Friday, January 13, 2012

Logan's Done

I'm buoyed by the case for Scottish independence and hope that it gives the Basques and the Catalans and the Slow Foods movement and the Walloons and the Texans and the Inuit and the obscure tribes of the Amazon ideas.  Liberal futurism is always so blandly totalitarian--whether utopian or dystopian, the whole Earth is forever resolving itself into world governments or other vast transnational, deracinated, cultureless, monolingual blocs, as if history is but a pale reflection of entropy and in the inevitable flight from primitive tribalism our animal passions cool to match the background radiation and we all end up in white corridors wearing space jumpsuits and eating our food in pill form.  But why should the future be thus?  Liberalism likes to blow kisses in the direction of diversity, but seems to fundamentally despise actual difference, and when they blow their stacks because some obviously racist conservative type denounces them as the real racists, I sorta hafta laugh, because it thrusts awfully near an uncomfortable truth, which is not, lord knows, that Asians are the smartest and blacks have an extra calf muscle due to natural selection on the slave ships or whatever, but rather that culture actually exists and has meaning; that it cannot simply be dissolved by New Deal social democracy or a more unified European fiscal policy or even hundreds of years of subjugation by some larger national entity.  Riddle me this, maze uh-meez: why shouldn't the Basques be free?

100 comments:

frijoles junior said...

Word. Let a thousand tribes bloom.

fish said...

why shouldn't the Basques be free?

Because I read in The Economist that they were terrorists.

la Rana said...

Free from what?

IOZ said...

Free to use all the Xs and Ts their hearts desire.

Jack Crow said...

And to treat their "z" as a "th."

Mr.Fundamental said...

the wind takes all flags. . .I want a flag.

Leonard said...

Yah, go Scots.

Of course progressives do not tolerate actual substantive diversity. This is because they believe in actual substantive equality. Thus they either disbelieve diversity (as they do for human biodiversity, despite their own lyin' eyes), or else they regard diversity as unsubstantive, as for example religion, where Islam is the religion of peace, Muslims are essentially Protestant, and all that stuff that MEMRI translates are just taken out of context or something.

Justin said...

Liberal futurism is always so blandly totalitarian--whether utopian or dystopian, the whole Earth is forever resolving itself into world governments or other vast transnational, deracinated, cultureless, monolingual blocs, as if history is but a pale reflection of entropy and in the inevitable flight from primitive tribalism our animal passions cool to match the background radiation and we all end up in white corridors wearing space jumpsuits and eating our food in pill form.

Yeah, to the point, check out (what I assume is) a still shot from a movie making the rounds called Thrive. The technocratic liberal utopian vision has what appears to be an impenetrable, opaque, Darth Vaderish guard tower overseeing Prozac land. I also love the Orwelllian 'Peacekeeper' sign. But then I am a sucker for a campy, psychotic attention to detail.

Jack Crow said...

Kinda tin eared, Leonard. None of the institutionalists have a leg up on diversity. Sure, liberals would homogenize attitudes, but your conservatives would do it with conduct and loyalties, instead.

And the idea that diversity is necessarily opposed to and exclusive of equality is somewhat leadenly dense. A construct like equality can operate within an ecological diversity if it allows for it. And diversity is a categorical construct, itself. It is no more bound by naturality than is equality.

basques said...

Foodie Friday!

Leonard said...

"My" conservatives? I'll cop to anarchist, libertarian, and reactionary, but not conservative.

I grant that diversity is not necessarily opposed to equality, if the terms are sufficiently spun by a sufficiently limber mind. But that's not what we're talking about; the topic is mass politics. What happens to an ideal like equality when it is imbedded into a mass-mediated mass democratic political context? Here all ideals naturally become totalized, because complexity does not survive the sound-bite, and complexity does not survive the one-minute attention span of the swing voter. And for that matter, it is much easier to mock and deride apostates, as for example IOZ is doing in this very post, than to actually go out there and educate yourself. And IOZ certainly does not lack grey matter.

Anonymous said...

...as headache threatens, my eyes slowly start to glaze over.

Luckily headach is pre-empted at the last moment.

Capt'n Obvious

Gabe Ruth said...

But SWPLs liked ethnic restaurants, no?

MazingerZ said...

Volkstum tribalism meets anarchoutopianism! Fun!

