July 18, 2003
Ethnolysis
Jason Malloy points out that the use of the word "genocide" should not refer to miscegenation:
Genocide is the murder by force of indivuals who want to live, while "miscegenation" is men and women forming absolutely voluntary relationships of their own preference.
I propose the term ethnolysis (like catalysis, dialysis), from ethnos (people, nation) and luein (to loosen, dissolve, destroy) to describe the dissolution of an ethnic group via any method, including miscegenation, genocide, oppression, ethnic cleansing, etc.
Posted by Dienekes at July 18, 2003 11:55 PM | PermaLinkI think "ethnolysis" is an excellent coinage. I'm going to start using it.
Posted by: Unadorned at July 19, 2003 04:40 AMI'm not surprised that a poster on the gene exp site - which includes all sorts of Asiatics, racial mongrels, etc - cannot see how racial mixing = genocide. Perhaps the UN definition of genocide should be looked up, which includes the idea that conditions that prevent the survival of any group can be considered genocide. Thus, multiracialism - leading to displacement and mixing - IS genocide.
And, it doesn't matter if the aliens are "high IQ" or not.
BTW, see this:
http://www.vanguardnewsnetwork.com/vnn/showEssay.asp?essayID=1507
Oh. Sorry, I deleted the comment after Friedrich's comment was deleted. I'll use your word, context permitting.
I imagine one of the more common forms of ethnolysis is assimilation.
Posted by: Jason Malloy at July 19, 2003 05:21 AM>> I imagine one of the more common forms of ethnolysis is assimilation.
If by assimilation you mean absorption of a minority to a dominant majority, then that is not ethnolysis, since the group continues to exist, unless it is radically altered, in which case the term might apply.
Posted by: Dienekes at July 19, 2003 03:43 PMsince the group continues to exist
I'm inclined to disagree. Are razib and I the same ethnicity? I would say 'yes':
Ethnicity is an aspect of social relationship between agents who consider themselves as being culturally distinctive from members of other groups with whom they have a minimum of regular interaction. It can thus also be defined as a social identity (based on a contrast vis-a-vis others) characterised by metaphoric or fictive kinship
Posted by: Jason Malloy at July 19, 2003 10:17 PM>> I'm inclined to disagree. Are razib and I the same ethnicity? I would say 'yes':
You might very well be part of the same ethnic group. An ethnic group is founded on two principles: (i) defining oneself as part of a group, (ii) being accepted by others as part of that group
But, if you and razib are the same ethnicity, this may mean that the process of ethnolysis has already taken place to a great degree in American society, with the racial/ethnic groups that constitute that society slowly being ethnolyzed, as their members transfer their ethnic identity to the American ethnic group. In other words, people might tend to feel less and less, e.g., KOREAN-American, and more and more Korean-AMERICAN.
Posted by: Dienekes at July 19, 2003 10:53 PMJason wrote,
"Ethnicity is an aspect of social relationship between agents who consider themselves as being culturally distinctive from members of other groups with whom they have a minimum of regular interaction."
But its more than this, otherwise there's no such thing as race. Race can be denied, but only if everything else in the universe is denied, because exactly the same neo-marxist sophistries apply to all of existence or they apply to none of it. I'm afraid races and sub-races (i.e., ethnicities) exist. Some people may not like their existence, and for reasons many and varied -- for example, they may intensely dislike particular ones (most U.S. leftists intensely dislike white Southerners, for example, and would be delighted to see them ethnically cleansed out of existence tomorrow; a great many Indian Hindus can't STAND Indian Moslems, and ditto; vice-versa (Moslems hating Hindus), and ditto; Greeks hating Turks and vice-versa, and ditto; Neo-Nazis hating Negroes, and ditto; etc.), or they simply find the whole subject a pain in the ass and wish it would go away because it bores them. I don't have an interest in fly fishing or football and to the extent conversations are dominated by them I might wish no such things existed, just because after a while they start to bore the frickin hell out of me. I happen to be an ardent conservationist -- a "green" though not on the wacko fringe -- and once made the mistake of going on about conservation issues with a friend who, I didn't realize, couldn't care less. We were riding in a car and I was pointing out countryside areas of great beauty which we were passing through as I talked. He put up with it as long as he could, then patiently said, "You see the inside of this car door? This whole area around the handle, the window control, the paneling? Well, the inside of this door doesn't interest me in the slightest and your 'beautiful countryside' is the same -- that has as much interest for me as the inside of a car door. If all that countryside literally disappeared tomorrow and got asphalted over into a giant parking lot it would make not the slightest difference to me." There are things some people just don't care about or find interesting and for many, race/ethnicity is one such.
If Jason is a white Euro, there's a sense in which he and Razib can't be the same ethnicity except as American Man (a Poe Forum regular) points out in this comment (below) -- the degree of detail one wishes to consider varies the scope of "relatedness" one is considering, obviously, but this is a tautology which no one ever was confused about and which means nothing ("we're all members of the human race" -- yeah, and we're all made up of atoms, too, just like the planets and stars -- that has it place, to be sure -- but so does the other):
http://www.richardpoe.com/forum.cgi?article=2479&permLink=43420#43420
Jason wrote,
"It can thus also be defined as a social identity (based on a contrast vis-a-vis others) characterised by metaphoric or fictive kinship"
There's a point beyond which biology can't be denied. Exactly what importance that has -- exactly what it implies -- is a whole other question. But the fact itself can't be denied. A bunch of chicks and ducklings may feel a metaphoric or fictive kinship but when the ducklings go into the pond for a swim the chicks can't follow. That doesn't have implications for everything but it does for some things, mainly in the domain of justification of political and moral resistance on the part of some to the ethnic cleansing or extermination of their own (or of some other) race or ethnicity which people who either don't care about that race, or who detest it and wish its destruction, want desperately to carry out.
