13 October 2013

Meritocracy and Its Discontents

We've considered the dangers inherent in a multi-ethnic society.  One of them is a policy that deserves special attention, because it (1) is getting ever more popular, (2) can lead to disastrous outcomes, and (3) has actual merit from a race-realist perspective.  That policy is affirmative action.

We've looked before at its history.  Though unpopular amongst conservatives, there are two plausible arguments that could be made in its favor:

I. Natives should restrict foreign immigrant groups' ability to dominate certain institutions.

II. It is a social good to 'insert' members of lower-perfoming groups into roles where they can feel productive.

Our first argument is one for which there is much evidence, both for and against.

I. Countering an alien elite

1) Chinese in Malaysia

Thomas Sowell has written about 'middleman minorities,' which can quickly become 'market-dominant minorities.'   A glaring example is the Chinese, a group which has climbed from coolie to capitalist all over East Asia.  Watching these foreign interlopers take over commerce, industry, and academia has not been pleasant for Vietnamese, Indonesians, Thais, and Malays. From Sowell's Migrations and Cultures:

Malaya was also richly endowed with some of the most extensive deposits of tin ore in the world, as well as rich petroleum deposits and other minerals. The climate and soil were also suitable for growing rubber trees, eventually making Malaya the world's leading producer of rubber. But the development of all these resources was largely the work of foreigners, not Malays. Those Malays with wealth usually did not choose to invest it in such enterprises and, among less affluent Malays, relatively few were willing to work on rubber plantations or in tin mines, when they had the option of a less arduous life on their own land.

... Beginning at the very bottom, in occupations rejected by most Malays, the Chinese rose economically, many using their savings to open tiny businesses, some of which grew into more substantial enterprises. Whereas more than half of all Chinese in Malaya in 1911 were either agricultural laborers or mining laborers, just twenty years later only 11 percent of the Chinese were in these two occupations.

Education statistics from the pre-quota era (excluding Indians):

Employment statistics from several decades into the quota experiment:

It would appear that the quota efforts have indeed borne some fruit.

2) Indians in Uganda

The Indians in Uganda followed a similar pattern.  First imported as coolies by the British the build the Ugandan Railway (as Africans showed little interest), they scrimped and saved and stuck around to make a buck.  Sowell:

Throughout East Africa, the Indian operated on a very small profit margin, lived extremely cheaply, took the risks of selling on credit, and worked long hours in remote places under what would be impossible conditions for Europeans. He was, in short, performing an economic function which no one else was available to perform--a point also noted by various contemporary observers.

The enormous economic role of Indians in transforming the economies of East Africa is all the more remarkable because of their relatively small number in proportion to the total populations of those countries. At the peak of their population size in Uganda [... ] They were just over one percent of the population.

Indians dominated the Ugandan economy during the colonial era:

And well into the era of independence:

Channeling popular anger over this, in 1972 Idi Amin threw this market-dominant minority out on their backsides.  If they left promptly, they were allowed 55£ and the right to not be murdered.

 Protestors burn a two-wheeler owned by a man of Asian origin along the main Kampala-Entebbe road on April 12, 2007. A mob stoned to death an Asian man in Uganda on Thursday and two other people were killed during a protest over a plan to cut down nearly a third of a rainforest reserve to grow sugarcane, police and witnesses said. Troops in several armoured cars were deployed in central Kampala after police fired tear gas and live rounds to stop rioters attacking Asian businesses and a Hindu temple, angered by moves to expand an Indian-owned company
The Uganda African Trade Movement issued a public statement plainly stating that its members "intend to wage an atrocious war everywhere in Uganda on any Asian returnee."

The economic role of the Indians in Uganda can perhaps best be appreciated by considering what happened after they left. The economy collapsed. The Asian shops were often simply turned over to Amin's favorites, who sold everything and then closed them down. The confiscated wealth was not simply redistributed; the total wealth of the country was diminished. In agriculture, the Asians' coffee and tea plantations, which required constant care, were neglected after their departure and became breeding grounds for deadly tsetse flies. 

Uganda eventually asked them to come back, though few have agreed to do so.

3) Jews in Euro lands


In the West, one of the 'market-dominant minorities' par excellence has been the Jews, particularly the Ashkenazim of Central European origin.  In the early 20th century, the height of influence they reached in these regions was breathtaking:




Since WWII, a similar pattern has become evident in the United States:

At various times in all the countries indicated, some have called for 'reining in' these alien elite via quotas.  Is there an argument to be made that this is a productive use of affirmative action?  The debate continues...

