Saturday, November 14, 2015

More on Murray

Read the title, don't say it, because he emphatically is not. He is one of the intellectual titans of the HBD movement. But his apparent visceral disdain for Trump renders him unable to maintain his composure when the subject in question is perceived to be anywhere near the GOP front runner's orbit. Murray earlier today (issue here):


Fully fleshing out someone's position when it is presented in fewer than 140 characters is rarely a sure thing, but I read this as insinuating that Trump supporters posture about human migration and that amnesty supporters (of which Murray self-describes himself as) need to make sure they are thinking about and analyzing it to counter that posturing.

It's unclear that Murray is even aware that John Derbyshire is an unapologetic Trump supporter. By linking to his article in this context, Murray is obviously admitting that Derb is among those who are "thinking, analyzing, not posturing". Oops.

Trump supporters are the only ones who have been doing that. Serious thinking about the National Question has been and continues to be done by people who tend to view the Trump phenomenon is a positive rather than a negative development (to put it mildly).

On the other hand, maybe I'm misreading what is intended by Murray to be humble admonishment of those of a like mind, as in "Trump sucks but he and his supporters are substantively dealing with this while we're ignoring it or serving up embarrassing boilerplate about it in the WSJ and NYT".

10 comments:

Anonymous said...

What is this guy's deal? If its about personality and "tone" then sorry, he's just a goddamn sensitive pussy.

If he's on the take for AEI shekels, okay thats at least understandable, if still contemptible. If its just "signalling", less understandable, more contemptible.

I can't really see any other explanations. He can't honestly disagree with the Trumpian National Question given his life's work.

chris said...

Between 15-64 years 27 000 000 Germans are male.

We can assume that for 15-32 the numbers would be 13.5 million.

If Germany adds 1 million 90% male migrants that is 10% of this groups demographic and if they had 10 million by 2020 that's over half.

This would change the sex ratio for this demographic from 1.04 to 1.11 and 1.71 respectively for this age group.

1.11 is almost the same as China's and India's and 1.71 is worse than China's and India's sex ratios.

1.71 means there will be almost 2 men for every one women in this age group, and that is supposed to be fine?!?!

The media goes into consternations and theorising over how China's sex ratios and India's sex ratios cause unrest in their populations and they don't even make a peep about this?!?!
That just goes to show the media's cards. Nothing they say is true.

Redpill people about this sex ratio and the scientific studies surrounding it.

Maybe start a hashtag abou the #Barebranches theory of gender ratios.

https://mitpress.mit.edu/books/bare-branches

"What happens to a society that has too many men? In this provocative book, Valerie Hudson and Andrea den Boer argue that, historically, high male-to-female ratios often trigger domestic and international violence. "

http://www.amazon.com/Bare-Branches-Implications-Population-International/dp/0262582643

http://www.jstor.org/stable/3792447?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents

http://www.economist.com/news/asia/21648715-distorted-sex-ratios-birth-generation-ago-are-changing-marriage-and-damaging-societies-asias

Audacious Epigone said...

Even if he does disagree on libertarian non-aggression grounds, that alone can't justify this level of vitriol. It's bizarre.

Anonymous said...

@chris

What nobody (but me has asked) is "what race are the men in question?"

I don't think that an excess of men in China (or hypothetically, Japan/South Korea/Singapore/Taiwan/Vietnam) will cause mayhem because we're talking about CHINESE men. Before abortion was legalized in China, my understanding is that about 15% of girls would be killed. Abortion has simply replaced infanticide. If sperm sorting were cheap, it would replace abortion. China has had more men than women for many years, and their civilization hasn't collapsed; in fact it has survived longer than many other cultures.

When there are an excess of East Asian men, they will fill up their time with lawful activities: reading manga, playing video games.

When there are an excess of White men, the vast majority (over 99%) will be peaceful and fill up their time with the same lawful activities. If you don't believe me go to your nearest local gaming or comic book store. There will be few lunatics out there who will cause mayhem and destruction but society will still survive.

When there are an excess of Black or Middle Eastern men, many will cause mayhem or destruction. I don't want to come up with an exact percentage, but it will be enough to bring their societies down. Even in the best of times, when there is no war, famine, epidemics, etc, Black societies and Middle Eastern societies are hanging by a thread of sanity, so when there are imbalances all hell breaks loose.

Anonymous said...

What do you make of this:

https://twitter.com/charlesmurray/status/666089033345441792

I'm not buying it. It seems likely he is backing down after being skewered. Trolling isn't his style, and trolling his own supporters about a passionate topic is just downright senseless.

Anonymous said...

Murray has been demonized and "hurt" by the tunnel-visioned academics in the universities and is afraid to say/think anything that may bring down their ire ... again.

He's been cowed. Frightened. Silenced.

He knows what immigration does to a community. He's written about heterogeneity and the impact of too-much-difference on social trust. He knows, though he's afraid to say, that Trump is right.

Can you imagine what would happen to him in the gulag of academe if he openly supported Trump? He can. He knows.

Audacious Epigone said...

Anon,

Baffling, thanks. I'd guess the same as you do. It would be exceedingly atypical of him, he's been doing it for an extended period of time, and he's been incorporating other topics that can easily stand alone into his attacks on Trump. That doesn't seem to add up.

Anon2,

That he isn't even cautiously supporting Trump doesn't surprise me, but he could easily get away without saying much at all on GOP nominating process. I would have even expected him to.

Audacious Epigone said...

Anon,

Baffling, thanks. I'd guess the same as you do. It would be exceedingly atypical of him, he's been doing it for an extended period of time, and he's been incorporating other topics that can easily stand alone into his attacks on Trump. That doesn't seem to add up.

Anon2,

That he isn't even cautiously supporting Trump doesn't surprise me, but he could easily get away without saying much at all on the GOP nominating process. I would have even expected it of him before these series of attacks started up.

Tjaden said...

Murray is obliged to the beltway right for not purging him during the backlash from The Bell Curve. Usually when the left calls for the scalp of a rightist scholar Conservatism Inc. hands over the offender's scalp on a silver platter. Murray's was curiously spared. My theory is that Murray had connections with members of the donor class (his title at AEI is the WH Brady Scholar) who told AEI to quietly hang on to him.

Interestingly, during the early nineties, AEI was rebounding from a financial slump. Yet he was not purged even though his writings were certainly not conducive to their pecuniary interests. Perhaps Conservatism Inc. had greater integrity back then. They were likely men who reminisced on the early post-war America in which they were raised and felt emboldened enough by Reagan Era populism to put their wallets on the line.

Audacious Epigone said...

Tjaden,

He's in his seventies and he's published several books. Is it still necessary for him to march lockstep?

He did a recent interview with Stefan Molyneux on genetics that was quite politically incorrect, with Murray conjecturing a lot more than he and Herrnstein did in TBC. Maybe towing the AEI line on mainstream vulgar politics provides him with something like intellectual tenure and relevancy to continue to explore things outside the Overton Window.

Parenthetically, he is quite enigmatic at the moment!