luciusjuniusbrutus Posted February 8, 2018 Posted February 8, 2018 Sam Harris, many know of him and respect him from many sides of politics if not likely religion. Sam is painfully aware of the race and IQ correlations, but refuses to concede that deportation and the wall is one answer to a large crime, social welfare and healthcare epidemic in our country. I watched many of Sam's talks, debates and have even touched his books. The man is too rational to not see the political corruption attached to the left and DACA. He has had many podcasts decrying President Trump for racism and stupidity, who has done wonderful things since being elected, who received the Rosa Parks Award for wouldn't you guess it, not being racist, who was hailed as an icon in the media for his pro diversity business practices for above two decades. Sam has always to my knowledge presented reasonable arguments for his assertions and considered the opposition's point of view in great care if not delicacy, but what I hear from him lately is the derangement syndrome that has infected the left, just name calling and blatantly untrue accusations on the part of Sam. Has anyone else noticed this in public intellectuals, or can give further examples? Is Sam's inability to acknowledge the threat of importing low IQ races and cultures a sign of his fragility to his mainstream nature of public life or has he really just gone full syndrome? I listened to his podcast with Charles Murray on the race and IQ differences and can say he is painfully aware of the data points. I would be happy to chat about any of Trump's policies and their potential impacts, though I cannot say I would find many on the left of center on Stefan's community discussions.
Fashus Maximus Posted February 8, 2018 Posted February 8, 2018 1 hour ago, luciusjuniusbrutus said: Sam is painfully aware of the race and IQ correlations, but refuses to concede that deportation and the wall is one answer to a large crime, social welfare and healthcare epidemic in our country. Implying that America is "our" country. Sam's loyalties are with his people, not us Americans. Of course, he wants us to be surrounded by savages; it leads us - the majority population - to be anti-social, atomized, individualistic, and any other thing that leads to a decline in our birth rates. It's in the best interest of Sam's people for this to happen to us. 1 hour ago, luciusjuniusbrutus said: Has anyone else noticed this in public intellectuals, or can give further examples? More of Sam's fellow non-Americans, of course. Ben Shapiro, Mike Cernovich, Bill Maher, Bill Kristol, Paul Krugman, Ben Bernanke, Peter Schiff... 1 hour ago, luciusjuniusbrutus said: Is Sam's inability to acknowledge the threat of importing low IQ races and cultures a sign of his fragility to his mainstream nature of public life or has he really just gone full syndrome? Implying something's wrong with him. He's simply taking his own side. What's so surprising here?
Jsbrads Posted February 19, 2018 Posted February 19, 2018 Thank you Lorry I sincerely did not recognize where Fashus was going with that list. I don’t know all those people’s genetic heritage. Yes, Sam is a Jew, but I never heard anything by him that indicates that he has an in group preference for other Jews. I would say the same for Ben Shapiro even tho Ben is very religious, while Sam isn’t. lucius the only thing I can say is, the brain’s ability to backup to foolish accepted premises is incredibly redundant. Wanna see Harris/Murray soon I have a friend who is aware of the problems of Welfare, recognizes the negative motivations, but can’t seem to wrap his mind around a world without Welfare. Dave Rubin seems stuck on the same point despite the obvious awareness, visible recognition of how deterimental it is.
g19 Posted February 20, 2018 Posted February 20, 2018 I sometimes listen to Sam Harris' podcasts. I am extremely disappointed in an obviously intelligent person's complete lack of self-awareness, which is present in so many of his discussions. It is hilarious to listen to his discussions where he and the other guest (and audience, if present), speak of Trump like he is Hitler or Stalin and that the evidence of his evil is so self-evident that it need not even be mentioned. At the same time, he'll talk about self-segregated bubbles. As luciusjuniusbrutus notes, there is no doubt that Harris is aware of race and IQ differences, and he routinely pats himself on the back for daring to discuss controversial topics, yet he steadfastly tippytoes around this issue. Even worse, he slams those who do have the fortitude to engage in that discussion, like his attack of Stefan. Sam is a bright guy for sure, but he is an intellectual coward.
