Mga app ng Google
Pangunahing menu

Post a Comment On: Steve Sailer: iSteve

"Jason Malloy's latest collection"

42 Comments -

1 – 42 of 42
Anonymous robert61 said...

Re Joyce, don't social scientists know the difference between "affect" and "effect", or is there really such a thing as "cohort affect"?

6/21/09, 11:20 PM

Anonymous robert61 said...

"piece between different countries"

Never mind.

6/21/09, 11:25 PM

Blogger georgesdelatour said...

Genetically closer nations most likely to go to war?

I think this one is stupid. Off the top of my head:

The Iraq War, the Gulf War, the Vietnam War, the Algerian War, the Korean War, World War 2 in the Pacific, the war between Britain and Turkey in the Middle East during WW1, the Anglo Zulu Wars, the Indian Mutiny, Wounded Knee, Pizarro and Cortez's conquests of South America, the Crusades, the Moorish conquest of Spain...

6/22/09, 1:26 AM

Anonymous Silver said...

First, we find significant racial bias in perceptions of worthiness: respondents rate recipients of their own racial group as more worthy. -- study #8

I think it's most noteworthy that the bias exists rather than that it was overcome in a special, "emergency" situation (charity). I'm sure the bias manifests itself in manifold subtle (and not so subtle ) ways in ordinary contexts. After all, there's something about racial diversity that destroys trust.

6/22/09, 1:49 AM

Anonymous Silver said...

Genetically closer nations most likely to go to war?

I think this one is stupid. Off the top of my head
-- quote from georgesdelatour

Well, historically don't nations went to war with nations that they bordered. And given the historic spread of peoples, nations have been most likely to border other nations genetically similar to themselves. So of course they went to war with people genetically similar. The same factors that kept people genetically separate (bodies of water, mountain ranges) also prevented them from warring on one another (to the same degree).

6/22/09, 1:53 AM

Anonymous Anonymous said...

I am seeing a lot more white yuppie babies in Chicago. Maybe a primeval survival mechanism is finally kicking in among European descended people.

6/22/09, 3:14 AM

Blogger John Anello said...

The myth that abortion reduces crime is still taught as an undisputed fact in most college criminology classes; the counterargument is never presented. I suspect this myth is still paraded as fact because it makes liberal professors feel good about their support for the murder of the unborn. They can say to themselves “See abortion has actually helped society!” Wrong!
Criminological research shows that crime rates correlate much stronger with economic conditions and unemployment figures, fluctuations in the 18-24 year old male population, shifts in drug use (crackheads are typically more violent than heroin junkies), and unusual spikes in the release rates of convicts.

6/22/09, 4:41 AM

Anonymous dearieme said...

Scots almost always fought wars against their close kin the Norse, Irish and English. There was no-one else available.

6/22/09, 4:49 AM

Blogger master_of_americans said...

Tibetans and lowland Indians didn't go to war very often, I think, because of the giant mountain range in the way. This didn't stop Tibetans from conquering chunks of northern India in the 8th centuries, albeit briefly (perhaps they learned their lesson and chose not to stick around). I don't think anybody really wants Tibetan land very much, but Mongols still went out of their way to conquer it a few times. That might be considered a peculiarity of the Mongol national character, though.

6/22/09, 5:04 AM

Anonymous Anonymous said...

Scots almost always fought wars against their close kin the Norse, Irish and English. There was no-one else available.

You gotta work with watcha got!

6/22/09, 6:01 AM

Blogger Jonathan said...

Genetically closer nations are probably more likely to go to war just because of proximity. But if you look at a lot of georgesdelatour's counter examples closey they fall apart - Cortes' conquest of the Aztecs was really non-Aztec tribes attacking their closely related Aztec cousins at Spanish instigation. In the Middle East in WWI again most of the actual fighting was Arab vs. Turk not British vs. Turk. The Korean war of course was really Koreans vs. Koreans with the US and China assisting, the same in Vietnam. The US did not declare war against the Korean nation or the Vietnamese nation. WWII in the Pacific was mostly about the Japanese fighting the Chinese and trying to conquer other bits of Asia - the US vs Japan part was a sideshow in terms of total casualties. There are many modern examples of non-related groups living next to each other who have not gone to war (yet) - the Russian-Chinese border in the Far East, Australia - Indonesia, the US-Mexico border (thought that should have been obvious), and the Semitic-Negro fault line across most of Northern Africa. It may well be that genetically disparate groups don't go to war historically because the difference in cultural development leads to one group simply colonizing the other, or, as in the Tibet-Indian case the neither group lives well in the other environment. This is probably also why Semitic tribes never pushed hard below the Sahara - they simply couldn't deal with the diseases and climate as well as the Blacks who were already there.

