Shocking Old News
In addition to reporting and opining on the latest developments in the ATCGs of human differences, n/a at race/history/evolution notes has a gift for finding and exposing historical evidence of the long struggle between race-realists and race-deniers.Quoting Jonathan P. Spiro in Grant vs. Boas:
These students of Boas set about devising the intellectual weapons and amassing the ethnographic data they would need to combat the disciples of Grant. And while on a theoretical level the debate between the Grantians and the Boasians pitted the defenders of heredity and biological determinism against the proponents of environment and the primacy of culture, it was difficult not to notice that it was at heart a confrontation between the ethos of native Protestants and the Zeitgeist of immigrant Jews.Quoting Gelya Frank in Boasianism as a cult:
THERE HAS ALWAYS BEEN a lively, if sometimes hushed, in-house discourse about American anthropology's Jewish origins and their meaning. The preponderance of Jewish intellectuals in the early years of Boasian anthropology and the Jewish identities of anthropologists in subsequent generations have been downplayed in standard histories of the discipline.
There has also been a whitewashing of Jewish ethnicity, reflecting fears of anti-Semitic reactions that could discredit the disci- pline of anthropology and individual anthropologistsNow I'm shocked, shocked to discover that jews, especially supposed professionals dedicated foremost to the study of man's tribalism, could so whitewash the full extent of their own tribe's dominance of that field until so long after the fact. Doubly shocking is the excuse, which is of course that "the anti-semites" made them do it.
Actually I'm well beyond shock, as the more I've examined the subject the more commonplace and even banal such revelations have become. Today, looking back at what transpired in the hundred years or so since the Grant/Boas struggle, I'm compelled to make two points:
1) The Boasians, prevailing as they did, have produced as a consequence a social and academic environment which is anti-racist only in name. The regime is in fact as race-based as ever, the discrimination has only been reversed. Today it is perfectly acceptable to be anti-White, and horribly taboo if not illegal to be "anti-semitic".
2) Those who opposed the Boasians, to the extent they saw and objected to the self-serving jewish agenda and feared for the future of their posterity, were correct. And if it's proper to label them and those of us who continue to struggle "anti-semites", then it's only fair to recognize that our opponents were and still are anti-White. It conforms to their own name-calling standards and, more important, accurately reflects the empirical results of their words and actions.
The image above is from Race: Reality and Denial by Richard McCulloch.
Labels: anti-white, franz boas, history, jewish influence, madison grant, race
posted by Tanstaafl at 5/06/2009 08:32:00 AM
41 Comments:
But how could a group of jewish academics undermine and eventually dethrone the "gentleman amateurs with no academic affiliation or perhaps an association with a museum"
(aka rich white protestants)?
Possibly:
"Grant went on to collaborate with Southern white racists to pass antimiscegenation legislation, and he influenced many states to implement coercive sterilization statutes under which thousands of Americans deemed to be unworthy were sterilized in the 1930s."
When he was helping found the Galton Society in 1918, he wrote to the other organizers: “My proposal is the organization of an anthropological society … confined to native Americans, who are anthropologically, socially, and politically sound, no Bolsheviki need apply.” [http://www.amren.com/ar/1997/12/index.html]
I found it interesting that hereditarianism faced such a great risk from the socia-political bolsheviks. Wouldn't the superior Nordic race be un-phased by mere cultural corruption?
But how could a group of jewish academics undermine and eventually dethrone the "gentleman amateurs with no academic affiliation or perhaps an association with a museum"
(aka rich white protestants)?-FF
What's your point? Are you saying it didn't happen? If so, I've got some bad news for you.
I found it interesting that hereditarianism faced such a great risk from the socia-political bolsheviks. Wouldn't the superior Nordic race be un-phased by mere cultural corruption?-FF
The logic here is so obtuse it's mind-bending. Culture-distortion's entire point is to undermine Nordic societies. Take away our identities as North Euros and what do we have?
My point is it did happen, one reason being Grant's affiliation/support for antimiscegenation and sterilization legislation. This is another example of what Sailer/Mangan are being criticized for. Affiliation with extreme viewpoints is like putting out a fire with gasoline - its possible to do it but there are less dangerous ways.
As I read it, hereditarianism is his basis for creating a superior society made up of superior "nordic" stock. The Boas theory is cultural where regardless of "stock" the society will have its good/bad/ugly controlled by socio-political changes.