II. Buying social peace

Our second argument remains largely hypothetical, as it comes from a race-realist perspective, which is today high heresy.  We present it nonetheless, as sooner or later genetic science will push HBD into the mainstream, and lawmakers will have no choice but to contend with the fact that some groups will simply never perform at the same level as others.  What to do with these people?

1) Precedent: Integrating the mentally handicapped

Such an idea is not without precedent.  Many governments fiscally entice the private sector to hire the handicapped. In the U.S., the carrot is a tax break of up to $2400 per disabled employee. Walgreen's, for one, has taken advantage of this in a big way:

Disabled employees at Walgreen's distribution plant in South Carolina

At first glance, the Walgreens distribution center in Anderson, S.C., seems ordinary enough. But upon closer inspection, it's anything but. More than 40 percent of the 700 workers here are disabled.  Walgreens employee Julia Turner has Down's Syndrome. Derrill Perry, who works right next to her, is mentally retarded. Garrick Tada has autism. Luann Bannister, one of their training supervisors, is in a wheelchair.

And Angela Mackey, who recruited most of them, has cerebral palsy. "I hope that from my work and from this program, I'm showing that disability or not, we all have potential. We all have value," Mackey said.

The French have gone even further, imposing a quota of 6% of disabled employees on any company of twenty people or more.  Those who choose not to fulfill the quota must pay a yearly 'handicap tax' equivalent to 100 hours of minimum wage pay per 'missing' disabled employee.

The parallel may seem unduly harsh.  Can we really compare an entire ethnic group to the mentally handicapped?  La Griffe du Lion:

In 1959, AAMD [American Association on Mental Deficiency] set the IQ threshold for mental retardation at < 85. The civil rights movement of the next decade forced psychologists to rethink this boundary, because half the African American population fell below it. In 1973, responding to this concern, AAMD (by then AAMR) changed the threshold for retardation from IQ < 85 to IQ < 70. The boundary moved south by one standard deviation! The proportion of blacks below the threshold instantly dropped from about 50 percent to 12 percent. Subsequent refinements made it still more difficult to meet the criteria for retardation.

Brutal as this comparison may sound, sometimes looking at the extremes can help us better understand the middle.  Millennia of natural selection have left us with groups widely disparate in cognitive ability.  When this fact (re-)hits the mainstream, policymakers will have to adjust.  What might 'affirmative action' look like in an HBD-aware world?

2) HBD-aware affirmative action: A road already traveled?

Were a space alien to decamp in the modern U.S., he might very well look around and guess the state already recognizes some groups as cognitively less able.  How else to explain the 'running head start' they're given in so many arenas?  Otherwise put, the blueprint for 'HBD-aware quotas' may already be before our very eyes.  Walter Williams:

The U.S. Department of Justice, led by Attorney General Eric Holder, rejected the results of Dayton's [2010] Civil Service examination because not enough blacks passed. The DOJ has ordered the city to lower the passing score. ... The DOJ-approved scoring policy requires potential police officers to earn the equivalent of an "F" on the first part and a "D" on the second.

Our state equality-rain-makers have done the same not only in Dayton, but in (among others) Boston, Chicago, Virginia Beach, New Jersey, and Connecticut.

The glaringly obvious conclusion is not lost on all Afros:

Keith Lander, chairman of the Dayton chapter of the Southern Christian Leadership Conference, and Dayton NAACP president Derrick Foward condemned the DOJ actions. Mr. Lander said, "Lowering the test score is insulting to black people," adding, "The DOJ is creating the perception that black people are dumb by lowering the score."

Mr. Foward agreed ... "If you lower the score for any group of people, you're not getting the best qualified people for the job."

In an HBD-aware quota system, of course, as with handicapped-hiring programs, the above is a feature, not a bug.  The same acknowledgement of lower ability exists in college admissions, as Espenshade and Radford have shown in their landmark study:

It also exists in medical school and law school admissions:

If you're a black or, to a lesser degree, Hispanic applicant, your chances of being admitted to medical school are far greater than whites or Asians with the same college grades and Medical College Admission Test (MCAT) scores.

