Ask a left-leaning libertarian anything!

Ask a left-leaning libertarian anything!

Other urls found in this thread:

www1.udel.edu/educ/gottfredson/30years/Rushton-Jensen-reply-to-commentaries-on-30years.pdf
sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160289611001413
youtube.com/watch?v=U2RVIi6M7oM&t=2743s
youtube.com/watch?v=BTCVEVazeRE
fathermag.com/news/2778-stats.shtml
isites.harvard.edu/fs/docs/icb.topic185351.files/Rushton-Jensen30years.pdf
atavisionary.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/Heritability-of-interests-a-twin-study-Lykken-bouchard.pdf
web.missouri.edu/~segerti/1000H/Bouchard.pdf
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/7945151
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19488046
ipr.northwestern.edu/publications/docs/workingpapers/2013/IPR-WP-13-09.pdf
strobertbellarmine.net/books/Maistre--Considerations_on_France.pdf
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flynn_effect
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25954211
sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160289609001561
sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160289608000615
sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160289614001512
sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160289604000522
sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160289607000189
iapsych.com/iqmr/fe/LinkedDocuments/lynn2008.pdf
sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160289615000653
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22963424
sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160289613000706
sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160289613000470
psycnet.apa.org/?&fa=main.doiLanding&doi=10.1037/0033-2909.101.2.171
youtube.com/watch?v=7NyX5CxGraE
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

Why is democracy and equality preferable to autocracy and hierarchy?

Do you believe nations should be allowed to broadly exclude others from entering simply due to race or religion? I know you wouldn't want it in your country, but say one specific nation did.

Why are you still alive?

>Why is democracy and equality preferable to autocracy and hierarchy?

Trying to change things through force will never work in the long-term. Change has to happen within individuals themselves, and most people don't want to be ruled over in an authoritarian fashion.

>Do you believe nations should be allowed to broadly exclude others from entering simply due to race or religion? I know you wouldn't want it in your country, but say one specific nation did.

I think that's fine. I do think it's scapegoating the issue, but countries should have the right to sovereignty.

Can you consider that there's a difference between being lead and inspired forwards as a united and homogeneous people and being ruled over as subject?

Individuals will change of their own accord, but it's under the supervision of a society built to encourage desirable values and behaviors. Similarly to how a society built on equality fosters degeneracy, consumerism, and dysgenics, a society built on hierarchy, tradition, and racialism will foster strong families, high-trust communities, and overall racial prosperity.

>and most people don't want to be ruled over in an authoritarian fashion.
>people aren't attracted to authority

How do you think us fascists get into power? We become the new Intelligentsia and the people follow suit with our plans. Prepare your anus, shitlib, the pendulum has swung back and Hitler's ghost is arising.

My key point is that in the long-term, you're always going to alienate certain segments of society. That's when discontentment and uprisings happen. If you want to get rid of degeneracy (which is what I think you're alluding to), you have to lead by example as an individual. Give people the freedom to live how they wish as long as they don't hurt others, but show them that there's a better way. If people want to change, they will.

>How do you think us fascists get into power?
Populism, majority-rule, etc. The problem comes in when people are forced to live a certain way.

Who do you foresee being alienated in a racial ethno-state adhering to the principles of Tradition?

>You have to lead by example as an individual.

Which is exactly what our Autocrat should be. Codifying morality and punishing behavior by law should be the least desirable option.

In my opinion, the racial ethno-state is an ideal in your head. There's always going to be people who don't agree with the over-arching message of traditionalism, and over time, that's going to cause problems.

Let's say the SJWs got their way and their autocrat banned hate speech. Wouldn't go well with us, would it? Over the long-term, such societies would collapse as we've seen throughout history.

>The problem comes in when people are forced to live a certain way.

Thy ought to live a certain way and that is the way of their people. People are still willing to have laws and wills within a society, even if strict. Most people turn to extreme authoritarianism only in desperate times, which is what ought to happen because we live in desperate times. Tradition is mandatory always, however.