6/22/09, 7:18 AM

Anonymous Anonymous said...

There was an interesting study from Australia based on the black names resume experiment.

http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5j3zjqtoWMyBvaUFxZa3hXGchv7yQ

"They found Chinese applicants needed to send 68 percent more CVs than those with English names to get the same number of interviews, with Middle Eastern job-seekers requiring an additional 64 percent and Aborigines 35 percent.

The information about the applicants' qualifications for the advertised position was identical, leaving the name as the only variable for employers to decide whether to grant an interview."

"The researchers suggested recently arrived migrant groups faced the most prejudice, pointing out that Italians -- well established since the 1940s -- needed to send only 12 percent more applications than Anglo Saxons."

I'm especially surprised at the moderate amount of bias towards Italians.

6/22/09, 9:24 AM

Blogger David said...

Steve said

"the femme fatales were notable for their long legs. It was a signal to the audience that the regular guy hero was getting himself in over his head."

LOL

6/22/09, 9:53 AM

Anonymous TH said...

I don't think anybody really wants Tibetan land very much...

The Chinese disagree with you.

6/22/09, 9:54 AM

Anonymous testiing99 said...

Charles Murray has some data and thoughts on this Steve: Link Here echoing that the Upper Class has maintained the nuclear family.

However, the middle class is tipping into illegitimacy, up to 20% according to Murray, for White Middle Class.

I've seen other data, IIRC the WSJ, sorry no cite, that suggests that the birth rate for educated White women is up, but it's among 20 something single mothers.

IF women are hard-wired for hypergamy (desire men more powerful than themselves) then single motherhood is an unstoppable force, absent the politically impossible prospect of rolling back women's stations in life.

Murray's data are at least not contradictory to that theory (i.e. Upper Class men are probably higher status/power than most women, able to "attract" marriage and family vs. single motherhood.)

Jonathon -- Not a sideshow (US-Japan) for US or Japanese casualties. The Japanese suffered little from China and indigenous peoples of SE Asia, who had little military forces. They suffered a LOT from the US Military, and vice versa. The firebombing of Tokyo for example killed about 300-400K people.

Moreover it took Cortez to topple the Aztecs, as it did Pizarro the Incas, because they were the only ones with a concept of total war (fight until your enemy is destroyed) rather than "face battles" and the same goes true for the Zulus-British, or Algerians and French, or Greeks-Turks (most of the Turks are Central Asian vs. Hellene Greeks) or Turks-Arabs, or the Barbarian Invaders (Germanic tribes) vs. Romans, Gauls, Britains, and other Italo-Celt mixtures like the Iberians. Then there's the Mongol and Hun invasions, and so on.

A more refined version of the theory would be, neighboring/related peoples go to war, but periodically a distant, unrelated people with significant technological or other advantages sweeps in and conquers a lot of people.

6/22/09, 1:04 PM

Anonymous Anonymous said...

TH said...

"I don't think anybody really wants Tibetan land very much..."

The Chinese disagree with you.


As far as the Chinese are concerned, Tibet is part of China, just like Taiwan, and has been so for a long time. Well before the Qing dynasty.

6/22/09, 1:43 PM

Anonymous Anonymous said...

---I'm especially surprised at the moderate amount of bias towards Italians.---

Mamma Mia!

-Guido

6/22/09, 2:07 PM

Anonymous dc watcher said...

The Japanese suffered little from China and indigenous peoples of SE Asia, who had little military forces.

I don't know how much the Japanese suffered from the Chinese, but the Chinese and Koreans certainly suffered from the Japanese, as did quite a few other Asians, especially Filipinos and Malays. The evil deeds of the Japanese during WWII are about as bad as they get. Yet the Japanese are among the most civilized and humane people under normal circumstances. Highly organized and civilized cultures generally keep violence under control but when it it is motivated to war, watch out.