"Take away our identities as North Euros and what do we have?"
My point exactly - Why do you need your North Euro "identity" to establish you are superior stock?
Secondly, I keep hearing IQ standards thrown around like they should carry weight - yet, Az-jews have the highest IQs. Doesnt that justify them being in control using Grant's logic proposing elimination of the weak and unfit?
I'd take Grant's honest nordicism over the dishonest anti-White regime we live under now.
But let's not pretend the choice is between a coffee-colored dystopia or a totalitarian deathcamp dystopia.
As it stands the globalists seem capable of supplying us with both.
I don't see where the quotes in flippityfloppity's post come from; they are not at the linked AmRen article.
They sound as if they come from some rather biased leftist source.
As far as I am aware, the sterilizations that were done in the pre-PC era were mainly of what were then called 'the feeble-minded', people too severely impaired to be parents. Remember, this was in the pre-pill days. There were no wholesale forced sterilizations done on a racial basis, despite the leftist urban legends that get repeated.
Also as far as I am aware, Grant generally wrote about 'the Anglo-Saxon stock', more than the loaded term 'Nordic' which, like the term 'aryan' is now forever associated with Hitler et al.
As for Ashkenazi IQs, maybe somebody here can clarify that but the supposed 117 IQ is not universally accepted. That whole notion is overused, along with the idea that East Asians have much higher IQs than Whites. In any case, IQ is not the be-all and the end-all.
Grant's views were very much mainstream and the fact that they are now considered fringe, 'extreme' views is just proof of the thorough job done by Boas et al at undermining the existing order and establishing the myth of egalitarianism. And it was done not by force of superior intellect but by manipulation and several generations of propaganda aimed at the young.
Flip,
Clearly it served your ethnic interests (Irish/Italian)to aid organised Jewry in undermining America's Nordic/WASP founding people. It's the race-replacement that shall not be named.
Happy now?
"But how could a group of jewish academics undermine and eventually dethrone . . ."
If you bothered to read the articles, you'd see it was pretty straightforward: they took over journals and churned out enough PhDs to fill every anthropology department in the country with their own. They targeted the public and scientists in other disciplines with books based on shoddy and/or fraudulent research.
"My point is it did happen, one reason being Grant's affiliation/support for antimiscegenation and sterilization legislation."
You clearly have no grasp of American history.
Who in their right mind would ever want to be lorded over by such people?
There's also the small matter of them hating us.
VA - [apologies for laziness]
Original sources are tough to come by:
www.solargeneral.com/library/PassingOfGreatRace.pdf
I am going to stick my neck out and trust this is a copy of the original publication, but these days ya never know. You will get a "feel" for Grant's direction shortly into the skull discussions and it follows throughout. Its tough not to skim and cherry pick.
[Aside for Tan: "The cross between a white man and an Indian is an Indian; the cross between a
white man and a negro is a negro; the cross between a white man and a Hindu is a Hindu; and
the cross between any of the three European races and a Jew is a Jew." Dennis Hopper?]
Also, no guarrantee on these sources:
http://www.amphilsoc.org/library/exhibits/treasures/aes.htm
http://www.amphilsoc.org/library/mole/a/aes.htm#boxfolder2
[Some of the photos are interesting]
"the sterilizations that were done in the pre-PC era were mainly of what were then called 'the feeble-minded'"
You will see the eugenists were calling for other inheritable traits like criminality, alchoholism, "and many others" to be breeded out. Many others.... hmmmm.
Obviously adverse reaction to their cause from a white-dominated society regardless of the influence of academia played a part.
I grossly oversimplified [and probably misinterpreted] Boas et al as well, but it doesnt offer any value to the discussion. The IQ issue also adds little value [just a vented comment].
n/a - Are you suggesting Academics cherry pick data to drive their point home. That's outrageous! Certainly, the Grant's of history would never do that. Gimme a break - Boas certainly had his faults (there is enough papers available pointing them out) but he promoted change in anthropology bringing it in line with the hard sciences. Breaking the good ole boy network in Academics is a major problem regardless of who (and where/when) the entrenched boys are.
Anon - I have no ethnic interests. Im American.
Tan - "honest nordicism". Define "honest".
Weston - Hear.Hear. They are goddam racists and should be called out as such.
Just declare everyone an "American". Problem solved.
Pure genius.
Tan - "honest nordicism". Define "honest".
You already linked Grant illustrating it in The Passing of the Great Race.