new genetic evidence seems to indicate that the Y chromosomal lineages of "pure" irish & welsh (ie; from the heartland of ireland & wales away from the coasts) have a relationship to the basques. it seems then as everyone assumes the basques are autochthons who have spoken their language before the incursion of indo-european, at some point the non-indo-european speakers of the "celtic fringe" became celtic because of cultural transmission of the latter's folkways. what is that defined as?
one thing to remember is that ethnic/racial identity is far more important for some than it is for others. i don't deny my racial identity, but for me as an individual, it doesn't matter very much in the grand scheme of making who i am distinct (my lack of religious affiliation, my libertarianism, my pro-transhumanism, etc. are far more important). i do acknowledge its importance to most of humanity, just as i acknowledge the importance of religion to most humans, but again, neither my religion (which i lack) or my race (which i don't think of much aside from when someone comments on it positively or negatively) have a strong impact on my self-perception.
Posted by: razib at July 20, 2003 05:04 PMEthnic identity is wholly constructed after birth. Therefore, it depends wholly on the environment one finds himself in. A person adopts the ethnic identity of his parents, but also that of the society with which he interacts.
Therefore, ethnolysis can take place when a parent fails to transmit his ethnic identity to his children (either because he doesn't want to, or because he can't), and the only way in which this can happen is if society has a different ethnic identity than the parent.
Hence, the ideal circumstances for the preservation of an ethnic identity are a mono-ethnic society, since in a multi-ethnic society there is some drain from the ethnic group.
Also, I'd like to add that race plays a role in ethnic identity only inasmuch that race is a part of an ethnic group's self-identification. So, a Dutch baby being raised in the Congo would be completely accultured into Congolese society, and would even consider himself Congolese, but there would be a residual tension that would not allow him to be "completely" Congolese.
Finally, I don't think that ethnic identity is "chosen". This may happen in a minority of cases, whereby an individual loses all sense of affinity to his old ethnic identity and assumes a new one. I tend to think that ethnic identity is passed on to us very early on in life and is very hard to alter later on in life.
Posted by: Dienekes at July 20, 2003 06:23 PMRazib wrote,
"one thing to remember is that ethnic/racial identity is far more important for some than it is for others. i don't deny my racial identity, but for me as an individual, it doesn't matter very much in the grand scheme of making who i am distinct [...] . I do acknowledge its importance to most of humanity, just as i acknowledge the importance of religion to most humans, but again, neither my religion [...] nor my race (which i don't think of much [...]) have a strong impact on my self-perception."
I agree one-hundred percent with, and endorse completely, every word in what I quote here from Razib's comment. Every word of it applies to me fully as much as it does to him.
I left out a few bits about "lacking religion" (that's age-related; come back in twenty years or so and Razib will have seen the light on that, especially him, since the man shows the capacity for wisdom -- we were ALL self-styled atheists at the age he is now), "libertarianism" (my politics are "pro-normalness and anti-degenerateness," which means that -- whatever else I may be -- I am anti- the Democrat Party as constituted since around the late sixties and having only gone further downhill since then towards promoting degenerateness in all its conceivable forms), and "pro-transhumanism," which I assume means passing on humanity's function to machines and AI? -- yeah, I'll leave "pro-transhumanism" out of my blanket endorsement).
I don't strut around saying how great I am because I'm a white man. I don't think about being a white man any more than Razib thinks about being a brown one, and I don't judge any individual's worth on the basis of anything other than his individual worth -- not on the basis of what race, color, religion, sex, ethnicity, nationality, or what-have-you which he happens to be.
The difference between someone like me and the numerous yellows who've gloated privately to Razib over the white man's ever-weakening position and said how once he's out of power they're going to sit on him and shit on his face is not only that they're racists and I'm not, but that they're so dishonest that they claim to be the opposite of what they are in spades. Number one, I'm no racist, and number two, I say what I am -- unlike them.
What I oppose is simple: the drive by certain élites and other self-interested parties to weaken or extinguish, or both, certain races/ethnicities/ethno-cultures who don't want to be weakened or extinguished.
Any who DO want to be, be my guest. I defend those who don't want to be, and consider the élites who are trying to do it to them to be evil.
That said, it goes without saying that this whole subject is not everyone's cup of tea, but simply bores many people to death. We see, however, how most of them pay attention to it very much in nearly every aspect of their lives, but indirectly. They just haven't the wit or the integrity to acknowledge that.
Posted by: Unadorned at July 20, 2003 06:51 PM
Can the yellows "sit and shit" on their own, or will they copy their defecatory style from the white man also, like everything else?
Seriously now though, Yellow complaints are a bit stretched. Whatever they think the "white man" did to them - which I see as nothing more or less than the exploitation of China when that nation was weak, something the equally yellow Japanese did as well (and worse) - the position of the Oriental in his own nations was never seriously threatened. And that's an important point. Opium war? Yes. Significant European immigration to China? Hell, no. The Chinese and other Asians were not ever threatened as a biocultural entity in their homelands. Instead, what they did get from the white man was the modern technology and scientific method which they copy and now seem to wish to threaten us with.