This sliding scale of standards has even worked its way down to public primary and secondary schools.  After the 'No Child Left Behind' nation-wide cheating debacle, the State of Virginia has thrown up its hands and adjusted its expectations to reality:

Again, indignation follows:

 ...there is no way around the fact that the commonwealth is codifying different expectations for various groups of students. Virginia students of all races and incomes go to school together, but “together and unequal” is the message of the new policy.

In other words, race-realist education policy.  The HBD-aware future is now?

Such submission to brutal reality can also be seen around the world.

Sowell, on India:

Explicitly lower cut-off scores for members of the scheduled casts and tribes have been common among Indian universities and technical institutes.

South Africa:

Medical school admission policies extend from a strict, race-based system in use by the University of Cape Town (UCT) to a “definite effort to accommodate candidates from a disadvantaged academic background” at Free State University.

UCT is clear about its racial selection criteria, by which black students need to obtain 534 out of 900 points, whereas white and Indian candidates have to achieve 700 out of 900 marks to make their “admission probable”.  The university’s website also says that coloured [mixed-race] pupils have to score 578 points and Chinese 660.



The report ... recommends [Scotland] Yard lobby for a law change that would allow “positive discrimination” in [police] recruitment. ... A statistical analysis of past exam results concluded that white candidates were more than twice as likely to pass.  ... Black and Minority Ethnic candidates [were] nearly two times more likely to fail on the basis of Written Communication than white candidates.

If we have implicitly agreed that different groups are differently-abled, what is next?

III. HBD-aware affirmative action: the next step

The day will come, and soon, when we shall be forced to acknowledge race-based differences in ability. Where do we go from there?  Symbolic set-asides?  Or separate institutions? 

1) Symbolic set-asides

If ethnic groups of all ability levels are tossed into the same ring, one will inevitably rise to the top.  A way to counter this is through 'symbolic set-asides.' Though we don't like to admit it, this is the system we have now. Not just in the U.S., but in India, Sri Lanka, Malaysia, South Africa, Brazil, Australia, and many other places, the lower-performing are shoe-horned into positions they could never attain on their own merit.  Is this defensible, from a race-realist perspective?

The Pros:

  • Social peace is bought.

In theory, symbolic set-asides calm the agitation of the less able group.  A sense of group pride is restored when we see people like us in prestigious or powerful posts.  In Andhra Pradesh in India, where the Andhras economically dominate the Telanganans, one of the latter's leaders said,
'Yes it is true that they [the Andhras] are also better qualified for many of the jobs than we are.  Maybe they are better qualified, but why is merit so important?  We can have some inefficiency.  That will be necessary if our people are to get jobs.  Are we not entitled to jobs just because we are not as qualified?'

To the efficiency-obsessed managerialist mind, the question might seem absurd.  But our societies are not assembly lines. They are human patchworks. Centuries-old ethnic patchworks, in the case of India or the U.S.  We must find a formula for le vivre-ensemble that will keep us from tearing each other apart.

The Cons:

But what price social peace via quotas?  Thomas Sowell has put together a long list of nasty side effects in his Affirmative Action Around the World.  Including, but not limited to:

  • It pushes people massively to 're-designate' in order to take advantage of the racial spoils.
Rainbow nation: Cherokee Indian senator Elizabeth Warren, Hispanic DOJ Civil Rights spokeswoman Xochitl Hinojosa, black NAACP president Benjamin Jealous

  • It jumps from original, deserving groups (e.g. descendents of slaves in the U.S.) to ever more unrelated groups (Arab, Indian, Latino immigrants) like a virus.
  • The real beneficiaries are often not the most disadvantaged, but the 'cream' of the less able group who were already doing very well (e.g. wealthy children of the mulatto elite getting college spots over both ghetto Blacks and poor Whites).

  • It creates 'Ali Baba' companies (e.g. a Chinese company obliged to use Malay 'front men' in order to get govt. contracts in Malaysia).
  • It leads to 'education mis-match,' wherein students who would have done fine at mid-level schools end up overwhelmed by (and dropping out of) top-tier schools.
  • It disincentivizes hard work in the less able group (they know jobs, college spots, etc. will be handed to them based on their race).
  • It disincentivizes hard work in the more able group (they know that merit is not rewarded).
  • It pushes the most able to emigrate, creating brain drain and economic slowdown.