Your worst post ever. May I suggest you are a bit out of your depth when it comes to European ethnic hatred and who did and does and will do what to whom there.

mark r. said...

Let's get Pat Buchanan back on tv.

IOZ said...

When did Pat Buchanan go off the teevee?

Anonymous said...

U call PBS teevee?

Capt'n Obvious

zencomix said...

"and we all end up in white corridors wearing space jumpsuits and eating our food in pill form."

They kill everyone who reaches 30 because the quality of the soylent green goes down when older corpses are added to the mix.

Aeolus said...

The question isn't whether culture exists somehow or other the question is (a) how cultures get mapped onto individual people's actual behavior and (b) the extent to which "belonging" to a particular culture should entitle you to treatment or freedom of action. In a condition of perfect anarchy sure it would be great if a thousand tribes bloomed and everybody could toke to his heart's content.

j r said...

"omplexity does not survive the sound-bite, and complexity does not survive the one-minute attention span of the swing voter."

sez the guy constantly hawking human biodiversity...

or is it human biodiesel, cause that's something that i can get behind.

Joe said...

Liberals have the same attitude toward diversity as neocons do toward democracy in the middle east: It's great as long as it produces the right results.

Peeing on the corpse of liberalism said...

I realize you guys don't like Leonard's politics, but that's not a reason to pretend the science doesn't exist. Just because blacks score, on average, 15-20 IQ points lower than whites, is not a reason to bring back slavery. Although it probably is a good reason to stop trying to blame society for a difference in outcome between the two groups, especially when studies taking into account every possible socio-economic metric have already been done.
But, you know, I'm not judging. You can still be a liberal. Just don't be a human biodiversity denialist.

IOZ said...

I know I have a coworker whose IQ increased by an average of 15-20 points when she converted to Judaism.

Enron said...

"Just because blacks score, on average, 15-20 IQ points lower than whites, is not a reason to bring back slavery"

Oh no, not this liberal eugenicist fakakte again

Anonymous said...

Wasn't the day when we came up with a totally objective measure of human intelligence awesome?

Justin said...

Just because blacks score, on average, 15-20 IQ points lower than whites, is not a reason to bring back slavery.

Let's not be too hasty to rush to judgment on that. Intellectual rigor requires us to consider all the possibilities. I have before me a series of images with shifting shapes, I bet 9 out of 10 black guys couldn't make heads or tails of this, but they could still work in the field and contribute something to society.

IOZ said...

Different mothers, huh?

IOZ said...

AND PROUD WE ARE OF ALL OF THEM.

Peeing on the corpse of liberalism said...

IOZ is apparently pandering to an audience that doesn't understand the difference between the Ashkenazim ethnic group and Judaism as a religion. Which is strange, since IOZ's posts appear to pander to people smart enough to know better.

Cognitive dissonance is people!

IOZ said...

No dear I am making fun of your use of the phrase "on average".

Peeing on the corpse of liberalism said...

"Wasn't the day when we came up with a totally objective measure of human intelligence awesome?"

It is truly a wonder that a completely random test of completely imaginary characteristics tends to accurately predict intellectual achievement.

I'll accept a counterexample - such as a nuclear physicist with an IQ under 90.

Carrying water for Leonard is tiring but rewarding.

NutellaonToast said...

I don't think as many liberals as you say really look to Star Trek as the embodiment of their ideals, but ok.

Anonymous said...

Sure, just let me refer to the global database that carries the IQ of every individual alive... hmm... We don't seem to have a complete data set. It seems only self-important windbags and poor bored people have taken this test.

Professor Coldheart said...

It is truly a wonder that a completely random test of completely imaginary characteristics tends to accurately predict intellectual achievement.

I'll accept a counterexample - such as a nuclear physicist with an IQ under 90.


I'll bet lumping "mental characteristics," "intellectual achievement," educational achievement (e.g., getting a Ph.D) and professional success (e.g., becoming a nuclear physicist) into a single ill-defined acronym (IQ) is more tiring than carrying water.

Anyhow, just own up to it and say the dumb [REDACTED] deserve whatever happens to them. G'wan. You have the warm cloak of anonymity and we know you really want to. You're among pacifists, remember? We wouldn't hurt a fly.

