Sunday, March 28, 2010

Wear the sentry's uniform, and...

In a post where he attempts to rally the troops, OneSTDV highlights cynicism on the part of some of the Steveosphere's best. HBD social reformer need not necessarily be an oxymoron, but there are inherently opposing forces operating. In OneSTDV's words:

[HBDers] consider themselves the ultimate skeptics, willing to discard the noble lies of race and gender.
We strive to see things as they are, and realize our ability to affect meaningful change by proposition is extremely limited. Demographics are destiny, but despite doing what we are able to do on that front, each day we cede a little more ground.

From my vantage point, the best thing for the West is for guys like me to snag the right woman and let the procreation commence. But the solipsist in me scoffs at the idea of shackling myself to all the accompanying responsibilities. Arguments that I'd be happier and more satisfied in so doing are unconvincing--I'm exceedingly pleased with all aspects of my life and the way I currently go about living it. Other than somehow finding a way to cram a few extra hours into each day, there's nothing I'd like to change. It is only out of a feeling of duty, perpetually threatened by a creeping sense that it has no foundation in concerns over my subjective well being, that I hold out plans of getting to "work" sometime in the vague future. These two aspects of my existence present quite the contrasting dichotomy, but I suspect my sentiments are not unique among readers.

There are the little things, though. One tactic I've found to be efficacious in spreading the HBDer worldview is to initially tie everything to Darwin. This observation could easily be made into a Christian Lander post about how to talk about evolutionary psychology with white people. There is scarcely a scientific figure SWPLs claim more intellectual affiliation with than The Beagle traveller. The comparison with Christians vis-a-vis Jesus is not unwarranted. An atheist who knows what books the synoptic gospels refer to, is able to name ten Old Testament prophets, and can drop lines verbatim from the Beatitudes--all with genial, if only putative, sincerity--is a long way toward planting seeds of doubt in the mind of a true but ignorant believer. In contrast, if the atheist takes the aggressive, condescending tact of a Richard Dawkins, he's probably only going to intensify the believer's faith.

Anyhow, for SWPLs, Darwinian credentials preclude one from being identified as a creationist of the 'religious right', with all the accompanying social positions that insinuates, and they won't want to be called out on what they don't know. Don't say outright that human populations are different (that's racist!); start by talking about how a hobby horse of yours is appreciating biodiversity, and how On the Origin of Species: By Means of Natural Selection or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life and Descent of Man (no need to commit the full title to memory, since most people are not even aware of Darwin's latter work) are among your favorite books. Remark how the increasing emphasis Darwin put on sexual selection as he got older really fascinates you. Parenthetically, DavidB's posts at GNXP are great refreshers if it's been awhile.

You've now hopelessly outgunned the middling SWPL, who will be apprehensive about challenging your motivations going forward out of fear of being exposed as much less familiar with Darwin's actual work than you are. Since HBD observations generally agree with personal experience, the SWPL isn't going to be fighting much cognitive dissonance, either. With Darwin providing cover, you are free to converse (relatively) honestly.

15 comments:

Anonymous said...

What, you mean you haven't yet done any breeding, ya hypocritical bastard? ;)

Me, I married the smartest girl I knew and had four smart kids. I'm teaching my kids to do the same. This is a battle that will last for generations...

KM

pzed said...

grats to anyone smart who wants to field a baseball team. as for myself, i'd be content to have one or none. kids cost you money, time and happiness. the demographic battle is for people that actually think the state of the world is important outside of their own lifetime.

that idea borders on religion. if you're dead, what does it matter if the world goes to pot? or if your wildest dreams come true where everyone on earth starts believing in hbd and procreate only on that basis, so what? whatever the outcome, you won't be there to lament or admire it.

the only way the demographic problem matters is if your own life can be extended indefinitely. since that is unlikely to occur, kurzweil excepting, there is no reason to care about the welfare of a future that you don't occupy. that is, unless you consider the sum of your existence to be the bit of code in your genes. if that is how you view yourself, well... good for you i suppose.

Jokah Macpherson said...

"These two aspects of my existence present quite the contrasting dichotomy, but I suspect my sentiments are not unique among readers."

They're not. I certainly don't feel anywhere near ready to take on the responsibilities of parenthood but who's to say I won't be a totally different person in a decade or so. There's a streak of psychological neoteny in my family - none of my direct patriarchal line ancestors dating back to the 1600's reproduced before age 30 (and most were well past that).

I agree that talking about HBD stuff freely is the best best but I don't know about using Charles Darwin as a segue. My experience is that SWPL's aren't really interested in the sciency aspects of evolution and only use it as a bludgeon against the wrong kind of white people, so you may end up boring them.

