Rightists fatter than leftists?

Commenter Mugabe holds up a "map showing that obesity rates for whites is highest in the red states" as evidence American conservatives are more likely to be obese that US leftists.

Similar notions have circulated among the clickbait consumers of the left for years (based on the same sort of inadequate state-level data). In 2010, Razib, looking at individual-level GSS data found:

I don’t see a notable different obetween liberals and conservatives. The only exception might be that liberals are more well represented among those who are below average in weight than those who are considerably above average, but the samples are small enough than I don’t trust that to be anything more than measurement error.
A survey from neuropolitics.org similarly found:
The above graph shows some interesting trends. First, the Very Liberal males reported the highest percent in the relatively trim 0-5 pounds range, (46%), and the highest rate, among males, in the obese 41+ range (16.8%). The regular Liberal males were second in the 0-5 range, at (38.3%). The Conservative and Very Conservative males had the lowest rates in the 0-5 range, at (29.6 and 34.9%).

Conversely, the Very Conservative females reported the highest rate in 0-5 range (38.2%). The regular Conservative females were next at (31.2%). The Very Liberal and Liberal females had the lowest rates in the 0-5 range, at (26 and 31%). They also had the highest rates in the obese 41+ range (17.7 and 19.4%). [. . .]

According to our survey respondents, the Liberal males are thinner than the Conservative males, and the Conservative females are thinner than the Liberal females. However, this is self-reported, not controlled for age, and not clinically confirmed. So for now, the hypothesis that political-gender cohorts have different average Body Mass Indexes is still very speculative.

The finding that leftist males are disproportionately likely to be very skinny or very fat is in line with my own impressions. Unattractive and sex atypical people (effeminate males, masculine females) are drawn more strongly to leftism. Sex typical, conventionally attractive people are more likely to be conservative. Larger (non-obese) and more masculine males are more comfortable with undisguised assertion of self- and group interest (probably because weighted across evolutionary time they're the ones, at the top of status hierarchies, who could get away with it).


Bruce said...

They seem to go by weight and not body composition. The stereotypical leftie male in my mind is a skinny weakling who rides a 10-speed bike all day. It would be interesting to see data as a function of % body fat.

Also, red states have more blacks and there's lots of fat blacks.

Steve Sailer said...

I have a nurture theory that jogging tends to make you liberal and weightlifting makes you conservative.

It could easily be studied on a college campus by signing up volunteers for a study in which they get free personal training, while being randomly assigned to the running v. lifting groups.

Bruce said...

My nurture theory is that riding a 10-speed bike makes men liberal because that tiny little seat crushes their nuts.

When I started lifting heavy weights I actually noticed I started smelling different – and my wife noticed it too. I started smelling more stinky-masculine like a locker room. Lifting heavy weights (squatting and deadlifting in particular) supposedly releases lots of androgens so I guess maybe that’s what I’m smelling.

Santoculto said...

Conservatoids is a primitive tribe, someone who believe in fairy tales cannot be anything near to be more ''evolved'', specially by human perspective, anti-natural and humanized perspective.

Almost non-white populations are predominantly conservatoids. What made SOME europeans spectacularly special, unique, is exactly their anti-natural nature, the combination of mental excesses and higher intelect. The genuine human phenomena of nature, anthropomorphy, a kind of natural transhumanism, without tattos and weird plastic surgeries, or transnature.

Liberals are a evolved path of white men, more creative, more objective, more abstract, less robust if compared with average conservatoids, but stay in mind, evolution don't jump and liberals are just a intermediary path and not the end of it.

Santoculto said...

The average white liberal men resemble the creative geniuses types, more weak, more neurotic, more effeminate sometimes and not all the time, intelectual oriented (and not technical oriented, like a writer versus engineer).

Is a little positive jump ou evolution not believe in this jewish idiocy called ''christianism'' but is not enough because most them finnish between a truly psychotic-literalized-bible and a ideologue, someone who believe in a set of MORE rational ideas (the prelude to the facts) but which are not facts, a high functioning psychotic.

Anonymous said...

interesting that a totally meaningless survey of all races are is in line with your conservatardism, while the facts are still the facts as i showed them.

and, btw, only white trash morons like yourself use words like "leftism". the so-called "left" in mercastan is the far right by global standards, whereas american "conservatism" is FRINGE crazy batshit.

germany exports as much as the us with 1/4 the population. thank you "conservative" mercastan. what five countries have the developed world's largest trade deficits as a % of gdp? you guessed it. the anglo-prole-sphere. the united kingdom of shit. canuckistan. the antipodes. shitmerica. thank you aglo-saxon economic policy.


self-identifying american "conservatives" = white trash. and self-identifying "conservatives" in New England = super white trash/white trash royalty.

ALL good looking people are NOT conservatives. ALL. there are NO physically attractive "conservatives". "conservative" women = pageant contestants. they're hideous.

Anonymous said...

and btw fucktards.

i'm 6'1.25" and can bp 225.

Anonymous said...

"conservative" men are short dweebs without a personality angry that women don't like them. they were all very unpopular in high school.

ALL of the richest counties in the US went for Obama in 2008 and 2012.

marin, manhattan, fairfield, suffolk, santa clara, fairfax, etc.

the american south has single handedly ruined america starting in the 80s and the southernization/white-trashification of american politics.

n/a said...


There was also this study (but obviously no indication of effects of genes vs. training):

Study Finds Correlation Between Fiscal Conservatism And Big Biceps

Does physical strength lead to conservative beliefs? [. . .]

The hypothesis: men with more upper-body strength would be less open to economic redistribution. And it turned out to be true, to an extent, depending on socioeconomic status. From an evolutionary biology perspective, the idea is that physical strength would enable a man (and it is gender-specific, as I'll get to in a sec) to hold and protect property, making him less likely to support sharing with the group.

"Our results demonstrate that physically weak males are more reluctant than physically strong males to assert their self-interest — just as if disputes over national policies were a matter of direct physical confrontation among small numbers of individuals, rather than abstract electoral dynamics among millions," says one of the lead researchers.

Socioeconomic status also showed a correlation with economic views. As expected, rich men were generally opposed to redistribution, and poor men generally in favor of it. Men with stronger upper bodies tended to have stronger views--rich, strong men were very much opposed to redistribution, while less strong but still rich men were less opposed. On the side of those that support redistribution, the trend was reversed: poorer but strong men were strongly in favor of redistribution, while weaker poor men were not as committed.



I'm several inches taller than you, I can bench press more than you, and I have comparable or higher standardized test scores than you. Now what?



"Liberals are a evolved path of white men, more creative, more objective, more abstract, less robust"

The "more creative" part is probably correct, but not "more objective".

"The average white liberal men resemble the creative geniuses types, more weak"

I believe at least looking at IQ alone correlations with physical size and strength tend to be if anything positive.

spagetiMeatball said...

Would islamists be physically fitter than shia clerics then, is this generalisable to different human populations?

spagetiMeatball said...

Would islamists be physically fitter than shia clerics then, is this generalisable to different human populations?

Santoculto said...

average leftist ''believe'' in human evolution (by lamarckian way). The average leftist are much better than classical conservatives, who believe in sacred-cour bible!!! The differences are significative for them, when we compare them, but average leftist still continue mediocre if they are compared with independent thinkers like us.

''I believe at least looking at IQ alone correlations with physical size and strength tend to be if anything positive.''