Peeing on the corpse of liberalism said...

We all deserve whatever happens to us. Except when a monopoly agency of force imposes their social engineering on us.

Anonymous said...

...that's not a reason to pretend the science doesn't exist.

Science is fine except when it contradicts liberal social dogma. Always funny to see how much of that dogma the IOZ crowd embraces.

Justin said...

I'll accept a counterexample - such as a nuclear physicist with an IQ under 90.

Wrong counterexample, to become a specialist in the type of structured abstract and formal system thinking that IQ measures is tautological. Plenty of nuclear physicists are idiots in contexts that do not lead to becoming a nuclear physicist. I'd say given the actual application of nuclear technology as it relates to humanity, the smartest nuclear physicist is the one who knows enough not to become one.

IOZ said...

Well I'm an ENTP myself and the placemat told me that I should avoid anyone born in the year of the Hare or the Monkey.

anne said...

again .. ." i put two questions to pen jack c. about two weeks ago ..the only time i have ..,i only know of him from all of the comments he leaves around everywhere … . .this was one of them ..of my questioning … he did not get what i was on about at all.. so i didn’t go on in trying to make clearer what i was touching on .. but some of what you are talking of here made me think of this .. ” … i wonder ..are you speaking to..a little ..to something of this here (i said to him ..pen jack)_..my cousin chris was away on a job in japan ..and he wanted someone to attend ..so i went .. .i sat with bertram brockhouse ( a nobel prize in physics ),we became friends for a short time .. before his passing because of this meeting ..of how it went …. of my point here ..his mind was very different from my own .. but still he had some sense of what i was about ..i could tell this from how he responded.. in our talking .. i have always felt that the brightest of us .. do what they/we do ..but have some sense of what others are about ..as he was/did .. . ..i wish that there was more of this .. .in others “ " "

Anonymous said...

anne,

If Bertram was nodding and saying "hmm, yes, interesting" at what you were saying, it wasn't because he had a sense of what you are about - no one does. He was just being polite.

anne said...

.. .he wasn't nodding

IOZ said...

La taille du bateau, le mouvement de l'océan.

Freddy el Desfibradddor said...

brockhouse's autobiography here includes a photo of him in his later years

http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/physics/laureates/1994/brockhouse-autobio.html

j r said...

"Just because blacks score, on average, 15-20 IQ points lower than whites"

Wait, so those blacks work together on putting the different shapes into the holes? I wouldn't think they'd score much better. They do such a good job at putting putting balls into hoops and things of that nature.

j r said...

duh... "would think"

Professor Coldheart said...

The dogs bark, but the caravan moves on.

LA Confidential Pantload said...

Why should Basques be free? Shouldn't you at least cut them into tranches and try selling bunches of them as triple-A investment vehicles?

IOZ said...

Yeah I don't know LA I hear that if you fuck with the Basques they tend to leave some toxic assets wired to your ignition.

anne said...

freddy, what was the point of your mention of a photo, .. yes he had a fine face .. my old friend .. ,/to whoisy ,not that ocean if that was meant for me ../ and to those that do not know ..i write as i do in part because i have a flutter in my hands ,they are like birds.. making typing difficult .. .

Professor Coldheart said...

BTW, I love this rigorous "science" in which guys who go into six figures of debt pursuing a PhD. are naturally smarter than guys who hustle T-shirts out of the back of their van.

David Macharelli said...

Riddle me this, maze uh-meez: why shouldn't the Basques be free?

Because they didn't work hard enough in school and so are woefully undercredentialled for freedom.

Peeing on the corpse of liberalism said...

Here's the deal, yo - I agree that IQ isn't the be all end all measurement of what it means to be human. Yeah, you can be your own personal genius at selling T-shirts and properly identifying strains of cannibus while getting handies from sophomore art majors at the state school you've set up shop in this week. I agree! Life is bigger than any textbook.

But realize this means you knock down your own 'counter-argument' (more like emotional pleading) that accepting reality (human biodiversity) is akin to stamping the with LOSER and so we shouldn't talk about it, regardless of its truth value. Since IQ doesn't matter, then what's the problem?

Justin said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Justin said...

Yeah, you can be your own personal genius at selling T-shirts and properly identifying strains of cannibus while getting handies from sophomore art majors at the state school you've set up shop in this week. I agree! Life is bigger than any textbook.