Anon - there is a big difference between declaring "everyone" American and someone declaring himself American and shedding ethnic ties. I have no need, trust or desire for Reagan and/or (soon-to-be) Obama Amnesty programs.
Tan - Im still trying to decipher if Grant's Passing level of honesty is closer to:
1)I did not have sex with that woman Monica Lewinsky
2) The British Government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa
3) Typical academia - here is my theory, here is my data, how can I mine my data to fix my theory; who should I pick to "peer" review; how do I explain all this anomalous scatter - oh yeah, draw a straight line.
Who knows, it may be none of the above and be revisited as real science.
error opening your link
Please. It's not about cherry-picking or mining the data, or peer review or anomalous scatter, it's about full fledged fabrication. Phenotypical plasticity is a straight up fraud, on the level of Bernie Madoff.
"In 1912, Boas published what became a classic study that claimed to show that the skull shapes ("cranial forms") of the descendants of European immigrants to the United States altered from those of the original immigrants. Boas offered no explanation for why the changes took place, but if they were real, his finding pretty much wiped out the idea that different racial and ethnic types differ in fixed physical characteristics.
Boas's study, write Abram Kardiner and Edward Preble in their popular history of anthropology, They Studied Man, [pay archive]
"did much to establish the notion in human genetics that what are transmitted in the germ plasm are not fixed characters but potentialities ... dependent upon the environment for the particular form they will assume. The 'nature-nurture' controversy was largely obviated by this alternative."
In political terms, if human beings have few or no "fixed characters" and are shaped by the social environment, then what we know as modern liberalism is in business. So is communism, which also assumes that human beings can be transformed by manipulating the social environment.
It's no accident that Boas was a lifelong sympathizer of Marxism.
Unfortunately, for the social and human engineers, the study has now been shown to be invalid. Last week in the New York Times Science section, science reporter Nicholas Wade reported on an article in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences by anthropologists Corey Sparks and Richard L. Jantz that took another look at Boas's study and methods. The effects of the new environment on the skulls of the immigrants' descendants, they found, are "insignificant," and the difference between the European and American born children were "negligible in comparison to the differentiation between ethnic groups." [“A New Look at Old Data May Discredit a Theory on Race” By Nicholas Wade, NYT.Oct 8, 2002]
Moreover, as Dr. Jantz told the Times, Boas
"was intent on showing that the scientific racism of the day had no basis, but he did have to shade his data some to make it come out that way."In other words, Boas decided what his conclusions would be before he finished the research and then "shaded"—i.e., cheated on—the data to make them support the conclusion he wanted.
This is not science; it's fraud -- and modern [neo]liberalism is founded on it."
Today, the feeble minded don't even see the light of day. 95% of Down Syndrome foetuses are aborted. So much easier than sterilization. No fuss no muss. Just chop'em up and suck'em out.
Why sterilize criminals when today you can simply abort them?Lots of sweet abortion photos if you wish to see them.
How 'bout dem Syrian Jews and their anti-mis code?“Never accept a convert or a child born of a convert,” Kassin told me by phone, summarizing the message. “Push them away with strong hands from our community. Why? Because we don’t want gentile characteristics.” ...
Anon-
Primary source:
http://www.pnas.org/content/99/23/14636.full
After suggesting Boas may have had "motives" Sparks and Jantz state:
"We make no claim that Boas made deceptive or ill-contrived conclusions. In Fig. 1 it is evident that there are differences between American- and European-born samples. What we do claim is that when his data are subjected to a modern analysis, they do not support his statements about environmental influence on cranial form."
Welcome to Academia.
There is no doubt that Academia is chock full of charlatans over the ages (some Clinton some Bush). I can only criticize their works on the basis of no data (grant) and crappy data collection (boas) giving little weight to either paper in determining hereditary vs. environment.
Im no expert but I would guess neither genetics nor the environment exclusively determines what a person will be.
No data, that's funny. Now you suggest the work of Weismann and Mendel was without merit? It wasn't crappy data collection. It was a straight up misrepresentation of the data collected.
Ya gotta love Grant's admonition of Chapman and Harvard for admitting Jews; "resorting to Kykological Tests to save herself from being swamped".