This comparison between iq and sociological or physiological correlations are very generalist in my opinion. For example, smoking vice have negative correlation with higher iq. Makes sense, smart people on average, tend to avoid smoke, now, today, because greater campaign against it, but also because, the average smart tend to have lower mutational load and less tendency to be addicted. Higher iq correlates negatively with less environmental stimulation because higher focus predisposition.
But a lot of great smart people are known by their smoke vice.

Average iq of smokers, by now, is 92, but many intelectual people are smoking addicted. The average smarts (compared with the group with 92 scores) with (average) 107 iq have less predisposition to be smoke addicted. But look for addicted drugers and addicted smokers, no have differences. And there are some positive correlation between drug vice and higher iq scores.

A lot of greater verbal geniuses have physiological weaknesses. Again, understand how works statistical layers. It can be hiding some important pieces for us.

It make sense with neurotypical smarter ones but not with outsiders and many historically recognized geniuses in the past and in the present are like that, outsiders.

Outsiderness and creativity need have some different phenotypes to produce a perfect observative, sensitive and analytical mind. And many times, diseases or lack of extremely good health will correlate perfectly to produce this phenomena.

Anonymous said...

n/a just showed his trashiness.

where did you grandfather go to college?

are you a direct descendant of anyone form the mayflower?

my answers are:


william bradford

and if you're "several inches taller" and can bench press much more you're a FREAK. the only thing you're good for is playing american prole-ball as an offensive lineman, and you're almost certainly part POLISH.

Anonymous said...

and if your test scores were "as high or higher" (which they AREN'T!) you'd be in the BGI study. you AREN'T.

Anonymous said...


these show (ignoring the misleading fitted curves)

1. the highest percentile of white southerners was more likely to have voted for obama than any other percentile except the second lowest.

2. the highest percentile ex-south was more likely to vote for obama than any percentile except the two lowest.

3. the american white middle class is SUICIDAL.


n/a said...


Yes, my test scores meet/exceed the cutoffs for the BGI cognitive genomics study. You are not that special.

And I have no desire to descend from anyone other than the people I descend from, none of whom landed in America earlier than 1621 that I know of, and most of whom arrived after 1629.

"these show (ignoring the misleading fitted curves)"

I just gave you a much more informative source, and you grasp for a plot disaggregated only at the level of South vs. non-South, with no idea as to the source of the data or level of sampling error. It is not a surprise that urban, coastal whites are shifted left relative to non-urban whites and that these areas average higher incomes (along with higher costs of living).


Population of Owsley County: 4,755. Obviously this is a deeply important story, reflective of broader trends and brought to you by one M[ikhah] B[en] David because he cares deeply about rural Kentuckians failing to vote in their own interests.

I have no love for the Republican party, but I find it hilarious you're able to get worked into a froth over Upworthy-grade progressive clickbait or imagine that the interests of white Americans would be better served by voting Democrat.

n/a said...


"Would islamists be physically fitter than shia clerics then, is this generalisable to different human populations?"

I would expect similar sorts of correlations between physical formidability and willingness to openly take one's own side to be found everywhere. But the form this takes would obviously be expected to vary depending on circumstances.

Anonymous said...

yet more lies and autism from n/a. what you showed me was TOTALLY UNINFORMATIVE, and only a totally uniformed person (WITH LOW TEST SCORES) would think otherwise.

show me the scores and show me that you're in the BGI study.

you won't, because you can't. put up or shut up. beat GRE 800 800 800. beat SAT 1560. beat GMAT 770. i'm waiting for the proof lying sack of conservatarded shit.

what the fuck kind of conservative can a puritan be?

the puritans were upstart bourgeois at best. arravistes. they beheaded their king.


Anonymous said...

the dems ARE INFINITELY better for white america AND have been.

they would never have fought the civil war which reunited the good part of america with its most british and thus most white trash part, the south.

and what kind of disgusting piece of shit cares about "white america". almost all of white america is obese and retarded.

the best advice to any european american is EMIGRATE. america was doomed from the beginning. it's not a country (and never was). it's just a business.

n/a said...


I don't buy 800 GRE verbal for you, unless you had a subsequent traumatic brain injury.

Anonymous said...

haha fucktard.

here are the scores.

i also scored 99+ percentile on the verbal when i was nine.

dad harvard english ab

grandad prineton english ab phd

mom ma english.

i reppes my uni at college bowl in the regional finals.












Anonymous said...






3. YOU DON'T EVEN HAVE A GRASP OF THE FACTS.http://www.nature.com/news/smart-genes-prove-elusive-1.15858

n/a said...


(1) There's no evidence this is your score report. (2) If you did get 800 GRE verbal, I'm assuming this was not at age 21 but after another decade or two of vocabulary accumulation (or it reflects a childhood of obsessive SAT prep). I can't say I've ever been particularly impressed by the abilities you've actually displayed.

Anonymous said...


my vocab in my comments is GREATER THAN YOURS!

I took it right after i quit my first job as an actuary (after making the high score in the US on the first exam) when i had just turned 26.

my score on the vocab subtest of the WISC was my HIUGHEST subtest score at age 9. 3 SDs above the mean.







Anonymous said...







Anonymous said...

and my prep for the sat was only reading a lot and doing the reading comp section of some past tests.

but since hs i've always written down words whose sense in the context i wasn't sure of or whose etymology i wanted to know.

if that's "obsessive" fine.

but as i said, i scored 19 on the WISC vocab at age 9, the most g-loaded of the subtests. at that time i couldn't be made to read anything let alone study "obsessively".

btw, if obsessive study can raise the most g-loaded subtest for adults and children what does that say about g?

it says a lot to non-retarded people.

n/a said...


+3 SD I can believe. More than that, not really.

Anonymous said...

that was the CEILING score.

is 800 more than +3? it would have been hard not to score 800 on the GRE verbal. have you ever taken it? when i sat it you could miss four questions and still get an 800.

i also scored HIGHER on the GMAT verbal than i did on the quantitative. 99th vs 96-98th.

i'm still waiting for your scores and BGI e-mail.

n/a said...


I have no interest in giving details beyond what I've already told you.

"is 800 more than +3"

I'd thought it was something like +4, but this table shows +3.5:

Anonymous said...

ah ha...

you have no interest.

good one! wink, wink, nudge, nudge,...say no more...

the last 40 years in america has been a disaster and the reason is only partly open borders and which both parties have supported and technical change.

the rest is solely due to the absurdly anti-labor policies of the GOP...which is a 100% rural and confederate party.

america's white-opias are almost exclusively liberal. why is that?

there are no conservatives in sweden...but there are ant-immigrant parties. why is that?

both parties are totally corrupt, but dem dominance would initiate a pro-labor trend until eventually american capital was under the same restrictions imposed on it in the 50s by that great communist eisenhower.

the dems are shit, but the GOP is a joke.

did you hear the debate last night?

to a man boring morons. trump is a one-eyed man in a kingdom of the blind.

trump-sanders 2016!

n/a said...

"there are no conservatives in sweden...but there are ant-immigrant parties. why is that?"

Proportional representation.

"dem dominance would initiate a pro-labor trend"

If by "pro-labor" you mean pro-current US citizen labor, this is of course sheer delusion.

Anonymous said...

if by "sheer delusion" you mean the TRUTH, which is what conservatards usually mean, then yes. facts are hard. who needs them when you have soft, gay truthiness.



Anonymous said...

one county?

hardly. your ignorance is impressive.

Mostly True
Facebook posts
"97 percent of the 100 poorest counties in America are in red states."