In any case, if the yellow is "superior", why the need to immigrate to the West?
Or is it just an imperialistic and expansionist thirst for new territory, to displace the white man as they originally displaced the original indigenous inhabitants of Asia?
If so, is it "racist" for whites to resist displacement?
Is the fact that the white man is so altruistic that he'll let others "sit and shit" even when he long had the power to eliminate that threat - is that fact not a indictment that whites are less "racist" than other races?
If the racial power was reversed, say, in the 19th and 20th centuries, would the Orientals have been as relatively restrained as the white man?
The yellows may crow about white weakness, and they may become "top dog", but their innate limitations will ensure that they will continue to be frustrated. They may displace the white man, but never replace him.
A yellow-led world will sink to the same level of inward stagnation that we've seen for most of the last 500 years from East Asia.
It seems like the last post went in as a double. One other point, as regards Razib's relative lack of race feeling. Dr. MacDonald's work on ingroup identification would suggest that such identification may be heightened during periods of danger to the group, and lessened during periods when such danger does not exist.
South Asians - whatever their problems - are certainly in no danger of extinction or substantial diminishment. It is well and good for a member of a demographically successful group to be relatively unconcerned with identification with that group.
On the other hand, note that during the "holocaust", Jewish identification increased, the same took place during the 1967 war - many Jews discovered "how Jewish" they really were.
Can the yellows "sit and shit" on their own, or will they copy their defecatory style from the white man also, like everything else?
I was under the impression that commenting on other people's websites was a privilege that involved certain common-sense standards of behavior.
Interesting that the above comment was made in reponse to one of my posts, rather than in response to "unadorned"'s original post dealing with this topic. Obviously then, sensitivities toward language is correlated to the amount of ideological agreement, or disagreement, with the person making the point in question?
Indeed, the use of the term "defecatory", compared to the original use of the word "shit" by Unadorned, makes one wonder which is "worse?"
I'd like to point out the obvious that if Mr. Pontikos has a problem with the tone and/or content of my posts he can contact me offlist and I will abide by _his_ judgement. Mr. Malloy is not the owner of this site.
Posted by: mxrienzi at July 21, 2003 11:08 AMI regret the bit of controversy I seem to have caused here by quasi-quoting (quasi-quoting from memory -- I didn't keep a copy of the original, or a reference) a strongly-worded passage from a comment Razib posted some months ago on a GnXp.com thread, one of the Kevin MacDonald threads I suspect, but I'm not certain. I looked for it just now over there but couldn't find it.
That sort of language is not always appropriate for use on blog-site threads, of course. It WAS appropriate when Razib employed it, however, and I feel it also was when I employed it above, quoting from his posted account of what certain people had said to him.
I have nothing but the highest respect for Razib, who is always a gentleman, nearly flawlessly so.
Posted by: Unadorned at July 21, 2003 09:05 PMWhat Unadorned (aka Cognassier) fails to remember is that in the thread in question he blamed a second generation child of immigrants from *democratic Taiwan* for the Communism of the PRC. Which was about as nonsensical as blaming Eastern European expatriates for communism in Russia.
That was what got Unadorned banned from GNXP for a *second* time. Here, you can read Jason Malloy's recap for yourself:
As for your first comment on the thread in question AD, godless is correct, you didn't do anything wrong, it was unadorned who brought racial insults into the picture which was completely offensive and unexceptable. I do think your comment was worded in such a way to make it look like you thought minorities should compete as groups against whites as a percieved group. Unadorned, oleg, and jdt did too, and as such you were playing into their (jdt and oleg at least) and KMDs hands, in voicing what they see as the REAL purpose of immigration: ethnic blocs of power hostile to white people (and orhestrated by you-know-who).I'm not sure if you intended that, but that's how it looked in context IMO. Personally I think a better way to phrase it is that you were glad America would design their immigration system so it became based, more so, on merit rather than race, so perhaps deserving people such as (your parents?) could live the American dream. :) [Btw, this is also the thread in which Razib paraphrases the "shit on face" business. I don't think that's any evidence of hatred - 30-40% intermarriage rates speak louder than words, and Asians voted majority Republican as recently as Bush 1's election.]
The first time Unadorned got banned was for verbally harassing Mary till she left the site. See this thread for evidence of the harassment. Samples:
I have my paddle ready, Mary ... if you'll just pull your skirt down a little, dear ... ... (Excuse me for being so smug,Mary -- don't ya wanna just smack me one, right in the face?) ... (Hey -- if we post our scores in the non-geek range on our lapels, do you think we might have a chance of getting better-quality tail at parties?) ... anyway - much more where that came from. that's what earned cog his banning - his bizarre, leering attitude and "ALL CAPS" breathless comments were reflecting poorly on the site and bothering the posters. Mary left soon after, not entirely b/c of Cog but certainly partly because of him (I think she said something along the lines of "if this site is going to attract these kinds of crazies...")
As for Rienzi - what was Europe doing from circa 500 to circa 1500, when China was the most technologically advanced country in the world?
To see how governments can choke the economic benefits of innovation, look
back 600 years to China, which at that time was the most technologically
advanced country in the world. Centuries before the West, it had invented
moveable-type printing, the blast furnace and the water-powered spinning
machine. By 1400 it had in place many of the innovations that triggered the
industrial revolution in Britain in the 18th century. But then its
technological progress went into reverse, because its rulers kept such tight
control on the new technology that it could not spread. It is a warning that
the fruits of the IT revolution should not be taken for granted.