Fashus Maximus Posted February 20, 2018 Posted February 20, 2018 6 hours ago, Jsbrads said: Yes, Sam is a Jew, but I never heard anything by him that indicates that he has an in group preference for other Jews. But you just said that you wonder why he sees no issue with importing sub-humans. Does he want a billion savages in Israel?
Jsbrads Posted February 20, 2018 Posted February 20, 2018 Fashus Much like every other human, of any demographic you choose, if they are Liberal, even if they are honest, their mind can get stuck on certain things. Much like Dave Rubin, my friend is both honest and generally conservative, tho not very ideological or political, and even he has problems imagining a government without a safety net. It rarely has to do with race or genetics.
Fashus Maximus Posted February 22, 2018 Posted February 22, 2018 On 2/20/2018 at 1:36 PM, Jsbrads said: if they are Liberal, even if they are honest, their mind can get stuck on certain things Even honest conservatives get stuck on certain things. Regardless of political orientation, the common factor is that they take their own racial side, often not explicitly or even consciously. For example, it is Neo-Conservatives like Jew Dennis Prager that support sending white men to die in the desert, much to the benefit of Israel; total coincidence that the Neo-Con movement was founded by former bolshevik Jews. Heck, Stefan's first instinct to the recent Iran protests was to support the protests and condemn the regime, again much to the benefit of Israel; note: by supporting the protests, he is supporting a Jewish funded marxist protest that offers our Aryan cousins liberation to finally be sexual degenerates and cuck their husbands with subhuman violent savages like in the West. Way to go stef; still waiting for you to call on Israel to do the same (but that would be bad for your fellow Jews, right? ). So ya, Sam Harris is one example out of the vast majority of people who take their own side. Nothing special here. On 2/20/2018 at 1:36 PM, Jsbrads said: It rarely has to do with race or genetics. Babies as young as 2 months old have a fully developed racial hierarchy of preference, as follows: immediate family > extended family > ethnicity > race. We know this because we can see when the area of the brain responsible for disgust lights up. It lights up the least for the immediate family, and lights up AF for a member of another race. Also, disgust lights up the most for blacks, which makes sense as they are the most genetically distant. Disgust triggers a fight or flight response which shuts off the empathy centers in your brain. The end result being, that you have empathy for your own, and none for the other, a.ka. unintentional in-group preference. Our beliefs are formed through that racial lens. It's just how we evolved.
Siegfried von Walheim Posted February 22, 2018 Posted February 22, 2018 10 minutes ago, Fashus Maximus said: Babies as young as 2 months old have a fully developed racial hierarchy of preference, as follows: immediate family > extended family > ethnicity > race. We know this because we can see when the area of the brain responsible for disgust lights up. It lights up the least for the immediate family, and lights up AF for a member of another race. Also, disgust lights up the most for blacks, which makes sense as they are the most genetically distant. Disgust triggers a fight or flight response which shuts off the empathy centers in your brain. The end result being, that you have empathy for your own, and none for the other, a.ka. unintentional in-group preference. Our beliefs are formed through that racial lens. It's just how we evolved. As far as Iran goes I know Stefpai is ultra-conservative as far as living values go. I had replied to you before on another post but it got modded out of existence. Basically I think we're largely in agreement about how society ought to be led by able men. Wanted to clarify that since I know my post disappeared. I know Stefpai strongly prefers the old Kingdom to the Caliphate (or whatever word they use to call their barbaric theocracy) which, as someone who's a fan of Christianity and Western values, makes perfect sense. Although Stefpai's an atheist he's practically a Christian. Also he mentioned lately it was his mother's step parents who were jews. So the man himself isn't the slightest bit Jewish (or maybe he is, like I might be because my father was raised by a single dad and he doesn't know for sure the ethnic makeup of his mother or her parents only that they're something around Lithuania, which could include Jews). I'm curious though: how do we mixed race Whites prioritize our "group" subconsciously? I'm ethnically part German, Irish, Italian (Sicilian), Welsh, and perhaps a tincture of English, Lithuanian and/or Jewish. I strongly identify as German-American and am not particularly close to the other components but I do notice I have unintended