— Facebook posts on Sunday, July 27th, 2014 in a meme on social media
Are 97 of the nation's 100 poorest counties in red states?

By Louis Jacobson on Tuesday, July 29th, 2014 at 5:38 p.m.
We checked to see whether this meme circulating on social media was accurate.
This map shows the official federal boundaries of Appalachia, a region that accounts for many of the nation's poorest 100 counties.

A meme circulating on Twitter and other social media recently caught our eye. Created by the liberal group Occupy Democrats, it said, "97 percent of the 100 poorest counties in America are in red states. But tell me again how Republican policies grow the economy?"

This was a variation on a few memes we’ve checked previously -- that nine out of the 10 poorest states are red states (we rated this Mostly True) and that Republican-leaning states get more in federal dollars than they pay in taxes (also Mostly True).

While the meme’s suggestion that "Republican policies" are causing poverty is too subjective a question to be fact-checked, we decided to take a closer look at the set-up to the claim -- that "97 percent of the 100 poorest counties in America are in red states."

First, we’ll explain our methodology.

To determine the nation’s 100 poorest counties, we downloaded data from the U.S. Census Bureau’s American Community Survey. This data covers five years ending in 2012, and includes more than 3,000 counties and county equivalents (such as Louisiana parishes). This data enabled us to rank-order these jurisdictions based on two commonly used measurements -- median income, and percentage of the population in poverty.

As for determining whether a state is "red" or "blue," we decided to define it by whether the state voted for President Barack Obama or Mitt Romney in 2012. This means we counted North Carolina and Indiana as red states, since Obama lost them in 2012 after winning them in 2008. (Though either way, the differences would have been marginal.)

So how did the data turn out?

of the ten poorest counties in america 5 are in Eastern Kentucky which is solidly GOP.

For median income, we found that 95 of the 100 poorest counties were located in red states. Here are the 10 poorest, all of them in red states:

1. Owsley County, Ky.

3. Wolfe County, Ky.

5. McCreary County, Ky.

8. Jackson County, Ky.

9. Clay County, Ky.

the dems are married to capital. the GOP is its whore. and GOP capitalists are the nastiest people in the history of the world.

fortunately they're outnumbered 2 to 1 by dem capitalists.


the business of america is business.

Of those worth more than $30 million, two-thirds support Sen. Obama, while one third support Sen. McCain.

must all be jews and papists. but how could that be? in a "conservative" worldview every rich person deserves every cent. how could those world beating wasps have let the jews and papists beat them? a rising tide lifts only jew and papists boats?

the gop plan is to DUPE white racists into voting against their own and the country's interests. the southern "strategery" has worked for 40 years. you live in the ruins.

Anonymous said...

one county?

hardly. your ignorance is impressive.

of the ten poorest counties in america 5 are in Eastern Kentucky which is solidly GOP.

1. Owsley County, Ky.

3. Wolfe County, Ky.

5. McCreary County, Ky.

8. Jackson County, Ky.

9. Clay County, Ky.

the dems are married to capital. the GOP is its whore. and GOP capitalists are the nastiest people in the history of the world.

fortunately they're outnumbered 2 to 1 by dem capitalists.


Of those worth more than $30 million, two-thirds support Sen. Obama, while one third support Sen. McCain.

must be all those jews and papists. but how could that be? in the "conservative" fantasy world every rich person deserves every cent. how could those world beating wasps have let the jews and papists beat them? a rising tide lifts only jew and papists boats?

the gop plan is to DUPE white racists into voting against their own and the country's interests. the southern "strategery" has worked for 40 years. you live in the ruins.

Harlem Whiteboy said...

Have you got a thread where I can catch up on the Mugabe troll-thing? Has he got a blog? Nothing to say about what reads like rage-nigger if you don't know. (I haven't read many rage-niggers, instead spend time in Harlem with the semi-low I.Q.'s.) I found this blog from your discussions at Outside In, clever slipping in--he should have known to delete you. Something really peculiar about threatening to delete the remarks about his wife, and also admitting that she's 'totally uninvolved, liberal'. Yeah, I don't see how there could not be a conflict of interest, and anyway, of course there always is. He's always attracted people because of the writing-twisting (also saw the 'Jesus' remark about him). I used to think it was impressive in the Hyperstition days, and he's a quite insane troll himself. Now I follow him as a character, and you can see strange things with it, as when he recently went to London and Ireland. I never knew why his wife's ethnicity wasn't common knowledge, and so may have been the one who outed this to a number of people at 8chan, where I've never written again.

The Mugabe is interesting, though, in talking about the 'white-trash royalty', etc., this is all new terminology. Isn't there some pro-Brit talk, then the South is the 'most British part' and garbage, etc. Okay, I'll be reading regularly, I suppose, because he was wrong to think that your remarks would be left there because they 'were amusing' and then Warburton even feels the weakness and says 'maybe Outside In has run its course'. Of course, anyone would think so when you don't delete somebody busting their chops, and he just let you do it. (I've been permanently banned from the beginning, because I exposed his trolling.) No, they were correct. How committed can he be and also live in harmony with someone who is 'totally uninvolved, liberal'? She was very involved with his old Hyperstition and CCRU blogs and writing, but she's not such a sharp writer herself. I used to see things about tourist things in Shanghai, she was always rather banal, and she used to blog about the kids--stupid things about making their son practice the piano: "Five minutes a day!"; so I would have thought she was as purely machinic as he is. Esp. good was 'you're in no position to be calling people crazy'. I just don't see how it's not totally chaotic, even if they're still so 'devoted' (in 2014, she did some book, reserving all the fulsome acknowledgements to him, as in 'thank you for the adventure'.)

This thread is harder to understand, though. Are those the kind of things workout partners like Condi and Dubya would have said to each other to ratchet up the heat? Otherwise, what kind of physical fighting is it most like?

Harlem Whiteboy said...

Oh yeah, I wasn't paying attention to the post enough. So this screaming commenter is, in fact, trying to level things for Black Supremacy with a far more elaborate proliferation of the 'white trash' themes than I've yet seen. That's a kind of nigger-nigger, like Ta-Nehisi. His interview on Charlie Rose was repeated, which did momentarily make Charlie look like white trash himself, because Coates is ridiculous. Not that 'Black Supremacy' as some kind of urge doesn't make sense, I don't have any illusions about what it must mean when you don't like being black. White is definitely easier in some ways. I've got someone on my blog (not going to specify, and I moderate all comments, not trying to become a big discussion democracy, and anybody that pisses me off, I just delete regularly) who comes in as 'DYKENESS' and talks like Mugabe does about white trash, e.g., ALL MEN ARE UGLY, ALL WOMEN ARE BEAUTIFUL, and told me she would easily 'break my ballerina legs', which was amusing.

Definitely a lot of fat white trash in the red states, though. You do see in every news clip about W. Virginia in particular, people who are probably still eating Faulknerian fried dough. We had people on the farm like that, my grandfather was not exactly SJW, as you types say. That was another red state, I left long ago, so that, acc. to Mugabe, I could make 'an artistic treatment' of WHITE TRASH, since that's what New York is for, you know. Okay.

Tons of black obesity here, though. I know I'm not doing any research on this, because doesn't interest me beyond not being able to look at obese people or abide them. Was yesterday at a 'soul food restaurant', and it was unbearable that two morbidly obese white boys were talking about how 'good the fried chicken' was. Sad stuff. The nice black waitress is obese too, but not quite so, and the owners are black and svelte, one was once a top model here.

