would be interested in hearing more of your thoughts

  7. Mucius scaevola says:

    Why is demography not destiny in a racial sense? That’s exactly what it means as per this topic, no? It is my opinion that shitty black areas exist precisely because black people live there. How does prenatal nutrition explain twins adopted into diff. Houses but who had same nutrition from same womb and then had same iq/performance results? Doesn’t. maybe that’s not what you meant not sure. You should read a bit of sbpdl, amren and vdare.

  8. Pingback: Natural Selection Redirection | realitydoug

  9. Pingback: Are We Ready? | Alpha Is Assumed

  10. Pingback: Making Exceptions into Rules | Alpha Is Assumed

  11. Amazing article, thanks for sharing !!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s