>In my opinion, the racial ethno-state is an ideal in your head

Race isn't just genetic its an ideal, you're correct, but what unites all people under a race is a certain set of universal ideals which are only common to said race by genetics and tradition, and as per the traditionalist modus operandi wisdom must be passed down via tradition. This is the point of the traditionalist movement, it begins as an intellectual one until it drowns out the voice of those ho are obviously morally defunct. What you have done in your mind is convinced yourself in a false dichotomy of people. similar to the R/K selection fags, where they simplify human behavior into concrete seperations. In reality, most people who live in urban environment versus rural still have the same core beliefs whether they believe so or not. It is the same among race. Its not that a small minority will rule over the many with iron fists, fascism is the rule of the overwhelming majority against the minority in a time of need.

Depends on which laws we're talking about. If it's a law that goes against the Constitution or infringes upon the right of someone to pursue a victimless action, then I would be against it.

I think people should realize that only they can help themselves in times of desperation. At the end of the day, no one can improve their situation except themselves. If you're against degeneracy and progressiveism, don't practice it. Fight against it. Show that there's a better way to think.

ask a utilitarian anything (voted for zoltan istvan)

OUT OUT OUT NORMIE GET OUT REEEEEEE

Disprove Malthus Theory of Population Growth accounting for race, IQ, and social capital.

What role should the government play in reducing existential risk?

Asteroids
Pandemic disease
Catastrophic climate change
Unfriendly AI

What's the point in optimizing government institutions for certain social outcomes (growth, poverty reduction, freedom, equality, health etc) if humanity gets obliterated for all time?

...

I agree that we have more in common than not. At the end of the day, most people want to do good and help their fellow people. I think where we disagree is that I would go one step further than you.

You say it's about race, but I say it's about culture. Culture is something that we can all play a role in changing regardless of race.

Why do you think it's genetic? I think it's more the environment that affects behavior.

>Depends on which laws we're talking about. If it's a law that goes against the Constitution or infringes upon the right of someone to pursue a victimless action, then I would be against it.

Your constitution a shit in many places.

think people should realize that only they can help themselves in times of desperation. At the end of the day, no one can improve their situation except themselves. If you're against degeneracy and progressivism, don't practice it. Fight against it. Show that there's a better way to think.
>he thinks leftists give you brownie points for moral etiquette

>Person 1

Hey these communists are infiltrating institutions and brainwashing people into believing a false doctrine that will capitulate the economy and turn people into slaves! Should we start create a police state and community funded program to ban and burn communist literature? 70% of the locals agree on this!

>Person 2

Omg that's statism, are you trying to infringe on the rights of others? We need to follow muh constitution!

>Person 1

But they're targeting children with propaganda designed to turn them into sexual deviants, slaves, and morally bankrupt nihilists!

>Person 2

So? Its Unconstitutional.

>Person 1

If you say so

*all their children abandon societal mores*
*they all grow up to become degenerates because communists infiltrated the government*

>Person 2

Well at least we still have muh constitution.

Please see my posts in another thread as to why much of these behaviors and trends are genetic/hereditary

Were you born a cuck, or did your father leave at a young age?

>this post

Well done lad. This looks like a good new pasta.

Been posting this data for a few days now, I hope it really gathers some traction.

That's a tough question. The most I can say is that I would support investing resources into shit that affects us now, rather than a future that might not happen.

Lot of shit there mate, but I'll take a look. Was just in that thread too.

How much weed do you smoke each day?

I realize its a bit of an information overload, but ask me about any of those links and I will summarize them for you.

Sup Forums character limit doesn't allow me to include summaries for them without using like 50 posts lel

>he thinks leftists give you brownie points for moral etiquette

Yeah, I hear you. Leftists piss me off more than conservatives - especially this election. If you show they love and respect, even if they don't show it back, they will be more inclined to listen to you, though. That's what I've found.

Meant to say, "if you show them".

About a cubic ton.

www1.udel.edu/educ/gottfredson/30years/Rushton-Jensen-reply-to-commentaries-on-30years.pdf

This one I guess. I definitely am under the impression that it's more "nurture" than "nature" that governs how we behave in society.

