Fascism and "race and iq"

You mean the posse run by literal autists Ryan Faulk and JF Garapey? Literally who cares, let them build themselves up into the mainstream and they'll crumble upon their very first interaction with a geneticist.

so how did he convince you of that?

Wasn't JF a geneticist?

He was pointing out all sorts of statistical and physiological differences between the races. Hes a biologist so hes quite used to arguing on the facts where as I normally focus on his motives for introducing the facts.
I could hear people in the background giggling when I called him a Chinese supremacist.

genetecist and autist both end in 'ist'
Coincidence?

nope, a neuroscientist. The two fields are not the same, but to youtube kiddies coming across as an expert in a field isn't very difficult

Still ends in 'ist'.
I rest my case.

Kek, I would also say something like that probably and not get taken seriously anymore

...

fuck, I never stood a chance

Stop taking the bait please.

Can a comrade* write a rebuttal to this short fascist video about British education?

www.youtube.com/watch?v=UA0XGVjQtQM

(Can someone make a mirror so we don't give him more views?)

*Probably easier if you're British.

you should make a separate thread about this video

Doesn't that make him even more qualified to speak on the subject of intelligence in races?

For people that care so much about biology, you know fuck all about it don't yah?

what are you even doing here
But well you seem to have missed these:

I think he implied it is mostly genetic.

If intelligence is mostly genetic and only certain races have those "smart genes" then the answer is obviously r.ace mixing not genocide.

That is still bollocks, recent-ish discoveries show with epigenetics that even if there was a "smart gene", it would not properly show up enough in a population to make any real difference.

I'm not challenging that, but got a link by any chance? Want something to refer to when I get into arguments with race realists

Wouldn't that dillute the smart genes? The best solution here is to make gene therapy, psychobiotics, nootropics, and brain stimulation widely available to the public.

Pretty much the entire conceit of right-wing politics is that any move towards equality or improving the lives of the bottom portion of society undermines the excellence of chosen few.

theguardian.com/science/occams-corner/2014/apr/25/epigenetics-beginners-guide-to-everything
TL;DR: Epigenetics is when sequences of code are triggered by environmental conditions: so even if intelligence was 100% genetic, it would still be dependent on the environment.

So that's why Holla Forums hates transhumanism.

Thanks!

But if you didn't have the right genes then it wouldn't matter what environment you were placed in.

Since their own bell curves show that there are dumb whites, as well as smart blacks, why not deport all the dumb huwites and blacks to Africa and create a mulatto master race with the people you got left?

Reminder that race is a spook.

That is one other thing "race realists" never state, is genetic intelligence positive or negative: do your genes make your smarter or dumber? I mean say there is some natural mean for mankind, and say that they are correct and blacks as a whole are below that: is that due to lacking a certain generic feature that makes everyone else smarter or is it due to possessing a certain genetic feature that makes them dumber. I have never actually seen one of these wanks say one way or 'ther.

I think it would go either way. Intelligence is a highly polygenic trait. Some genes make people smarter other gene make them dumber.

There is no debate.

Typical nazi. Refuses to engage with the core of his beliefs because he knows it's all feels.

Someone post the Umberto Eco article on ur-fascism

Exactly.

This user fucking knows.
nybooks.com/articles/1995/06/22/ur-fascism/

Sigh…gould falsified his data when he wrote mismeasure of man. Boaz too falsified his data set when he argued cranial capacity is mostly environmental when he did he a similar study half a century before gould. Just give up.

He is claiming to be an expert on genetic inheritance. I don't know if you're trolling but no, this alone does not give him expertise in the inheritance mechanism of intelligence or anything else.

There are Eye Cue differences between any given population, this has no moral bearing whatsoever…you can safely reply to these kinds of arguments with a shrug. Fetishizing Eye Cue is for reactionaries and smug liberals.

Everyone afraid of debate says the same

[citation needed]

Though it is indeed agreed upon among historians that Europe remained a very violent place well until the early 20th century, how did this guy manage to dig up the homicide rate for 16th-century Britain? No such statistics were being recorded back then.

Let's assume you're right. What social policy should be implemented on the basis of racial differences in Autism Level?

Also, please answer:
Would you oppose eugenics to improve the Autism Level of "low Autism Level" races?

