What is /pol/'s honest opinion of this book?
Please try to answer without pictures people riding zebras for novelty.
>>74801970
It's shit
>>74802242
Not that I agree with the book, but for some reason ever retard on here thinks that taming is the same thing as domestication
not this fucking shit again
The silver lining is that even a progressive anti-white jew like Jared Diamond was forced to admit that whites are superior.
>>74801970
A book no one would take seriously
He literally says he is writing it to disprove racism and that he won't accept extremely likely biological explanations for differences in brain development
Bizarrely enough, he makes an exception to claim that cannibals from Papua are mentally superior to Europeans lol
>>74801970
>determinism: the book
it's shit and all of Jared's points have been debunked a trillion times by real historians
>>74802301
Domestication is a by-product of taming
reminder that liberals now think this book is racist
>>74802464
do they?
last time I checked they still believe it is some sort of Bible
I find it really odd that people are so invested in the idea that white people are just naturally good at everything. Is your ego really so fragile, you can't accept or even just entertain the idea that having better resources helps build a better civilization? Kinda pathetic.
>>74802377
I don't dislike the book on the whole, but you would think given the much greater populations and clearer geography for travel in eurasia, that there inherently would be more selection for different traits in eurasia. It's like he made no effort to preempt the genetic critique in the 10,000 year explosion.
0tl;dr
>geographical determinism
>lol smallpox blankets
It sucks
>>74802646
???
Every one in the Alternative Right recognizes that East Asians are smarter and way less degenerate
it is not about superiority, it is about Liberals believing in the Dogma that nature and evolution give a fuck about equality and Nature would somehow say the human brain was "good enough" and didn't need any further changes ever again after moving from the jungle to the african savannah
>>74801970
pseudo-science
>>74801970
Technically they're not riding the zebra.
>>74801970
This book is a "white people are nothing special they were just lucky history is deterministic but I'm not a jewish marxist I pinky swear" episode.
>>74802753
Muh beast o burden
>>74801970
It is very clear the author has an agenda, he focuses on every fact which would even remotely be in favor of his theory, while dismissing/ignoring counter-examples and opposite facts.
Alrso requesting that one i screencap that always gets posted in "guns germs and steel" threads.
>>74802646
Apefrica is literally the most resource rich continent in the world.
>>74802301
Domestication is what happens when you tame and breed wild animals over many generations. You select for and encourage traits such as docility that only a small percentage of wild animals have.
Took Russians all of 50 years to domesticate red foxes, for example.
>>74802891
> "I'm not a jewish marxist I pinky swear"
He does not try to deny it tho
>>74802646
>implying africa doesn't have a shitton of resources
>>74801970
>M-muh race have nothing to do with success
>W-white had better environment
But when whites enter Zambia, suddenly the crops magicaly break records.
See, no zebra
>>74802800
>Every one in the Alternative Right recognizes that East Asians are smarter and way less degenerate
Don't they try to claim that whites are somehow more creative than Asians, even though Western culture in the past half-century has been completely dogshit?
>>74802646
Africa has much better climate and far more resources than Europe does though
>>74802301
another day, another idiot american
>>74803137
Yes, but it's generally not a genetic argument.
>>74801970
I didn't read much of it. misses the forest for the trees
>>74803137
The neo-reactionary theory is that Whites were WAY AHEAD of asians during the renaissance and the industrial revolution, but the advantage collapse in the 1900s because of the dysgenetic social changes brought about by leftism
There is evidence of that, even a leftist newspapers published, Westerns were 14 IQ ahead one century and a half ago
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/05/22/people-getting-dumber-human-intelligence-victoria-era_n_3293846.html
Diamond's book is a classic example of knowing the answer you want and tailoring the research to get that answer.
I think Hanson's "Carnage and Culture" probably provide a better and more realistic approach to grand theories of history and development.
>>74803137
Literally the only arguments I've seen that Asians are more creative than Westerners is side-by-side comparisons of anime and Tumblr fan fiction drawings.
>>74803183
what do you expect from a nation under the new media
Ecological imperialism is way better book
>>74801970
It's shit.
>>74803416
That's a fair claim, but it's not like he was pretending, he set out to challenge the traditional claim that whites are simply superior by proposing a new idea and having sources to back it up.
People do that all the time, what's wrong with it? It's just basic debunking.
>>74801970
I don't understand the controversy. It just describes how humans adapted to their enviroment, and how those differences affected us.
It doesn't "disprove" racism at all, so it's not a win for leftists. We think of Africans as stupid, but they're pretty well adapted to their enviroment. Day-to-day living in Africa doesn't require much planning or long-term thinking, and the conditions have been that way for probably 50k years. Yes there's natural disasters and war but that's why they have so many children.
Think of it this way; had Europeans not ever come to North/South America, Native American tribes would live relatively the same way. Some more advanced than others.
It also isn't a win for whites, it just explains why we're on top globally. We didn't just suddenly pop up in Europe, life spread and different civilizations advanced, while others stayed the same. Through thousands of years of years of war and harsh conditions white people kept advancing. The conditions were just right.
Then we took over North America for the most part, and used it's wealth of resources and advantageous global position to pretty much take over the world. I feel no shame in this, that's just evolution for you. Sooner or later one of the races will exterminate the others, maybe it will be whites, maybe jews, maybe asians. Eventually that race will split into branches and they'll fight each other again.
>>74801970
i just reported this, have fun in the pokey, faggot.
Consensus is the book is shit. I think a better question is how do I get educated in three books? /pol/ please oblige
>>74804775
>the traditional claim that whites are simply superior
That wasn't the default intellectual position and hadn't been for decades. Diamond first formed his conclusion, or rather adopted the same conclusion that's formed the very foundation of cultural anthropology for the last 50 years, then culled and manipulated the data until he got his result. It's ridiculous and you should be strangled.
