Sunday, May 13, 2018

Stefan Molyneux on the GSS and free speech absolutism

Regular readers who watch this presentation will recognize that it is strikingly similar to this post. It also draws from this one.

This is not on account of Molyneux being a plagiarist. He contacted me and I subsequently worked with his producer, Michael, who had seen the post and found the topic fascinating. Over the course of several e-mail exchanges, I helped Michael understand how to navigate the GSS in general and how to replicate the results from that post specifically.

Michael was extremely cordial and complimentary. He offered to compensate me for my time. I refused and made it clear that no attribution was necessary. There are posts on this blog that delve into things Molyneux understandably doesn't need to get tangled up in. While I know the data presented are always reliably and precisely pulled from primary sources, it's easy to imagine a large portion of his audience questioning the validity of his presentation upon seeing the blog as the source. Pointing to the GSS directly is a better way to go.

Oh, and now we have a guy with nearly one million subscribers giving a detailed presentation based on the GSS, one of the most underutilized data sources in the world of social science. Three cheers!

Molyneux is doing civilizational-saving work. So far as I'm aware no one else is doing as much to spread realism about race and IQ as he is. Charles Murray gave the relationship salience with The Bell Curve, and other psychometricians and evolutionary psychologists have conducted research on it, but no one with a platform approaching the size of Molyneux's has weaved it into discussions of every topic it applies to (which is just about every topic there is).

Understanding IQ differences as an abstract concept is one thing. Actively applying it to everything aspect of existence is another. The latter is what will change the zeitgeist, and no one is doing as much to realize that change as Molyneux.

Parenthetically, Molyneux (or Michael) didn't apply the BORN filter when tracking free speech absolutism by intelligence (the relevant portion of the presentation takes place around the 31 minute mark). Since intelligence in this context is estimated based on the English vocabulary of respondents, it's an imprecise proxy if people who are not native English speakers are included. Consequently, my figures--which exclude respondents born outside the US--are modestly higher at all ranges of intelligence.


Sid said...

First, congrats on Molyneux drawing from your work! It's also commendable that you would decline some of the fruits of that. I hope a number of Molyneux's subscribers find their way here.

I said this on Twitter, but I'll repeat it here:

Not only is Molyneux applying HBD to important issues in front of a large audience, he has also become a shorthand for HBD awareness. In my experience, the question, "Do you watch Molyneux?" acts a code for, "Are you aware of HBD?" Once you say yes, there's an immediate familiarity and understanding without ever having to go into the messiness of elaborating on your views of the topic.

In contrast, The Bell Curve is the opposite. If you admit you've heard or read of it, you're supposed to immediately condemn it. And as great as Steve Sailer is, his influence is more among other HBD commentators referring to him, or "respectable" columnists trying to simultaneously refute him without naming him.

Molyneux also applies HBD to important topics, but rarely frontloads with it. In contrast, a number of the greats both in and outside of academia (Jensen, Taylor) would present the topic of race and intelligence to the audience first and then try to discuss the implications of it. This acted as a barrier, because normies in the West are trained from birth to see race realism as perhaps the greatest evil. If you start with race and go to immigration, few people will listen. Start with immigration and then make your way to race, and a lot of people will have accompanied you.

Given that Molyneux comes from a philosophical background and is so eloquent, most of the people who go around tarring and feathering others as racist are too intimidated to take him on, and they can't just point and gawk at a video title.

At any rate, I think Molyneux will serve as an example for people like us should we decide to unveil our names to the public.

Audacious Epigone said...


Exactly. Making it THE topic of discussion--as is effectively the case with TBC even though only a single chapter actually dealt with race and IQ--forces people to immediately stake out their intellectual/political positions.

Bringing it to bear on other topics, in contrast, allows it to at the least be thought about meaningfully. Molyneux often does this with guests--he'll bring up race and IQ in his response to something they say along with other points and then when the mic gets back to them, they'll broadly agree without specifically touching on race and IQ (because they may feel apprehensive about dealing with it).

Of course he's still labeled a "racist", "white supremacist", "fascist" (libertarian fascism ftw!), etc, but there verifying that claim requires people to watch his videos rather than just see a title or a written excerpt and then point and sputter. And that process will bring a lot of people in. As a consequence, he's mostly ignored by major media.

Sure, keep ignoring someone who gets hundreds of thousands of views on videos he puts up daily (plus all the podcast downloads of the same that don't show up in the youtube stats (that's how I usually listen to him)--that's a guaranteed strategy for victory!

mark auld said...

I found V.D. through Moly,Z man from V.D., and you through Z...honorable mentions are worthwhile.

Audacious Epigone said...

Mark Auld,

The sentiment is understandable. To it, Molyneux has retweeted me before, so there's that.