1. Produces idiosynchratic differences that are a result of chance
2. Amplifies genetic differences. For example, behavior differences between Celtic peoples and Anglos.
@tabularasathe Well, as much as "chance" is really even a thing. But I assume you get my meaning.
But no, I don't think all intra-European differences in behavior (which are overstated) are down to circumstance. But my focus is more on IQ, which is a more heavily studied and heritable thing...
@tabularasathe ... than most studied psychological traits. And, practically speaking, also less malleable because heritability kinda means immutability in practice. It tells us to what extent it has been "mallea'd" thus far.
@tabularasathe Now, to the extent blacks in the US are "culturally separated" from whites, that'll amplify genetic differences. Like how Japanese in Brazil behave vs. Japanese in Japan.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
I had an epiphany that needs to be better generally known.
It started with a few "strange facts", and there are two sides to it.
The first is that blacks were taller than free whites during slavery. This is important. Very important, as it's a reflection of nutrition, which...
... in pre-industrial times is used as an indicator of general wealth before modern or modern-ish econometrics existed.
And black life expectancy relative to whites after age 8 was better than it is today. That's complicated because it's lower if you count years before age 8.
Blacks have a higher infant mortality rate than whites TODAY, but, that doesn't impact life expectancy as it used to. The literacy of blacks in the US was around 20% by emancipation, vs. ~40% for southern whites.
So weird to think about what blank-slatists think about black people. Like, they're aware of how differently they behave - how they move, talk, etc.
If you don't think that's down to genetics - damn you must have really radical ideas about environmental malleability.
Like, a guy who drives around in a blinged-out car playing rap music. If you think none of that's genetic, then it must be his "upbringing". Okay, well then why are black people's "upbringings" so different? Bam - back to the slavery-segregation story arc.
It's really trippy to think about. What a magical world. And it makes these nostrums about the endless possibilities from "education" more plausible. They must be endlessly frustrated and confused, since they're always failing to "fix" black people.
Something smelled rotten about this Covi-19 thing all this time. There was a segment of the population that throught, or pre-thought, "I don't know what it is, but something's rotten about this".
And the Wuhan-Faucci lab connection appears to have been it.
I think the restrictions went overboard, but there's people who had a vague, instinctive reaction that something was fishy about the whole thing. Maybe, at one point, they undershot the necessary precautions and were anti-mask too early. Literally, MAYBE.
But now that it's kinda out of the bag now, well, it seems we know what was fishy. We found the stinky thing, and the conspiracy that ended up being real, which wasn't the most terrifying among the possibilities, is now known. Also, institutional media "lied" in the sense that
@Dickson53131575@Max7758469453 There are universal "defaults" and there is "causiness". The universal defaults are general and mostly universal. Causes are specific and particular. The most powerful thing, if it can be done, is to make the default and the cause one and the same.
@Dickson53131575@Max7758469453 Now if a culty person is ginned up on something unnatural, like some red communism anarchism of "wokeism" or whatever, there's a certain awareness, even among them, that they're hopped up on something unnatural, or at least a new way of thinking, with all the dangers that has.
@Dickson53131575@Max7758469453 But what if a culty person's cause is "to uphold the default and oppose causes" - well, then their "cause", if they're white, will effectively be WN and opposition to anything that challenges the default. I'm assuming, practically speaking, causey people will always be causey.
@Max7758469453 Well Islam is in heavy decline, and with Christianity we see a deprecated cult. And yes, deprecated cults tend to be filled with more "conservative" types who are more "moderate" in their behavior. The same thing occurred in the USSR, and is occurring in China.
@Max7758469453 I don't know what causes the flare-ups of this cultic energy, but you see more culty types at the point of revolution, then once they win out, more "conservative" types take over, and eventually the cultic beliefs stop being enforced.
@Max7758469453 But with something like Islam, there's a problem in that a lot of the religious beliefs align with the default. For example, hating Jews and, by extension, the west. Well, those groups are foreigners - no cult required to get people to hate foreigners. That's default.
@Max7758469453 "I think the more orderly conservative types were part of the religious vanguard back then."
That's very silly. I mean there's no way to prove it, but Jesus' retinue and the early Christians in the Roman Empire were obviously shitlib-types.
@Max7758469453 Monastic orders seem a lot like communes to me. Weird dress and haircuts, obsession with morality and the constant neurotic battle against "sin", weird dietary beliefs. I mean, the parallels to battling against "the racism within" are palpable.
@Max7758469453 The mistake I think most people make is operating at the level of ideological content. Based on that, well - yeah, every previous big-cult is going to be "to the right" of the current cult. But that's practically a tautology, because the new cult was set up that way.