attractions to some of their features. I'm wondering how someone like me is subconsciously programmed to perceive his tribe. Does my brain naturally prefer people with this odd (and entirely Roman Catholic by the way) mix or is it mostly towards the dominant (German) elements? Also, admittedly I'm not sure how far Arabs and East Asians are relative to Whites (like I'm pretty sure Arabs are closer to us than the Japanese or their neighbors) but I find it easier to look at an East Asian and see "cousin" than an Arab whom I typically see as "enemy" or "rival", though admittedly I think that's partly affected by my cultural upbringing. I am not repulsed physically by Middle Eastern women but I do see the men as being like mortal enemies. Historically it makes sense; but genetically I'm not so sure. Aren't Arabs versus Europeans kinda like Albanians versus Serbs (proportionally speaking)? I know my background has made me very positive to East Asians (both from direct experience with the people as well as with their cultural and fun stuff) but I'd assume given a blank slate without history I'd be more inclined towards Arabs than East Asians based on the studies that indicate we have a racial preference for that which is most like us. Perhaps also in our brains is a cultural adjuster. Meaning even if I'm distant from one group I might rate them higher than another because we are of a similar culture or share a positive history. I'm sure the brain can keep track of all our mental ticks; what I wonder is how strong the ethnic one is and how it works or conflicts with culture. Like I honestly have an easier time seeing Muslim Arabs as allies against White Atheist Leftists. I reject both of them but I think Islam is slightly better than outright North-Korean-style Communism.
Jsbrads Posted February 23, 2018 Posted February 23, 2018 Progressive Jews who boycott Israel? Are they also preferring an in group? Or do they see their in group as Berkeley? Humans are very adaptable. Their ideology does guide their preferences, including in group preference.
lorry Posted February 24, 2018 Posted February 24, 2018 On 2/19/2018 at 8:51 PM, Jsbrads said: Thank you Lorry I sincerely did not recognize where Fashus was going with that list. I don’t know all those people’s genetic heritage. Yes, Sam is a Jew, but I never heard anything by him that indicates that he has an in group preference for other Jews. I would say the same for Ben Shapiro even tho Ben is very religious, while Sam isn’t. No worries. In the OP you said... Quote Sam Harris, many know of him and respect him from many sides of politics if not likely religion. Sam is painfully aware of the race and IQ correlations, but refuses to concede that deportation and the wall is one answer to a large crime, social welfare and healthcare epidemic in our country. If Sam concedes that anti-social populations should be deported, then it follows that if Jews are an anti-social population, they should be deported.
Fashus Maximus Posted February 24, 2018 Posted February 24, 2018 On 2/22/2018 at 3:31 PM, Siegfried von Walheim said: how do we mixed race Whites prioritize our "group" subconsciously? Same way, whoever is closest to us genetically. Thing is, when you're mixed you have a broader loyalty, because you can't afford to be more selective than the race itself. I think this is why the concept of racial identity seems bizarre in Europe. They can afford to be more selective, and so what they cluster around is their specific ethnic identities. North americans, Australians, and Boers being mixed, racial identity is as selective as they can be. Think Identity Evropa vs Generation Identity. Same difference. On 2/23/2018 at 2:49 AM, Jsbrads said: Progressive Jews who boycott Israel? Are they also preferring an in group? Or do they see their in group as Berkeley? There is a bell curve for all personality traits, including disgust sensitivity. The less disgust sensitive you are, the lesser your in-group preference; low disgust sensitivity is also the reason behind R-type personality, and adherence to R-type ideologies like progressivism. So your example is perfectly represented in the stats I cite. The thing about bell-curves is that extreme cases like self-hating Jews are just that: extreme. They are not representative of the bell-curve average; exceptions prove the trend, not the other way around. On 2/23/2018 at 2:49 AM, Jsbrads said: Humans are very adaptable. Their ideology does guide their preferences, including in group preference. Claiming the exact opposite of what I'm claiming is not an argument. I've presented loads of evidence to support my claim, so I'd suggest you address them and present your own. Your whole reasoning is that we can't assume in-group preference because #NotAll. This is such a famous, obvious, and 3rd World-tier fallacy, that I'm not sure it merits anything other than just pointing it out.
Recommended Posts