Okay. Keep up the good work.

Santoculto said...

People who overuse caps lock...

Harlem Whiteboy said...

Fuck you. I only used it in a caps-lock quote, shitbrain.

Harlem Whiteboy said...

I have a faggot who writes my blog regularly, always uses it. Then there's a troll-faggot who I delete who uses it all the time.

Definitely think there's something to be said for Outside In's policy of not allowing people to talk like this, though. He runs a good blog in his way, although I'm not NRx.

Definitely think the strong-body correlation with withholding redistribution is true, though, a lot of the time. Hadn't heard it before, though. Inability to assert self-interest seems to be a problem of most people. They haven't the privilege in numerous ways, so have to buy friends, etc.

Harlem Whiteboy said...

So maybe you've got that unattainable thing, though, blog seniority. Now that I've defended my caps-lock, I should point out, Santoculto, that you cannot write proper English. Are you a Mexican immigrant?

Harlem Whiteboy said...

Well, yeah, Mugabe writes almost exclusively in all-caps, so I forgot. Sounds like bulimia as described in The Adonis Complex, some Jungian thing I read back in 2001. That's enough internet-rot for one day, unless I change my mind. Fuckin hot again today.

Harlem Whiteboy said...


By Pope, Phillips, and Olivardia. Definitely recommend. Bodybuilders who imagine they're still scrawny even when musclebound. Things like that. Often eat whole gallons of ice cream at one time.

n/a said...


Is there any leftist clickbait your mind has not let itself get plowed by?

"Mostly True"

Did you even read the rest of your own source:

Our bigger question concerns whether it’s significant that a lot of poor counties are located in red states. There’s reason for at least a bit of skepticism.

For starters, the list is dominated by rural areas. Generally speaking, rural areas have a lower cost of living, so the small income you make in a poor, rural Texas county is going to go further than it would if you lived in a poor, urban area like Detroit or Camden, N.J. This raises questions about how comparatively disadvantaged poor Americans are in rural and urban areas.

Also, rural areas are areas where Republicans tend to do well electorally. By contrast, impoverished areas of big cities are big enough population-wise to be balanced by more affluent neighborhoods, and these poor urban areas are often (though not always) in blue states.

It’s also worth pointing out that many of the counties on the list are located in Appalachia, particularly in such states as Kentucky, West Virginia, Mississippi and Georgia. That’s a region that has suffered economically for generations -- long predating the time when Republicans took over from Democrats in most elected offices.

In Appalachia, "it’s clear there’s a regional problem, born of isolation, geographic and political; exploitation, of timber and coal; and poor education," said Al Cross, director of the Institute for Rural Journalism and Community Issues at the University of Kentucky.

Finally, there’s an eccentricity that shaped both of the top-100 lists. Each is dominated by three states: Texas, Georgia and Kentucky. What ties together these three states? They have a lot of counties. In fact, these three states rank first, second and third on the list of states that have the most counties. Texas has 254, Georgia 159 and Kentucky 120.

If we divide up the entire US into bins with population 5000, do you imagine the list of the most impoverished bins will be dominated by white, Republican areas? Also, can you think of any other reason beyond "racism" a region whose economy has been dependent on coal might have for not supporting the party sworn to destroy the coal industry?

n/a said...


Mugabe is not black (if I remember correctly, he's some mix of Irish Catholic and colonial American). He just comments incoherently on a variety of blogs under names of third world dictators. He has a reasonable amount of native ability, but wants to project himself as uniquely brilliant and insightful while also trying to project that he doesn't care about self-presentation. But most of his brilliant insights on genetics boil down to the same one or two environmentalist talking points that never signified what environmentalists thought they did; and despite the pretension of upper class nonchalance, he resents his lack of wealth and is deeply concerned with status, the scramble for which has led him to internalize many of the concerns of aspirational urban leftists.

Nick Land did end up deleting my final comment, by the way (I had not planned to reply again but Land resorted to "Nazi" as he and Warburton comforted one another):

Mark Warburton,

One of the more amusing parts of posting here is watching the drones pop up to offer this pearl-clutching brand of moral support each time moldbuggist dogma is questioned and cognitive dissonance threatens. Now that Warg Sandwich has boarded his submarine, I guess you'll have to do.


I am not and have never been a "National Socialist", while if I understand correctly you were in the past an avowed Marxist.

You demonstrate I was more or less correct in my impression of why you were so uncomfortable with the "cuckservative" phenomenon until you were overruled by your readership: because you want to hold open the same channels of social control (name calling and appeals to leftism as legitimate moral center) among those you try to ride herd over.

Anonymous said...

yet more lies by white trash moron n/a.

yet more misunderstanding. yet more conceptual simplicity.

n/a is an example of a poor white, like charles murray and peggy noonan, who affects what he believes to be a posh way of speaking. never mind the total vacuity of his windy posts and comments, it's not even the way rich people actually speak. but how could he know that?

i give him facts. he gives me irrelevant surveys.

and i only resent his and his kin's lack of wealth coupled with their conservatism. i don't resent my own lack of wealth, because i have plenty, and i've never needed to work for it.

"urban leftist" --- yet another white trash/american expression.

the FACTS:


many genes of small effect CANNOT be an out. why? because the effect is too small to be selected for through natural processes.

n/a reminds me of pincher martin. a nauseatingly prescious and prolix HBDer who joined the us military and loves america but hates black people and has no understanding of behavior genetics or genetics or statistics AT ALL. he talks but never says anything.

and i'm a mix of a lot of western european nationalities.

English, Irish, French, Spanish (from Spain), Swiss. my Spanish ancestors were in the country before the pilgrims.

my family name is famous enough. the american branch sold its xxxx for 100m in June. i'd tell you more but then you'd guess my name.

you're pathetic n/a. anypne who hangs his hat on his ne colonial roots hasn't got anything else to hang it on.


Anonymous said...

But most of his brilliant insights on genetics boil down to the same one or two environmentalist talking points that never signified what environmentalists thought they did

why is it that all who fancy themselves belletrists have nothing to say?

1. you understand none of my "insights". your argument against selection limits was particularly pathetic.
2. you understand none of the "talking points" of "environmentalists".
3. "environmentalists" do NOT exist.

you write and speak in cliches n/a.

it's time to start actually THINKING.

i'm still waiting on the BGI e-mail and your p/l.

Anonymous said...

and my scramble for wealth and status has led me to "internalize urban leftism".

you sound like you're totally out of touch with reality.

you sound like a black preacher or "activist". blacks love to jive. but they hate to actually do anything.

n/a said...


You already rambled quite freely about your distant relatives selling their vineyard and how your branch of the family had no money.

"many genes of small effect CANNOT be an out. why? because the effect is too small to be selected for through natural processes."

So random drift explains the difference in intelligence and height between chimps and humans. That or you have a poor understanding of quantitative genetics.

Anonymous said...

yes none compared to some of the others n/a. i never said i was rich. if i were i'd give almost all of it away. the top 5% is plenty. the top .1% would be fun, but i missed that train yesterday. maybe if i'd run for it i could have caught it, but that was too much to ask. but i never really wanted to catch it as bad as others i've known. every train has the same destination.

how is an allele selected for which has no detectable effect in 100,000 people?

the point is FUCKTARD. humans as a species have reached their selection limit for intelligence.

even you can be just as smart as me. or could have been until you went in for all this racist pseudo-science.

be a man and admit that you just like white people for aesthetic reasons or because you're white. whoever understands wagner understands national socialism.

and btw, you've ignored that the GRE is more selective than the SAT, which is more selective than high school graduation, which is more selective than just being alive.

and why have you been reading my comments on other blogs? you sound obsessed. you should really shave your beard and get out of your cabin in the Maine woods.

all those wasps who were at harvard when your granddad was milking his cows were douchebags. they don't care about you and they never will.

