Skip to content

Open Discussion Thread

bouche-femelle-de-bande-dessinée-avec-la-bulle-de-la-parole-28426486

I’ve started this page as a place for open discussion. If you have a question,  a request, or something that you want to bring to my attention, and it doesn’t fit anywhere else (or you want somewhere current), put it here.

I can’t guarantee you’ll get fast service from me. I’m having a hard time keeping up with my other stuff as it is. 🙂

A couple of updates worth mentioning here. I’ve disabled the comments at my JayMan’s Race, Inheritance, and IQ F.A.Q. (F.R.B.). Invariably, my pages and posts, with my declarative  assertions they feature, attract (wittingly and unwittingly) bullshit-peddling commenters, and I don’t want a 100-comment long back and forth there. As such, I’m removing some of the comments from there, and they may appear here, eventually. As well, if you have something to say about my F.R.B., put it here.

190 Comments

Leave a Comment
  1. RaceRealist / Aug 4 2016 9:42 AM

    Hey JayMan,

    Thoughts on the Solutrean hypothesis? And also what do you think about the legends of the ‘white gods’ or South America?

  2. Anonymous / Aug 6 2016 11:20 AM

    Do you have anything on the Out of Africa theory? Is it still largely accurate, or has it been debunked?

    • JayMan / Aug 6 2016 11:22 AM

      Of course it’s accurate.

    • Anonymous / Aug 6 2016 11:26 AM

      Like you, I have taken on the task of arguing against the stupidity of white nationalists. Do you have links to any articles that prove its accuracy?

    • Les Lester / Oct 22 2016 4:24 PM

      Hmmm, I stumbled upon your blog in an unusual way. I had noticed a guy’s post about how white leopards or panthers can, for the most part, only be reproduced through inbreeding. Thus, I found myself somehow on your blog reading about European clans. Responding to the Out of Africa framework, I’d have to say it’s on target. According to my research, and I know this seems like hyperbole, but every high culture on the planet literally derives from Black cultures. From Africa to Asia to the Americas, the first big-building projects, not to mention the earliest people, were Black cultures. http://leslester.blogspot.com

  3. chrisdavies09 / Aug 8 2016 8:46 AM
    • chrisdavies09 / Aug 8 2016 8:56 AM

      (I downloaded the 2010 study about bilingualism supposedly delaying the onset of Alzheimer’s. It is of course substandard; sample sizes of n=200, & observational study with several variables not controlled for)

  4. RaceRealist / Aug 13 2016 10:14 PM

    Hey JayMan, I know you’re into philosophy a bit; question.

    What do you think about these responses from Hochman to Sesardic on the biological reality of race?

    http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1369848616300140

    http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10539-011-9249-3

    Thanks for your time.

  5. rw95 / Oct 3 2016 5:16 PM

    Jayman,

    As much as we may hate to admit it, HBD and clannishness does somewhat reinforce the white nationalist ideology, at least somewhat. If the only non-clannish peoples are Europeans (within the Hajnal line) and the Japanese, then it does logically seem to imply that deportation or segregation is called for in our increasingly diverse USA, does it not?

    It’s not looking good for us non-whites Jayman. Not good at all.

    • kn83 / Nov 22 2016 2:39 PM

      The Japanese are only non-clannish toward other japanese, thats what makes them stand out. They have the perfect balance.

      Also, the only way I think the values of the white nationalist will ever be mainstream is if they start inbreeding and reproducing rapidly, displacing the mostly out-bread majority of whites. If they don’t then universalist and leftist tendencies will continue to dominate.

  6. Anonymous / Oct 24 2016 5:19 AM

    You supporting Trump?

  7. jamilla watson / Dec 1 2016 10:14 AM

    Do humans have free will?

  8. rw95 / Jan 18 2017 6:36 PM

    Things to look forward to when HBD becomes mainstream, Jayman:
    http://voxday.blogspot.com/2017/01/the-toll.html

  9. Dopamine Addict / Feb 24 2017 3:15 AM

    I would like to pitch a blogpost for your site. Is there a standard process / email adress?
    Subject: Neuropsychology of emotion, decisions, evolution. Kind regards.

    • JayMan / Feb 24 2017 9:33 AM

      Thanks for the suggestion. My email is at the top right.

      The problem with that idea though is that we currently have a pretty poor understanding of such things. Apparent new breakthroughs are often quickly overturned by new discoveries.

