Mga app ng Google
Pangunahing menu

Post a Comment On: Steve Sailer: iSteve

"Henry Louis Gates, Pointy-Haired Boss"

23 Comments -

1 – 23 of 23
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I'm getting tired of all these litteratis. Where are the railway, agricultural, hydraulic and civil engineers of Africa? Only the Boers in South Africa? Why do blacks not get down and fix their f. continent which is teeming with natural resources? It’s so f. easy. Just 4 million whites in South Africa turned the place into a contender for the First World club, in spite of being harassed by terrorist campaigns and sanctions. Why do blacks have such problems with the built environment and food security? Instead they wax about literature and bully themselves into the power structures of foreign peoples or go live on the dole in the US or Europe. If they got their act together in Africa they could become a world power.

7/31/09, 12:27 AM

Anonymous l'art du cum f'art said...

"If they got their act together in Africa they could become a world power."

When did you start reading Steve Sailer? Just now?

An important part of human biodiversity and Steve's writing is that the sentiment you express above is much, much easier said than done.

7/31/09, 1:03 AM

Anonymous Anonymous said...

All the waffling here smells like black privilege.

I'd like to see equivalent waffling on behalf of whitey in a Salon piece. Or maybe several, since weighting by demographics (to say nothing of practicality - black men have to answer for violating the AA rules how often, exactly?) isn't an unreasonable request.

Maybe I shouldn't be too hard on Salon. Putting black face on might be the only way these sissies can broach the subject.

"I wouldn't buy an encyclopedia about women if it were written by men."

LOL. Ceteris Paribus, men would write a better one.

Also, isn't the reader more important than the writer? And doesn't that become more so as one ventures into "Who? Whom?" territory? E.g., wouldn't either sex be better served with a product created by and intended for their own sex?

Why do blacks have such problems

Throw this idea (blacks are whites with different surfaces) out the window.

It's a racist idea, btw: everyone in the world can/should/will be just like whitey if they try.

~Svigor

7/31/09, 2:44 AM

Anonymous Billare said...

One reason that tenured economics professors are about as pro-immigration as strawberry farm owners is that they both profit from cheap immigrant labor.

This makes no sense to me. First, of all, as academics, on average these economists are center-left, certainly more leftward than the mainstream. Do you think really such a justification could sit well in their minds, when many of their kind belong to a belief system that demonizes talismans like "lobbyists" and "Big Business"? It might well be an ultimate justification for their support, that helps to subtly and unknowingly preserve the status quo, but there is no way that it could be the proximate motivation, as it might be to someone of a more "capitalist" bent. Only sociopaths and the truly demented would act in such Machiavellian fashion against their own precepts.

And then, why on Earth would university faculty be concerned with administrative issues anyway? Anyone who has been near a university campus recently knows that the low-skilled work there, e.g., a work-study type job, usually pays better than similarly skilled work elsewhere. Whenever wage negotiations begin with the unions who represent the hired help, leftist professors are often the ones combating against the administration petitioning to give higher wages to lower-skilled workers. You can see one such case of this related within this Harvard Crimson editorial. It's economists (as bloggers) who argue to raise universities' costs by pushing for idea like compensating college athletes as professionals. It does not accord well with psychological mindset of the academic to believe that they would care more about nuts-and-bolts departmental accounting over higher held academic and philosophical ideals. Highly-intelligent people such as economists do not take relatively lower paying jobs than they are otherwise able to then concern themselves with the pecuniary aspects of Life -- or policy.

Instead, let me suggest a couple of reasons of my own. I'd venture that since probably an increasing percentage of those faculty's most capable Ph.D students are increasingly East Asian / Indian / talented and exotic minority groups ("Asian"), so that inclines them to be favorable to foreign immigration. That is the aspect of immigration that is most salient to them personally, and accordingly that should most shape their ideological views. Also, in my experience, within a cohort of talented students, of those more Asian students than White tend to aspire to the kind of academic and esoteric work which an overseeing professor would tend to favorably look upon. I.e., after the awarding of the Ph. D, its the Asian kid who heads off to a post-graduate position at UCLA while the White kid is heading off to make his big bucks at Ren-Tech. I saw this idea illustrated recently by the Audacious Epigone, a comrade-in-arms, who said within a similar debate: "....[s]till, I can't reconcile myself to an immigration policy that would keep a Razib Khan from attaining citizenship."

7/31/09, 2:54 AM

Anonymous Billare said...

