Thursday, February 25, 2010
Wednesday, February 24, 2010
The Most Dangerous Animal....
"We used to wonder where war lived, what it was that made it so vile. And now we realize that we know where it lives, that it is inside ourselves"
-Albert Camus, Notebooks, VOL. 3, Entry For September 7, 1939
I have become fascinated by war and the ability that we have as a species to firmly occupy opposing psychological states - at the same time! Humanity is capable of seemingly limitless compassion, but also absolute, devastating violence. It was armed with this curiosity that I began to study war more intently - the blood and guts, twitching bodies, screaming terror and reeking stench of it--not the clean, sterile, whitewashed version of it so popularly portrayed in Hollywood blockbusters - and that self-education continues in earnest with the following book recommendation.
In The Most Dangerous Animal: Human Nature and the Origins of War, David Livingstone Smith sets out to connect the strings of history, to the mountains of biological evidence in support of the idea that "war is nature", and attempts to illustrate just how it is that war is not separate from, but rather an integral part of our evolutionary development. The language is clear, the evidence is presented professionally and the tone is matter-of-fact - this is a book for the casual laymen interested in understanding the evolution of war and how it relates to the development of the human animal. But it is also a book for the academic elite who may be looking for a fresh and truly fantastic organization of known field work, as well as some intriguing theoretical ideas about the subject of war by Mr. Smith himself.
At the very least, what Mr. Smith has offered is a robust explanatory theory of the undoubtedly human penchant for bloodshed and our paradoxical aversion to it. Throughout the book, Mr. Smith gives very detailed accounts of the savagery and brutality that humans have inflicted upon one another throughout our bellicose existence. It is fascinating, and at times heart-wrenching, to read about these events "straight from the horses mouth".
Also of note, is the VERY extensive and VERY excellent bibliography. The bibliography alone is worth the purchase in my opinion.
A couple of reviews for Mr. Smith's book, one of which comes from a man that many of you will probably be intimately familiar with:
"This is the most important post-9/11 analysis of war and it comes none too soon, as hundreds are daily dying and commentators continue to ask why. David Livingstone Smith has provided a cogent answer to the deeper why question of war; not why Iraq? or why Afghanistan? or why Darfur?, but why war at all? Smith's answer - that war is buried deep in our evolutionary past - will be controversial, but his case is irrefutable. We have seen the enemy in the mirror, and until we gather the courage to accept our true nature, men will fight and people will die. Every politician should read this book before deciding on war."
- Michael Shermer
"Here is the unvarnished tale of human gangs, driven by built-in survival mechanisms and an uncanny ability for self-deception, romping through history--raiding, pillaging, terrorizing, waging wars, and committing large-scale atrocities in the name of abstract gods, holy lands, master races, and political systems. David Smith’s rapid-fire account of our uniquely lethal nature makes a mockery of our dreams for peace. We could always try, though, but seeing ourselves as we truly are is a necessary first step. This book shows us how."
- Anouar Majid, author of FREEDOM AND ORTHODOXY: Postcolonial Islam in a Polycentric World
"Deftly combining concepts and analytical skills from traditional philosophy with an impressive grasp of contemporary science in several disciplines, Smith has produced a unique work that is at once chilling, invigorating, enlightening, and ultimately hopeful. Believing that truth is the best medicine, I recommend for every thinking person a full dose of this fiercely argued and deeply insightful book."
- Dale Peterson, author of Jane Goodall, The Deluge and the Ark, and co-author of Demonic Males
In closing, I am by no means a master-reviewer, but I cannot recommend this book enough.
Sunday, February 21, 2010
I Love New York
I've been on a writing craze of late, in preparation for a new project and here's my latest output.
