what the Alt-Right actually is (NAFTA, Kentucky, banks, tax)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The Alt-Right can pretty much be summed up as a a group of people with extremely high self-esteem. They don't make an emotional connection between words said, memes posted, and themselves. In other words, they are nearly impossible to offend, a kind of anti-Left nemesis.
While the Alt-Right's views may be vague, and span quite wide with no solidly defined commons, that aforementioned quality is the defining constant among them all.
Name calling, shock news, degrading adjectives, pretty much like raindrops upon a duck's back. The media uses words to fight and when those words appear to have no effect, it's quite irritating.
According to the alt-right site, the Daily Stormer, the core precepts and values of the alt-right are as follows:
1. Anti-semitism
2. White countries for white people (no immigration of nonwhites, deportation of nonwhites from white countries including the US regardless of citizenship, the 14 words)
3. Scientific racism
4. Opposition to feminism and gender equality, support for traditional families
5. Endorsement of white history
6. Cultural normalization (defined as strict laws against drugs and porn, strictly enforced)
7. Common sense economics (defined as protectionism and "free market socialism" without Jews)
8. The white struggle as a global battle (unity of all white nations, global race war)
Now how is this different from white nationalism, again?
(Source: Andrew Anglin, "A Normie's Guide To The Alt-Right", Daily Stormer)
Knowing all of this, this is what I can say.
1) I am not an Anti-Semite. It is a hateful, wrongful way to think. As someone who believes in Christ, I definitely cannot justify anti-semitism.
2) Culture and race aren't the same thing. If a Black man born in England, and raised in the English culture, will likely have more in common with a White Englishman than with a Black man from Nigeria, Ghana, or Jamaica. A Black English person and a White English person are likely to have more in common with each other than either of them with have with a German, French, Ghanaian, Congolese, or Dutch person.
3) Scientific racism is basically pseudoscience. It is used to justify one's hatred of those of a different race.
4) I am for the building of families. I am also for women voting, working, and being part of society.
5) We should learn everyone's history.
6) I am not a drug user or a user of pornography. I also do not believe in locking someone up for smoking a joint or looking at a picture of a naked woman.
7) Economics should be that everyone participates.
8) The 8th statement ties into your last statement. It is basically white nationalism under a different name.
According to the alt-right site, the Daily Stormer, the core precepts and values of the alt-right are as follows:
1. Anti-semitism
2. White countries for white people (no immigration of nonwhites, deportation of nonwhites from white countries including the US regardless of citizenship, the 14 words)
3. Scientific racism
4. Opposition to feminism and gender equality, support for traditional families
5. Endorsement of white history
6. Cultural normalization (defined as strict laws against drugs and porn, strictly enforced)
7. Common sense economics (defined as protectionism and "free market socialism" without Jews)
8. The white struggle as a global battle (unity of all white nations, global race war)
Now how is this different from white nationalism, again?
(Source: Andrew Anglin, "A Normie's Guide To The Alt-Right", Daily Stormer)
Nothing. It is white nationalism. Gee imagine a group of people trying to co-opt a movement. Why the hell didn't the stormers call themselves the Alt-right before?
The eradication of a 17 point IQ gap goes way beyond the Flynn effect. I've never read anything that apportions the determinants of IQ on a percentage basis. Most people in the HBD world seem to be pretty hard hereditarians, which is why so many people lost it when Britain's GSCE and CAT results came out showing poor African and Caribbean students outperforming poor White British students.
I suppose my larger point is that you just can't accept the data you like and reject the data you don't like. There's also a tendency to treat certain authority as gospel (Lynn, Murray, Rushton, etc.) so long as they are saying things you (not "you" specifically) like and rejecting it when they are not.
Because the whole topic is taboo, and information is actively suppressed, discussions of race are often of very low quality. Of course you can point to examples of people dismissing relevant data, making unreasonable arguments or otherwise being unrealistic in the name of race realism. But can you make a good case against realism itself? What is the alternative? Should we all go along with demands that we turn off our brains and pretend to believe in universal equality regardless of contrary evidence? ...just give up on using science to understand the development of our own species because some people are offended by it?
The Alt-Right can pretty much be summed up as a a group of people with extremely high self-esteem. They don't make an emotional connection between words said, memes posted, and themselves. In other words, they are nearly impossible to offend, a kind of anti-Left nemesis.
While the Alt-Right's views may be vague, and span quite wide with no solidly defined commons, that aforementioned quality is the defining constant among them all.
Name calling, shock news, degrading adjectives, pretty much like raindrops upon a duck's back. The media uses words to fight and when those words appear to have no effect, it's quite irritating.