I have yet another possible reason, or perhaps to yourself, a "bias". Economists deal frequently within their scope of their work with the GDP statistic. Keep in mind that there is little dispute that Asian immigration is more Pareto-efficient than other types of immigration -- not only do they raise their own wages, they pay out to the government more than they take in. (To raise the wages of bureaucrats and...academics?) In other words, if it were codified in some Bible somewhere, Asian immigration as policy would pass a primary test of "citizenism". Indeed, since economists hang out with like-minded people, they are well aware of studies that demonstrate how much of the paradigm-shifting and GDP-enhancing entrepreneurship in Silicon Valley was caused by Asian immigration. So it is innocuously understandable that this debate is framed and their beliefs formed by the language of their studies.

Now of course the fact that Asian immigration doesn't fail that one test does not completely remark upon the possible distributional issues that such immigration may raise within a specific field or sector. Your political philosophy seems to be a bit more than pure citizenism, so I understand how you would be concerned about the manner such immigration impacts other native-born, mostly White, Ph.D candidates. However, those distributional questions cannot wholly frame the metric that fully measures the desirability of Asian immigration, since to my knowledge the United States of America also is not known as the People's Republic of America. What I'm saying is that it is not prima facie clear who is on the correct side of the immigration debate -- save of course for the major plank of stopping majority Mexican illegal immigration -- you or they. In fact, I tend slightly more often to default to the positions of economists such as BC and TC of GMU, since too many of those arguing against them default to relativistic, and IMO, weak "cultural hegemony"-type haranguing.

7/31/09, 2:56 AM

Anonymous Billare said...

Why do blacks not get down and fix their f. continent which is teeming with natural resources?

Anonymous #1,

I think J. Philippe Rushton would say: "...because it's teeming with natural resources."

7/31/09, 2:59 AM

Anonymous Billare said...

"I wouldn't buy an encyclopedia about women if it were written by men."

I'm so often astonished when I discover how many leftists actually believe this. I'm kinda interested in the history of such thinking - does anyone know if the idea was prominent in another philosophy before this century? I.e., the "critical" view that if you're from one culture, and I'm from another, we can't possibly interpret one another?

7/31/09, 4:01 AM

Anonymous Anonymous said...

l'art du cum f'art,

u dont have to preach to me, i'm from that continent. i know about their dysfunction and am accustomed to all the prejudice against blacks. but aren't we supposed to believe that they can slowly develop themselves? is it just going to be this game of dispossession of whitey's assets, enabled by another much more powerful group in the shadows?

7/31/09, 4:12 AM

Blogger AMac said...

"But look, what we hire here are qualified people, people who can do the work. White people can do this work, and black people can do this work."

I think that quote somehow strayed in from another post. Wasn't that what Mayor DeStefano was proposing for the mission statement of the New Haven Fire Department? Or was it the NYFD?

The mixup is understandable, Steve. It can be hard to keep track of which animals are the more equal ones.

7/31/09, 6:23 AM

Blogger Truth said...

"You think I'm not all for affirmative action? But look, what we hire here are qualified people, people who can do the work. White people can do this work, and black people can do this work."

Hey, you guys should love Skip.

7/31/09, 7:30 AM

Blogger John Anello said...

Good point. Economists especially libertarian ones are the biggest open borders anarchists out there

7/31/09, 8:24 AM

Anonymous Anonymous said...

"I wouldn't buy an encyclopedia about women if it were written by men."

In fact, why constrain this brilliant dictum to encyclopedia?

Why not go the whole hog?

Why not say, "I'm not going to go to any gynecologist who relies upon medical studies written by men."

7/31/09, 8:57 AM

Anonymous Anonymous said...

I want to hear more about this plagiarism. We know from the Finkelstein-Dershowitz saga that Harvard turns a blind eye to plagiarism, but that doesn't mind it won't matter to the rest of the world.

7/31/09, 9:39 AM

Anonymous Anonymous said...

I would emend your last point to: many tenured economics professors are in facor of immigration because they themselves are immigrant labor. Expensive immigrant labor, in their case, of course, not cheap.

7/31/09, 9:52 AM

Anonymous Anonymous said...

This is the reason why my blood boils when I see Gates referred to as a scholar. Scholars are, almost by definition, nerds. They're people who spend their lives digging through obscure books looking for obscure info because they enjoy that kind of thing. African mentality is antithetical to nerdiness. Smart blacks aren't nerds, they're smooth-talkers.