2) Separate institutions

If symbolic set-asides are not the answer, another presents itself. Just as women have created a separate space for themselves in pro sports to avoid being consistently out-matched by men, some groups have decided that voluntary separaton has its advantages.

After fighting all the way to the Supreme Court, Afro-Americans are increasingly admitting that segregated schooling could be more solution than problem:

Ernie Chambers, the only African-American in the Nebraska Legislature, was a major force behind a law enacted this week that calls for dividing the Omaha school district into three racially identifiable districts, one largely black, one white and one mostly Hispanic.

The law, which opponents are calling state-sponsored segregation, has thrown Nebraska into an uproar, prompting fierce debate about the value of integration versus what Mr. Chambers calls a desire by blacks to control a school district in which their children are a majority.

While de facto segregation in mostly-white schools is a crime, in mostly-black schools it is more and more seen as a benediction:

They highlight successful charter schools, such as the Knowledge Is Power Program (KIPP) national chain that targets black and Hispanic students. The KIPP charter, which opened last fall in Jacksonville and has 96 percent black enrollment, recently received accolades from Gov. Rick Scott for helping minority students achieve academically. That's justification for grouping students by race or ethnicity in charter schools, supporters say.

"I would not call it segregation," said Patricia Levesque, executive director of former Gov. Jeb Bush's Foundation for Florida's Future, a lobbying group. "Charter schools may target minority communities because they want to provide those students with options."

Those 'options,' it would seem, include a playing field that excludes non-Blacks.

The endless problems faced by Afro boys in public schools has some leaders calling for double segregation--by race and sex:

Curtis Dright III, 5, lines up with the rest of his kindergarten class on the first day of school at The 100 Black Men Community School on Tuesday Sept. 04 2012 in Oakland, Calif. Photo: Mike Kepka, The Chronicle 
But at the 100 Black Men Community School, a new all-male public charter school, educators and organizers say they refuse to accept ... any of the other statistics associated with black boys that include higher dropout rates, lower test scores and disproportionate placement in special education programs.

[...] Terrell Wrice, 11, was happy to be there.  "The school gives us a different feeling - equal in one environment," he said, adding that the only downside was a lack of girls.

This desire for 'a different feeling - equal in one environment' has even extended to the humble spelling bee:

The African-American Spelling Bee Championships are scheduled to take place 9am Saturday morning at [Houston's] Jack Yates Senior High School.

"You're telling these young black children you're not good enough to compete, ... so we'll create something you can win," said [KTRH talk show host Micheal] Berry.  "They have a trophy that's meaningless, there's no honor in that."

[Teacher Jackie] Terrell fired back, saying "There is honor in that, we're creating an opportunity they wouldn't otherwise have."

The subtext is clear: Afros who can see race realism--however blurrily--are beginning to carve out spaces for their own which are safe from competition from the More Able.

*     *     *
Though many have a knee-jerk reaction to affirmative action--'end it now!'--the question is more complex than it may appear.  Does an indigenous people have the right to limit the power of an alien elite, via quotas?  Conversely, from an HBD perspective, does a multi-ethnic society with wide ability gaps between groups owe some 'set-asides' to the less able, in the interest of social harmony?

As genetic science is barreling along at break-neck speed, we suspect that race-realism about cognitive ability will soon (re-)hit the mainstream. When it does, policy-makers in multi-ethnic states will have some very serious questions before them.  The time to think about them is not later, but now.



Anonymous said...

hmmmm so I wonder since the Native American Indians were here first and rounded up and put on reservations ,what do they think...I am sure they are laughing at how we all seem to think revolves around blacks and whites and every other 3rd world people pouring in here pissing all over their country.Hell we did them a favor separating them from our bizzarro society and letting them keep their identity ....which a lot of the anger is about everyones identity,culture,history...the very thing that makes groups feel like one...I ,a white man,am becoming more despondent because my history ethnicity race culture are being erased here in the good ole USA....I wonder how long whitey is going to sit around and be torn apart....I guess like the Indians were but at least they were put on reservations and have still kept their identity alive...which holds them together.

Discard said...

I don't see any reason to accommodate the Non-Whites. Whites have been displaced in the country our ancestors built, and no politician cares at all. No compromise. When the smoke clears, we can rebuild, just like Germany and Japan.

Akkea said...

I was researching race at Ivy League institutions, and based on my calculations, when you differentiate between Jewish whites and gentile whites, whites must have even higher scores than Asians to get into these schools. Jewish students, meanwhile, need lower scores than either Asians or whites despite being brighter than either group. I did base this on measured IQ and not actual recorded SAT scores of the Ivy League students.