You can find this poem and a larger selection of my work over at my other blog which is dedicated solely to poetry; http://wwwtheveil.blogspot.com/
GWC
empty beer cans rattle-
dreams get wasted-
torn Levi's like street couture-
shoes rebel against feet; shuffle
amongst the shit-
old bones piled in piss-
eyes distant, bulging and hollow; bloody
gum grin like those cats at Loews-
smiling at the bottom of a bottle-
illuminated by barrel light;
personification-
New York at night
© GWC 2010
You can find this poem and a larger selection of my work over at my other blog which is dedicated solely to poetry; http://wwwtheveil.blogspot.com/
GWC
empty beer cans rattle-
dreams get wasted-
torn Levi's like street couture-
shoes rebel against feet; shuffle
amongst the shit-
old bones piled in piss-
eyes distant, bulging and hollow; bloody
gum grin like those cats at Loews-
smiling at the bottom of a bottle-
illuminated by barrel light;
personification-
New York at night
© GWC 2010
Monday, February 15, 2010
Rosedale
I originally wrote this poem back in mid-2009, but recently changed it quite a bit with the intent to distribute to various resources for possible publication. I'm pleased with how it turned out.
GWC
there was a time
when my fingers
caressed
her blushing face-
she is a memory
out of phase
no longer visited
on the street
corners crept back in-
now she walks
another beat,
but they don't share
Rosedale moments-
those dirty hippie sheets,
or the wrinkled dollar bills laughing
from the corner table;
cheap perfume
mixing with motel-sweat-
we were just two beaten souls
searching for a diamond
gaze,
and behind those nicotine curtains
we found our place
© GWC 2010
GWC
there was a time
when my fingers
caressed
her blushing face-
she is a memory
out of phase
no longer visited
on the street
corners crept back in-
now she walks
another beat,
but they don't share
Rosedale moments-
those dirty hippie sheets,
or the wrinkled dollar bills laughing
from the corner table;
cheap perfume
mixing with motel-sweat-
we were just two beaten souls
searching for a diamond
gaze,
and behind those nicotine curtains
we found our place
© GWC 2010
Thursday, February 11, 2010
Wednesday, February 10, 2010
Geert Wilder's Trial Opener
This is what it's all about folks:
And this is why he's on trial; FITNA:
In short, let it be said here and now that freedom of speech CANNOT and MUST not be silenced. May the fire of courage forever warm your heart, to stand firm in the face of tyrants and murderous savages who wish to end your right to freedom!
And this is why he's on trial; FITNA:
In short, let it be said here and now that freedom of speech CANNOT and MUST not be silenced. May the fire of courage forever warm your heart, to stand firm in the face of tyrants and murderous savages who wish to end your right to freedom!
Tuesday, February 9, 2010
Race Realism
This is an older article but relevant to what I wish to cover in this blog.
By Ian Jobling • 12/26/06
The culture of the age that we live in is founded on a lie: racial egalitarianism. It is an article of faith among the elites that govern the West that the races are the same in abilities and temperament, and that it is only racial bias in the present or in the past that prevents all races from performing at the same level.
This dogma has been conventional wisdom among the Western elites since 1950, when the United Nations published its “Statement on Race,” which declared: “[T]here is no proof that the groups of mankind differ in their intelligence or temperament. The scientific evidence indicates that the range of mental capacities in all ethnic groups is the same…. [G]enetic differences are not of importance in determining the social and cultural differences between different groups of Homo sapiens.” Link, p. 102.
In the succeeding years, this dogma has filtered downwards from the elites and entrenched itself to such an extent that it is dangerous for any Westerner to contradict it.
The heart of race realism is recognizing this lie for what it is. Both the findings of the best scholars and simple common sense force us to recognize that the races are inherently different. But holding onto the truth is a hard duty, as it means refusing the dominant ideology of our culture, which constantly tries to persuade us that racial equality would be achieved if only people, and especially whites, were less racist.
The idea that the races are innately different flies in the face of the conventional wisdom that is promulgated by the mass media and many experts. It may seem odd that I am trying to persuade people to renounce the conventional wisdom. Last week, in criticizing the conspiracy theories of David Duke, I argued that conventional wisdom ought to be trusted in almost all cases. The reasonable person should reject it, I said, only where the evidence against it was overwhelming. Any challenge to conventional wisdom had to meet three stringent criteria:
1)There must a respected school in the relevant community of experts that thinks the conventional wisdom is wrong.
2)The community of experts and other shapers of opinion must have a powerful motive for not recognizing the truth.
3)Facts of which we can be absolutely certain contradict the conventional wisdom.