Remember that even if the EA's have a genetic creativity deficit (a topic I am agnostic on), genetic engineering of neurological properties is a "solved problem". Only technical difficulties remain. And the guy who made the key breakthrough in intelligence engineering of mammals was Joe Tsien at Princeton - that's right, an East Asian.
Arguably the Chinese market authoritarian system is better adapted to putting eugenics into play than our system, as they can make people "disappear" without notice, and have already passed several pro-eugenics bills. (ctrl-f for china) I truly hope this will not be the case, but I would not advise complacency.
(btw, Rienzi, you do know that Fermi married a Jewish woman, right? Time to take him out of the pantheon... ;) :) )
Posted by: godlesscapitalist at July 21, 2003 10:38 PMWhy is it that my "opposition" - such as it is - always acts childish? I have no "pantheon", and "Fermi" and his semitic wife are no heroes of mine.
One wonders how much of the early Chinese "technological advance" was due to the jump-start given by White culture (and genes?) from early migrants - one can't help remembering the Caucasoid mummies found in western China.
Be that as it may, when one looks at the entire spectrum of civilization, one cannot but help notice that Europeans outstrip Asiatics - even with the 1000 year interlude of the "dark" and "middle ages", the latter of which did see some cultural progress.
I don't know. Here we are - arguing by computer - invented by whom? Which uses electricity - the nature of which was discovered by whom? Etc etc. No doubt there are Chinamen who use western science to further human progress. I've never said that that the Asiatic was incapable of such endeavors. But, I have no faith in their ability for sustained creative progress. Talk of "neurological engineering" means nothing - let's then "engineer" a ghetto Negro - why not?
The bottom line though is that this is secondary. Ethnic genetic interests are primary. Every people need a territory - for themselves - to live and breed (and improve themselves.) I fully support the idea of "Asia for the Asiatics." Western involvement there was a mistake. But, hey, if the west pulled out of colonialism (which _never_ had a demographically threatening aspect to Asiatics, brown or yellow), then maybe Asiatics can _stop_ colonizing the west. Out of Europe. As far as America goes, let us separate. Why not? Why the _urge_ to live amongst "racist Whitey?" And if my Nordicist friends want separation from non-Nordic Europeans, that's fine too, as long as all is done in a fair and equitable manner.
I have no problem with fair, logical, and equitable separatism, and if someone doesn't want to live in the same nation as me, OK, let's work it out reasonably. But the coloreds don't want this. They cry about "White racism" while at the same time wanting to move into the White man's territory.
In the last analysis, if EAs are so wonderful, then why, praytell, do so many of them want to immigrate here? To "bless us" with their knowledge? Or to enjoy the superior western culture? Or to just displace the White man?
BTW, the Chinese reaction to the SARS crisis was not very inspiring. Left alone, they ignored the problem until they infected the world. Only after intense pressure from the WHO (i.e., Whitey) did they make an attempt to do _something_ about it.
Left to themselves they would have ignored it until the last living Chinaman bumped his bicycle into the mountain of rotting corpses in downtown Beijing.
We really don't need these people. Thank you and goodbye.
Posted by: mxrienzi at July 22, 2003 07:44 AMFirst, Dienekes' site is not the place to air my differences with the individual known as Godless Capitalist. Will GC allow me to defend myself on his site? If so, there's where I'll do it -- in detail. If not, he's just showing all the more what a piece of crap he is.
I checked out the link he gives that promises to show where I harrassed people -- I presume he means I harrassed Asian Dude and "Mary." But I was extremely disappointed in what I found -- comparing dick sizes?? IS THAT ALL??? I mean, just the other day I submitted a post to a readers' forum that was all about comparing the dick sizes of different races, and afterward I actually decided to request that it be erased, because it was way too tame! I mean --- to all my fans out there, I can do better than what's in this link -- LOTS better! (What GC leaves out, of course, on the thing about where dick sizes were discussed, was THE CONTEXT! He left out the blog entry and thread which my comment was part of -- the fact that his fellow blogger Joel had posted some entry about a contraption having to do with dick sizes or something purely as a joke, and other comments in that thread joked about it exactly as I did. What looks odd completely out of context doesn't when seen in context. GC neglects to mention of course that on GnXp.com they're known for raunchy threads and they'll go on and on and on about dick sizes, breasts, what color women have the best this and that -- he leaves all that context out of it, of course. Anyone can quote anything out of context and make it sound inappropriate, which in context is seen to be the opposite. To all my fans, I wish to reassure them that, had I not been held back by that way-too-tame GnXp.com context, I could have been WAY, WAY raunchier toward "Mary", whoever THAT is, than talking about Joel's blog entry about some dick size contraption. Trust me! PLEASE just give me another chance! I can do better, I promise!!)
I mean, I looked for me harrassing Asian Dude in that link but I was disappointed! THE BEST PART HAS BEEN DELETED!
[Here, from the link GC gives, was Asian Dude's first obnoxious post:]
"NOTE TO KEVIN MACDONALD:
"You may be sorry about the loss of European Dominance over the polity, but I am damn sure not... I'm glad that America was rid of European Dominance so that other groups could also make their presence felt...
"As far as blaming Jews for everything goes, I suggest you have a chat with George W. Bush about restricting immigration, I don't believe he's a Jew and I believe that there are some sound economic reasons for encouraging immigration that he might like to share with you....