In 1934, Grant proclaimed that the US had become a "dumping ground for Italians and others we will not mention..." (shhh...don't mention the JQ)
In the end it's all about ethnic interest and money. And that's why flip's so ardently despises Grant. It's clear that the 1924 restriction was an attempt to save the founding American ethny, a Nordic and more particularly WASP people who were being race-replaced by successive waves of Catholics and Jews. The belief that there was a founding American people, indigenous to America, undermines flip's notion of "American".
I believe the admittance of Jews to elite universities and such during the time which Grant wails about had to do with them (Jews) being able to out test the upper crust WASPs of the time on university admission testing. Steve Farron, in The Affirmative Action Hoax attributes this point in time as the start of non-academic admission criteria into universities. Criteria such as character, leadership, and public spirit.
Bottom line is that Jews, like the Borg, are relentless in their pursuit of dominance. They beat the WASPs at their own game thanks to many things, including but not solely to dishonesty and conniving. They should have never been let into the Western lands, though who knows what other problems would have been created then.
flip:
"Boas [. . .] promoted change in anthropology bringing it in line with the hard sciences."
Wow.
Anon, not Desmond Jones:
Elite universities were not selective in those days. Since entrance exams simply assessed competency in required subjects, the large Jewish enrollments were not a result of Jews out-testing WASPs. They were simply a reflection of Jewish ambition/chutzpah.
"They should have never been let into the Western lands"
True.
n/a - clarification. Boas changed anthropolgy from:
Come up and publish theory and then collect data to substantiate the theory.
to:
Come up with a theory, collect data and interpretations to substantiate your theory, then publish your theory.
More in line with the hard sciences that was developing at that time.
Anon -
1) No data referred to Grant's Passage - he references Mendel once. He does not provide his own independent data something Weismann criticized Darwin's reliance on Lamark for and subsequently spurred his research. How am I suddenly being characterized as an opponent of genetics and hereditary traits?
2)"It was a straight up misrepresentation of the data collected." Do you state the same for ANY scientist that has his data and/or theory debunked?
3) "The belief that there was a founding American people, indigenous to America, undermines flip's notion of "American"." Does this mean you support repatriation of the Spanish to the southwest and Gulf Coast because they were "founders" and "indigenous" - (which of course is laughable - who's "indigenous"?).
4) I "despise" Grant? I criticized his work. I also criticize boas' work based upon questions in his data collection as presented by some of the critiques cited in the Jantz paper. But, as can be expected in Academia - there is criticism of Jantz:
www.gravlee.org/files/pdfs/gravlee03b.pdf
Data collection bias has plagued ALL scientific research and continues even today. For n/a - this is the "wow" Im referring too - anthropologists have recognized Boas as a researcher who was concerned with the quality of primary data [and additionally i will point out that he received a significant amount of fame for criticism others work].
Interesting reference material provided.
If you don't despise Grant, then why the whole shtick about sterilizations? Amniocentesis is a far greater "monster" than Grantian eugenics by any measure.
Those Americans who fought to close the doors, maintain their nation and its values are still demonized.
Notre Dame Vs. the Klan: How the Fighting Irish Defeated the Ku Klux Klan 84 years later, [Catholic] town's stand against KKK recalledDespite the violent opposition of Jews, blacks and Catholic whites, these brave Americans, against all odds, beat back the treachery of their own government to close the doors to mass immigration. And now these same white ethnic groups bitch and complain about a modern day ethnic aggression that is not in their interests as well as celebrating the "defeat" of the same people that fought to end mass immigration.
It's really hard to resist a little schadenfreude especially since the tirade against founding WASP Americans by white Catholics and the RCC has not let up over the last 84 years.
Sounds more like masochism than schadenfreude.
In Klansmen, Irishmen, and Nativists: The Origins of Racial Nationalism in America | The Occidental Quarterly Irishman Michael O'Meara writes:
Standing together against the first Chinese arrivals—and to the swarming millions threatening to follow in their wake—native Americans and Irish Catholics discovered their common racial identity.
Almost from the start, they recognized the joint stake they had in opposing a people which worked at half the white man’s wage, retained their alien clothes, customs, and language, practiced a “heathen” religion, and created distinct, over-crowded, dirty, and often self-contained communities associated with vice and disease.
Comprising more than a fifth of the California labor force in the 1870s, these Chinese newcomers, with their low living standards and servile conditions, were seen as threatening not just the racial definition of the nation, but the American way of life—the prevailing standard for what it meant to be a free white man—and, ultimately, white civilization.