6/22/09, 2:11 PM

Anonymous bmt said...

Could you please give me the citation for the height of the British Tory cabinet of 1895?

6/22/09, 2:32 PM

Blogger Steve Sailer said...

Citation for height of British Tory cabinet of 1895 -- see the first chapter of The Proud Tower by Barbara Tuchman.

6/22/09, 3:41 PM

Anonymous nsam said...

Interesting caveat follows the main finding of no bias in giving. The last sentence is probably a nod to PC.
--------

Despite our successfully manipulating perceptions of race, respondents give about the same amount irrespective of the race of
the recipients in the pictures. Thus, while our respondents do rate ingroup members as more worthy, they appear to overcome this bias when it comes to giving.

As we will explain in the conclusion, we do not believe that our failure to find racial bias in
giving contradicts prior evidence of discrimination and racial group loyalty. First, racism may have been higher in the past. Second, there may be racial discrimination in the real world that our study fails to detect. Finally, even if there currently is no racial bias in individual preferences for redistribution, cumulative effects of prior discrimination may
cause racial inequalities to persist.

6/22/09, 3:59 PM

Blogger master_of_americans said...

What I meant was, people don't want to live on Tibetan land. Even the modern Han Chinese migrants to Tibet live almost 100% in urban areas.

6/22/09, 5:09 PM

Blogger James Kabala said...

Jonathan: Excellent post, except that the U.S. and Mexico did go to war from 1846-1848.

6/22/09, 5:42 PM

Anonymous Anonymous said...

You keep trotting this crap out, t99, but you have no evidence for it.

I used to be a nanny, I have four children now, I have spent my entire adult life in the upper middle class mommy hood. Demographically speaking, single mothers who have never been married are lower class. Individual exceptions are not numerous enough to matter and they never will be.

6/22/09, 5:49 PM

Anonymous David Davenport said...

The Korean war of course was really Koreans vs. Koreans with the US and China assisting...

Wrong. After the Chinese crossed the Yalu River, the "Korean" war was mostly USA versus the Chinese People's Liberation Army.


... - the US vs Japan part was a sideshow in terms of total casualties.

Non-Japanese civilian casualties, maybe. But not in terms of civilian or military Japanese casualties.

There are many modern examples of non-related groups living next to each other who have not gone to war .... the US-Mexico border (thought that should have been obvious)..

Americans have never been quite literally at war with Mexico?

6/22/09, 7:43 PM

OpenID ironrailsironweights said...

There was an interesting study from Australia based on the black names resume experiment.

They found Chinese applicants needed to send 68 percent more CVs than those with English names to get the same number of interviews, with Middle Eastern job-seekers requiring an additional 64 percent and Aborigines 35 percent.

.
.
.
I'm very surprised, having always thought that there was little prejudice against Chinese in Australia, and a lot against Aborigines.

Peter

6/22/09, 7:46 PM

Anonymous Anonymous said...

Keep in mind that Japanese crimes have been inflated a bit after the fact. Most of the figures for Nanking come from a single source, a Chinese doctor who testified at the war crimes trial. His testimony conflicts with the written testimony of the Japanese military, the Red Cross and Germans who were in China at the time. The actual number of civilians killed is probably much less than typically reported. Most of the history has been written by Iris Chang, whose ethnic identity issues and inability to read primary sources in their original language make her an unreliable historian.

6/22/09, 9:49 PM

Anonymous Lucius Vorenus said...

And I'd have to kick myself if I didn't mention this fellow, from up North, who flourished from about 1291 until 1308.

Or this fellow, who flourished from about 1365 to 1384.

6/22/09, 10:26 PM

Anonymous Anonymous said...

Question re abortion cut crime controversy:

It always struck me as strange that Levitt and Donahue are not correct. NAMs make disproportionate use of abortion. I read that the black rate was around 50% in the US. This probably means that NAMs would be a much greater portion of the US population sans abortion (assuming they wouldn't adjust their sexual behavior much). Since Blacks commit violent and property crimes at around 7 to 10 times the non-hispanic white rate and hispanics commit violent and property crimes at around 3 times the white rate, one would assume that without abortions, the US would have a lot more of such crimes per capita due to the different demographic composition of the population? I can buy the argument that legal abortion doesn't have much of an effect on the per capita frequency at which whites, blacks, and hispanics commit crimes, but I would think that the different demographic development caused by legal abortion would have to affect US rates as a whole?