  10. rw95 / Mar 14 2017 1:20 AM

    Jayman, thoughts on the rising tide of white nationalism/alt-right? I’m beginning to think separation is inevitable at this point.

  11. Kn83 / Apr 9 2017 10:29 PM

    Jayman, what do you make of Satoshi Kanazawa”s Savanna Hypothesis? Over time, I have noticed that nearly all of his claims about higher IQ in his book The Intelligence Paradox tend to fall flat when applied to non-W.E.I.R.D. populations as well as non-whites in the west. It makes absolutely no sense that more intelligent people would be worse at evolutionary “familiar” activities than dumber people.Nor, when looking at non-white and non-NW Euro populations do you see any strong link between higher IQ and leftism, homosexuality, vegetarianism, monogamy, and drug use. The only thing that does seem to be universally linked with higher intelligence is secularism.

    Any thoughts?

    • JayMan / Apr 9 2017 11:04 PM

      Pretty much. All of claims rely on WEIRD populations.

  12. kn83 / Apr 10 2017 12:39 PM

    Also, Kanazawa’s statements about IQ and fertility also don’t add up when considering history. He apparently failed to note that it is only in the last few decades that IQ became negatively linked with women. Also, didn’t you post some data on your twitter and this site that shows that in most societies today that men of all IQ levels have equal fertility rates on average?

    If higher IQ is so maladaptive as he claims then there is no way it could have been strongly selected for in the last 10,000 (especially by the Ashkenazi). Kanazawa seems to be one of those evo-pychologist that mistakenly assume that evolution stopped or slowed down since agriculture when the opposite is true.

  13. Ivan .M / Apr 18 2017 10:18 AM

    JayMan, I think we may have found a potential treasure trove of information relevant to possible selection pressures in medieval and early modern Japan!

    Here’s a Google Books entry on “Japan’s Industrious Revolution: Economic and Social Transformations in the Early Modern Period,” by Akira Hayami: https://books.google.com/books?id=Z-1rCQAAQBAJ&dq=%22Economic+and+Social+Transformations+in+the+Early+Modern+Period%22&source=gbs_navlinks_s

    The table of contents looks VERY promising. I stumbled upon this while searching for whatever I could find on shōen (Japanese “manors”) and peasant migration during Tokugawa rule.

    It was a post on Shinto at the neoreactionary blog Bloody Shovel that got the wheels in my head turning. The author, spandrell, a fluent speaker of Mandarin and Japanese, is very knowledgeable about East Asian history. His piece is short and worth a read: https://bloodyshovel.wordpress.com/2014/11/26/shinto/

    My gut also tells me that rice farming played some small role in the evolutionary path of the Japanese (à la the “rice theory” of regional variation in modern Chinese psychology). Anyway, I hope the book proves a major help to you, hbd chick, Peter Frost and others!

    Cheers.

    • JayMan / Apr 18 2017 10:23 AM

      Good find! Thanks!

  14. kn83 / Apr 27 2017 12:21 PM

    Hey Jayman, what do you make of this clown?

    https://www.madinamerica.com/2016/06/reared-apart-twin-study-mythology-the-latest-contribution-part-1/

    Its so infuriating that people like this get support.

    • JayMan / Apr 27 2017 12:57 PM

      Multiple methods of inquiry produce the laws of behavioral genetics. That’s why they’re laws. So he’s fighting a lost battle.

  15. rw95 / Apr 28 2017 1:39 PM

    Anything on India IQ potential? I know India scores low now, but with proper nutrition/less inbreeding what do you think genetic potential is? Anatoly Karlin believes somewhere in the 95-97 range.

    • JayMan / Apr 28 2017 2:16 PM

      I doubt it. I’d guess 85-90 at most.

    • rw95 / Apr 28 2017 2:27 PM

      What makes you say that?

  16. kn83 / May 1 2017 12:14 AM

    What is the average I.Q. of Brahmin Hindus? I heard it around Ashkenazim level.

  17. Robert M. Berwin / May 13 2017 5:28 PM

    Interesting blog and a lot to go through!

    I agree with you regarding the no-free-will position. I believe Kant would see it as a ‘synthetic a priori’ truth. That is, it flows from the very notion of causality. (Kant in fact believed in free will as a moral necessity, but relegated it to the noumenal [unknowable] realm.)