Because it works better

That ones actually already had its summary posted haha

>(2005) Rushton & Jensen post their appeal to scientists and academics of all stripes to cease the usage of the moralistic fallacy because they believe it holds back scientific progress.

Their words will do this greater justice:

"Despite repeated claims to the contrary, there has been no narrowing of the 15- to 18-point average IQ difference between Blacks and Whites (1.1 standard deviations); the differences are as large today as they were when first measured nearly 100 years ago. They, and the concomitant difference in standard of living, level of education, and related phenomena, lie in factors that are largely heritable, not cultural. The IQ differences are attributable to differences in brain size more than to racism, stereotype threat, item selection on tests, and all the other suggestions given by the commentators. It is time to meet reality. It is time to stop committing the “moralistic fallacy” that good science must conform to approved outcomes."

How much should we discount the future? When do people stop becoming important--three generations out? 5? 10? 50? 100?

The risk of asteroid death at any point will never be high enough to warrant investments in defensive capacity under your approach. Doesn't this doom humanity to eventual obliteration?

>If you show they love and respect, even if they don't show it back, they will be more inclined to listen to you, though. That's what I've found.
>He's this new

At some point you realize that not everyone on Earth is a rational person. Some of them can't be convinced and will never listen to reason. Eventually initiating force become necessary.

I used to be in the right leaning libertarian quandrant, until a few years ago. Now I'm essentially a national socialist. Some people just don't deserve love and respect, and will only abuse it to further themselves.

>Doesn't this doom humanity to eventual obliteration?

Who cares? What happens happens. Nature is too powerful to fully control.

Didn't even know about the IQ differences, shit. I guess I'd still say it's not important enough for me to say that society should be based on race just on the fact that people can still change behavior, not race.

>Now I'm essentially a national socialist
How people can get behind such radical ideologies is beyond me. Reminder that if you're a monarchist, ancap, natsoc etc. and thus there aren't a plethora of working examples of your ideology then its essentially worthless

Kill yourself.

sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160289611001413

(2011) Lynn & Vanhanen analyze the relationships between national IQ and a variety of other metrics.

They find that:

Higher IQs are associated highly (0,79-0,92) with educational achievement.

Higher IQs correlate highly to producing more academic publications, a greater score on the patent index, higher intellectual autonomy, more useful STEM graduates, more nobel prizes in literature, peace, and science, more qualified scientists and engineers, more technological exports, and greater political mobility.

Higher IQs correlate highly with greater GDP per capita, GNP per capita, Real GDP per capita, GNP-PPP per capita, and all other measurement of wealth per capita.

Higher IQs correlate very highly to greater economic freedom.

Higher IQs countries have less income inequality.

Higher IQs are associated with higher gross incomes, lower unemployment, higher rates of investment, less poverty, more savings, and higher rates of self-employment.

Higher IQ countries have lower crime rates in all areas.

Higher IQ countries have less corruption, political, business-related, or otherwise.

Higher IQ countries have stronger rule of law, property rights, and are less likely to become failed states.

Higher IQ countries have fewer babies born at a low birth weight or prematurely, have lower HIV/AIDS rates, have lower infant mortality, have greater life expectancies, have lower maternal mortality, and have reduced rates of malnourishment and undernourishment.

Higher IQ countries have lower birth rates and average fertility.

Higher IQ countries have lower population growth rates and higher sex ratios (more women than men), alongside a higher maternal age.

Higher IQ countries are more likely to be atheist, ascribe less importance to religion, or to lack spiritual belief.

Watch these, as a libertarian I know you could appreciate molyneux

youtube.com/watch?v=U2RVIi6M7oM&t=2743s

youtube.com/watch?v=BTCVEVazeRE

This. Sup Forums is absolutely retarded on this point. Even conceding that IQ differences certainly exist and have some kind of impact it would pale in comparison to that of influences such as single motherhood amongst blacks.

fathermag.com/news/2778-stats.shtml

>85% of all youths sitting in prisons grew up in a fatherless home (Source: Fulton Co. Georgia jail populations, Texas Dept. of Corrections 1992)
>71% of all high school dropouts come from fatherless homes (Source: National Principals Association Report on the State of High Schools.)
>75% of all adolescent patients in chemical abuse centers come from fatherless homes (Source: Rainbows for all Gods Children.)