Anonymous said...

Whites have been displaced in the country our ancestors built

DISCARD I LIKE that,that is the one thing that really kills me ,all these third world people did not do one thing to build this country but they all want the free ride now that all the work has been done ..and it is hilarious how these people can't fight their own battles in their own countries and fix their own laws but man they all come here and turn my own laws and country against me...whitey sacrificed her white sons and daughters to fight their battles against their despots and shit all over us now....unreal

Californian said...

The inherent dilemma is that multiracial societies must deceive themselves. They have to pretend that race-is-just-a-construct(tm) rather than face up to the reality of racial differences. A system which has to consistently lie to itself is one which is inherently corrupt and will be unable to compete against a power which faces the reality of race. I'm thinking China here, which has been reported to be pursuing a eugenic program, promoting high-IQ children.

Be interesting to see what will happen in a generation or two when China goes up against a self-deceiving Western world.

Medical school admission policies extend from a strict, race-based system in use by the University of Cape Town (UCT) to a “definite effort to accommodate candidates from a disadvantaged academic background” at Free State University.

There are two problems here, one obvious and the other perhaps not so obvious:

1: This means that substandard applicants will be getting into medical school. Which means they are more likely to drop out, which means that many fewer qualified doctors...and in the long run, a less healthy society. Of course, some of these sub-standard students will be allowed to "pass" to maintain the quota but that means unqualified doctors will be out in the real world, again a formula for a less healthy society.

2: The "disadvantaged academic background" business translates into: It's all YT's fault! i.e., were it not for colonialism-apartheid-racism-white-flight, blacks would have gotten an equal education and thus would be maxing out their pre-meds. (We shall ignore here the fact that prior to colonialism, etc., blacks were largely illiterate with no modern medical practices.) The result is that since it's all YT's fault, it will lead to more hostility towards white people, hence more flashmobs, farm-attacks, rioting, drivebys and so forth and so on.

Now, the question is: what does an intelligent society do about all this?

Titus Didius Tacitus said...

You left out the problem of deception. Even though you implicitly admitted it's a problem, as it shows up at least by implication under different headings, you didn't include it as one of your main heading items. You should because it's important.

Everything about "affirmative action" is touched by deception and spin, starting with the label itself. (Which means discrimination by race, mostly, but where that is "good", meaning against whites or at least not beneficial for whites. As opposed to the evil discrimination, which was for whites. Of course antiwhites framed this terminology.)

A less able majority discriminating in its own favor has less ability and need to engage in deception in its "affirmative action" practices. That means there's a better chance that programs will do what they are said to. A simple program, nakedly rationalized by the advantage of a majority, isn't that tricky to oversee. Is it working? If it is, the majority keeps it. If not, the majority is likely to change it till they get the benefit they wanted. The whole of the law does X, and very little of it is about deceiving either the majority, that knows what it wants, or minorities that know very well against whom this is directed. There aren't large parts of the program that are essentially feints designed to make it look as though the real point isn't what it is. Therefore there are no perverse incentives and bad consequences from those nonexistent feints.

Discrimination in favor of more able minorities comes in various flavors and levels of danger. In a relatively harmless scenario, the more able minority focuses on some productive industry like farming or mining, is neither demographically dynamic nor in favor of alterations to the demographic balance of the state, and has few perceived grievances and little out-group hostility toward the majority. A group like that can probably get what it wants with straightforward bribery and not too much deception. So negative externalities will be relatively low, and though "social peace" won't be furthered it shouldn't be harmed much.

In the nightmare scenario, the more able minority stars in rent-seeking and in culture and politics, it is demographically dynamic and also wants to import a lot of other people who will also benefit from the "affirmative action", and it has strong perceived grievances and out-group hostility toward the majority. A minority like that, with an agenda that no sane majority would agree to if given a well-informed free choice, will engage in immense deception to get what it wants, and will see the negative externalities as acceptable or even retributive justice. And it will have the ability to impose that.

Discrimination in favor of a less able minority raises the issue of how this comes about, as the minority can't easily organize to bring this about. The ostensible answer is likely to be: "the idealism of the majority". When there is no more-able minority out to impose its own agenda and looking for "feints" that may even be the case. But where there is a more-able minority in action, programs for the benefit of less-able minorities are likely to wind up as part of their deception strategy. As such, their actual benefits are likely to be less truthfully monitored and there are likely to be negative externalities.