The Salon article tries to blame blacks' unwillingness to sign up for this Afropedia thingie on low salaries. I'm sure that the result would have been the same if the salaries were tripled. If you're not a nerd, then spending 8 hours a day doing research in libraries would seem very, very unpleasant to you. More than unpleasant, it would seem perverted.

7/31/09, 10:23 AM

Anonymous testing99 said...

In the US, Booker T Washington expressed just that sentiment. That a Black Middle and Working class, trained within an inch of it's life on the Prussian model, would win economic power and from that wide/deep power, political freedom.

WEB Dubois argued that political power through agitation by a "talented tenth" of the Black community, it's natural aristocracy, was the path to political then economic power by virtue of White concessions. Sound familiar?

Guess who won the argument?

7/31/09, 12:46 PM

Anonymous Melykin said...

Speaking of South Africa, the other day I heard a surprisingly politically INcorrect piece on CBC (Canadian Broadcasting Corporation) Radio. They were interviewing a white farmer in South Africa about the so called land reform that is going on there--whereby farms owned by whites are sold to blacks under some sort of government program. The white farmer told of a nearby farm that had been sold to blacks. It had been a productive farm that employed many people, but the new owners have abandoned it after taking all the wire and pipes and anything else they could to sell as scap. Now no one works there and the farm produces nothing.

Maybe South Africa is going to go the same way as Zimbabwe.

7/31/09, 1:21 PM

Anonymous Eman said...

Henry L. Gates isn't as Black as he says - he has partial Jewish ancestry:

“Consider the story of Harvard University’s Henry Louis Gates, Jr., an African American, who was both shocked and bemused to learn that his DNA on his mother’s side did not track back to the Yoruba people as he had long thought. The Yoruba have a rich mythology and are believed to have been among the most culturally sophisticated of the African cultures before the arrival of Europeans. “A number of exact matches turned up,” Gates wrote, “leading straight back to that African Kingdom called Northern Europe, to the genes of (among others) a female Ashkenazi Jew. Maybe it was time to start listening to ‘My Yiddishe Mama,” he quipped.”

- from http://www.gnxp.com/blog/2007/10/10-questions-for-jon-entine.php

7/31/09, 2:25 PM

Blogger Polistra said...

>>I'm kinda interested in the history of such thinking - does anyone know if the idea was prominent in another philosophy before this century? I.e., the "critical" view that if you're from one culture, and I'm from another, we can't possibly interpret one another? <<

Yup, that was the theoretical basis of Mussolini's version of fascism. He called it "subjectivism". (Not that he -really- based his dictatorship on any theories, but this was the nominal core.)

7/31/09, 3:41 PM

Anonymous Anonymous said...

u dont have to preach to me, i'm from that continent. i know about their dysfunction and am accustomed to all the prejudice against blacks. but aren't we supposed to believe that they can slowly develop themselves?

No. E.g., how do you maintain a telephone system when there are more people pulling down the wire for the copper inside than there are people willing to make it work?

Okay, that's a poor rhetorical question, since it's been answered (wait for whitey to invent cell phones), but I trust you get the point.

This really is the point you have to get; it's not that there are no intelligent blacks, it's that the proportions (smarts, medians, dumbs, psychos, etc.) are such that the smarts can't really get anything done before the dumbs and the psychos tear things down again.

What's the point of creating a business to make money to buy that nice new car when the locals are going to strip it down to the blocks in short order? I exaggerate, but that's the gist.

~Svigor

7/31/09, 3:48 PM

Anonymous David Davenport said...

IMO, weak "cultural hegemony"-type haranguing. ...

Please define "cultural hegemony"-type haranguing.

Do you mean to say, Asian cultures and mores are as good or better than older stock American culture and values?

7/31/09, 5:39 PM

Anonymous Nine-of-Diamonds said...

"The Salon article tries to blame blacks' unwillingness to sign up for this Afropedia thingie on low salaries."

Hey, don't let it make your blood boil. What makes you think that Salon would be honest about the reasons for this fiasco in the first place? Their (& the rest of the media's) reason for being is to prop up a mediocrity who'd be bagging groceries right now if it weren't for Stanley Ann's "noble savage" fetish. "Race Realism" WRT intellectual giants like Gates, Sotomayor, & the Majick Negro himself is a bit much to expect.

The disproportionately Jewish/SWPL Salonistas have objectively good reasons for inflating black accomplishments & minimizing black failure, & there's simply no reason to expect them to act against their interests.

8/2/09, 9:34 AM

Anonymous estetik said...

post thank you for the beautiful share with us, respect

8/7/09, 12:11 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