Very few challenges to conventional wisdom meet these criteria, but the challenge of race realism to racial egalitarianism does. Studies of the black-white gap in intelligence prove beyond any doubt that the race realist perspective is correct.
The school of researchers that argues for the biological basis of racial intelligence differences, among whom are psychologists Arthur Jensen, J. P. Rushton, and Richard Lynn, have solid academic credentials and publish in peer-reviewed psychological journals, and their work is respected even by those who disagree with them. Furthermore, in 1988, a survey of experts in intelligence and its measurement found that a full 53 percent believed that the black-white difference in IQ was partially genetic in origin. The same study found the news media consistently overestimated the percentage of IQ experts holding egalitarian views. There can be little doubt there still exists today at least a significant school of experts that hold race realist views.
The reason why this school exists is simply that the evidence for race realism is so powerful. Hundreds of studies have been conducted on black-white differences in IQ, and wherever blacks are in the world, they score substantially below the white mean of 100 on IQ tests. In reviewing the literature on black intelligence in Race Differences in Intelligence, Richard Lynn found that 57 studies of the IQ of blacks in Africa conducted between 1955 and 1994 consistently showed that they had a mean IQ of around 671. Fourteen studies between 1986 and 2002 of blacks in the Caribbean and Latin America found a mean IQ of 712. Thirty-one studies of American blacks between 1918 and 1998 found a mean IQ of 853. Twenty-nine studies conducted in Britain and the Netherlands between 1966 and 2002 found a mean black IQ of 85 there as well4. In Israel, two studies of Ethiopian immigrants who are Jewish by religion but racially black showed they had a mean IQ of 655.
Second, despite all the efforts made in the US to achieve parity among the races, the IQ gap has not gone away. Indeed, it has remained approximately the same for nearly a century. In 1917, the first large scale IQ tests in America found about a 17-point difference between the scores of the races; the most recent studies show the difference is about the same6. The equalization of spending on black and white education, government educational programs for the poor, diversity training, and all the rest of it simply has had no discernible effect on the racial IQ gap.
This in itself is powerful evidence that the black-white IQ difference is rooted in biology. However, there is much more evidence of this. First, psychologists know intelligence is a highly heritable (i.e., genetically determined) trait. The heritability of IQ is as great as 80 percent, meaning it is primarily determined by genetic background7. The more related people are, the greater the similarity in IQ scores. The IQ’s of identical twins have a correlation of 0.86, whereas those of fraternal twins have a much weaker correlation of 0.6. However, after they have grown to be adults, there is no correlation whatsoever between the IQ’s of unrelated children who are reared in the same household8. Given the strong heritability of IQ, it is exceptionally unlikely that such a large difference as that between mean black and white IQ has no genetic component.
Some of the most powerful evidence of the biological origin of racial differences in intelligence comes from trans-racial adoption studies. For example, a 1992 study examining the IQ’s of adopted white and black 17-year-olds raised in upper-middle-class white families found that despite their similar environment, the adopted children with two biological white parents had a mean IQ of 106, whereas the adoptees with two black biological parents had a mean IQ of 899.
There is no doubt that IQ tests do measure intelligence. In fact, a person’s IQ is the strongest predictor of how well he will perform in school and whether he will get a well-paying, high-status job10.
In light of evidence like this, none of the cultural explanations of racial differences in intelligence and educational achievement are even remotely plausible. Some object that IQ tests are not a good measure of intelligence because they are culturally biased. But the racial IQ difference appears even on reaction-time IQ tests, in which subjects must respond as quickly as possible to a simple visual stimulus, such as a flashing light or a change in color in a dot on a screen11. It is difficult to see how such tests could be culturally biased.
Nor do arguments that blacks score lower on tests because of socio-economic deficits hold water. If class background explains differences in IQ scores, why do blacks raised in upper-middle-class white families score so much lower on IQ tests than whites from the same background? Moreover, black high-schoolers from affluent backgrounds regularly score lower than whites from poor households on SAT tests, which are a good measure of intelligence12.