As a side note, I self-tested on your Bible quiz and got perfect scores. Also, the solipsist in me is skeptical that the solipsist in you even exists.

Anonymous said...

To me, a man with many children projects power. A childless man seems weak, like something is wrong with him. Kind of like childless unmarried women with cats. Maybe it is just a psychological alpha/beta perception thing where the alphas are breeders and betas aren't.

As for Darwin and evolution, painfully few understand it at all. That is the only way an obviously absurd notion like race being a social construct could even be posited, let alone accepted.

Anonymous said...

See the book by HBD'er Cornelius Troost titled "Apes and Angels". He takes exactly the approach you describe - attaching HBD to Darwin.

OneSTDV said...

Thanks for the belated link. [I'm always humored by how you quote such old posts.]

But for me personally, I have trouble arguing offline. I like to ponder my answers and of course, it's just very important to cite pertinent material. When I discuss something offline, it always ends up, "Yea well there's this study that says..." or "What about this cultural phenomenon...".

But it's very non-concrete. The argument is much more potent when it's written clearly and the actual evidence can be reviewed.

As for procreating: there's always sperm donation. You get to spread your genes without any of the responsibility. Isn't there a Genius Sperm Bank?

Audacious Epigone said...

KM,

Thanks for picking up my slack.

Pzed,

And then there was the devil on my shoulder...

Jokah,

Now in my mid-twenties, I'm skeptical that it is possible for me to be a totally different person in a decade, but I'm stuck at the crossroads, so it wouldn't take a volte face.

Re: solispsism, there are those moments when I'm blown away by the thought that I might be utterly, entirely alone.

Anon,

It is well-established that women find taken men more attractive than they do single men. I wonder, too, if men who have children are similarly perceived as more attractive than those who do not.

Anon2,

I meant to read that but never got around to do it. I just ordered it on Amazon.

OneSTDV,

You start something, put it aside in the draft stage, and...

Your problem isn't unique, and the range of subjects it applies to is a lot broader than just HBD. Analogies are good (ie, race is to humans as breed is to dogs). Articulating an idea face-to-face is a different challenge than polishing it online.

Re: sperm banks, I tried once, but there was no question about income or intelligence, only educational attainment. Since I only have a BA, it's not happening.

Audacious Epigone said...

OneSTDV,

Hah, when it comes to geniuses, I'm down here looking up.

Steve Setzer said...

AE,

I know several intelligent, very pretty, well-educated women in their 20s who would probably fit most of your bill, and who I know are looking for a sharp guy who wants to be (a) a husband and (b) a dad. They also generally want to be stay-at-home mothers of three or more. Unfortunately for you, most (not all) of them are LDS and looking for the same. (More guys than girls drop out of the Mormon Church in their teen years.)

Should I send the missionaries to your house? :-)

OneSTDV said...

@ Setzer:

I'll take em.

Audacious Epigone said...

Steve,

Regarding Mormons, the more I hear, the more I like. My Lutheranism is really only nominal, so if it is for the good of Western Civilization, I think I'd be open to it...

Steve Setzer said...

@AE, OneSTDV

:-)

Just call me the un-Roissy...I recommend marriage highly!

If you ever do visit Salt Lake or Provo, look me up.

Anonymous said...

"From my vantage point, the best thing for the West ..." Do HBDers as such really have much in common? Apart from affirming that scientific statistics show significant differences in various bio-groups, what makes HBDers allies? The "West" of Ayn Rand, Charles Lindbergh, Albert Einstein, and Patrick Buchanan shows a subjective variance. Why is "HBD" any different? Is the basis of White Nationalism the observation that most Whites seem to be the victims rather than the beneficiaries of non-white immigration, mandated racial equality, and so-called multiculturalism?

Audacious Epigone said...

Anon,

Broadly, yes, in that nature matters, human populations are different, and those differences determine in large part what society looks like and what mores and customs it internalizes. Bring more Mexicans into the US, and the US is going to increasingly resemble Mexico, as opposed to the presumption that Mexicans coming into the US will increasingly resemble their native northern neighbors.

Anonymous said...

I got married and had children, mainly out of a sense of duty to my parents and to my ethnic group (I'm Jewish). I've had 2 children and I would like to have 4 more.

Still, the orthodox and ultra-orthodox Jews are probably reproducing my genes far better than I could ever hope to myself.

The fact is that the rules of the game have changed, courtesy of Fritz Haber and Carl Djerassi.