In such a situation, white solidarity was paramount—which meant that, in face of the Yellow Hordes, religious differences dividing Protestant natives and Catholic immigrants in the antebellum period had to be superseded.
Accused of cheapening labor and introducing foreign elements in the East, the Irish were now welcomed into California nativist ranks—as whites facing a common threat—and, accordingly, they came to play a leading role—perhaps the leading role—in spearheading the trade-union, political, and communal opposition to the Chinese.
The extent of white solidarity in the popular classes was such that it spurred numerous official and unofficial measures to restrict Chinese participation in the economy and in other realms of American life.
As early as the 1850s, local and state laws were passed to limit the type of jobs the Chinese could work, the land they could own, and the schools their children could attend, while white, especially Irish, workingmen not infrequently resorted to violence to drive them from certain trades and neighborhoods. In mining, logging, and construction, the Chinese were forced out entirely and in numerous small towns throughout California and the Northwest, Chinese communities were abandoned in face of angry white mobs.
Then, in the late 1870s, in a period of economic crisis, a Workingmen’s Party, led by an Irish demagogue, Denis Kearney, was formed in San Francisco.
Its principal slogan was “The Chinese must go.”
Supported by a mass network of “anti-coolie clubs” and trade unions, the party became the chief vehicle for the cause of Chinese exclusion.
There's no limit to what Whites can accomplish when we set aside our petty ethnic and schismatic bickering.
flippityfloppity said: "[Boas] promoted change in anthropology bringing it in line with the hard sciences...."
Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha!!!! ROFL
(You're kidding, right?)
Re. Ashkenazi IQ:
Average Ashkenazi IQ does seem to be higher than the average, European IQ -- probably even higher than the average northern European IQ. (What the actual number is is debatable.)
But, keep in mind that Ashkenazi IQ is heavily weighted (or whatever the correct term is) on the *linguistic* side -- their scores are higher on the language-related areas of IQ tests than on the visio-spatial (or what I believe to be indicative of logical thinking). If I remember correctly, their visio-spatial scores are even below average.
Thus, the Ashkenazi gift for eloquence and persuasiveness, but not logical thought.
You've gotta admit that a lot of Ashkenazi Jews write very well -- it's a pleasure to read something they've written, as long as you can gloss over all the logical fallacies. (Reading Tanstaafl is MUCH more pleasurable, however, to my mind, because of his clarity of thought!)
The crucial difference in where the strength of Ashkenazi IQs vs. northern European (and Asian for that matter) IQs lies is frequently glossed over by psychometricians. I dunno why...?
[Boas] promoted change in anthropology bringing it in line with the hard sciences-Flippityflopitty
That's an inversion of the truth.
Boas and his followers have consistently bent the facts to fit their ideology. For example, they did their best to pervert craniometrics (which clearly demonstrate racial difference) - people like Gould slandered craniometry as an inherently racist practice and put it off limits because it would smash their weak assertions. Genetic studies are similarly ignored or explained away by the Boasians. IQ tests too, &c.
Boasian anthropology is not consonant with the hard sciences in any fashion. It's approach is not scientific and never was. There is no topic they wouldn't put off limits in order to impose their pseudo-scientific Marxist bilge upon a once-promising field.
When you think about it, it's just another great example of how the utterly alien and totalitarian jewish psyche manifests.
Sorry for the poor formatting just above, my mistake.
Jun & Shal-
Im no anthropology expert but Ive read a number of papers (regretfully now because it was a time sink) that criticized Boas as not applying science and others lauded him for applying scientific parameters to data collection (of which included social science data). With every paper that discredits there's a letter or paper that clarifies or credits.
Most of the papers I read do not discount genetics but establish that they play a role.
Where were the fighting Irish Catholics, the new found American brother by another mother; the harbinger of white "American" solidarity, in the 1920s?
Oh...right, they were out beating up the Klan. Ethnic interests prevail. When it serves our interest to beat on the Chinese, we will. When it serves our interest to beat on the Klan, we'll do that too.
It's always the same with WNs. Any concern shown for the displacement of the founding WASP Americans is petty. It's the race replacement that cannot be named.
The "schtick" referred to "affiliation/support for antimiscegenation and sterilization legislation" being an "extreme" point of view.
Once the support for it collapsed, the scientific movement (including those that supported it) went down with it. Whether it was scientific, political, bad press (Nazis) or financing (there seems to be noise from each of these) the movement lost favor.