What a dick. You said controlling for any socio-economic context. Certainly passing IQ texts with flying colors means you are very smart within ours. You have to be a genius in our socio economic culture where one can get many food and shelter tokens to become the kind of person who sees the value in monkeying with stuff that could plausibly destroy the species, or at the very least ensure all kinds of crazy health shit happens to a bunch of people in the near future. You probably lack the intelligence to do this if your primary concern is smoking grass and getting laid. I just fail to see how that's a validation of the objective measure of intelligence imparted on the IQ.

Justin said...

But realize this means you knock down your own 'counter-argument' ... that accepting reality ... is akin to stamping the with LOSER and so we shouldn't talk about it, regardless of its truth value.

The real problem is that no one argued this, and I have no idea what that even means, or if its even an argument or English. I tried to remove your parenthetical asides to understand and its even more incomprehensible somehow.

Professor Coldheart said...

Ditto Justin above. I literally can't comprehend your second paragraph. The one sentence I did understand ("Since IQ doesn't matter, then what's the problem?"), I agree with.

Anonymous said...

On second thought, liberal dogmatists' belief that "intelligence" is a meaningless concept explains a lot about their behavior.

Anonymous said...

"Here's the deal, yo"

Give me a hard copy right there.

Montag said...

[yawn] ANY basis for systematic inequality, (i'm talking about the unequal ability of individuals comprising large swaths of society to exercise power over their own lives,) is evil.

how is this claimed 15-20 IQ point differential germane? a setup that holds low IQ people at a disadvantage is no better than one that holds an ethnic group at a disadvantage.

Justin said...

On second thought, liberal dogmatists' belief that "intelligence" is a meaningless concept explains a lot about their behavior.
Is there an alternate dimension thread you are somehow hooking into? Who is the liberal? And who is arguing intelligence is a meaningless concept? I was agreeing with you that intelligence is only a fitness for a particular context. I was trying to point out to you that you cannot actually control for socio-economic factors if your intelligence test is testing aptitude within a particular socio-economic context. That is far from saying its meaningless, it just to say that if your system rewards intelligence, and your system exhibits pathological behaviors, then it is probably rewarding pathological intelligence, such as what it would require to become a specialist in studying and advancing the use of highly toxic, deadly and potentially catastrophic tools.

Justin said...

I apologize for that last crack. I just read some of your comments again, I am guessing by some of your idioms and the way you are spotting your grammar that English is not your first language. That's kind of dick to insult someone who is using a second language. Apologies. I really am trying to understand what you are saying and respond, see above, but some of it is hard to parse.

la Rana said...

I went out and achieved ANYWAY!

j r said...

"...this means you knock down your own 'counter-argument' (more like emotional pleading) that accepting reality (human biodiversity)is akin to stamping the with LOSER and so we shouldn't talk about it, regardless of its truth value."

The funny thing about the HBD crowd is that absolute insistence that they are just revealing and reveling in the pure truth and light of empirical inquiry, while at the same time completely ignoring just about every accepted principle of empirical inquiry. Protip for ya: when you confuse units of observation; when you make claims that are technically accurate but lack any meaningful precision; when you bait-and-switch a population-level statistic for a metaphysical state of being... you're not dealing with very much "truth."

Quebec said...

Et nous?

Canada said...

Not you

Justin said...

@5:31

I am more intrigued by their lack of self-awareness about their appeal to objective truth and anxious need for on everyone to publicly admit that they are right. ("You're all just too scared to admit the truth!")

I try not to be rude to them though, they are going to make fine concentration camp guards in a few years.

Peter Ward said...

Devolution? My god man! States could vote to outlaw abortion!

mistah charley, ph.d. said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
NutellaonToast said...

Isn't anyone tired of arguing racial intelligence with this guy? What, do you think he's suddenly going to snap out of it and scream "Oh, shit, I've been using pseudo-scientific nonsense to defend my innate racism! Now I see it?!"

Anonymous said...

So, can we let the Confederates finally go their Journey of Separate Ways?

Justin said...