Harlem Whiteboy said...

No, it doesn't sound so rich, but that's clearly what's important to him, although insisting on making these points on the net is always telling.

Yes, I saw those remarks before he deleted them. But I definitely think it was important. Ms. Greenspan was his graduate student at Warwick, and they're a decent couple in their weird way, I guess. He's actually brilliant, but too tortured.

"it's not even the way rich people actually speak. but how could he know that?"

You can fucking know that from watching the goddam Queen's Christmas Message. You sound like a total fucking IDIOT, frankly, and I love it that I thought you were a ghetto nigger from reading your remarks. I guess n/a just finds you funny in your crazy-nigger psychosis.

I frankly don't think any rich people, unless they're doing crack, say 'FUCKTARD' every other word, and put people down as every species of white trash. He's very accommodating, I'd delete every fucking post you write. None of it is of any interest at all.

Anonymous said...

the difference between humans and humans and humans and chimps is a different difference.

chimps within the same troop are more genetically distinct than an abo and a swede.

as mammalian species go, humans are remarkable homogeneous, even more so than domesticated animals.

perhaps there are some humans like secretariat cognitively, but all humans are thoroughbreds; they're all much faster than donkeys, and secretariat is the limit. he can only be cloned, he can't be used to make an even faster horse.

Anonymous said...

the royalties are the epitome of white trash.

Harlem Whiteboy said...

'and i only resent his and his kin's lack of wealth coupled with their conservatism. i don't resent my own lack of wealth, because i have plenty, and i've never needed to work for it.'

But it was obvious 15 years ago that you can say any fucking thing on the net. Why do you think people would believe you? I didn't even know about 'belletrist', so I learned one thing from you. I always thought of the French form, so you've white-trashed it even if you are a nigger.

Which word I hardly ever use, and am much more black- and brown-friendly than I am Jew-friendly. I would have done better in New York had I not been so gentile-oriented, but Hispanics and blacks are some of my good friends. I just think you sound like somebody in the Baltimore riots, you don't sound like a belle-lettrist yourself, god knows. And I know all there is to know about rococo a la crebillonage, Mozart and Fragonard's Ass too. You are a hilarious troll, though, take it so seriously.

n/a said...


"be a man and admit that you just like white people for aesthetic reasons or because you're white"

Where have I ever denied these are two of the reasons I like white people?

"how is an allele selected for which has no detectable effect in 100,000 people?"

The sum of the effects is readily detectable.

"humans as a species have reached their selection limit for intelligence."

Do you realize how fucking stupid this is? Do you believe no part of the difference in intelligence between sub-Saharan Africans and Europeans is likely to be related to genes? If we increased the number of Europeans relative to Africans, we would be selecting for intelligence. And within populations, there's no question whatsoever that broad ranges of intelligence are represented and that intelligence has significant heritability. We're obviously not at any sort of selection limit.

"your argument against selection limits was particularly pathetic."

I never said selection limits don't exist. I said you were an idiot for presenting the suggestion that thoroughbred race times had hit a wall due to selection limits (which I don't find likely, but even if it's true) as an argument against the potential utility of embryo screening for intelligence in humans. Even if it turned out we could "only" boost population means 3 to 5 SDs through selection, this would hardly be insignificant.

"and why have you been reading my comments on other blogs?"

Don't worry, I don't think anyone goes out of their way to.

Harlem Whiteboy said...

'the royalties are the epitome of white trash.'

I think you meant 'the royals'. Anyway, if the Queen is white trash and you're not a nigger, how are possibly not white trash since you're only in the 5% and are a mongrel mix not worth scrolling up to see.

Harlem Whiteboy said...

"be a man and admit that you just like white people for aesthetic reasons or because you're white"

I agree that those are definitely two of the best reasons for liking white people. I like white people and some of the others, but the problem is, nothing works because all of our aesthetic tastes are different. As, for example, I like a lot of browns, but am only just beginning to like even the moderate Muslims, and far worse than all the NRx talk of blacks is the Islamists, to my mind. I hate their fucking guts and support the fiercest anti-terrorist policies. I'm only getting over the moderates after deciding I was falling victim to scapegoat psychology, but the mistake was understandable since the Quran does advocate violence against 'infidels'. I admit I loathe Islam, though.

Anonymous said...

The sum of the effects is readily detectable.

except it isn't, and the only way to select for such tracts of alleles is artificially. at no time has natural selection been like artificial selection in its severity. and even if it were that time was very likely unlike all others in its fitness landscape.

and the height analogy is so tired and FALSE. there are non-pathological alleles which DO/HAVE BEEN FOUND TO have a reproducible effect on height. no such alleles have been found for ANY behavioral/psychological trait except mental retardation.

even secretariat may have sired some knock-knee-ed/cripples/ or otherwise pace retarded foals.

Anonymous said...

hillbilly art fag gets what is over n/a's head...that aesthetics and morality are the same thing and that neither is scientific, but are nevertheless REAL.

apparently n/a has taken his puritanism/congregationalism so seriously that science is still his master discourse.

hee hee hee!

Anonymous said...

no white trash. i meant royalties.

evelyn waugh is one of my heroes, and "the age of hooper" wasn't all in his head.

what people like n/a don't realize is that they are themselves hoopers however ancient their american pedigree...as if such could be ancient...as if such a pedigree could be anything less than ridiculous.

Anonymous said...

nigerian americans have the highest educational attainment of any american group believe it or not. i worked with one when i worked as an actuary.

so what is it?

do you want to shut immigration based on race or based on IQ? they ARE two different things.

or do you imagine that all of the children of america's nigerian immigrants, supposing they're interbreeding, will revert to the nigerian mean?

Anonymous said...

"liberal" is just a pejorative in mercastan, though some have self-identified as such.

"conservative" doesn't mean anything, but those who self-identify as such believe it does.

if they (white americans) were actually conservative they'd be monarchists, anglomaniacs, and religiously they'd be roman catholics.

nope not conservative enough.

they'd be pagans and they'd want to re-establish the roman empire.

nope not conservative enough.

they'd be cro-magnons and practice human sacrifice.

nope not conservative enough.

they'd be chimps.

nope not conservative enough...

nope not conservative enough.

they'd be a subatomic particle at the very beginning of the big bang.

to identify oneself seriously, that is without it being a joke, as a "liberal" or as a "conservative" tells me only one thing about you; you're a moron.

the "liberals" have their utopia---SCANDINAVIA.

the "conservatives"? wtf does that mean. there are n korean "conservatives", PRC "conservatives", puritan traitor conservatives (n/a), and then there were molotov and kaganovich...conservatives (stalinists) to the end of their near century under the sun.

Harlem Whiteboy said...

"no white trash. i meant royalties."

In that case, you had to mean also the Japanese, white trash. I'm so glad we can think of ourselves as 'brothers'. Maybe it's a fair imitation of les nouveaux riches, what with that silly peroration about 'English, Irish, French, Spanish (from Spain)'. Eh bien, white trash? I've got all of that except the Spanish.

You just want to be a narcissist. I wish there were more, frankly. I do it all the time, and am tired of being condemned for it. It's the only way not to give a shit what another goddam prick or cunt thinks. Of course, there are difficult days, since the atmosphere changes after major expulsions.