The problem of deception in "affirmative action" is such as to call into doubt the promise of "social peace" as a reward. You might get long-term peace in a low-deception scenario, but in a high-deception "nightmare scenario" long term peace is unlikely.

DavidtheDuke said...

What about a forced meritocracy despite the whinings of the low-scorers, thereby naturally dividing the world by ability, regardless of reace? Would a monarchy be required to keep this in line?

Also, if you're wondering why liberals believe in AA, it's because of racial nepotism. They don't even have to necessarily believe in racial equality of ability, but that blacks etc have unfairly been held down by the haughty whites. Whether this happened in varying degrees I don't think is even important: enforce strict meritocracy no matter what.

Same goes for a minimum income society after large-scale automation, provide a floor of opportunity for all, while restricting child rearing to those that can clearly contribute to the scientific and cultural advancement for all.

The problem remains however doing this can always be misconstrued for "racism!".

M.G. said...


Interesting. Have you posted these results on the internet anywhere? A hundred years back many Ivy League schools put unofficial quotas on Jewish enrollment. The president of Brown University in 1920 put it this way: 'The idea that any shrewd boy can by cramming get by on written examinations and must thereby be admitted to college is anti-American.' Sounds oddly similar to what we hear today about Asians...

M.G. said...


Be interesting to see what will happen in a generation or two when China goes up against a self-deceiving Western world.

I'm fascinated to see what will come of this. They appear to have no taboos whatsoever about genetic science. But when they start fiddling with embryos in the petri dish, will it be just high IQ they select for? That's not the whole story of societal success. The West's famous innovative, 'think-outside-the-box' streak has helped us hugley. Will the Chinese try to select for this type of trait too? If so, watch out.

...unqualified doctors will be out in the real world, again a formula for a less healthy society.

Did you ever hear about what happened to the black medical student in the famous Bakke case, poster child for successful affirmative action? Lost his license in total disgrace. That's too steep a price to pay to make some Afros feel good about themselves.

The "disadvantaged academic background" business translates into: It's all YT's fault!

Yes, until genetic science somehow proves that cognitive ability differs between groups. However, I have a feeling that at that point, progressives will move seamlessly from 'Society has short-changed NAMs, so give them hand-outs' to 'Biology has short-changed NAMs, so give them handouts.' Time will tell.

M.G. said...

Titus Didius Tacitus--

Which means discrimination by race, mostly, but where that is "good",

Yes, here in France they do call it la discrimination positive. Slightly less euphemistic.

...the more able minority stars in rent-seeking and in culture and politics, it is demographically dynamic and also wants to import a lot of other people who will also benefit from the "affirmative action"

Yes, one thing you can say for the Chinese in Southeast Asia is that you don't get the sense they are trying to utterly hijack and change their hosts' cultures.

The ostensible answer is likely to be: "the idealism of the majority".

This really may be all it takes. One very-able minority in the U.S. has certainly helped things along, but I think ethnic NW Euros' pathological out-group altruism could have gotten us to the same place all on its own.

You might get long-term peace in a low-deception scenario, but in a high-deception "nightmare scenario" long term peace is unlikely.

Good points all. I feel the high-deception scenario we're currently living in the U.S. cannot last much longer. Too many holes in the dike, as it were.

M.G. said...


They don't even have to necessarily believe in racial equality of ability, but that blacks etc have unfairly been held down by the haughty whites.

Perhaps, but even if one believes such a thing, logically the whole project should have a shelf life. AA was originally about 'leveling the playing field,' and all early proponents, black and white, thought it would be over and done with in a decade or two. But just like a toll-booth, it gets harder and harder to give up as time goes by...

AmericanGoy said...

Stunning post.

I would like to think that I had some input into its creation with my flippant remark in a previous posting... But then again my ego is already big enough.

I will comment on this once I gather all my thoughts into some sort of a sane pattern.

Again, best blog, and many of the comments are superb too.

AmericanGoy said...

I am also amazed at the Wikipedia article linked as source:


I am amazed that it was not deleted yet!

DavidtheDuke said...


But just like a toll-booth, it gets harder and harder to give up as time goes by...

I was simply providing understanding behind the thought process behind AA, don't agree with it.