Eisner was the one who did the leg-work in trying to establish a reliable murder rate for the period:
vrc.crim.cam.ac.uk/vrcresearch/paperdownload/manuel-eisner-historical-trends-in-violence.pdf
btw I wrote that post :P

Why don't you all go to 4/pol/ with this? Or Molymeme?

DO NOT deny science.
DO NOT deny statistical data.
DO NOT insult people who rightly point out what you're saying does not match scientific results and statistical data by questioning their motivation.

DO point out that individuals need to be judged as individuals, not as members of any arbitrarily chosen group.
DO point out that no individual characteristic should be a basis for discrimination.

Thank you for being the only sane person in the thread.

Here are the graphs again if you want to look into the sources or keep them for later use:
Graph #1:ourworldindata.org/homicides/
Graph #2 violentdeathproject.com/countries/united-kingdom
Now tbh I'm not sure where this guy got this graph but it seems pretty much in-line with other estimates of the historical murder rates of the US and the UK. I have heard criticism that UK police and the legal system try to deliberately disqualify and misclassify homicides into other categories making their murder rates artificially lower. If true, this isn't unlike the Japanese police calling murder cases they couldn't solve or didn't want to solve as suicides. But in any case it seems a fair bet that the UK murder rate is below America's but I'm open to the contention that it isn't. I think it would also have to be shown that US police don't frequently miscategorize and misreport murders for that contention to matter.

The other two graphs can be found in this article:
telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/12037479/Mapped-Which-countries-have-the-highest-murder-rates.html

And pretty much anything else in the post can be found in the articles linked in it and in addition to the source article I posted already.

>>>/suicide/

Guess what, no.

Even if some races have different I.Q.s it should not matter to Marxists as Marxism is critique of capitalism and has nothing to do with arguing about I.Q. points

This is Liberal bullshit

Side note I must agree somewhat if this user here

It doesn't matter to me if certain races have lower I.Q.s then others. The reactionary idea would be to separate and create a "other". It really is a irrational rational idea in my mind because one, yes for the average normie that may seem like the right idea, but then two is you just created race tension that hasn't been seen since Columbus found the new world. But this time everybody has guns. We want forward motion, obviously. So the simple solution would be to help these so called low I.Q. folk up their I.Q., it would be a generational endeavor but the right move. At least that's my two cents.

with not if*

You know what they said about people living in a glass house?

nature.com/articles/6800418

A collection of threads dedicated to this autistc shitfest.

archive.is/uPGEN
archive.is/I9vEh
archive.is/GFOBo
archive.is/An7zF
archive.is/zyLDD

Arguing about it is very frustrating because Holla Forumsyps are good at sophistry using technical wording, so you have to dedicate a lot of time to have a fine understanding of thoses topic yourself.
And when you actually knows enough to BTFO them, you hit yourself against the wall of ideology and bad faith and Holla Forumsyps will dance like they won anyway.
It's not even a matter of rationale at this point, it's pure propaganda game. To beat their narrative, you would need to be even more autistic than them, spam your argument not only any time the topic is discussed anywhere, bur also when it's not related to the discussion, becoming pic related but whit antiracism.

But this is where it becomes a problem, because that kind of behavior is why a lot of people here hates Holla Forums in the first place.
I can't bring myself to clogg unrelated hobbyists boards with my own gospel like Holla Forumstards are doing

Thanks user!

Regression to the mean.

There are policy implications of it.

mobile.nytimes.com/2011/06/14/science/14skull.html

no, you counter it by making original content and your own propaganda, 99% of leftist shit is simply them trying to refute or cry about things the right is doing. you're always 2 steps behind, and by the time you make some rebuttal they've already moved on and won far more people with their new content

that's why the left can't meme

whats the point of hating them? you can't argue huh

Your grand-grandchildren will be brown ;)

Nice

nigres usally have an Autism Level of 80 while real people have one of 100
really makes you think

wew

What about Holla Forums-tards who can't even spell "nigger" right?

That means nothing with internationalism, especially given that we live in an era where intelligence is selectively more pressured for in mating.

why do you answer such an obvius bait post?

every time i see Autism Level tables, Ghanians and Nigerians are always doing so well. How can WN explain this?

You can't combat this argument, because they're right, in spite of any moral qualms you may have with it.

Either concede the point or dismiss it as inconsequential, but none of you can say it's false.

wew

I'm not claiming victory, it's not my argument to make, it's just the correct one. Try harder, tranny.