    Regarding the utility of IQ measurements, I would mention that Marilyn Vos Savant remarked in an interview, “Women and blacks have accomplished nothing.” And indeed, men have vastly outperformed women in almost every creative and academic field. For example, there hasn’t been even a single great female composer (and if IQ scores don’t correlate with superlative musical ability, so much the worse for the tests). So what is going on? David Stove, in his article “The Intellectual capacity of women”, points out that claiming that women have been suppressed simply begs the question as to their status in the first place. There’s no doubt that the de facto suppression of women can account for some of the discrepancy in accomplishment. But all of it? Really? I would suggest that, at the very least, men have a greater degree of passion or “sticktoitiveness” than women. Van Gogh was obsessed with painting. Apart from the occasional visit to the brothel, that’s all he did. And the musicologist Charles Rosen wrote that Beethoven’s music was “the result of a labor and meditation almost unparalleled in the history of music.” I just don’t see this kind of creative monomania among women. But aren’t women distracted by raising children? Yes, But can this distraction (plus the aforementioned suppression) account for all of the difference? One would think that since women make up half the population, and have enjoyed a fair degree of liberalization in recent decades, maybe a couple of them would have risen to the very top in the more abstract fields, like physics, math, and music. But that hasn’t been the case. Perhaps they do have the sheer cognitive ability. But the facts on the ground suggest that IQ tests are missing something of importance when it comes to superior accomplishment.

    • kn83 / May 14 2017 12:04 AM

      You are right. IQ test don’t not account for personality and temperament traits, which influence the likelihood of creative genius.

    • JayMan / May 14 2017 7:17 AM

      Creativity probably has to do with more than personality, even.

  18. kn83 / May 14 2017 12:02 AM

    Jayman, I remember reading a twitter post from you that asked why don’t all non-mongoloid women have big breast and stated that it was impossible to know. However, you stated that the reason why not all women have big butts is do to sexually antagonistic selection. That doesn’t sound too probable to me. Can you elaborate?

    • JayMan / May 14 2017 7:16 AM

      One reason some women have high waist-hip ratios is masculinizing genes. They’re selected against in women but selected for in men so they stick around.

  19. kn83 / May 14 2017 3:56 AM

    Sorry to bother you but I have a question. What do you make of this claim?

    http://akinokure.blogspot.com.es/2013/03/primitive-mans-sex-life-was-free-of.html

    I think this (and most of Agnostic’s post in general) is mostly a load of nonsense as well as the accompanying bicameralism hypothesis. What is your take?

    • kn83 / May 14 2017 3:58 AM

      Also, notice his tendency to downplay any signs of non-reproductive sexual behavior in animals.

    • JayMan / May 14 2017 7:23 AM

      Correct, most of Agnostic’s posts are nonsense. Modern hunter-gatherers are indeed insightful to ancestral behavior but only limitedly so; they too are just as removed from their ancestors as we are. Non-reproductive heterosexual sex is hardly mysterious since sex not only serves the role of reproduction directly, but serves to strengthen emotional bonds between male and female.

  20. kn83 / May 30 2017 9:53 PM

    About the liberal-conservative baby gap, I would count the Left out just yet. There is still the phenomenon of people born to conservative families turning liberal at later ages (which is more common than the opposite) and the fact that the left still runs western media. With the advances in technology I’m pretty sure the elites will eventually notice their lower fertility rates and find methods to incentivize liberals to reproduce.

    On a related note, one fact that many HBD blogs fail to notice that even though Mormons and Christian fundamentalist have much higher fertility rates now, Christianity on the whole continues to decline at a slow but noticeable rate with Millennials being the least religious generation of Americans ever. Also, these ex-Christians aren’t joining new faiths nor are their children if they have any, which explains how the descendants of God fearing Victorians could be atheistic SJWs. These are just some reasons why I’m doubting a massive turn to the Right in America, any thoughts?

    • JayMan / May 30 2017 9:55 PM

      Children generally don’t switch political views away from their parents.

      Selection is acting for increased conservativism and religiosity, but the rate is slow and could conceivably reverse in the future.

  21. Ivan .M / Jun 5 2017 12:59 AM

    Any chance of a Yeyo Twitter stream? His stuff on female intrasexual competition via feminism (as well as conservatism) is great, not that I’m ignoring the Hajnal line or anything.

    • JayMan / Jun 5 2017 7:42 AM

      Not a bad idea.

  22. Dianna Scott / Jun 15 2017 4:21 PM

    Do you think hybridization or mutation played a greater role in hominid evolution.

    • JayMan / Jun 15 2017 5:03 PM

      Mutation is a given as it drives evolution. But hybridization between human groups and with archaic hominids also appears to have played an important role.