Concluding the new "fraud" science as the cause is not the entire picture.
Im sure the Irish will cover up their crosses when obama comes to visit ala Georgetown.
Anonymous 12:53,
It's always the same with WNs. Any concern shown for the displacement of the founding WASP Americans is petty. It's the race replacement that cannot be named.
Personally, I see the displacement and dispossession of the founding Americans, including WASPs, as a travesty. As a precedent it concerns me greatly, but not as much as the current displacement and dispossession of myself and my broader relations today. Sorry about that, but I think that's unde
rstandable.
I would not presume to inform anyone what their ethnic interests are, but I'm having trouble understanding how even a WASP could in the midst of a flood of utterly alien ethnies see their interests best advanced by shitting on closer relations.
FF,
I understand you consider yourself a literal anti-racist, which I take to be the belief that race-based motives are bad. What doesn't make sense to me is the energy you expend in criticizing Grant while defending Boas.
Today's ruling class is anti-White, and not in the slightest anti-jewish. This is not at all what Grant so openly desired, but it is by stealth and deception what Boas and other jewish anthropologists helped bring about. Grant lost and is today halfway down the memory hole. I would think that from a literal anti-racist point of view the tribe of bogus "anti-racists" who prevailed and are today still busily at work would be more worthy of criticism.
Thanks Jun.
Actually, guys, it is patently unfair to compare Jews, as a group, for IQ purposes, against the broad, amorphous category of "White 'gentiles".
Even more absurd when it is defined further down to only include "Ashkenazi" Jews!
This is also an ongoing problem with comparing Whites as a broadly-defined group to East Asians, which is a sub-group of the 'Yellow' race.
See a pattern developing here?
Aditionally, it is Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, Hong Kong, Singapore and pockets within mainland China and among the overseas Chinese that make for the 105 average, rather than among Asians or 'East' Asians as a whole.
Where as the Whites are broadly grouped together, as with Hicks and Helsinki natives -- but 'yellows' (Asians) are carefully distiguished into sub-groups; and their highest scoring group(s) is compared to the broad overall White average.
Some articles of interest:
*
Germans are brainiest (but at least we're smarter than the French)
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article697134.ece
IQ of mongolians
http://cat.inist.fr/?aModele=afficheN&cpsidt=18770425
Can Asians Think? (*Author means creatively* -- I think)
http://www.epjournal.net/filestore/ep04120128.pdf
*
Savitri Devi cites the German way of dealing with similar matters and goes beyond the arguments (which often seem more designed to impress others with our own intelligence and cause us to provide, at best, equality to those with arguments in opposition) about IQ. It is not the IQ which qualifies people as American or which places them in positions of leadership and power. The article from which the below excerpt appears is, "National Socialism and Cultural Renewal".
---
http://library.flawlesslogic.com/gold_03.htm
---
"There were only two ways of dealing with the plague: either eliminate the press altogether, or else, use the incurable propensity of the newspaper readers to believe all that is printed for the triumph of the National Socialist Idea, by allowing the papers to print nothing but what was conducive to the strengthening of the new spirit, or at least, what was in no manner opposed to it. Of the two courses, the second was undoubtedly the easiest at the same time as the most profitable. One cannot teach people to think for themselves in a day. But if, while they are learning to do so, they must have something to believe, let that be the truth rather than lies. So the second course was taken. The press was not eliminated, but controlled, as foreseen by Point Twenty-Three of the Party Programme demanding, "legal warfare against conscious political lying and its dissemination in the press." All editors of newspapers in German and their assistants had to be "members of the nation," i.e., to be of German blood. Papers in other languages, or even foreign papers in German, could be published with the permission of the Government. But no non-German was allowed to influence the German press, either financially or otherwise, the penalty being (if any such transaction was found out) "the suppression of the newspaper and the immediate deportation of the non-German concerned with it."