Essentially to bring up IQ as a source of the black-white disparity is to begin to look for extra answers to a question which is pretty much already been adequately answered

Tell me among all of the policies you agree with, which of them help the economy? Which increase efficiency? Which speed up economic growth?

How do we deal with the problem of balancing inflation and employment For the long term?

italy's fascism worked amazingly well, so did hitlers natsoc economy. If hitler wasnt so hellbent on killing everyone they would be on par with the US today.

Higher IQ countries have less war, extremity, acquiescence, happiness, and life satisfaction.

Higher IQ countries have higher human development index scores, lower time preference, greater interpersonal trust, more books in the average home, and greater, "speed of life."

Higher IQ countries have lower mean temperatures, higher latitudes, lighter skin colors, and greater skin reflectance.

Higher IQ countries exist at greater distances from Africa, have lower consanguinity, have lower inbreeding depression, and have fewer infectious diseases.

Now, consider that IQ has been found to have a heritability factor between 0.5 and 0.8 (aka highly heritable).

isites.harvard.edu/fs/docs/icb.topic185351.files/Rushton-Jensen30years.pdf

(2005) Philippe Rushton and Arthur Jensen (author of, "The g Factor") conclude that IQ is the greatest indicator of future success in Western societies when inter-generational income dependence is accounted for.

They also found that IQ is at least 50% heritable and likely nearer to 80% heritable. To draw comparison, height is 70-90% heritable.

During their analysis they concluded that Whites have a minimum of 75% IQ heritability.

I have more as well, but Sup Forums character limit is a bitch atm

National Socialism worked incredibly well actually.

>No working examples of monarchy
>checks flag

K

You have two examples from the middle of the last century. I'm not willing to begin structuring my entire society around that.

Absolute monarchy*

The welfare state effectively subsidizes single mothers, remember whatever you subsidize you increase.

Now if you were to compare these rates to the African Continent what would you get you bogan fuckwit? Single Motherhodd amongst blacks is in part caused by their IQ, criminality rates, overall impulsivity, and minority status within a differently racially oreineted society.

>environment

Why is it that transracial twin-studies still dont show any significant differences?

atavisionary.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/Heritability-of-interests-a-twin-study-Lykken-bouchard.pdf

web.missouri.edu/~segerti/1000H/Bouchard.pdf

(1990) Bouchard et. al., analyze the results of their study of twins reared apart.

They found that about 70% of the variation in IQ was found to be associated with genetic variation. In addition to intelligence, their results also showed that multiple measures of personality and temperament, occupation and leisure-time interests, and social attitudes are likewise highly genetically influenced and determined.

In their own words, "These findings extend and support those from numerous other twin, family, and adoption studies."

ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/7945151

(1994) Plomin et. al., determine that variability and stability in cognitive abilities is largely genetic later in life.

Their study shows a general cognitive ability (g) estimate of ,80 in two twin studies and show that the heritability rises throughout adolescence and into adulthood. They also find that the nearly 90% of the causes are stable genetic factors with a phenotypic stability of ,92.

ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19488046

(2010) Haworth et. al., use a sample of 11.000 pairs of twins from four countries in order to determine the amount heritabilities of general cognitive ability change from childhood (9) to early adulthood (17).

Their analysis reveals that, "The heritability of general cognitive ability increases significantly and linearly from 41% in childhood (9 years) to 55% in adolescence (12 years) and to 66% in young adulthood (17 years)," disconfirming their hypothesis that, "common sense suggests that environmental influences increasingly account for individual differences in behavior as experiences accumulate during the course of life."

Literally Hitler here.

A lot of things are out of our control, but organizations like NASA will still operate and hopefully come up with a solution I would think.

>Eventually initiating force become necessary.