  23. Dianna Scott / Jun 15 2017 7:52 PM

    There are articles supporting the idea that DNA from male sexual partners becomes assimilated into the female partners body and can affect the woman and the offspring of a subsequent male partner. Do you agree with this? If so, could you elaborate on this process.

    • JayMan / Jun 16 2017 7:11 AM

      That of course is nonsense.

  24. Dianna Scott / Jun 16 2017 8:24 AM

    Thanks, J.

  25. Kn83 / Jul 21 2017 9:38 PM

    What do you make of Donald Trump? As an HBD-aware liberal, do you think his 4-8 year run and President would be beneficial for America?

  26. ling / Sep 1 2017 3:57 PM

    What is your view on the effects of peer groups?

    • JayMan / Sep 1 2017 3:58 PM

      Largely nil, except for language.

  27. kn83 / Sep 29 2017 12:08 PM

    Jayman, Do you consider Psychiatry a legit science? After reading your “Features and Bugs” article on this site I’m starting to understand what the anti-psychiatry folks are talking about: that many if not most “disorders” are determined by cultural and moral bias rather than biological evidence and that therapy is a scam.

    • JayMan / Sep 29 2017 12:12 PM

      Psychiatry is valid to the extent that it helps patients. This is generally not to the extent that most practitioners believe.

  28. Kn83 / Sep 30 2017 3:11 PM

    Jayman, in your page about the worldwide distribution of personality you pointed out that Arctic peoples (who tend to be hunter-gatherers) have some of the highest suicide rates in the world. Also, I’ve once came across data suggesting that hunter-gatherers are overrepresented in suicide rates in both Sub-Saharan Africa and Southeast Asia. This would be a huge blow into the myth of the noble savage: not only were primitive humans NOT more peaceful, they were also weren’t any happier. Any thoughts?

    • JayMan / Sep 30 2017 3:18 PM

      This would be a huge blow into the myth of the noble savage: not only were primitive humans NOT more peaceful, they were also weren’t any happier. Any thoughts?

      Good observation. I wonder what the time depth of that pattern is…

  29. Kn83 / Oct 15 2017 2:09 PM

    Jayman, do you believe there is anything problematic about career women, or it this another matter where the Alt-right/manosphere is way off base?

    • JayMan / Oct 15 2017 2:11 PM

      (Isn’t “problematic” a SJW word?)

      The real answer is whether it is or not it is what is, and won’t be changing any time soon.

  30. Kn83 / Oct 15 2017 3:51 PM

    I don’t like the word “problematic” either, it feels of hypersensitivity. I for one don’t by the idea that female self-reliance is somehow dysgenic. Its an idea most popular with resentful beta men that can’t seduce/appeal to most women, so the want to limit their options to make their mating success easier

    • Kn83 / Oct 15 2017 3:53 PM

      By-buy, the-they typos

  31. Ivan .M / Oct 20 2017 2:09 PM

    What do you think of Anatoly Karlin’s Sino-triumphalism via eugenics?

    • JayMan / Oct 20 2017 2:22 PM

  32. kn83 / Oct 29 2017 5:41 AM

    Jayman, do you believe there is any strong link between social status and suicide in America? All data and research I’ve seen tends to be inconsistent, suggesting no link at all.

    • JayMan / Oct 29 2017 6:53 AM

      Probably not. But I’d have to look into it.

  33. kn83 / Nov 3 2017 3:14 AM

    Jayman, what do you make of the claims of this website?
    http://www.mygenes.co.nz/index.html
    http://www.mygenes.co.nz/lungshu.html

    Notice the tendency to play-up shared environment.

    • JayMan / Nov 3 2017 6:21 AM

      Whitehead is good at pointing out the weakness of genetic factors in explaining homosexuality but poor at everything else. In the second link especially he seems to misunderstand the reason twin studies were developed in the first place (falling back on genetically and otherwise confounded correlational studies).

  34. kn83 / Nov 13 2017 9:05 AM

    My comment didn’t appear, is their a problem?

  35. 8Ball / Nov 20 2017 2:29 AM

    Hey JayMan, what do you think of this site? I think they build a good case and it’s an easy read.

    https://mapbiology.wordpress.com

  36. hfel / Dec 10 2017 2:39 AM

    Hi JayMan! I have been reading some of your posts for a while, and as someone new to HBD, I still have a few questions before I could be convinced of your quite “extreme” view.