"Posted by: asian dude here on March 11, 2003 02:41 AM"
[Here was my initial reply to Asian Dude, but this is nothing -- there were a couple of subsequent exchanges between me and the imbecile which became a lot more, shall we say, "frank" -- I'm disappointed that GC, who dishonestly deleted them and then defended the moronic Oriental troll, didn't re-post them so everyone could REALLY see an example of me harrassing somebody -- this piddling initial reply of mine that follows is tamer than hell and boring as all get-out, but trust me, folks, I can do A LOT BETTER -- the REAL action came after this one, but has unfortunately been deleted:]
"Asian Dude writes, 'You may be sorry about the loss of European Dominance over the polity, but I am damn sure not... I'm glad that America was rid of European Dominance so that other groups could also make their presence felt...'
"Those 'other groups' have their own countries, Dude. Let them go back to them and good riddance if yours is going to be the attitude they adopt once they set foot on U.S. soil. If 'making their [ethno-cultural] presence felt,' rather than respecting the ethno-culture here as they found it, is what they want, let them go home (in your case, I assume to China) and make it felt there -- I assume there are plenty of people back home, Dude, who are DYING to 'feel your presence.' This country's already taken -- sorry!
"Come here, by all means, and embed yourself in the prevailing white Euro Christian matrix already here, out of sheer respect. You and your ethnic group will be more than welcome. But don't come here and start talking like you're out to overthrow everything here. You've totally fucked up [in the original this had asterisks in place of some letters -- I took them out here just to spice things up here a little -- hey, people are reading this, don't forget, to see me harrassing somebody ... and the rest is soooooo tame] China -- go home and sort that place out before you go shooting your mouth off here. There is an ethno-culture here which extends way beyond your pitiful, narrow-minded college-campus-Feds-imposed-PC-research-grant-applications-publish-or-perish-etc. world, which deserves to be respected just as yours back home does.
"Note that the LEAST which your sickening attitude entails is 'What's sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander' -- there would be nothing wrong with eradication of the traditionally dominant ethno-culture in every country in the world, including China's. Let's start eradicating them all right now, if that's the way the game is played.
"I've lived many long years in foreign countries, Dude. Don't pull that crap on me. Oh, and .. uhhh ... don't let your frustration over Oriental girls' preferring white guys shape your politics TOO, TOO MUCH, Asian Dude.
"Posted by: Unadorned on March 11, 2003 05:55 AM"
As for harrassing "Mary," whoever THAT is, all I can say is I have a reputation to defend around here and I'm outraged -- OUTRAGED! -- at GC's RUINING that online rep I've taken so long to build up and cultivate! How dare he -- HOW DARE HE!!! -- imply that when I decide to harrass a woman online I can't do better than talking about paddling her butt and dick size!! (even if she IS a neurasthenic, hormoneless little creep in the worst tradition of the butt of Camille Paglia's numerous satires about today's U.S. college girls or the novelist E.M. Forester's depiction of that PATHETIC English neurasthenic woman in his novel, "A Passage to India") -- even if this creep "Mary" (whoever THAT'S supposed to be -- never heard of her ... OHHHHHHHHHH wait a minute -- you mean that imbecilic non-entity who was pretending to run a dull-as-death blog site about strictly no subject matter in the universe??? THAT creep??? OK -- I gotcha now --- I see the one you mean ... My GOD, what a creep! ....) -- even if the woman I've decided to harrass is THAT pathetic sort -- "Mary's" sort -- I RESENT THE IMPLICATION that harrassing her about getting her butt paddled with her pants down is the best I can do and I DEMAND that GC retract that LIE! I have fans out there who know I can do LOTS better than that and I WILL NOT STAND IDLY BY AND SEE MY REPUTATION AS A HARRASSER GET ALL SHOT TO HELL BY MISREPRESENTATIONS! All I can say in my defense is CONTEXT -- if GC will kindly post the context my my paddling and dick remarks, including the blog entries they were in response to and the entire readers' threads they were part of -- my fans will see why I was FORCED TO HOLD BACK IN MY HARRASSMENT OF THIS WOMAN AND DIDN'T COME OUT WITH ANYTHING MORE DEVASTATING OR RAUNCHY.
A final word to all my fans: PLEASE DON'T LOSE FAITH IN MY HARRASSMENT POWERS JUST BECAUSE OF THIS SLIGHT BY GC -- I CAN AND WILL DO BETTER IN THE FUTURE!!!
(Now, the above is just for an appetizer. It's been EXTREMELY toned down, out of respect for Dienekes' site. If GC will let me come onto his site to defend myself, where that defense rightly belongs and not on Dienekes' site, I'll bring on the main course. Will he let me defend myself there?)
One wonders how much of the early Chinese "technological advance" was due to the jump-start given by White culture (and genes?) from early migrants - one can't help remembering the Caucasoid mummies found in western China.
What are you *talking* about, Rienzi? Do you have any peer reviewed evidence of "Caucasoid genes" (or haplotypes, rather) in China?
Europeans never invaded China. By contrast, the Huns swept from Mongolia into the heart of Germany. I'd say there was quite a bit more gene flow-via-conquering into Europe, considering the obviously alien languages of Finnish and Hungarian and the phenotypes of the Lapps, particularly if they followed Genghis' example.
Talk of "neurological engineering" means nothing
Ummm...really? Do you really not understand the potential for genetically engineering human intelligence? I suggest you read this debate on the question of a cybernetic future vs. a genetic future. One way or the other, transhumanism is around the corner, and it is only an engineering challenge. No fundamental breakthroughs are required in order to begin the genetic engineering of human intelligence.