You wouldn't say that if the people initiating the force did it on behalf of progressives. This is the problem. You can lead by example, but you can't lead by force and expect the changes to be sustainable.

ipr.northwestern.edu/publications/docs/workingpapers/2013/IPR-WP-13-09.pdf

(2013) Branigan, McCallum & Freese embark on a meta-analysis of the variation in heritability of educational attainment.

Their meta-analysis covers thirty-four twin-studies from nine nations and finds that nearly-half of educational attainment is attributable to shared genes, while roughly thirty-five percent of variation is attributable to shared environment, with the rest either missing or attributable to non-shared environmental factors.

atavisionary.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/Heritability-of-interests-a-twin-study-Lykken-bouchard.pdf

(1993) Lykken et. al., analyze the heritability of interests in a study of twins raised together and reared apart.

By 'interests,' what is meant are individual proclivities for vocational pursuits, leisure time activities, talents, various aspects of personality, and self-assessments of cognition.

Earlier twin studies by the likes of Bouchard, Iacono, Finkel, Pedersen, Steffenburg, Jang, Coccaro, Scarr, and Weinberg have shown that twins reared in separate families, in different socioeconomic strata, and given incredibly different educational paths all showed incredible similarity in cognitive, physical, and personality factors and are decidedly more similar to their biological than their adoptive parents. This study merely affirms those results.

In terms of occupational interests, twins reared apart were no less than 51% likely to pick the same careers and had at least a 48% heritability for choosing the same leisure time activities. They were also no less than 52% likely to self-assess themselves in much the same manner on hundreds of different interests, and no less than 55% likely to report extremely similar talents. These are the weakest correlations available, but the average correlations for these fields of interests was over two-thirds, with many like religion being firmly over 90% heritable in adulthood despite different religious upbringings.

Intellectual aptitudes and educational achievement were 90% heritable. The breadth of interest in outdoor activities was 84% heritable, self-esteem was 71% heritable, adventurousness and risk-taking were 88% heritable, interpersonal warmth and the propensity for becoming a public figure or official was 65% heritable, artificing versus athletic attitudes were 82% heritable, religious attitudes versus attitudes of sensual indulgence were 89% heritable, personal attractions were 55% heritable, love of animals and agrarian lifestyles were 86% heritable, the desire to become a physician for males was 69% heritable and 73% heritable for women.

These heritabilities all showed themselves in identical twins whom are genetically the same but whose only differences exist in being raised apart from one another. They were more similar to their biological parents and biological siblings than to their adoptive families in 100% of tests.

Sorry, that was a long one.

The fascist system uses the corporatist economic model. Its roots lie in medieval guild socialism and the nordic model is effectively corporatism-lite.

Corporatism's overall goal is across the board economic efficiency no matter what.

>You wouldn't say that if the people initiating the force did it on behalf of progressives

No I would. I wouldn't like it, but I could understand it. You really ought to read De Maistre's Considerations on France.

strobertbellarmine.net/books/Maistre--Considerations_on_France.pdf

Violence is in human nature. Intellectual debate and culturural conflict is itself another form of warfare. If people of my idea logy posed enough of a threat and could be eliminated by a majority who would become more loyal to my killer's ideology through the conflict, it would be stupid not to kill.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flynn_effect

Why has white single motherhood stayed constant throught the New deal and great society

>Single Motherhodd amongst blacks is in part caused by their IQ
>overall impulsivity
>minority status within a differently racially oreineted society
Well they've remained constant and single motherhood has increased so obviously not

>criminality rates
>Implying drugs should be illegal in any case

Yeah blacks have lower IQ's I'm not debating that, I'm debating how relevant it is in explaining disparity when they have 50% single motherhood

Well I'm not an absolute monarchist so I can't really help you there. What exactly are you then?

Ha funny, I have the exactly same spot in this poll.

ANARCHY FIST BRO

What is the name of your wife's son?

>A lot of things are out of our control
The entire history of human progress has been bringing things that were formerly out of our control *into* our control. Why take a "oh jee whiz, whatever happens happens" approach to steroid defense?