Nutellaon, I've never once gone back and done that when I changed my mind about something. And frankly, I don't give a shit if he tells me about it when he snaps out of it, if he ever does. I suppose he could track me down in 10 years and thank me after he realizes that, holy shit, a culture that promotes and rewards intelligent sociopathy and self-destructive avarice has no business claiming it can create universally objective standards of intelligence, but I won't remember him.

Maybe it will take something more romantic, like considering what the ramifications of Shakespeare or Picasso's IQ scores would be on how we remember the scale of their genius. Does a 120-130 render Romeo and Juliet the work of an objectively lesser mind than the one who came up with relativity?

Anonymous said...

too bad IOZ and then LaRana asked interesting questions but the shiny bauble of feeling superior to Bell Curve racism once again got in the way.

I am with Nutella. How many times makes this incredibly dull discussion finished.

Anonymous said...

'culture actually exists and has meaning'

I agree. When you talk to separatists in Spain, though, the main issue seems to be money. The Catalans and the Basques consider themselves more capable and productive than the rest of Spain. So they resent how much Madrid skims off the top and and then keeps to itself.

I suppose cultural differences make this theft more apparent and thus more galling than if they regarded the Madrilenos and themselves as all part of the same tribe. Still, I don't think the underlying issues are that different from the ones that animate states rights libertarians in the U.S.

Anonymous said...

P.S. If people are mistaking y'all for liberals it's because striking poses about racism and IQ in crowds of people for whom this issue was settled long ago is very much a liberal thing: Vain. Pointless. Boring.

rob payne said...

From Wikipedia a few quotes from Binet the fellow who developed the first IQ test:

“The scale, properly speaking, does not permit the measure of intelligence, because intellectual qualities are not superposable, and therefore cannot be measured as linear surfaces are measured. —Binet, 1905”

Also:

“Some recent thinkers seem to have given their moral support to these deplorable verdicts by affirming that an individual's intelligence is a fixed quantity, a quantity that cannot be increased. We must protest and react against this brutal pessimism; we must try to demonstrate that it is founded on nothing.[142]”

So even the guy who invented IQ tests didn’t regard them as a measure of intelligence.

While I enjoy Rock and Roll or some forms of it if you compare it to the complex music developed by Black musicians, that is to say modern jazz (not swing which was dance music) one might conclude that Blacks are far more intelligent than Whites, excluding Classical and symphonic music from the formula of course. I’m not saying this is true or that jazz is better than rock or that rock cannot be sophisticated rather I point this out because nobody really understands what “intelligence” really is. Is it the product of Harvard and Stanford or is it that some people are born smarter than others? It just seems to me that holding up IQ tests as some kind of sacred scientific be all, know all, as an indicator of intelligence is fraught with problems because it ignores too many other factors and wasn’t designed to measure intelligence in the first place.

Anonymous said...

I am going to amend my statement that these separatist movements are about money and say that I think they are largely about taking control over one's affairs (including one's money) by getting them away from a corrupt, incompetent or inefficient central authority. In these conflicts, I think cultural differences are more of an organizing stratagem than the inspiration.

Jack Crow said...

Martin Wisse has the finest demonstration of intelligence I've seen in a long time. It has the added bonus (and pleasure) of being wordless:

http://cloggie.org/wissewords2/2012/01/12/clever-clever-corvid/

Anonymous said...

Amen, Jack. That is great.

NutellaonToast said...

Justin, well, then ask for his email address and periodically send him nice emails asking him how he's doing and attaching an article about the shortcomings of IQ tests. My aunt has been doing that for decades with me and Zionism, and I'm sure to come back around to defending Israel any minute now.

Just leave us the fuck out of it, already.

Anonymous said...

Who said the Basques weren't free?

Anonymous said...

So what kind of evidence would you folk accept that there are differences in intelligence (however you wish to measure it, but measure it you must) between racial groups? I mean, you don't deny that west africans appear to have an advantage when it comes to sprinting, do you? Or is it just a coincidence that Simon Goldstein hasn't taken the 100 meter dash yet.

Anonymous said...

"Riddle me this, maze uh-meez: why shouldn't the Basques be free?" asked IOZ.

Anonymous said...

Liberal is as liberal does. The majority here (IOZ included) march in lockstep with mainstream liberal animosity toward IQ, Dawkins and Pinker, evolutionary biology etc. When it comes to social issues you're indistinguishable from Katha Pollitt.

Leonard said...