We really don't need these people.
Hey Rienzi: here's a challenge for you. Name the most prominent Italian American scientists you can think of in the US in the last 15 years or so. I'll start you off with the 2002 Nobel Prize winner, Giacconi. Wanna bet that Indian, Jewish and Chinese ancestry Americans are vastly overrepresented relative to the Italians in technical contributions, medals, etc. in that time period? Btw, Oleg made a comment like this recently about "not needing" the technical expertise of "Jeurasians". Here's a repost ;) :
The basis of your argument seems to be that the white majority badly needs Jews and Asians.First, let's take a look at how much of the technical elite is composed of white gentiles. You might be interested in these calculations by Griffe on rank ordering by merit, given current estimates of IQ from NLSY data. Note that Griffe uses the conservative estimate for the Jewish-white IQ difference, namely 12 points. Increasing the gap will alter the statistics appropriately. This calculation was done in 1998, when demographics were slightly different, but the calculation is time independent.
The point to note is that in a pure-merit (i.e., no AA) scheme, 5% of the population (Jews + Asians) takes about 45% of the seats. The other 55% goes to the gentile 75% of the population. I wouldn't be surprised if today's demographics led to those predicted numbers being less than 50% for gentiles. Don't get me wrong - I'm not dissing the smarts of white gentiles, just examining your claims. IMO the overrepresentation is because the Jews in this country are inherently smart, while the Asians represent the best that East and South Asia have to offer.
One other point to note: the above calculation includes both math and verbal scores. If we take a look at the elite engineering institutes which really determine the fate of the country, the disparities become even more lopsided. Consider MIT:
(MIT stats)
8% of MIT's undergrads are foreign
27% of MIT's undergrads are Asian.
20% are black/Hispanic
Hillel counts another 10% as Jewish.
That leaves 35% white gentilesSubtracting the blacks/Hispanics gives about 80% of the seats assigned on a merit basis. Of the 72% that went to Americans, slightly more than half (37%) went to Jews and Asians, while the rest (35%) went to white gentiles. Again, Jews and Asians only make up 5-6% of the population, while white gentiles make up 69%. In other words, a tiny fraction of the population beat out the largest group in the population for the merit-based seats at arguably the best engineering school in the country (alongside Caltech and Stanford).
As for the claim that innovations have been mainly the domain of white gentiles...why don't we list the major discoveries made by American citizens in the last decade, along with the ethnicity of the discoverer? That might be an interesting front-page post in itself, even with the selection bias.
One other point: the low IQ segments of the population are reproducing faster than the high IQ segments. Countering this dysgenic trend in the medium term is easily accomplished by importing the smartest and hardest workers from other countries. Such workers assimilate, speak English, intermarry, and do not commit crimes.
I ask a simple question: what have you done for me lately, sir? ;) ;)
Posted by: godlesscapitalist at July 22, 2003 12:28 PMIn the last analysis, if EAs are so wonderful, then why, praytell, do so many of them want to immigrate here? To "bless us" with their knowledge? Or to enjoy the superior western culture? Or to just displace the White man?
If Europeans were so superior, why did they strike out in search of overseas paths to trade with China and India? Things are not simple as you make them out to be, Rienzi. The age of European dominance upon the world stage is over. The age of American dominance is now. As an American citizen, I hope it continues indefinitely. But unlike you, I am not so foolish as to downplay the threat posed by China.
It's all well and good to back away with your hands in the air and say "it was all a mistake". But China has a long memory. They've been fed with all kinds of propaganda on the Opium Wars, and the iniquities visited upon them by the Europeans. In many, many respects they're like Germany in the 1930's...simmering with resentment towards the West, booming economically, rearming rapidly, under totalitarian control, subject to constant propaganda...all with a massive manufacturing base and a cadre of technologically advanced professionals. What's more, they have a population of angry excess males projected to be 40 million in 2020 - 2/3 the size of the UK *alone*.
You can dismiss this threat by believing that the East Asians are just inferior, and will never match the white man on the battlefield. That would be a major mistake...
Posted by: godlesscapitalist at July 22, 2003 12:45 PM>> Europeans never invaded China. By contrast, the Huns swept from Mongolia into the heart of Germany.
Europeans indeed never invaded China (except as colonials), or at least the eastern coastal regions where Chinese civilization flourished. However, Europeoids penetrated deep into Asia during the Bronze Age and were found in the central regions of Mongolia.
Posted by: Dienekes at July 22, 2003 01:47 PM>> I'd say there was quite a bit more gene flow-via-conquering into Europe, considering the obviously alien languages of Finnish and Hungarian
Hungarians don't show significant traces of East Asian genetic influence. In particular, Y chromosomes of East Asian origin are almost entirely absent, indicating what we know from history, that the Magyars were a small group.
The ancient Mongolians were also partly Europeoid, as they are today.
Posted by: Dienekes at July 22, 2003 01:54 PMEven if we assume that China will use its excess population in wars of conquest (unlikely), the West is quite safe because of mutually-assured destruction.
Posted by: Dienekes at July 22, 2003 02:21 PMRM "If not, he's just showing all the more ***what a piece of crap he is.***"
His musings on GNXP leave little doubt that the individual known as godlesscapitalist is indeed a "piece of crap."
Posted by: friedrich braun at July 23, 2003 12:56 AMPlease don't refer to other posters using personal insults.