'Mercastan' is fucking pathetic. You're probably a fucking truther freak.

Harlem Whiteboy said...

'i worked with one when i worked as an actuary.'

Nice mimesis of Joan Didion's review of the Starr Referral back in 1998. I think hers was an 'ordinary citizen' or a 'disaffected voter', but she sounded concerned, which she was not.

Nigeria is expected to have a huge population boom and be a rival to China in the next 50 years or so. Wonderful with all the Boko Haram, so why don't you talk about something in the mainstream, you know, the way the rich people on TV talk, not the net gadflies. You know, the Iran-Nuclear Deal and people like John Kerry.

Harlem Whiteboy said...

Have to agree about the fact of 'the age of Hooper', though. And it's proliferated everywhere exponentially since first uttered. There's the other one, too, what's his name? One Julia was married to, Rex, yes... she said 'he simply doesn't exist'. But she was quite unadulterated bullshit herself, nothing worse than that talk of 'God's mercy'. She wanted to be forgiven for having enjoyed getting fucked adulterously.

Anonymous said...

yet n/a is a proud englishman...even though he's a mercan.

and despite of all temptation to belong to other nations he remains an english man...

the english are the most class/status obsesses people in the history of the world.


the same reason e kentucky holler dwellers vote GOP.


deep down the english know they're the white trash of europe, so naturally they imitate what they imagine to be the social conventions of the continent.

england is cancer.

but n/a can't he'p it, he's not even old enough to buy booze.

Anonymous said...

but n/a "has me pegged" within his idiocratic world, which is contemporary mercastan.

i am an alcoholic. should you abuse me with such an appellation i would thank you for the compliment.


of course...

n/a can only abuse me with appalachians.

despite scoring in the 99th percentile on the GMAT verbal i scored only in the 6th percentile on its "analytic writing"...and more than 6% of those sitting it have english as a second language.

one was objective, the other subjective, but n/a won't skip a beat before saying:

this is indication of some psycho-pathology.

hooper! comrade! i knew a "hoops" in school. he was taller than ME (than i is for peggy noonan and jew fucktards). he was a good bball player. but he was a total retard.

oh and i also went to school with two blacks whose dads were former pro-athletes. one of them was taller than me. he ws also quite slow.

Anonymous said...

i remember my dad took me to a performance of hms pinafore when i was 11 and many other gs plays. he was a savoyard at the time at least. i recall jacking off in the restroom at the intermission of one of them. big white dick in a big mirror. auto-eroticism.

i'm thinking n/a's dad took him to a monster truck rally and he suffers from micropenis.

not classism. hardly. my dad was a loser and a douche-cunt. he turned down all offers of a "better" life despite his harvard degree and top 10% of his law school class.

but...he wasn't a HOOPER.

that's the ONE thing i can say in his defense.

Anonymous said...








Anonymous said...

anyway n/a,

you're boring. maybe in a decade of reading and THINKING you'll have something interesting to say. i doubt it, but i'm not an hereditist.

stat crux dum volvitur orbis FUCKTARD.

read Sein und Zeit. understand it and repent.

and i'm less catholic than e kentucky snake handlers (all of whom are republicans btw).

Harlem Whiteboy said...

I had the same experience but much older, I mean the best one. I was constantly jerking off in public for years, especially churches--once behind a pulpit in the 80s. But I was about 36 when I did it at the New York State Theater after seeing Patricia McBride do 'Coppelia', It was fabulous because a young man walked in just as I was admiring myself unto veritable fountaining without having even the slightest intention of stopping because of his mere prolish need for a toilet...I sweah, I don't think even Oliver Mellors experienced more in one of his 'fulfillments', and I've ool-wez admah'd him daily, of course.

I hadn't thought of Peggy Noonan for years, although she always comes back faithfully, just the way Susan Sontag used to, anytime her opinion was not needed on really almost anything. There MAY have been something Noonan finally wrote well about a few years ago, I'm trying to remember I truly do not miss Susan, though, and I heard her read twice--in the same clothes, 3 years apart at the same YMHA.

I think now the Didion thing was talking a focus group, with one of the above, the citizen or the voter. She said something like "sometimes they spoke to one", quite like your cast of thousands of Nigerians, but she was being snide to you as well, long before your time as actuary...

You're too unkind to n/a, he already did a real service slyly interviewing Nick Land so that he was forced to see his strange split whether or not he wanted to.

But the White Trash Insistence in the general sense is very comedic. I've never seen it quite this opaque. Mine is more just 'low-class'. There's a line early on in the 2013 Pynchon 'the bleeding edge' that is fantastically hilarious. I'm going to fetch it (said in Eugenie's voice when she went to fetch Augustin in 'Philosophe')...

Yes, here it is:

"[Daytona said:]'You think twelve-step people's a lower class than you, always did, you on some spa program, lay around with the seaweed all on your face and shit, you don't even know what it's like--well, and I am telling you..." Pausing dramatically.'"

We went to this soul food place yesterday where I totally love the owners and employees and the food. I had to tell my friend about this so I wouldn't say anything in the restaurant because I can't quit laughing about it. Also had to get rid of having just read about Bobbi Kristina Brown having had a 'Sweet-16-Themed Funeral', which was the vilest white-trash-nigger horror thing I'd yet heard of. I'd 'learn more', as the computer says, later...

I'm listening to Sam Cooke Live from the Harlem Square Club in 1963 in Miami right now.


Anonymous said...

no fucktarded hillbilly.

i was joking.

you're serious.

but you're just as loquacious as n/a.

it's called bathos.

look it up.

in general your lect should indicate your judgement of your interlocutor, not the judegment you wish him to have of you.

there are so many things we understand charles and he (rex mottram) doesn't.

anyway i'd like to find one intelligent hbder. are there any? n/a's crossed off.

and at the bottom i see you're "listening to" something?

is that music?

ALL music is prole and adolescent even it's von karajan's studio recordings of wagner or monk's tio album...IT'S DEPSICABLE. ALL ENTERTAINMENT, BUT ESPECIALLY MUSIC IS DESPICABLE.


Harlem Whiteboy said...

Well, I did say 'ta', which was quite loaded, but

'there are so many things we understand charles and he (rex mottram) doesn't.'

So you're from the Flyte Family, is it? You know, Mummy so rarely did things like that.

On the net, these 'judgments' don't matter, if someone is ultimately low-class, which you clearly have proved to be, even if it's not white-trash low-class. It just doesn't 'matt-ah', you know.

Yes, I like verisimilitude in my sexual adventures. I blog about them all the time, although that's not all, of course. I only did porno film once.

'undah-stahnd things, yes... EVEN Misseez Mus-braht'. There's your Nigerian, I guess.

Well, I couldn't be SURE you weren't interesting, now could I? Now I know. As I said:


Harlem Whiteboy said...

but you're just as loquacious as n/a.

You see, you're really rather a ruin, since it's you who is most loquacious. I'm just abundant.

Now I'm listening to The Doors album 'When You're Strange'. Wonderful opener of 'Moonlight Drive'.

I've read Sein und Zeit, and it is unfortunate Zeit was not written or maybe it wasn't found. My Heidegger period is not something I ever revive, though.

I'm curious as to what someone so livid with all kinds of hate values, aside from Evelyn Waugh, of course. But no one knows, because IT REALLY IS JUST THE NET. You do behave like a drunkard, which is surely heard as less complimentary than 'alcoholic'. But then again, you may just be a very tight-assed parvenu.