6/22/09, 10:28 PM

Anonymous tom said...

"Keep in mind that Japanese crimes have been inflated a bit after the fact. "



Well argued Anon. We need more of this type of myth debunking of WWII. Also of the Western theatre.

6/23/09, 12:25 AM

Blogger georgesdelatour said...

Jonathan

What actually constitutes "going to war"? The colonization of the western hemisphere, from Columbus and Cortes to Little Bighorn and Wounded Knee, and the colonization of Australia, often effectively amounted to war against the indigenous population - certainly from the point of view of the indigenous. Admittedly there weren't too many set-piece battles, in the manner of Waterloo.

I'd say most of my other examples still stand - the Moorish invasion of Spain (and the subsequent Reconquista), the Crusades, Mahmud of Ghazni's wars in India, the Indian Mutiny, the Anglo Zulu wars, the French-Algerian war, Mau Mau, the Philippine-American War. I think your characterization of the Vietnam War is wrong. The US dropped more bombs on Vietnam than were dropped by all sides combined in World War Two - and, in fact, dropped six times more bombs on South Vietnam than on North Vietnam. The war is simply called "the American War" in Vietnamese.

6/23/09, 2:09 AM

Anonymous stari_momak said...

Jonathan: Excellent post, except that the U.S. and Mexico did go to war from 1846-1848.

And we took Veracruz in, I believe, 1910, and of course there was the Pershing punitive expedition, and the Zimmerman telegram...

Also, Mexico itself, under both Spanish rule and as an independent state, was constantly involved in what must be called a race war on its northern frontier -- the Apacheria. Read "Blood Meridian" for a fictionalized account. And then too Mexica had a war it quite literally calls a race war, La Guerra de Castas, against the Maya in the Yucatan. It would be interesting to see if either of these made it into the dataset and how they were coded.

6/23/09, 3:32 AM

Anonymous Anonymous said...

From the Latin American paper:

"When using the data from the international student achievement tests through 1991 to build a measure of cognitive skills, Hanushek and Kimko (2000) find a statistically and economically significant positive effect of cognitive skills on economic growth in 1960-1990 that dwarfs the association between years of schooling and growth. Their estimates stem from a statistical model that relates annual growth rates of real GDP per capita to the measure of cognitive skills, years of schooling, the initial level of income, and a variety of other control variables. They find that adding cognitive skills to a base specification including only initial income and years of schooling boosts the variance in GDP per capita among the 31 countries in their sample that can be explained by the model from 33 to 73 percent. At the same time, the effect of years of schooling is greatly reduced by including cognitive skills, leaving it mostly insignificant, while adding other factors leaves the effects of cognitive skills basically unchanged. The general pattern of results is duplicated by a series of other studies that pursue different tests and specifications along with different variations of skills measurement."

We are only mice running in our little wheels...

- Billare

6/23/09, 5:33 AM

Anonymous dc watcher said...

Keep in mind that Japanese crimes have been inflated a bit after the fact...Most of the history has been written by Iris Chang, whose ethnic identity issues and inability to read primary sources in their original language make her an unreliable historian.

Yes, I am aware of this controversy regarding the Rape of Nanking book. However, we have plenty of witnesses of western extraction who were there and have described the horrors. One missionary whose name escapes me commited suicide when she returned the US because she felt she had not saved enough people. She is considered a hero among the Chinese even today, who don't have many westerners they revere.
The Japanese deeds in Korea and Malaysia, not to mention the Philippines, are well documented. They even raised hell in Australia, and let us not forget the infamous case of the poor American "Flyboys" who were systematically cannibalized.
Taking not of this does not mean one is anti-Japanese. The Japanese are among the few nations who have had the grace to officially blush for the atrocities commited by some among them in the past. In a word, they do have a sense of responsibility and accountability, major attributes of truly intelligent, rational, eminently human cultures. A lot of Americans can't believe what some of our military and government is doing now, in our names. The dichotomy of violent and humane behaviors in advanced nations, is IMHO, one of the great modern mysteries.

6/23/09, 5:44 AM

Blogger georgesdelatour said...