>organizations like NASA will still operate and hopefully come up with a solution I would think
Yeah, better just hope for the best, not push for more funding or anything. It's not like we're having a discussion about public policy or anything. I guess NASA and AI safety are just outside politics and there's nothing we can do.

Social democrat, I'm wouldn't get rid of Australia's monarchy

Flynn effect has been BTFO.

ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25954211

sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160289609001561

(2009) Rushton & Jensen refute erroneous claims made about the nature of the Flynn Effect and its relationship with the Black-White IQ gap.

In their conclusions they state, "We conclude that predictions about the Black–White IQ gap narrowing as a result of the secular rise are unsupported. The (mostly heritable) cause of the one is not the (mostly environmental) cause of the other. The Flynn Effect (the secular rise in IQ) is not a Jensen Effect (because it does not occur on g)."

sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160289608000615

sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160289614001512

sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160289604000522

sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160289607000189

(2007) Teasdale & Owen analyze the Flynn Effect.

In their own words, "We here report data from a population, namely young adult males in Denmark, showing that whereas there were modest increases between 1988 and 1998 in scores on a battery of four cognitive tests–these constituting a diminishing continuation of a trend documented back to the late 1950's–scores on all four tests declined between 1998 and 2003/2004. For two of the tests, levels fell to below those of 1988. Across all tests, the decrease in the 5/6 year period corresponds to approximately 1.5 IQ points, very close to the net gain between 1988 and 1998. The declines between 1998 and 2003/4 appeared amongst both men pursuing higher academic education and those not doing so."

In short, they noted a reversal of the Flynn Effect, in spite of improvements in median and per capita GDP. The consistent reasoning behind these changes is dysgenic fertility and the importation of low-IQ foreigners.

iapsych.com/iqmr/fe/LinkedDocuments/lynn2008.pdf

iapsych.com/iqmr/fe/LinkedDocuments/lynn2008.pdf

(2006) Lynn & Harvey analyze the evidence for decline in world IQ.

Their analysis reveals a slow decrease in IQ in spite of gains made due to nutrition in the form of the Flynn Effect. They find that the Flynn Effect, having stopped or reversed in some nations, is nearing the point of obsolescence and due to lower IQ individuals having more children than higher IQ individuals, global IQs are set to rapidly decline.


sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160289615000653

(2015) Dutton and Lynn find a negative Flynn Effect in France between the years of 1999 and 2008-9.

Their conclusions show that French IQ has declined 4 points (3,8) in a ten year period. Their results are inline with 7 other studies referenced showing a negative Flynn Effect in Europe, which is likely a reflection of a broader dysgenic trend.

ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22963424

sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160289613000706

(2013) Edward Dutton and Richard Lynn conclude that Finland has suffered a negative Flynn Effect between the years of 1997 and 2009 in all IQ metrics.

sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160289613000470

(2013) Michael Woodley, Jan Nijenhuis, and Raegan Murphy conclude that Western IQs have declined by an average of 1,6 points per decade since the Victorian Era.

What's your favorite item on McDonald's value menu?

I don't know, I just feel like that's more of a luxury when we have more immediate issues to take care of first. I would support funding NASA and clean energy far more than funding wars, but we should take care of the economy first.

>Unironically citing the Flynn affect
>through the Wikipedia link

>Why has white single motherhood stayed constant throught the New deal and great society

Because white people aren't black, we have a different modus operandi when it comes to sexual behavior, parenting, and criminality.

>Implying drugs should be illegal in any case

Oh so you're a butthurt lolbertarian then? Yes drugs should be illegal and we should live in a non-multicultural society. I'm assuming you've read the Putnam study?

This doesn't take a rocket scientist to see. Look at inner city black guys. They have a life expectancy of like what 25? If not then they wind up in jail o prison. There are no grown men in that culture. It's a bunch of edgy teenagers playing Lord or the Flies.

>Social democrat

IQ, they hunger for more and are better equipped for more.

The blacks (even as black females are the most educated group) simply do not have the same intelligence or strategies.

39.6% of welfare recipients are black while they are only 13% of the population. That's more than twice the amount of whites before you add in the difference in population size.