It has to end sometime, by disaster or not. I think the bigger question is: can a civilization actually maintain a orderly meritocracy, or do each group inevitably work to undermine it for its own interests? The only way I see that staying that way is with some sort of central, disciplined central power.

'Course, that isn't foolproof either as any human government is capable of corruption. At this point with all the foreseeable possible existential future threats to humanity right now like nuclear weapons, overly successful biological warfare, climate change and ecological disruption, cultural and demographic destabilization, peak oil, and amoral/malicious superhuman intelligence it's hard to see how continued increased human influence can continue without either enhancing human intelligence via eugenics, brain-computer interface, and/or straight up benevolent AI is our only out.

All other human-level civilizations seem eventually susceptible to varying degrees of Idiocracy.

redzengenoist said...

@MG: I fear that you you do your otherwise excellent blog a disservice by analogizing the role of Jews in the West to the role of Indians in Uganda. The countries of NWE with few Jews do not suffer from the retardation suffered by African countries devoid of Indians - those are the countries of NWE with the strongest metrics of per capita accomplishment and development. There is some merit to the analogy, but it must be qualified.

icerink said...

Why not just recruit individuals who can do the job the right way? If a person can come and live a productive life, has a great skill, contribute to society, and be of good use, why should that person's race or ethnicity matter? If said person won't behave or causes trouble, deal with that person accordingly. Simple as that. I'm an individualist, and persons should be dealt with according to what they do as individuals.

M.G. said...


The only way I see that [meritocracy] staying that way is with some sort of central, disciplined central power.

Agreed, but this is also true for affirmative action countries. It has been the secret to Malaysia's relative success. As Sowell said, free speech is so limited there that no Sharpton or Jackson could ever get a megaphone to rile the masses. And of course in the U.S., federal power has been growing steadily as the egalitarian project extends its tentacles.

it's hard to see how continued increased human influence can continue without either enhancing human intelligence via eugenics, brain-computer interface, and/or straight up benevolent AI is our only out.

I think petri-dish-level eugenics is coming sooner rather than later, but it's likely, as Californian said above, that the Chinese will be the pioneers. That said, it's possible for a small, high-functioning overclass to exist quite happily with an enormous low-functioning underclass, as old South Africa showed.

M.G. said...


I agree that there's no comparison to make as far as the host population's competence: 20th-century Euros were some of the highest-functioning groups on the planet, East Africans some of the lowest.

Where I think the comparison has merit is the reaction of the host population. You must admit that in both Uganda and Europe/U.S., responses to over-achieving outsiders were similar. We saw calls for quotas, segregation laws, eventually (in Uganda and Europe) government-sponsored violence and expulsion. That's what I'm focused on in this post--not 'what did the visitors do for the natives?', but 'how have the natives reacted to the visitors?'

DavidtheDuke said...


The Chinese definitely are at the forefront, it isn't really racial what they're doing specifically though, it's more just finding the specific genes for genius. It'll probably be found the markers for it (which are probably very complex, and layered and what-not) are within certain population groups. And in 200 years when we've solved X number of scientific problems, there won't be any liberals who care whether whites were smarter than blacks in general, or probably jealous conspiratorialists angry that Jews really were the top of the 20th century intellectual food chain. We just won't be exactly human (if at all) by then.

redzengenoist said...

@MG: Yes, the reaction of the host population is the key difference.

There are reproductively segregated minorities, and even elites, which do not appear to awaken hostile reactions on the part of the host population.

Parsi in India are much beloved, despite having an overwhelmingly elite and privileged role in India, and appear to have won this elite status precisely by the virtuous, hard-working culture you describe. But they do *not* elicit a hostile reaction, much as many other elite groups (episcopalians, etc) do not. Parsi are almost universally idealised and praised in their host society, which they identify with.

Conversely, Gypsy minorities do elicit a hostile reaction, despite not being "enviable" elites, as do many other ethnic groups which display an anti-social behaviour towards their host populations.

Your post ignores the Gypsyish/clannish aspect, which is the reason almost always given for ethnic resentment of clannish, anti-social minorities, and which the minorities themselves always explain away as irrational prejudice, envy, and so on. I suggest this article on the subject:


anyname said...


Very interesting and very probably true imo.

Denise said...

I have replied to this post here:

"A General, Cursory Response to an HBD post"


anonymous said...