Posted by: Dienekes at July 23, 2003 02:33 AMAs for the claim that innovations have been mainly the domain of white gentiles...why don't we list the major discoveries made by American citizens in the last decade, along with the ethnicity of the discoverer? That might be an interesting front-page post in itself, even with the selection bias.
I didn't mean for this to go unaddressed. I'll try to dig up some info on the big inventions of the past few decades and post on the GNXP message board. But, suffice it to say, nearly all innovations are still the result of white gentiles living in Western countries. China, Japan, India, and Israel have contributed very little of value in the past 50 years despite having a collective population far greater than the number of whites on Earth, and the number of innovations attributable to Asians living in the US isn't even close to proportionate with the number of Asians found in major engineering schools.
Posted by: Oleg at July 23, 2003 11:48 PMOleg,
The South Asian known as "godlesscapitalist" has deleted the message board on GNXP.
The reason that I asked you if you were Russian is because 1) it's a common Russian name; 2) someone with the nom de plume "Oleg" posts on SF, and I thought that it might be you. BTW, have you noticed that the said South Asian continuous to make personal attacks against me even though he has banned be and I cannot any longer respond (maybe such cowardly, bully-boy tactics are the whole point?).
Here's what I wrote him:
GC:
Only a coward and a bully would keep attacking someone whom they just banned, when he knows that this person cannot defend himself on his blog (this seems to be a pattern with you, you’ve done the same thing with Michael Rienzi from Legion Europa and Unadorned, see dienekes’s blog). Unlike Razib whom I respect, you have no class (have you noticed that I didn’t have a problem with Razib? Unlike you, he doesn’t enjoy incessantly baiting and threatening WNs). I dare you to post this reply on your blog. I know that you won’t do it, though; it wouldn’t be your style. You’re more into quick “sucker-punches.” [He hasn’t posted this reply.]
Pssst...whoever that "friedrich" was on this other forum, it’s not me; don’t you have better things to do than googling me and searching me like an obsessed loser? Get a grip. I’m not that important. Maybe you have too much time on your hands. I don’t know.
And I'm not a scientist (and I never claimed to be one, have I?). But you’re not a historian, philosopher, psychologist, political scientists, philologist, etc., etc., etc. either. However, this hasn't kept you from spouting off on all kinds of issues, right? Well, we all get our info from somewhere.
Heteriosis has done some wonderful things for the Latin American countries. Maybe if we have enough race mixing in NA and Europe we might be able to reach the intellectual, cultural, economic, technological, etc. heights of...Brazil, for e.g. Do you think? Maybe? If we’re lucky? Not much heteriosis occurred for centuries amongst Ashkenazi Jews or Zoroastrians, either (see http://www.vdare.com/sailer/wealth_of_nations.htm) ... Gee, this fact hasn't hurt their cognitive abilities a whole lot, has it? You’re a pamphleteer and propagandist for race mixing, that’s all. Anyway, I don't what Whites to disappear, but I wouldn't expect a race nihilist to understand...
The South Asian known as "godlesscapitalist" has deleted the message board on GNXP.
It's still there. You probably just can't see it since you've been banned.
The reason that I asked you if you were Russian is because 1) it's a common Russian name; 2) someone with the nom de plume "Oleg" posts on SF, and I thought that it might be you.
Yeah, I just picked this name out at random. I didn't realize that someone was already using it at Stormfront, or I would have picked something different.
BTW, have you noticed that the said South Asian continuous to make personal attacks against me even though he has banned be and I cannot any longer respond (maybe such cowardly, bully-boy tactics are the whole point?).
Perhaps, though he hasn't banned me yet. In any case I wouldn't expect that you'll sell Godless on white nationalism anytime soon. I just argue with him for fun and because it's a good exercise, really. The bottom line is that whites don't need Asians and we would be much better off without Jews. By contrast, Jews need whites and Asians living in our countries benefit enormously from us. I think that Godless knows this and therefore perceives white racial consciousness as a potential threat, which is why he is so pro-race-mixing and pro-immigration (i.e., he basically takes the same stance toward whites that Jews have traditionally taken since he is in a similar position).
Posted by: Oleg at July 25, 2003 12:12 AMI was banned originally from GnXp.com by GC about ten or eleven months ago for nothing. The "basis" (if one could call it that) for this fantasy GC spouts about offensive sexual banter on my part is taken, of course, completely out of context.
Were the original blog entries and posts available, anyone could read them and see there was nothing wrong with my posts, but my guess is the original entries and threads are no longer available, due to various accidental archive losses over the months as they re-configured their site over there a couple or three times and had an accident or two with their set-up, if memory serves. Otherwise GC would have either: 1) posted a link to them so everyone could read them (which would completely exculpate me of course, there being nothing wrong with my posts, and he'd have to find some other fantasy to harp about), or 2) GC would have stopped harping on my "offensive" posts, since anyone could see for himself that not only was there was nothing wrong with them, but all mine were far tamer than most of the others, including quite a number of Razib's and many other posters there. (I realize now that my crime in GC's eyes was simply that I was white, you see -- in his eyes a white is not allowed to do things browns and yellows are allowed to do, and "being risqué with the boys" is one of the things white guys can't do without whipping GC into a blind, raging fury. Razib of course isn't like that.)