Sounds good to me and not dogmatic. Take for example the "conservative" who argues with the assumed the premise BS of a *******. Conservatives are so fiscally sound and regard themselves as a human abacus and are full of brass tacks common sense. Don't remember seeing them around talking about the housing bust in 2006....Most of them could not differentiate Adam Smith from Marx when I post the excepts from the works I bothered to read and they didn't.
A " conservative" for "free trade" which no matter what in all weather ,be it stormy or with blue sky, full steam ahead to free trade. ...
O Captain! my Captain! our fearful trip is done,
The ship has weather’d every rack, the prize we sought is won,
Its dogmatic.
Lets take an alt approach from the dogmatism of liberals ( I only know fluffy, and the Mexicans know how to do it) - and the conservative (its just the right thing to do according to the notes in my business elective i took in college) . Saying " I have been balancing my check book all my life" in an indignant Nixon voice I think really gives a good feel for schmarty conservatives....
Lets look as a "free trade analogy . Now why would I want to do my own plumbing rather than call a tradesman aka trade with him?
1 Maybe I would like to develop a skill . Even though It will take me 10 hours and I can pay for it with 3 hours of my work, I will eventually be able to do it nearly as well as a plumber. So for now , I will take the shot term economic loss .
That is why young markets were protected. Funny how patent protection is the exact same thing isn't it? We protect a market until its mature enough to handle it.
2. Maybe I cannot trust the only plumber in town. Sure his prices are good and the quality of his work is great, but he had an issue with a certain customer and he refuse to do business with him. Now that person has no plumber....
Funny how the US uses trade embargoes all the time , all while having not a care in the world depending on its enemies.....
3. Maybe I don't like the way the plumber dumps raw sewage in the lake . I like his prices and work but the only reason it seems he is the best in town is because his competition has to follow the environmental laws.
Ever see the smog in China? Shall we consider this a fair competitor?
Maybe that's the problem . Its just so much easier to cling to a simple dogma.
Well, I think if we're going to give the work of Richard Lynn and Tatu Vanhanen credence, then we need to accept their methods and conclusions in their entirety.
Lynn's research showed that the average IQ in Ireland was 87, which was a full standard deviation away from Irish-Americans in the 1970s. Lynn argued that Irish IQ was fixed and hereditable, but as Unz points out, that hypothesis can't be true because IQ scores rose over time. The same was true in Germany where a 17 point gap existed between East and West German children during the Cold War.
But who are we to argue with Lynn?
You are misstating what Lynn's claims are and his research just as Unz does. Lynn estimates the average IQ in Ireland at 95, and it is 100-102 for Irish Americans. The explanation is that many of the more intelligent left Ireland for Britain, the US etc. Lynn never states IQ is "fixed" and often makes adjustments for adverse environmental conditions, ie, sub-Saharan IQ mean is 67 but would be 80 without adverse conditions.
Lynn replies: Once again, it is a pity that Unz relies on our first study giving two IQs for Ireland rather than our latest compilation giving ten IQs for Ireland, from which we estimate an IQ of 95.
Lynn replies: Unz exaggerates. There are no cases in which “the intra-ethnic IQ gaps being discussed are absolutely enormous—often approaching a full standard deviation or more.” In our latest compilation we give the IQ for Ireland as 95, and therefore 4 IQ points—less than one third of a standard deviation—lower than that in northern and central western Europe. The IQ gap for southern Italy is 10 IQ points, approximately two thirds of a standard deviation lower than that in northern and central western Europe.
The eradication of a 17 point IQ gap goes way beyond the Flynn effect. I've never read anything that apportions the determinants of IQ on a percentage basis. Most people in the HBD world seem to be pretty hard hereditarians, which is why so many people lost it when Britain's GSCE and CAT results came out showing poor African and Caribbean students outperforming poor White British students.
I suppose my larger point is that you just can't accept the data you like and reject the data you don't like. There's also a tendency to treat certain authority as gospel (Lynn, Murray, Rushton, etc.) so long as they are saying things you (not "you" specifically) like and rejecting it when they are not.
I will add something else. There were mental tests conducted during WWI. Blacks from Ohio, Illinois, and Pennsylvania scored higher than Whites from Kentucky and Alabama.
I will add something else. There were mental tests conducted during WWI. Blacks from Ohio, Illinois, and Pennsylvania scored higher than Whites from Kentucky and Alabama.
I would say it would be a culture thing.
... were part of the relatively successful first wave of blacks who had the resources to move out of the South and establish themselves in the Midwest.
it is funny, liberals are just liars. Not only is their platform about lies they even lie about rival platforms.
You can take that to the bank. The truth condemns liberals. That's why they condemn the truth and try to silence the truth.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