And I forgot to mention the Boxer Rebellion.

6/23/09, 6:03 AM

Anonymous Anonymous said...

---Keep in mind that Japanese crimes have been inflated a bit after the fact.---

I'll tell my Grandfather...

6/23/09, 7:50 AM

Anonymous dc watcher said...

Keep in mind that Japanese crimes have been inflated a bit after the fact. "
Well argued Anon. We need more of this type of myth debunking of WWII. Also of the Western theatre.

"Well argued"? That Chinese doctor was not the only person reporting on Naking, though I am not an expert on that particular instance, and was only thinking of it as a part of the whole.http://www.vcn.bc.ca/alpha/speech/Harris.htm
In an interview with Charlie Rose, Iris Chang plainly stated that she considered the Japanese actions to be the result of the deadly inevitability of total power bringing total corruption and some innate evilness, for indeed you could find plenty of historic examples among the Chinese. In fact, some of the things the Japanese were accused of were actually more frequently committed by the Chinese historically. So yes, the victims may have inflated the figures of the dead for propaganda purposes. The unfortunate casualties of "military actions" have often been used in history for larger purposes, deflated, inflated, denied altogether or even made up.

However, to argue well one would have to explain why Koreans, the Filippinos, Malaysians, and any number of Japanese occupied islanders in the Pacific, all recall the Japanese with a degree of horror. Or at least the generation who lived through WWII did. The Japanese had a dreadful reputation during WWII, quite at variance with what they were known for earlier. In my position at an aid agency, I had to review books written on the subject. While some aspersions may be unjustified, MacArthur decided to bring Japan back into the fold of world society and despite his regard for the Philippines, kept information about Japanese misdeeds at a minimum. http://ww2history.suite101.com/article.cfm/bataan_death_march_of_april_1942
There was probably more squelching of atrocity information than exaggeration.
The Japanese were probably no more atrocious than any other very powerful machine rolling over those in their way.

6/23/09, 11:33 AM

Blogger Edward said...

War and relatedness

The methodology mixes up two kinds of wars and two kinds of eras: ancient and modern.

It would be more revealing to treat civil wars, groups fighting for control of an existing territory, and expansionist wars, where one group fights for control of an additional territory to the one it already had. One form of war is characteristic of population expansion, the other contraction (of the ruling population?).

While the combatants in civil wars share a high degree of relatedness, the combatants of inter-state wars of expansion* must be less closely related.

When expansionist wars do occur the population expansion may be limited to areas where the expansionist power is comfortable fighting and living. When the expansionist state fights in an unfavourable environment it uses locals to fight its war and send over only a ruling elite to live there (British India).

*Eg.
The Colonialist powers
Japan
The United States
The Mongols - special case

6/23/09, 2:17 PM

Anonymous Lucius Vorenus said...

The LIFO stack seems to have eaten the first half of my comment.

Let's try it again:

Paleo The British were only creative for about 3 centuries, from roughly 1600-1900.

Yeah, we'll all just agree to overlook that little incident in 1215 AD.

Or anything in the 20th Century involving this guy or this guy or this guy or this guy or this guy or this guy or this guy or this guy or this guy or this guy or this guy or this guy or this guy or this guy...

6/23/09, 6:22 PM

Blogger Truth said...

"Paleo The British were only creative for about 3 centuries, from roughly 1600-1900."

London is still the first, or perhaps second, most influential city in the world depending upon whom you ask.

6/23/09, 9:20 PM

Anonymous Anonymous said...

"the Vietnam War"

What the war between South Vietnam and North Vietnam?

"the Korean War"

The war between South Korea and North Korea?

6/25/09, 10:14 AM

Blogger Janet Brown said...

This is just one more reminder that the private sector and competitive market forces, not the federal government, are the best means to meeting our country's rapidly expanding health care needs.

I was looking for a way to try and do something positive about it, and just signed a petition with the U.S. Chamber of Commerce here to help emphasize that. We need to get involved!

6/26/09, 3:37 AM

Comments are moderated, at whim.
You can use some HTML tags, such as <b>, <i>, <a>

Comment moderation has been enabled. All comments must be approved by the blog author.

You will be asked to sign in after submitting your comment.
OpenID LiveJournal WordPress TypePad AOL