Subsidize behavior and you'll create more of that behavior (assuming there isn't a better option that could easily be taken.)

White women would rather work or be married at a higher level, because these are better strategies.

Thank you for the responses. The tragic truth is that you're right and it will be because of this that humanity will not take the hard steps necessary to protect itself and will eventually die.

>He doesn't;t want to die someday

Immortality is overrated.

what the fuck are you doing here?

I can't stand forums and the layout of reddit, but I love politics and the humor that goes on here. There's some common ground, though (I gave my first votes to Bernie, but also Trump).

Life is good! The longer people are around the longer we have to argue over political issues and maybe eventually get it right!

Is there any reason I couldn't just dump other studies affirming the Flynn effect?

psycnet.apa.org/?&fa=main.doiLanding&doi=10.1037/0033-2909.101.2.171

How does one begin to explain generational gaps of 5 to 25 points without acknowledging significant environmental influence?

Your examples look mainly at single groups in single countries often who have seen radical demographic change over those periods of time

>Because white people aren't black, we have a different modus operandi when it comes to sexual behavior, parenting, and criminality.
Proof?

>Yes drugs should be illegal and we should live in a non-multicultural society
Sure thing just throw the +70% of people in jail for something which would never harm them or anyone else

>I'm assuming you've read the Putnam study?
Nope

>There are no grown men in that culture
Alright then why fuck up their communities for committing victim less crimes like drug use and prostitution

What's so appealing about sucking dick?

>Chile 48 IHDI

>Lowest Social Democracy, France 18 IHDI

>IQ, they hunger for more and are better equipped for more.
There are still plenty of low IQ whites and if that were indeed a reason you would've seen an increase

>39.6% of welfare recipients are black while they are only 13% of the population
Because 50% of black families are headed by single mothers

>>I'm assuming you've read the Putnam study?

There's your source.

>Sure thing just throw the +70% of people in jail for something which would never harm them or anyone else
>70%

Sorry pham I've known too many kids who fuck themselves up on heroin, meth, coke. Coke dealers should be executed, and drugs should be illegal.

Proof?

>Psychefag

Its impossible not to ignore at this point.

psycnet.apa.org/?&fa=main.doiLanding&doi=10.1037/0033-2909.101.2.171
>unironically citing the APA

APA is a dying organization m8, they're no longer a credible source.

youtube.com/watch?v=7NyX5CxGraE

in which ways are you left and in which ways are you a libertarian?

I for one am like you but on the right side.
I tend to be pretty libertarian on the individual level, but I become more authoritarian once the subject is foreign policy.

Regarding left-right axis, I am left in the sense that I think that there should be some regulations to the market to protect the consumer, worker, and the environment at the most basic level. (like no shitty chemicals in growing food, decent health and safety for the worker, and no dumping in rivers)
other than that I am pretty much right wing

>pic related is me

How come you think economic authoritarianism is okay to force upon your fellow man?

>Sorry pham I've known too many kids who fuck themselves up on heroin, meth, coke
Alright, thats awful for them but we don't want to go around ruining other peoples lives by throwing them in prison ruining their job prospects and increasing their likelihood of being imprisoned later for a violent crime

>Its impossible not to ignore at this point.
Taking this to be a normally distributed quality surely after the introduction of welfare to whites we would've seen some increase in single motherhood in whites at the lower end of the spectrum

>APA is a dying organization m8, they're no longer a credible source.
Has it been reviewed by any 'credible' source?

I'm aware that there's plenty of backing for the Flynn effect as well. The wikipedia page for it that you linked earlier actually includes my arguments against it and acknowledges them as true.

The Flynn effect absolutely held legitimacy in the past and it was certainly observable but it has largely ended or begun to reverse itself at this point.

>Sorry pham I've known too many kids who fuck themselves up on heroin, meth, coke. Coke dealers should be executed, and drugs should be illegal.

So how many of them need to fuck themselves up to make you realize you're wrong?