Do the shapers of public opinion have a motive to deny racial differences in intelligence? Very much so. In fact, they have several different reasons for denying racial difference, which will be the subject of future writings on this website. As one example, Western elites hold racist doctrines responsible for the rise of Nazism and the genocide it brought about. The elites think the key to preventing such atrocities in the future is to discredit the idea of racial differences. The Nazi genocide was very much on the minds of the writers of the UNESCO statement on race quoted earlier, which contains this passage:
The myth “race” has created an enormous amount of human and social damage. In recent years it has taken a heavy toll in human lives and caused untold suffering. It still prevents the normal development of millions of human beings and deprives civilization of the effective co-operation of productive minds. Link, p. 101.
There was thus a clear ethical and political agenda behind the UNESCO statement that gave its framers and subsequent generations of Western elites the motive to portray the evidence in a biased manner.
The work of race realist scholars proves that our culture ignores not only innate intelligence differences, but a principle of the utmost importance in explaining human behavior. If the popular media sweep such well-documented findings under the carpet, who knows what else they have swept there too? Once one has realized that innate racial differences exist, one begins to suspect a whole hidden reality beneath the surface of things that explains phenomena that are so mysterious to the talking heads on the news programs. To be a race realist is to constantly sense this monster in the depths.
http://whiteamerica.us/index.php/Articles/Articles/what_is_race_realism/
By Ian Jobling • 12/26/06
The culture of the age that we live in is founded on a lie: racial egalitarianism. It is an article of faith among the elites that govern the West that the races are the same in abilities and temperament, and that it is only racial bias in the present or in the past that prevents all races from performing at the same level.
This dogma has been conventional wisdom among the Western elites since 1950, when the United Nations published its “Statement on Race,” which declared: “[T]here is no proof that the groups of mankind differ in their intelligence or temperament. The scientific evidence indicates that the range of mental capacities in all ethnic groups is the same…. [G]enetic differences are not of importance in determining the social and cultural differences between different groups of Homo sapiens.” Link, p. 102.
In the succeeding years, this dogma has filtered downwards from the elites and entrenched itself to such an extent that it is dangerous for any Westerner to contradict it.
The heart of race realism is recognizing this lie for what it is. Both the findings of the best scholars and simple common sense force us to recognize that the races are inherently different. But holding onto the truth is a hard duty, as it means refusing the dominant ideology of our culture, which constantly tries to persuade us that racial equality would be achieved if only people, and especially whites, were less racist.
The idea that the races are innately different flies in the face of the conventional wisdom that is promulgated by the mass media and many experts. It may seem odd that I am trying to persuade people to renounce the conventional wisdom. Last week, in criticizing the conspiracy theories of David Duke, I argued that conventional wisdom ought to be trusted in almost all cases. The reasonable person should reject it, I said, only where the evidence against it was overwhelming. Any challenge to conventional wisdom had to meet three stringent criteria:
1)There must a respected school in the relevant community of experts that thinks the conventional wisdom is wrong.
2)The community of experts and other shapers of opinion must have a powerful motive for not recognizing the truth.
3)Facts of which we can be absolutely certain contradict the conventional wisdom.
Very few challenges to conventional wisdom meet these criteria, but the challenge of race realism to racial egalitarianism does. Studies of the black-white gap in intelligence prove beyond any doubt that the race realist perspective is correct.
The school of researchers that argues for the biological basis of racial intelligence differences, among whom are psychologists Arthur Jensen, J. P. Rushton, and Richard Lynn, have solid academic credentials and publish in peer-reviewed psychological journals, and their work is respected even by those who disagree with them. Furthermore, in 1988, a survey of experts in intelligence and its measurement found that a full 53 percent believed that the black-white difference in IQ was partially genetic in origin. The same study found the news media consistently overestimated the percentage of IQ experts holding egalitarian views. There can be little doubt there still exists today at least a significant school of experts that hold race realist views.
The reason why this school exists is simply that the evidence for race realism is so powerful. Hundreds of studies have been conducted on black-white differences in IQ, and wherever blacks are in the world, they score substantially below the white mean of 100 on IQ tests. In reviewing the literature on black intelligence in Race Differences in Intelligence, Richard Lynn found that 57 studies of the IQ of blacks in Africa conducted between 1955 and 1994 consistently showed that they had a mean IQ of around 671. Fourteen studies between 1986 and 2002 of blacks in the Caribbean and Latin America found a mean IQ of 712. Thirty-one studies of American blacks between 1918 and 1998 found a mean IQ of 853. Twenty-nine studies conducted in Britain and the Netherlands between 1966 and 2002 found a mean black IQ of 85 there as well4. In Israel, two studies of Ethiopian immigrants who are Jewish by religion but racially black showed they had a mean IQ of 655.