Harlem Whiteboy said...

"ALL music is prole and adolescent even it's von karajan's studio recordings of wagner or monk's tio album...IT'S DEPSICABLE. ALL ENTERTAINMENT, BUT ESPECIALLY MUSIC IS DESPICABLE."

I couldn't leave without pointing out that at least this idiocy is not something Charles and Julia 'would understand', unlike Rex. Not that you 'mean it', of course. You don't 'mean anything'. But it doesn't matter whether Charles and Julia even would agree with such gross trash about music, it doesn't matter that Heidegger's essays on art weren't about music.

But you seem comfortably ensconced and n/a is oddly patient with your shit. I still wonder why, because there is nothing quite like a 'wannabe snob'. Someone at Nick's said that 'Whiny tough guys are the worst', maybe you're one of those too, they're often related.

Livin' on the net, that's all we know about you. Even Nick Land said "If I'm not a 'loser on the internet', then the term has no meaning". But we do know something about him, even if we don't like all of it. He's not exactly a nobody.

Anonymous said...

i'd never call anyone white trash if actually thought they were. i hate classism more than i hate jews. n/a should try to immigrate to scandinavia. america isn't worthy of him. the war's over and the wogs have won. maybe he can't get in. maybe he has illiquid assets in mercastan.

he's apparently some sort of anglo-saxon supremacist. but that's the wrong team. the angles, saxons, jutes, frisians, normans, and whoever the Danes of the Danelaw were came from jutland and environs.

contempary jutland has:

1. the highest taxes as a % of gdp of any country in the world---50%.

2. the highest % of its workforce employed by government.

3. a much higher standard of living than white british.

4. the lowest GINI.

5. the smallest intergenerational income elasticity. the us and uk have the highest in the developed world.

6. according to 60 minutes the danes are the happiest people on earth.

the white british are the POOREST germanic language speaking population in Europe. they are now much poorer than the IRISH.

conservative, randian, libertarian ANGLO-SAXON economics simply does NOT work, let alone that it's evil.

i'm sure n/a will come around some day. scandinavia has its "leftists" who are also anti-immigrant. as bernie sanders has rightly observed...open borders is a CONSERVATIVE policy.

and i'm sure i'm a much bigger loser than nick land or n/a. but hereditism is quite widespread, pernicious, and FALSE especially in mercastan and britain. it's an example of what marx called ideologie and/or false consciousness.

Anonymous said...

i'm all for discrete homogeneous societies, but not because i believe in the superiority of one race to another. yet another FACT is that heterogeneity leads to conservative economic policies and that norms of reaction predict that on average one is most likely to achieve his potential in a society composed of people most like himself...given the same level of economic development.

but the brits and the mercastanis squander the potential of their citizens of all races. the canadians and antipodeans much much less.

Anonymous said...

thatcher even went so far as to say, "there is no such thing as society."

what she meant by this is the opposite of the truth.

social capital isn't just an idea.

whatever one's talents he may have no opportunities or may simply not fit with his particular society. i know better than any.

hereditism is therefore Ideologie, that is, the justification of the status quo, in that it assumes the phenotype is the same irrespective of time and place and that whatever it takes to gain status is a virtue and independent of the particular time and place and society. this problem can be obviated by studies of related people/peoples across the globe and across time. but h^2 can only decrease and very likely to 0. the jarre project is a great example, and it ruined the formerly richest man in america.

i'm sure n/a believes that however high his station it would have been even higher in the time of the "episcopacy". and he's probably right. but the milk has been spilt.

Santoculto said...

Harlem Whiteboy,
you're crazy**

i'm talking about Buggabe.

Anonymous said...

The finding that leftist males are disproportionately likely to be very skinny or very fat is in line with my own impressions. Unattractive and sex atypical people (effeminate males, masculine females) are drawn more strongly to leftism. Sex typical, conventionally attractive people are more likely to be conservative. Larger (non-obese) and more masculine males are more comfortable with undisguised assertion of self- and group interest (probably because weighted across evolutionary time they're the ones, at the top of status hierarchies, who could get away with it).



Anonymous said...

1Department of Political Science & Government, Aarhus University
2Center for Evolutionary Psychology, University of California, Santa Barbara
3School of Criminology and Criminal Justice, Griffith University


muscleheads at all levels in the us are "conservative" when race is controlled for. but there are hardly any muscleheads at the high end.

Anonymous said...

and everyone favors some redistribution.

the difference is one of degree not kind.

Anonymous said...

and it's no surprise that retarded cavemen like n/a would hate poor people if he were rich just like he hates everyone who isn't an english congregationalist.

what's odd about n/a is he's not rich, yet he hates poor people.

what's even odder is that he claims to be a pure colonial yet his ancestors never accumulated enough to be rich in at least 2015 - 1776 = 239 years.

n/a said...




I've never claimed to be "a pure colonial". My ancestry is half colonial American and half continental Germanic.

You're not understanding where I'm coming from at all.

(1) I don't hate poor people and I don't think I've ever said anything that would make a coherent person think I hate poor people.

(2) I don't hate "everyone who isn't an english congregationalist." I defend the descendants of New England Puritans: (a) because they're "my people"; (b) because I happen to know a bit about them, I sometimes feel compelled to respond when I see people being wrong on the internet, and too many people in this corner of the internet really seem to enjoy passing along misinformation about Yankees/Puritans.

(3) To the extent I've defended the old American upper class, the point is not that they were perfect. The point is, they were better in many ways (and even at their worst, no worse) than the elites we have now. Number one, at least they were American (and the other main point I've made, re: the "WASP" epithet as applied to old American elites, is that people misunderstand the nature or degree of their exclusivity, imagining that the old upper class represented some sort of distinct caste with origins in the deep past, wholly unconnected to "regular" Americans; when in reality the American upper class was always simply a segment of the broader American majority, never closed to social mobility from the core NW European-descended population). Hierarchy will exist in any large scale society. I would take elites with a sense of history and multi-generational responsibility from my own group over a hodge-podge of ethnocentric foreigners and deracinated members of my group focused only on their short term self-interest.

(4) I don't even hate most leftists of my own group. In a different environment, white Americans with leftist tendencies would not necessarily be promoting the same destructive policies they currently are (the same of course goes for establishment conservatives).

re: Scandinavia, regardless of where the political spectrum is shifted relative to America on the question of government redistribution, there will be people more or less inclined to the right. And obviously right now it's primarily those on the right arguing against immigration.

As for myself, I have no desire to emigrate anywhere. I would like to see Scandinavians preserved in Scandinavia, and Americans of mixed NW European ancestry preserved in America. This is my country, and, good or bad, these are my people. If we're doomed, so be it. But I see no grounds for dispensing with hope entirely at this point. There's nothing inevitable about the future our current elites have in mind for us, and I don't see that our interests are likely to be served by despair right now (or ever).

Anonymous said...

yes particularism is much better than universalism, and "states' rights" isn't just code for negrophobia.

universalism has been promoted by jews for gentiles, though jewish americans now outbreed more often than not.

but "conservatives" love free trade...

globalization and global sovereignty of capital = universalism. they're the same thing.

the right-left dichotomy is itself a "frame" like nature-nurture, not a description of reality. the reality is infinite dimensional so far as it is not artificially constructed by mass media...which, as John Macquarrie inter alia observed, has an effect beyond the wildest dreams of totalitarian dictators.

you (or one for the precious fakers) can't have the dominion of capital and closed borders and particularism simultaneously.