    In one of your posts about the fast change in acceptance of homosexuality, you were talking about the genetic potential which is unlocked in response to certain changes in the environment. Doesn’t this open the possibility that other traits or characteristics, which likewise show strong heritability, could change like this as well?

    From here one can ask whether the heredity of some specific trait even has much meaning in a wider sense, if different preexisting genetic responses can be triggered by various environmental stimuli. You have stated yourself that heritability =/= immutability, which I assume also includes environmental interventions?

    For example, with IQ, it might be true that genetics determines most of the variance in the current environment, but is there conclusive evidence that as such it’s impossible to tailor programs that suit people’s genome in order to make full use of their genetic potential?

    Thank you in advance for your time!

    • JayMan / Dec 10 2017 9:53 AM

      Doesn’t this open the possibility that other traits or characteristics, which likewise show strong heritability, could change like this as well?

      Yes, but the range of phenotypes that show this is fairly small.

      You have stated yourself that heritability =/= immutability, which I assume also includes environmental interventions?

      For example, with IQ, it might be true that genetics determines most of the variance in the current environment, but is there conclusive evidence that as such it’s impossible to tailor programs that suit people’s genome in order to make full use of their genetic potential?

      It’s called school :). Our education system is already one massive intervention. Everyone is living up to their genetic potential. Past that, there is not much more we can do.

    • hfel / Dec 16 2017 4:31 PM

      Was there evidence that societal acceptance of homosexuality can invert as dramatically before it started to happen? Or that obesity would become as widespread as it is today?

      It seems to me that as all estimates of heritability are only markers of differences between people in a given environment attributable to genetics, they are not indicative of an individual’s “total phenotypic range”, and as such a complete proxy for environmental mutability.

      That my country, Sweden, and Portugal and Spain, scored practically the same in the most recent PISA survey and that our close neighbours Finland and Estonia topped the charts (with Estonia’s Baltic neighbours scoring below all the aforementioned nations), all the while there supposedly being a genetic difference in scholastic ability between N and S Europe (and by extension other countries), doesn’t seem to indicate that this ability is as environmentally immutable as these heritability estimates suggest.

    • JayMan / Dec 19 2017 10:03 PM

      That my country, Sweden, and Portugal and Spain, scored practically the same in the most recent PISA survey and that our close neighbours Finland and Estonia topped the charts (with Estonia’s Baltic neighbours scoring below all the aforementioned nations), all the while there supposedly being a genetic difference in scholastic ability between N and S Europe (and by extension other countries), doesn’t seem to indicate that this ability is as environmentally immutable as these heritability estimates suggest.

      You realize that sampling issues and demographics (and test norming) are all issues in any national IQ test, including the PISA, right?

      It seems to me that as all estimates of heritability are only markers of differences between people in a given environment attributable to genetics, they are not indicative of an individual’s “total phenotypic range”, and as such a complete proxy for environmental mutability.

      Well, I’ll you that the range of environments that are found by SES brackets here in the U.S. don’t seem to modulate the heritability of IQ, for instance.

      Gross environment matters but that’s far from saying anything goes.

    • JayMan / Dec 19 2017 10:03 PM

      That my country, Sweden, and Portugal and Spain, scored practically the same in the most recent PISA survey and that our close neighbours Finland and Estonia topped the charts (with Estonia’s Baltic neighbours scoring below all the aforementioned nations), all the while there supposedly being a genetic difference in scholastic ability between N and S Europe (and by extension other countries), doesn’t seem to indicate that this ability is as environmentally immutable as these heritability estimates suggest.

      You realize that sampling issues and demographics (and test norming) are all issues in any national IQ test, including the PISA, right?

      It seems to me that as all estimates of heritability are only markers of differences between people in a given environment attributable to genetics, they are not indicative of an individual’s “total phenotypic range”, and as such a complete proxy for environmental mutability.

      Well, I’ll you that the range of environments that are found by SES brackets here in the U.S. don’t seem to modulate the heritability of IQ, for instance.

      Gross environment matters but that’s far from saying anything goes.

    • hfel / Feb 4 2018 5:43 PM

      After doing more reading and research I’ve come to the same conclusion as you have, though it was admittedly not an easy pill to swallow at first. Anyway, thank you for the work you’ve put into this subject, your blog is what first go me interested in it as well.