Nony, they don't believe you have to measure it. Why should they? Only racists think IQ has any substantial meaning. They are not racists. QED.

Instead of titular IQ tests, they measure secondary emanations of intelligence which are politically acceptable, like getting into Harvard or Yale. Or they measure IQ but only if it called "achievement". So long as they retain their fiercely achieved ignorance they can retain their equanimity. They will not read even the wikipedia on IQ, which is full of the grossest crimethink, except like Rob up there going straight to the Criticism section while peeping through slitted hand. Certainly that section is interesting reading, if only for the flimsiness of the criticism. Binet, for example, died in 1911, probably without even knowing about the discovery of the general factor, and long before this discovery was used to refine intelligence tests down to those heavily g-loaded, and even longer before IQ testing was applied scientifically to tease out IQ's correlations with other interesting things.

NutellaonToast said...

Sigh, oh well, at least you do gotta love how, upon being accused of oversimplifying an issue, the Leonards retort via oversimplifying their detractor's views. Now THAT ties a room together.

Anonymous said...

@Montag

The school-to-prison pipeline, no?

The negroes' problem in America is not that they dum', but that they be dummed.

Capt'n Obvious

LA Confidential Pantload said...

When I hear the word 'culture,' I reach for my bong.

Anonymous said...

Only racists think IQ has any substantial meaning.

And what would that substantial meaning be, Lenny? Spell it out for us. Let us know what exactly that alleged 15-20 point difference carves in stone. Pretend you just became King. What royal edicts are you going to issue based on these oh-so-scientific reports?

IOZ said...

Lol Harold Abrahams doesn't count because he couldn't tell the difference between the Ashkenazim and the Pope.

Professor Coldheart said...

Hey, someone changed my mind on the Internet once.

Leonard: could you go back to being humorlessly literal, please? Your attempts at being clever ("...politically acceptable, like getting into Harvard or Yale") have only confused me further, as I don't recall any of the regular commenters advancing "admission to Hahvahd" as a metric of intelligence, or worth. Not just in this thread, but any thread.

(Sorry, I take that back: was it you or Inky who once asked rhetorically how many Nobel Prize winners were of the Ashkenazim? I only remember that because it was such a sophomore debate tack.)

In short, unlike Nutella, I don't mind having this same pointless argument over and over again, but I'd rather you conduct it with people here expressing actual thoughts.

Anonymous said...

"So what kind of evidence would you folk accept that there are differences in intelligence (however you wish to measure it, but measure it you must) between racial groups?"

When it is supported by proper measurement of skull shapes.

IOZ said...

I knew I could trust him when I got a look at his high, square forehead.

Justin said...

Oh, shit, Nutella! I've been pointlessly threading with someone who uses pseudo-scientific nonsense to defend innate racism! Now I see it?!

NutellaonToast said...

oh, wow, it does happen. And now I'm both right and wrong at the same time.

Anonymous said...

Hey Leonard, this woman says Asians are genetically incapable of playing instruments in a symphony. But don't they have higher IQs than whites? I'm so confused.

Anonymous said...

Dude, plz don't lure the IOZ horde to freethoughtblogs. We've enough douchebag libertarian windbags to contend with as it is.

Ernie Monaco said...

Typical Basque.

Anonymous said...

For the same reasons that the Lega Nord oughtn't be free, mezahmee -- because basque nationalism has always been a romantic racist movement with tacky art and tackier music. What the Basque country needs is a rebellion of pre-national medieval mountain hamlets, each with their own unwritten Basque dialect and folkloric costumes.
Adrian

Anonymous said...

For the same reasons that the Lega Nord oughtn't be free, mezahmee -- because basque nationalism has always been a romantic racist movement with tacky art and tackier music. What the Basque country needs is a rebellion of pre-national medieval mountain hamlets, each with their own unwritten Basque dialect and folkloric costumes.
Adrian

JSN said...

Fuck Territorial Integrity.

Ironically, it was reading Strauss's The City And Man that caused me first to picture a world carpeted by republics, and only because, somewhere in the introduction, he explicitly describes it.

The Pushtun, Kurds and Quechua seems to have the largest populations, and no country.

On the other hand, the Karen autonomists signed a ceasefire with the Myanma SPDC government yesterday, after 65 years of conflict.