Second, despite all the efforts made in the US to achieve parity among the races, the IQ gap has not gone away. Indeed, it has remained approximately the same for nearly a century. In 1917, the first large scale IQ tests in America found about a 17-point difference between the scores of the races; the most recent studies show the difference is about the same6. The equalization of spending on black and white education, government educational programs for the poor, diversity training, and all the rest of it simply has had no discernible effect on the racial IQ gap.
This in itself is powerful evidence that the black-white IQ difference is rooted in biology. However, there is much more evidence of this. First, psychologists know intelligence is a highly heritable (i.e., genetically determined) trait. The heritability of IQ is as great as 80 percent, meaning it is primarily determined by genetic background7. The more related people are, the greater the similarity in IQ scores. The IQ’s of identical twins have a correlation of 0.86, whereas those of fraternal twins have a much weaker correlation of 0.6. However, after they have grown to be adults, there is no correlation whatsoever between the IQ’s of unrelated children who are reared in the same household8. Given the strong heritability of IQ, it is exceptionally unlikely that such a large difference as that between mean black and white IQ has no genetic component.
Some of the most powerful evidence of the biological origin of racial differences in intelligence comes from trans-racial adoption studies. For example, a 1992 study examining the IQ’s of adopted white and black 17-year-olds raised in upper-middle-class white families found that despite their similar environment, the adopted children with two biological white parents had a mean IQ of 106, whereas the adoptees with two black biological parents had a mean IQ of 899.
There is no doubt that IQ tests do measure intelligence. In fact, a person’s IQ is the strongest predictor of how well he will perform in school and whether he will get a well-paying, high-status job10.
In light of evidence like this, none of the cultural explanations of racial differences in intelligence and educational achievement are even remotely plausible. Some object that IQ tests are not a good measure of intelligence because they are culturally biased. But the racial IQ difference appears even on reaction-time IQ tests, in which subjects must respond as quickly as possible to a simple visual stimulus, such as a flashing light or a change in color in a dot on a screen11. It is difficult to see how such tests could be culturally biased.
Nor do arguments that blacks score lower on tests because of socio-economic deficits hold water. If class background explains differences in IQ scores, why do blacks raised in upper-middle-class white families score so much lower on IQ tests than whites from the same background? Moreover, black high-schoolers from affluent backgrounds regularly score lower than whites from poor households on SAT tests, which are a good measure of intelligence12.
Do the shapers of public opinion have a motive to deny racial differences in intelligence? Very much so. In fact, they have several different reasons for denying racial difference, which will be the subject of future writings on this website. As one example, Western elites hold racist doctrines responsible for the rise of Nazism and the genocide it brought about. The elites think the key to preventing such atrocities in the future is to discredit the idea of racial differences. The Nazi genocide was very much on the minds of the writers of the UNESCO statement on race quoted earlier, which contains this passage:
The myth “race” has created an enormous amount of human and social damage. In recent years it has taken a heavy toll in human lives and caused untold suffering. It still prevents the normal development of millions of human beings and deprives civilization of the effective co-operation of productive minds. Link, p. 101.
There was thus a clear ethical and political agenda behind the UNESCO statement that gave its framers and subsequent generations of Western elites the motive to portray the evidence in a biased manner.
The work of race realist scholars proves that our culture ignores not only innate intelligence differences, but a principle of the utmost importance in explaining human behavior. If the popular media sweep such well-documented findings under the carpet, who knows what else they have swept there too? Once one has realized that innate racial differences exist, one begins to suspect a whole hidden reality beneath the surface of things that explains phenomena that are so mysterious to the talking heads on the news programs. To be a race realist is to constantly sense this monster in the depths.
http://whiteamerica.us/index.php/Articles/Articles/what_is_race_realism/
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)