If I have to point a gun at some millionaire to ask for some minuscule portion of his fortune so that I can send several more hundred children to school I'll happily do it

>The Flynn effect absolutely held legitimacy in the past and it was certainly observable but it has largely ended
Well surely its reasonable to think there is a biological threshold past which environmental influences can no longer advance IQ

>begun to reverse itself at this point.
Especially considering the french studies recent immigration from the middle east and Africa could certainly be the source of this. As for the studies of northern European countries I can't be sure.

Because my fellow man is shit at economy.

Are you me?

when do you think natural selection will scoop you up

>Taking this to be a normally distributed quality surely after the introduction of welfare to whites we would've seen some increase in single motherhood in whites at the lower end of the spectrum

Pic related. Again, you're thinking of human behavior in far too concrete of terms. Racial differences explain a lot in terms of behavior, you really ought to read into some more evolutionary psychology.

>Alright, thats awful for them but we don't want to go around ruining other peoples lives by throwing them in prison ruining their job prospects and increasing their likelihood of being imprisoned later for a violent crime

No of course not. But the punishment for distributing large amounts of extremely harmful and addictive substances ought to be death regardless. Not like the people who do these sorts of things really cared much about life anyway. Its a shame the public will never get to talk one on one with drug dealers, psychopaths, or "real niggas"

>Has it been reviewed by any 'credible' source?

What your link? I'm not sure what it is, I can't open it for some reason, bbut I'm telling you that among the less quixotic psychologists the APA is considered a joke. Much like anyone who follows what Gould says.

>So how many of them need to fuck themselves up to make you realize you're wrong?

Look kid, I know you've brought to believe that government intervention only increases the prevelancy of certain anti-social behaviors within a society as was the case of alcohol prohibition, but the truth behind the narcotics issue within the US is beyond complicated. It involves government corruption, money laundering schemes, and multiculturalism. When I say "we" I mean the people, not the government. Drug abuse should not be tolerated by a moral society and those who defend it need to be eliminated.

How to enlighten stupid people so that we don't need authoritarianism to prevent them from violently enforcing shitty failed policies?

I've not really met any people who "defend drug abuse"

>Racial differences explain a lot in terms of behavior, you really ought to read into some more evolutionary psychology.
Its hardly concrete there's no more natural a way to look at variations in people than the normal distribution. If anything its concrete to suggest that almost every member of a specific race has this exact quality and other races have an almost complete absence.

>But the punishment for distributing large amounts of extremely harmful and addictive substances ought to be death regardless
They're primarily distributing it to people who statistically will never come close to harming themselves

>What your link?
Study finding generational IQ gap across 14 countries of 5 to 25 points, James Flynn 1987

>I'm telling you that among the less quixotic psychologists the APA is considered a joke
So everything ever published in their journal is to be completely disregarded? Besides I'm really just taking this from some guy who's accusing the gays of ruining the APA

Reducing environmental exposure to lead and other harmful chemicals, combined with investments in medical research and technology would help produce higher-IQ voters, leading to better policy outcomes. Not a silver-bullet, but it would help.

>"defend drug abuse"

You haven't talked to "real niggas" then. They exist, and they're a cancer that the US public just does not fundamentally understand.

Am I cancer Sup Forums?

>Study finding generational IQ gap across 14 countries of 5 to 25 points, James Flynn 1987

Oh so you actually just linked me to the study itself?

yeah I'd read these
Fluctuations in IQ in a specific amount of time doesn't imply the increase of IQ generationally ad infinitum.

there's no "drug problem" as there's no "gun problem"

Your ideology is literally a joke.

>there's no drug problem

Flat out lie

>"gun problem"

There isn't. Our democracy fundementlly doesn't understand the root causes of violence within itself. Nietzsche once said that a warrior's spirit, when repressed, begins to hurt itself. Make of that quote what you will.

now replace "violence" with "drug use"

>he's created a false equivalency this hard

Drug use is not the same as violence holy kek. They are entirely different psychological processes. One is the result of apathy, existential crisis, and a genetic predisposition to chemical addictions (which is different from psychological) Guns aren't the cause of violence, but drugs are the cause of drug abuse. This gets into a more ontological debate, but science as well as philosophy can attest to this.