  37. kn83 / Dec 11 2017 10:04 PM

    Hi Jayman. @Yeyo was made a comment on twitter about the Victorian ages making a comeback. The problem with this is that there is no real evidence that people in the Victorian age were in any major degree bigger prudes on average than modern Westerners today. They seemed to be no more or less sexually active and receptive than contemporary Whites:

    http://xroads.virginia.edu/~ug97/blues/simmons.html
    https://digitalcommons.denison.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1043&context=articulate
    https://interestingliterature.com/2012/12/26/ten-myths-about-the-victorians/
    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/history/11364833/Stern-fathers-religious-zealots-and-prudes-How-we-got-the-Victorians-wrong.html

    Besides, women outside the Middle-East are not dressing any more conservatively, pornography doesn’t seem to be going anywhere anytime soon, music videos and popular entertainment aren’t getting any less skimpy, and prudeness doesn’t seem to even be the main motive behind contemporary leftist politics on sex. So I don’t agree with the perception that we are returning to a repressive era when repressive era wasn’t even relatively repressed to begin with. People don’t seem to be any more or less sexually active or gratified now compared to a century ago:

    http://gssq.blogspot.com/2017/07/the-male-sexual-deficit-social-fact-of.html

    what are your thoughts?

  38. kn83 / Dec 22 2017 5:24 AM

    Jayman, one thing I’ve notice about the myth of Group Selection (despite being debunked numerous times by Dawkins, Pinker and others) is that it is equally appealing to both the far-left and far-right. Leftist love it because it allows them to deny the obvious selfishness of all living things and justify their egalitarian utopian dogmas and pathologically altruist urges. The Alt-right loves it because to them it justifies their White nationalist fantasies (which were never truly realized in any culture in history). It’s like these people are motivated ENTIRELY by their normative desires, not by any honest view of the science. Any thoughts?

  39. Ivan .M / Aug 10 2018 5:28 AM

    More on Japan: The Ties That Bind: Kinship, Inheritance, and the Environment in Medieval Japan – Kevin L. Gouge (2017)

    PDF: http://kevingouge.com/PHD.pdf
    Author’s website: http://kevingouge.com/wordpress/

    Gouge focuses on the ruling warrior class, so we don’t know if other segments of society practiced this loosely consanguineal, more corporate mode of kinship organization. Cited works by Haruko Wakita might contain clues.

    Ron Unz has noted that samurai made up a good chunk of the total population for much of their history. We know downward mobility among samurai really kicked in during the Edo period, but it’s unclear whether preceding periods saw any trickling down of individuals or families from warrior to non-warrior status.

    Overall, Gouge’s analysis sounds a lot like current news coming out of Japan:
    https://asia.nikkei.com/Opinion/Japanese-companies-the-adopted-son-rises2
    https://blogs.loc.gov/law/2017/04/many-adoptions-in-japan-are-not-about-raising-children/

  40. Phil Volkofsky / Aug 29 2018 11:01 PM

    Hi,

    I am interested to know what HBD has to say about ethnicity ( race) and criminal behaviour. Here in Australia we pride ourselves on “being the most successful multicultural society” in the world and that this is a good thing. It is often the case that a hoary old chestnut will raised its head and some politician will say that some ethnic group is is “bad” because they cause more crime ( are prone to more crime).

    More broadly any tendency to corruption and values that are anti- social. Much is made of culture ( and I am one of those who do) and that human behaviour that is good for the human condition, not just our local group, is something that all human groups can/ should pursue.

    My concern with reading a number of posts here is that we seem to conclude that Race is genetic i.e. there are fundamental differences in the way people behave based on membership of a racial group e.g. you mention people getting into a position of power and immediately pursuing ripping off of people etc. This fits with the idea that all blacks are prone to criminality for instance. Conversely it might fit with that all whites are prone to racism!

    For me a definition of racism is a belief that one race is inferior to another on genetic grounds e. g not as intelligent , more inclined to sexual deviance, more inclined to criminality. How can I stand for human development and equality if I know that genetically this is true?

    Am I too despair that HBD has the facts on this and that yes we must conclude that in fact the racists are right – if we want a “better” world we must focus on breeding with white people or at least within our own race.

  41. Neoreaction / Sep 6 2018 6:11 PM

    I am interested to know more about HBD. Besides yourself and HBD Chick are there any other HBD Bloggers you recommend?

Comments are welcome and encouraged. Comments DO NOT require name or email. Your very first comment must be approved by me. Be civil and respectful. NO personal attacks against myself or another commenter. Also, NO sock puppetry. If you assert a claim, please be prepared to support it with evidence upon request. Thank you!

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: