Peterson's 12 Rules For Life, have you heard of this?

[The Grand Nudger]

Imagine that, you were going to continue bitching and moaning.

Too bad you got preempted there, huh?

Or maybe we could discuss why it might be, pursuant to all of those links above..that the disparity (and correlations) between income, race ( a sociological construct, not a genetic one), SES, and IQ might be more pronounced in the US than other parts of the world? Why, in short, relative poverty and intelligence by specific metrics seems to be more heritable in the united states in context of minority populations and even more specifically in light of the reality of continued de facto segregation?

Would you like to work that one out for yourself..or would you like to throw another fit for a few pages before I link dump you for the third time?

Or maybe you'd like to bitch and moan for sources on income/iq studies that control for the effects mentioned and known from all of those other studies...for a few pages, to get link dumped a fourth time?

Or maybe you'd like to wager more money you don't intend to part with?

Or maybe you, as a person deeply invested in fantasies of white victimization and crypotmarxist dystopias..will never be satisfied with any amount of links....even if you only needed one to convince you of the accuracy of scientific racism?

[The Grand Nudger]

Since I'm still up and probably won't have time tomorrow:

I understand the dilemma you find yourself in.  In your opposition to whatever it is you think sj or pc issues are, that end to which you levy the complaints referenced above, you feel that the contents of scientific racism are shouted down for purely social reasons.  That this is another example of some assault on truth, as you've previously put it.  If that were the case, then perhaps you could also convince yourself that the other contentions you've made are well informed but similarly shouted down.

This, however, is not the case.  The reason that scientific racism was abandoned, was because it was wrong.  It was unscientific.  We once used race as a crude heuristic, but we've since learned that genetic variation is not fixed along racial lines.  That genes move within and between populations, not within or between races.  That it is a social, not biological, construct.  That two white people can have less in common, genetically, than they both do with a third person who is black.

These contentions are not shouted down because of their ideological inconvenience any more than adding transgender people to a civil rights code is an assault on free speech, or any more than equality is the real racism, or a murderous doctrine. This, Benny, is the rhetoric of resentment and division. The identity politics you loathe but misattribute to those who oppose them. It is, cheifly, wrong..but just as importantly it is damaging in a real and palpable way. This, is why people shout that shit down..because it's been debunked, and continues to exist solely as a lever in politics and excuse for apathetic institutional policy.

[bennyboy]

Imagine that, you were going to continue bitching and moaning.

Too bad you got preempted there, huh?

Or maybe we could discuss why it might be, pursuant to all of those links above..that the disparity (and correlations) between income, race ( a sociological construct, not a genetic one), SES, and IQ might be more pronounced in the US than other parts of the world? Why, in short, relative poverty and intelligence by specific metrics seems to be more heritable in the united states in context of minority populations and even more specifically in light of the reality of continued de facto segregation?

Would you like to work that one out for yourself..or would you like to throw another fit for a few pages before I link dump you for the third time?

Or maybe you'd like to bitch and moan for sources on income/iq studies that control for the effects mentioned and known from all of those other studies...for a few pages, to get link dumped a fourth time?

Or maybe you'd like to wager more money you don't intend to part with?

Or maybe you, as a person deeply invested in fantasies of white victimization and crypotmarxist dystopias..will never be satisfied with any amount of links....even if you only needed one to convince you of the accuracy of scientific racism?

That's a lot of narrative for a guy who give sources that disagree with him, and is too proud to cite even one little number-- 10%-- to get $150 worth of help to some black kids in need.

It's almost like. . . it's almost like the PC Left are just narrative-spinning, meme-spouting assholes, and care neither for facts, nor for actually helping anyone.  Farts smelling good today, bro?

---

This, however, is not the case.  The reason that scientific racism was abandoned, was because it was wrong.  It was unscientific.  We once used race as a crude heuristic, but we've since learned that genetic variation is not fixed along racial lines.  That genes move within and between populations, not within or between races.  That it is a social, not biological, construct.  That two white people can have less in common, genetically, than they both do with a third person who is black.

This is you:

1)  All these stats, facts, and papers are just you trying to dig up scientific racism.
2)  Scientific racism is wronnnnnng.

No, asshole.  Using science as a pretext for alienating or abusing others is wrong.  Using it to actually understand the issues that real people face, and make sure that efforts to correct the situation are in the right direction, is just common sense. The former is racist in the sense that it intends to JUSTIFY maltreatment. The latter is racist only in the sense that it recognizes racial differences in the US, but it attempts to generate solutions that might actual MINIMIZE maltreatment-- as opposed to just meme-spouting bullshit, which is your solution.

Learn the difference.

[The Grand Nudger]

Speaking of learning, you might want to take the time to seriously consider which side of that divide you're on.  What actual science tells us, rather than what scientific racism contends..is that the "differences between the races" are socially constructed, not biologically useful categorizations.  This, again, is why studies on income and iq control for those known effects of GxE.  There is no need, on the side of pc or sj (or anyone) to contend that there are no differences between the races..because the fact of that matter is that those differences are utterly superficial, related to the tone of our skin and little else (even that association is shaky as hell, lol). But, ofc, when a person acknowledges the reality of those differences as we can demonstrate them, those who leverage the phrase "difference between the races" have something much more elaborate and unfounded in mind.

There is no other purpose for scientific racism, which is neither scientific nor accurate, than to provide ideological cover for bigotry. None.

There is no purpose, other than to oppose those who oppose that bigotry, for claiming that the contents of scientific racism are shouted down out of ideological inconvenience, none.

I understand that you feel unfairly maligned for repeating the normalizing language of white supremacy...and maybe, all the way over there in korea..you really don't grasp what it is, where it comes from, or the effect that it has - but no one forces you to do this, say this, maintain these things, or die on this hill.  The only person maligning you, or stigmatizing you (there again white victimization rears it's hilarious head)...is you. You've been given reams of information at this point, both about the specific contention you're losing your shit over, and it's intersection with alt right politics, institutional policy, and a resurgent white supremacy. You can dig yourself out of this hole. Or, at least, I'd like to believe that you can.

Or you can opt to attempt a preservation of pride, to drag out some argument between you and I, to bullshit me and yourself about some dollar bills, about the pc left, and social justice, about guys like peterson, about racism.

It's always been your call.

[bennyboy]

Speaking of learning, you might want to take the time to seriously consider which side of that divide you're on.  What actual science tells us, rather than what scientific racism contends..is that the "differences between the races" are socially constructed, not biologically useful categorizations.  This, again, is why studies on income and iq control for those known effects of GxE.  There is no need, on the side of pc or sj (or anyone) to contend that there are no differences between the races..because the fact of that matter is that those differences are utterly superficial, related to the tone of our skin and little else (even that association is shaky as hell, lol).  But, ofc, when a person acknowledges the reality of those differences as we can demonstrate them, those who leverage the phrase "difference between the races" have something much more elaborate and unfounded in mind.

There is no other purpose for scientific racism, which is neither scientific nor accurate, than to provide ideological cover for bigotry.  None.  

There is no purpose, other than to oppose those who oppose that bigotry, for claiming that the contents of scientific racism are shouted down out of ideological inconvenience, none.

I understand that you feel unfairly maligned for repeating the normalizing language of white supremacy...and maybe, all the way over there in korea..you really don't grasp what it is, where it comes from, or the effect that it has - but no one forces you to do this, say this, maintain these things, or die on this hill.  The only person maligning you, or stigmatizing you (there again white victimization rears it's hilarious head)...is you.  You've been given reams of information at this point, both about the specific contention you're losing your shit over, and it's intersection with alt right politics, institutional policy, and a resurgent white supremacy.  You can dig yourself out of this hole.  Or, at least, I'd like to believe that you can.

Or you can opt to attempt a preservation of pride, to drag out some argument between you and I, to bullshit me and yourself about some dollar bills, about the pc left, and social justice, about guys like peterson, about racism.  

It's always been your call.

All your posts are about this narrative that you're trying to spin.  This is a tactic you use often. . . bullshit for 50 pages, and then claim you've made loads and loads of great points.  

I went back almost 100 posts, and literally typed out what you talked about in every single thread.  Then I started going through your sources, and showed that you not only were your claims wrong, but your sources agreed with me.  Color me pretty unsurprised.

My position is simple.  The steps to effective action are:
1) Decide what values you'd like to see reflected in the world around you.
2)  Find out the facts, in as much detail and with as great accuracy as you can.
3)  Brain storm several solutions, and decide which one seems best.
4)  Do the solution.  Actually do it.

The PC Left steps are:
1)  Decide what should be considered right.
2)  Declare that all facts accord with (1)
3)  When presented with actual facts that are not in accord, blame the person presenting them for being a witch.  If you shout "witchcraft!" often enough, people might not notice that rather than saving anybody, you're just burning truth at the stake of Truth™.
4) Whatever you do, don't actually do anything, or have a point-- because then someone might attack your position, and the fairy tale will immediately dissipate into the ether.

[The Grand Nudger]

Or maybe you're not actually being persecuted for witchcraft, by me or anyone on the pc left?   Un-possible, I know..I know, but it's worth considering.

If you say the things that racists say, you will be "mistaken" for a racist. If you maintain the arguments that racists maintain, you will be "mistaken" for a racist. If you call yourself a racist, you will be "mistaken" for a racist.

None of your exhaustive complaints about the pc left will alter this basic fact of human interaction, lol. I began our conversation assuming that you, like many others, had absorbed normalizing propaganda, despite not actually being a racist. You've told me that I was wrong. You've told me that your life experiences and personal investigations of these matters has lead you here. You've told me that you hold these positions because they are The Truth™.

No one is shouting witchcraft at you, you're putting in the work. If that's not how you want to come across, and it's not who you are...then..perhaps....instead of endlessly bitching about the pc left, or me, as though we were doing something to you...you should do a different kind of work to figure out why you're doing this to yourself? Does that seem reasonable?

[Silver]

I'm confused and too lazy to read back on what's being discussed.

[The Grand Nudger]

-and here's an article from slate, that I think might be immensely helpful to you in this specific context.

I’ve watched this debate for more than a decade. It’s the same wreck, over and over. A person with a taste for puncturing taboos learns about racial gaps in IQ scores and the idea that they might be genetic. He writes or speaks about it, credulously or unreflectively. Every part of his argument is attacked: the validity of IQ, the claim that it’s substantially heritable, and the idea that races can be biologically distinguished. The offender is denounced as racist when he thinks he’s just defending science against political correctness.


I know what it’s like to be this person because, 11 years ago, I was that person. I saw a comment from Nobel laureate James Watson about the black-white IQ gap, read some journal articles about it, and bought in. That was a mistake. Having made that mistake, I’m in no position to throw stones at Sullivan, Harris, or anyone else. But I am in a position to speak to these people as someone who understands where they’re coming from. I believe I can change their thinking, because I’ve changed mine, and I’m here to make that case to them. And I hope those of you who find this whole subject vile will bear with me as I do.

Here’s my advice: You can talk about the genetics of race. You can talk about the genetics of intelligence. But stop implying they’re the same thing. Connecting intelligence to race adds nothing useful. It overextends the science you’re defending, and it engulfs the whole debate in moral flames.

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2018...o-did.html

[bennyboy]

Or maybe you're not actually being persecuted for witchcraft, by me or anyone on the pc left?   Un-possible, I know..I know, but it's worth considering.

Have I claimed to be persecuted by you?

If you say the things that racists say, you will be "mistaken" for a racist.  If you maintain the arguments that racists maintain, you will be "mistaken" for a racist.  If you call yourself a racist, you will be "mistaken" for a racist.

You can air-quote all you want. I don't particularly care if you want to call me a racist or not. If I'm a racist who can use real facts to develop a plan for helping real people, then I'm fine with that. The actual effect of plans and actions is infinitely more important than defending myself from ad hom attacks from morons.

None of your exhaustive complaints about the pc left will alter this basic fact of human interaction, lol.  I began our conversation assuming that you, like many others, had absorbed normalizing propaganda, despite not actually being a racist.  You've told me that I was wrong.  You've told me that your life experiences and personal investigations of these matters has lead you here.  You've told me that you hold these positions because they are The Truth™.  

No, my position is not the expression of any dogma. You can keep The Truth™ to yourself, since apparently you find it sufficient replacement for original thought and actions that matter.

Still waiting for you to cite that 10% figure, but now I'm pretty sure you were lying about it, and will never be able to do such a thing. It's almost like. . . it's almost like that's what the PC Left DOES-- ignore facts, and spin some social narrative about an opponent's personal motivations or character instead.

That, by the way, is why I keep responding even though you still have provided no support for any of your narrative. I'm not going to be bullied by your shit-slinging rhetoric into walking away from this issue, because it is exactly your shitty style of argumentation that is wrong with the PC Left. You will keep spinning your yarns, and I will keep correcting your facts, until the cows come home.

No one is shouting witchcraft at you, you're putting in the work.  If that's not how you want to come across, and it's not who you are...then..perhaps....instead of endlessly bitching about the pc left, or me, as though we were doing something to you...you should do a different kind of work to figure out why you're doing this to yourself?  Does that seem reasonable?

Or. . . have a point and support it, instead of constantly attempting to use epithets to control the narrative? Does that seem reasonable?

Look, you can keep trying to deflect as much as you want. The fact is that I have the facts, I have ideas about how to help people based on those facts, and you have nothing.

You've literally said that your contribution to racism is to engage online with me. Yeah, that will probably give kids more opportunities, or prevent racist employers from discrimination against black applicants. Seems legit.

---

-and here's an article from slate, that I think might be immensely helpful to you in this specific context.

I’ve watched this debate for more than a decade. It’s the same wreck, over and over. A person with a taste for puncturing taboos learns about racial gaps in IQ scores and the idea that they might be genetic. He writes or speaks about it, credulously or unreflectively. Every part of his argument is attacked: the validity of IQ, the claim that it’s substantially heritable, and the idea that races can be biologically distinguished. The offender is denounced as racist when he thinks he’s just defending science against political correctness.


I know what it’s like to be this person because, 11 years ago, I was that person. I saw a comment from Nobel laureate James Watson about the black-white IQ gap, read some journal articles about it, and bought in. That was a mistake. Having made that mistake, I’m in no position to throw stones at Sullivan, Harris, or anyone else. But I am in a position to speak to these people as someone who understands where they’re coming from. I believe I can change their thinking, because I’ve changed mine, and I’m here to make that case to them. And I hope those of you who find this whole subject vile will bear with me as I do.

Here’s my advice: You can talk about the genetics of race. You can talk about the genetics of intelligence. But stop implying they’re the same thing. Connecting intelligence to race adds nothing useful. It overextends the science you’re defending, and it engulfs the whole debate in moral flames.

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2018...o-did.html

Sam Harris, that dirty white supremacist!  What a horrible, horrible racist he is!  I mean. . . have you ever MET a more hateful person than Harris?

[Rev. Rye]

So, are you going to actually read the article and not make ad homs about it mentioning Sam Harris (an intelligent man who goes from making good points to the absolutely asinine on a fucking dime) in the first paragraph?