As an example of the typical kind of risqué banter which characterized lots of GnXp.com threads at that time, just the other day a regular at the RichardPoe.com Forum posted a good-natured risqué but totally harmless brief comment about races and penis size which was funny and, of course, not at all inappropriate, but one-hundred-percent innocent and good-natured. It happens that no one replied to it, so it stood alone, but others might easily have replied to it, creating a risqué thread of whatever number of posts, about races and penis size. (I did reply to it, with more of the same risqué banter and joking spirit, but immediately afterward requested that the editor erase my post for reasons unrelated to the banter about penis size -- it was because my use of "Negro" and "Oriental" in what I'd written sounded disrespectful to my ears in retrospect -- though of course had not been meant disrespectfully. So my post was taken down at my request, leaving just the one risqué post.) Had around eight or ten posters, say, replied to that post about penis size in the same risqué spirit, there would have been created an entire thread of good-natured risqué banter, which everyone understood was not inappropriate, but funny and acceptible provided it remained within certain bounds of course.
That was exactly the sort of thread that got created at GnXp.com all the time back then. I don't read the site much any more since GC came back after his hiatus -- I just don't go there -- so I don't know if that sort of thread still gets created over there all the time. But it certainly did then.
This thing GC has posted on his site now, about how I said something shocking to "Mary" in one of those risqué threads, is all in his head. "Mary" was a blogger there at that time, and there was another female one named, I think, "Elizabeth" something or other, and there was sometimes risqué banter of this sort back and forth between the female bloggers and the posters, as well as between the male ones and the posters. The specific instance GC cites about penis size or whatever it was involved a blog entry posted by GC's fellow blogger "Joel" (I think the whole pen name "Joel" blogged under was "Joel Grus"). "Joel" one day posted some entry about a contraption of some sort that had to do with penis size, and his blog entry was funny and risqué, and was meant to be both. In posting it he made his own risqué comment in the blog entry itself. Naturally, there followed a string of risqué comments from posters, having to do with this contraption about penis size, or whatever it was. Maybe there were six? eight? ten comments in the thread? Mine was among them and was the same as the others -- no more or less risqué. If GC claims I posted something wrong in that thread, let him cite the entire thread including Joel Grus' blog entry and all the other comments that accompanied mine. Let people judge for themselves who the weirdo is. If he can't do that, let him apologize to me in public and then shut his filthy mouth.
Every one of the other things he takes out of context and cites about me have a similar explanation, one which totally -- not partly, but totally -- exculpates me, and totally inculpates him instead, for his dishonesty, or for his insanity, or both.
When GC banned me almost a year ago, Razib told me he did not see what I was being banned for. I had nothing against being banned, by the way, it being GC's site and in my view he could ban anyone he damn well pleased. If that happened to be me, too bad for me. The difference between then and this second time was he just quietly banned me without libeling me. He never said a word or had the courtesy to tell me why he was banning me (which was cool with me, by the way -- I didn't mind); Razib told me in a very friendly way that it was because GC viewed me as a racist sexist homophobe anti-transgender or whatever (all nonsense, of course), and he didn't really see it, but "had to go along with it."
When I resumed posting around January or February it was because I had been invited back onto the site. I had not communicated with or solicited permission from anyone there, whatsoever. One day, out of the clear blue, I received an e-mail totally unexpectedly from someone associated with the site, inviting me to resume posting there if I wanted to.
I didn't post there at first, but as the weeks went by I gradually got back into it. The reason GC keeps making a point of saying (whenever he refers to me in one of his psychotic tirades), "Unadorned AKA Cognassier or whatever name he goes under now," is, I suspect, that he thinks I snuk back on the site under "Unadorned," the SN he banned me under having been "Cognassier." I didn't sneak back on but was invited, as I just said. At first I resumed posting under Cognassier but then changed to Unadorned and said explicitly in a post there that I was changing my pen name because I used Unadorned in all other forums where I posted. No secret; no sneaking.
Just as GC should post the links to my "offensive language to Mary" so that people may read my posts for themselves and judge (and in so doing, REALLY see what morons both GC and Mary are for claiming I "offended" her), he should post the offensive language I used against Asian Dude, a yellow anti-white racist, in the second flap, which got me banned the second time. Actually, my fans will be extremely disappointed to know, I said scarcely anything shocking to Asian Dude. If I'd copied my posts to him, I'd post them here myself -- but I didn't. I think the worst I said was something like this: "If you keep up your crap, Asian Dude, I'll put you in your place on this forum with such words as will make your straight Chinese hair curl." I think it was that sentence -- utterly tame, as anyone can see -- that made GC flip. But you see, I was a white man, and GC can't abide to see whites defending themselves or their group.
There was a brown, however, who defended me -- a semi-regular poster who posts under a Hindu pen name. He saw the whole flap between me and the outrageous yellow racist, and saw my comments to GC after the latter unjustly attacked me afterward, legitimate comments of mine which GC then erased even as he dirtily libelled and slandered me.
This Hindu defended me, saying (it's still posted there if anyone wants to go see it) "Godless, why was Unadorned's last post erased? Please re-post it and respond to it."
I will not forget what that Hindu gentleman did.
On another subject: Oleg, you're wrong in what you say about Jews, above. I'll comment on exactly what you're wrong about some other time, this post having gone on too long already.
I will say that GC repeatedly blamed someone using the pen name "Oleg" for introducing what he derided as "the Black = ugly-looking" subject to GnXp.com. I think he said he banned "Oleg" for doing that. But GC was confused. It wasn't "Oleg" who introduced it. It was a GnXp.com blogger in an extraordinarily skillful and legitimate blog entry who introduced it. What the blogger introduced wasn't "black = ugly," as GC insisted on phrasing it, but an intelligent discussion on the esthetics of physical beauty.