Suddenly the fingers of a human hand appeared and wrote on the plaster of the wall, near the lampstand in the royal palace. The king watched the hand as it wrote. 6 His face turned pale and he was so frightened that his legs became weak and his knees were knocking. 7 The king summoned the enchanters, astrologers[b] and diviners.

paleocons, like me to an extent, and cons and neocons don't really have anything "extra-nominal" in common.

Anonymous said...

the only constant is change. cut your losses. put your energy into making a good life for yourself and your dependents if you have any.

good doesn't win in the end, but there's still technical progress and however dumb men become this will continue. nietzsche's superman will come and he will come even with open borders and dysgenics.

economics is itself still a pre-industrial revolution discourse.

The ideas of economists and political philosophers, both when they are right and when they are wrong are more powerful than is commonly understood. Indeed, the world is ruled by little else. Practical men, who believe themselves to be quite exempt from any intellectual influences, are usually slaves of some defunct economist.

religion has been replaced by ideology. but even this will be overcome. man creates himself through labor---technical (technological) progress. and eventually he overcomes himself.

that hundreds of single alleles have been shown to cause mental retardation while none have been to shown to have a statistically significant and reproducible and environment indepedent effect on any human behavioral trait, including intelligence, is quite telling.

behavior genetics is a dead end for particularists, and i would identify myself as one. whereas a belief in the often awesome effects of "norms of reaction" requires a particularist politics.

Anonymous said...

hereditism is itself an example of a universalism.

blut und boden includes boden.

but HBDers deny this. for them it's just blut, blut, blut all the time.

the suppression of the boden is universalism par excellence.

n/a said...


'the right-left dichotomy is itself a "frame" like nature-nurture, not a description of reality. the reality is infinite dimensional so far as it is not artificially constructed by mass media...'

All models are "frames" and not pure descriptions of reality. As non-omniscient beings, we must settle for models of reality in trying to understand the world beyond our immediate senses. The only question is whether or not a given model is in fact useful. I agree that mainstream "right" vs. "left" political theater as played out in the mass media today is not all that meaningful, but there are underlying traits that correlate with where people fall on this spectrum.

'while none have been to shown to have a statistically significant and reproducible and environment indepedent effect on any human behavioral trait, including intelligence'

I'm pretty sure several hits for intelligence have reproduced now. No one claims that heritability for traits like intelligence means the effects of genes are "environment independent". But environmental interventions currently within our power, beyond the basic nutrition and education already universally available in the developed world, seem to have little impact.

Anonymous said...

IX. Digit Ratios

After sanitizing the digit ratio numbers, the following correlations came up:

Digit ratio R hand was correlated with masculinity at a level of -0.180 p < 0.01
Digit ratio L hand was correlated with masculinity at a level of -0.181 p < 0.01
Digit ratio R hand was slightly correlated with femininity at a level of +0.116 p < 0.05

Holy #@!$ the feminism thing ACTUALLY HELD UP. There is a 0.144 correlation between right-handed digit ratio and feminism, p < 0.01. And an 0.112 correlation between left-handed digit ratio and feminism, p < 0.05.

The only other political position that correlates with digit ratio is immigration. There is a 0.138 correlation between left-handed digit ratio and believe in open borders p < 0.01, and an 0.111 correlation between right-handed digit ratio and belief in open borders, p < 0.05.

No digit correlation with abortion, taxes, minimum wage, social justice, human biodiversity, basic income, or great stagnation.

Okay, need to rule out that this is all confounded by gender. I ran a few analyses on men and women separately.

On men alone, the connection to masculinity holds up. Restricting sample size to men, left-handed digit ratio corresponds to masculinity with at -0.157, p < 0.01. Left handed at -0.134, p < 0.05. Right-handed correlates with femininity at 0.120, p < 0.05. The feminism correlation holds up. Restricting sample size to men, right-handed digit ratio correlates with feminism at a level of 0.149, p < 0.01. Left handed just barely fails to correlate. Both right and left correlate with immigration at 0.135, p < 0.05.

On women alone, the Bem masculinity correlation is the highest correlation we're going to get in this entire study. Right hand is -0.433, p < 0.01. Left hand is -0.299, p < 0.05. Femininity trends toward significance but doesn't get there. The feminism correlation trends toward significance but doesn't get there. In general there was too small a sample size of women to pick up anything but the most whopping effects.

Santoculto said...

I'm not immigrant or mexican, mein aenglische ist bund, bad, everyone in hbdsphere know about it. I enphasise ideas than grammar.

Santoculto said...

Hbders hardcore give enormous enphasis in ''intelligence'' based on ''capacity to earn money'' or ''capacity to make a perfect sat''. But are these people who are pushing biological genocidal agenda against white people. The smarts ''with'' higher iqs, on average. Practical creativity or complex survivability and wisdom are completely dispised by hbd'ers, as well smart kindness, courage and others positive personality traits.

If you eugenize american white people, is likely that they will become overwhelming a leftist and monarchists, it is good???

Snobs and pseudo-humanitarians...

I'm against sterilization of real nice people of all ''iq ranges''.

Hbd'ers defend consciously or not a ''eugenics of market''.

All selective tests to entry in faculty, regular jobs or iq tests are idealization of intelligence, how should be and not how it is.

To say ''iq test don't measure intelligence'', is wrong. Iq measure specially convergent thinking style and not whole concept of intelligence. Hbd finish their curiosity about intelligence here.

Scholastic ability tend to correlate with certain personality types like the teacher and academic scientist prototype.

Santoculto said...

Same way people like cats. In ancient Egypt cats were treated as special creatures. As well when white tourists visit China.

Harlem Whiteboy said...

Santoculto--yes, and I alluded to it at the very beginning when I realized you weren't talking about my all-caps. Apologies, and of course it doesn't matter about the English, there's this SVErshov that is very smart, but has a hard time in his (probably) Russian English.

Your recent remarks very good, I agree with most of it, but this isn't an area of major interest to me (for those very reasons of stupidity about intelligence of one kind only), and god knows, the blog is too fucked--same 'provincial-internet' tricks one sees so often. Best--HW

"I'm against sterilization of real nice people of all ''iq ranges''."


Problem gets worse when Highest IQers and hardcore HBDers get a veritable gift with some total black racist like our current 'Messiah', because he tends to prove everything they say is right. Although the smarter of the elites are surely just waiting for this to pass. Talk of 'white genocide', therefore, does seem to make sense when you have someone talking about 'people pretending to be white' and 'being indifferent to 9/11' because all those policemen and firemen (including the blacks) were more or less just waiting to 'shatter his body'. Hideous freak, and a scandal people of any colour are prostrating themselves at his feet. White people are not 'people pretending to be white', they are white people, even if a half-white like Obama is called 'African-American'. That phrase originated with Baldwin, though, so this son of a Black Panther is going to be able to get away with it for awhile.

Santoculto said...

Maybe, digit ratios need to be analysed together with brain hemispheric dominance, hand and body side domination to we had more perfect correlation results.

Santoculto said...


Anonymous said...

“This American Life” Shitlibs Get Their Testosterone Levels Tested

August 11, 2015 by CH

…and the results cause the men to burst into tears.

Via his poasting career, one of the funniest stories I’ve read this year.

It turns out that the gay Jew has the highest testosterone level at 274. The other four men are clustered around half of that (144)

144. Male shitlibs are LITERALLY low T manlets.