---
It is easy to criticise such a policy, advocating the "right of the individual to express himself freely," and what not. But one should first realise that, had a similar national press policy been applied in England (from the English point of view, that goes without saying) England never would have declared war on Germany in 1939; there would have been no bombardments, no ruins, no millions of dead -- nothing of that immense misery that everyone deplores -- but a happy Europe in which the two great Aryan nations, Germany and England, would have collaborated in a friendly spirit for the welfare of both of them and of the whole Aryan world. Such a result -- at least I believe -- would have been well worth obtaining at the cost of a little less liberty to lie. And then, also, I cannot help knowing that those Democrats who blame us for not having allowed the German papers to publish propaganda against our views, when we had power, are the self-same people who have been persecuting us for the last four years, on the sole ground that our outlook on life is diametrically opposed to theirs; the self-same people who sentenced me to three years' imprisonment for writing and spreading "Nazi propaganda." Their "liberty of conscience" and their "right of the individual to express himself" are the most ludicrous humbug -- so coarse and clumsy that anyone gifted with a shadow of common sense can see through it. The least said about those lies the better."
-----
You're doing great, Tan. I hope to be back in contact soon.
Flanders
--
IQ - thats the problem with "average" IQs across a group. You can probably data mine higher averages if you are selective enough.
Tan - I think you would agree, Grant et al and the Eugenics movement of the period is clearly based in racism. I made two (2) minor points - 1) Grant et al dug their own grave. - by standing firm on the idea that hereditarianism is the basis for the creation of superior persons and societies, the Nordics have exhibited the greatest success historically and are therefore the superior model and non-Nordics being inferior should be avoided at all costs by all means and furthered this belief by supporting antimiscegenation and sterilization legislation [which I can add included legislation regarding the "one drop rule"]. and 2)How could the superior Nordics society fall prey to mere cultural corruption - which was sarcasm I happily retract.
What I have read from the contributors and their resources is Boas conducted shoddy or fraudulent research to directly oppose Grant et al's work, and conducted this for their own Jewish-racist intents.
So the attacks on grant's critics are to provide either 1) credit to Grant and the eugenics movement and/or 2) show that jewish-racist researchers infiltrated academia and COLLECTIVELY CONSPIRED to turn Grant's nordic world upside down.
So one of the big egos in the room took racism personally. What a surprise it wasnt the white guy.
Boas' work has been critiqued and criticized - but, does it change the consensus on Grant's Passing or eliminate the value in cultural anthropology? Is it a corruption of the previous work we see today (ie, the multicult movement), or was it corrupt work that created what we see today?
My "defense" of Boas was not because I support his position, but because the comments exagerate or cherry pick comments from the sources referenced. Cranial plasticity - in one generation? That's gotta be hooey without even reading it.
Which leads me to the comment on "extremism" ala Mangan/Sailer. Your original post does not attack Boas but the movement caused by the Boasians - to which I agree. But the commentary treating this as an "aha" moment can and will be discredited and undermine the redeeming value along with it.
Kronprinz - That Telegraph article about the 30 year drop in IQ. I presume at least one factor is the changing demographics of British school children. The article, of course, makes no mention of this and I dont know how to see the report itself.
The article, and Steve Sailer oddly enough, both attribute the decline to watching TV, computer games, texting. A veritable shopping list of folk devils in other words.
But no mention of one thing that has definitely changed in 30 years.
Im not not denying said influences may be partly to blame but I'd bet money on there being a racial angle too. Strange that the survey didnt try and control for this, I wonder why?
Its at least possible that, had they controlled for race, they would have found that white children's IQ hadnt changed at all in 30 years.
Greetings Flanders! Please post a new email address. You're old one isn't working and neither is mine.
"Im not not denying said influences may be partly to blame but I'd bet money on there being a racial angle too. Strange that the survey didnt try and control for this, I wonder why?
"Its at least possible that, had they controlled for race, they would have found that white children's IQ hadnt changed at all in 30 years."
--
Hi Anon,
My broader point is that the 100 IQ number for Whites bandied around
is perhaps the number for British and American Whites, rather than for other north and western Europeans, which range up to 108.
I also think this may be due to dysgenic trends in the US and the UK for a 'reversal' of the Flynn effect to happen relatively quickly.
In other words, bad breeding --
thanks in large measure to the countries of the Anglosphere being extremely globalist and internationalist --
...and giving and transfering away the fruits of their intelligence, productivity and labour!!!
Tan, 83036. My site seems to have been hushed through no effort of my own. I'll contact you ASAP though there may be some delay due to my present circumstances.
Flanders
Tanstaalf,
Why do you not invite Wintermute home, to blog with you? It is meet. It is my understanding that he would like that very much. He is a hero of mine whose eloquence in defense of his people is only surpassed by his love for them. Why not make it happen?
cant figure out where int eh spectrum this blog lies Neil http://angloceltic.com
Post a Comment
<< Home