Historian here, its a fucking joke with us
If this book is taken as fact can we then claim that whites aren't any more evil than other races but rather whites took advantage of their position(s) of superioty they were given/earned? I mean, if blacks had the guns and the germs they'd have gone north and wrecked shit easily.
>>74801970
A book, written by a physiologist and professor of geology, that preaches geographical determinism.
Basically, don't bother reading it.
>>74801970
I don't agree with his biodiversity crap but I do agree that the environment in Europe was essential for white people to dominate from middle ages to present. Civilizations prior thrived in river basins. Europe as a continent has the best access to water. The Atlantic is a shorter trip than the Pacific to the Americas. I really believe that the development of sea travel was what made Europeans to think more mathematically. The enlightenment really began after sea travel exploded in the age of exploration.
>>74801970
>White people hate him!
>See how Jarod Diamond disproved White Supremacy with one easy trick.
>>74802646
This is wise. So much butthurt here. Diamond's book is reductive, but he does show well how much advantage a technological edge can give a specific society at a certain point in time. He's no Spengler and won't give a story about the phrenological desirability of white skulls, so /pol/ is going to rage.
>>74801970
Well, African kingdoms had contact with Europe from about the mid 15th century so they had access to guns, domesticated animals from Europe, the entirety of European learning, The Portuguese, Dutch and Spanish were all down there as mercenaries, traders, missionaries and Africans went to Europe on European ships.
So up until the mid-15th century, fine, but after that they could have traded for everything Europe had and then they should have reached some sort of parity with Europe but that never happened.
>>74801970
>ahhh europeans were evil colonizers
>libtard realizes this would make whites superior
>BUT THE NATIVE WERE MORE ADVANCED.... in some way
>>74802646
Since Rome fell Europeans were being raped by the Muslims tot he south and the Mongols to the east. If the land had some special magic that would propel the Europeans to be #1 they would've conquered the world millenniums ago. In fact one of the prime drivers for colonization was that other places had better resources than Europe.
>>74801970
>Diamond
Dropped.
It uses overly simplistic, borderline pseudo-science to make it's argument that the world is basically Civ and Europe got a good start.
>>74801970
He teaches at my school, and I think he is a cuck.
I read this book 10-odd years ago and I could've sworn it had a Darwinist bent to it; by having lived and evolved in a "simple" environment, african intelligence was not genetically selected for, rendering their kind simple-minded compared to populations living in more complicated environments.
Coming back these days and finding out its apparently a pile of leftist "it's not their fault they farm dirt" love letter to sub-saharan africa confuses the fuck out of me, was I reading it upside down?
How did environmental factors spawn the Greek philosophers?
general narrative for overhyped books
>hear about a new thing
>all over the news
>new thing gets awards
>taught in schools
>look into new thing
>oh you don't say.jpg -- it's nothing but liberal schlock
Like anything undertaken at this scale it provides, perhaps, some useful analysis but falls apart when scrutinized and is ultimately over-simplistic. Geographic factors certainly played a role in the differing development of civilizations, but there are also many other factors that impacted this. For example, the baseline philosophies developed by each civilization would go on to influence future development immensely. See Greek philosophy and philosophy born out of the hundred schools period in ancient China; the kinds of thought born out of these eras of ancient history would go on to change Western and Eastern civilization forever.
Then there's the prevalence of great minds who were born into the right time and right place to flourish and change the world, and then there's the outcomes of tremendous historical events that would change the course of the world forever (the Opium wars, the conquests of the Huns, World War II, etc...)
There are so many factors that go into why civilzations succeed and fail that it becomes impossible to provide some kind of succinct, tell-all about it. There's so much to go over, so many variables, so much just left to dumb chance, that you can't just explain it all in 500 pages.
We only have one existence on this planet, and civilization has only existed for a fraction of it. All these thousands of variables have aligned so that right now it's the West who rules supreme, but at various times of history other cultures were greater, and in the future other civilizations will rise and fall. This end of history, deterministic viewpoint is too narrow, and this is ultimately the failing of this book.
Anyone read collapse?
I think adapting to an environment with hot summers and cold winters helped us with developing agriculture / architecture / societies.
The growing season is short so food has to be made efficiently and stockpiled for the winter and you need a good home to survive the winter.
If it's too cold, you're not really farming and if it's too hot you have no incentive to figure out better ways to acquire food because you can just roam around when you're hungry and find something.
Too much heat makes you lazy and too much cold does not offer enough readily available resources to thrive.
>>74802381
Link please? I need to see it debunked. I read it years ago and the only thing I remember about it now is that you need agriculture to sustain yourself and surplus leads to markets.
>>74801970
Garbage. He relies on counter-factual history to support his argument for much of it. It's not taken seriously in academia and is instead shit all over.
>>74801970
>mental gymnastics to try and explain why non-whites are so shit at literally everything: the book
>>74808666
>UCLA
God I feel bad for you anon.
>>74806083
They must love you in Canada.
>>74806907
>Muslims to the south and the Mongols to the east
And where are they now?
>>74802301
The entire book is just nonsense, its the exact opposite reasons that caused Europeans (and Asians) to excel. Winters were hard, you had to be smart and have planning skills to store enough food for the winter, you also had to be able to farm it in the first place. Many parts of Africa have food growing wild year round, and it doesn't get cold, there is no selective pressure at all for intelligence.
>>74803366
Of course what they're not telling you is that these nations have become more "diverse" in that time...
>>74801970
It's utter shit. It dances around reality and provides easily-refutable assumptions. Liberals eat it up because it supports their bias.
Niggers have retard-level IQs. This is why they didn't domesticate animals. This has always been why. Attempting to warp reality to somehow fit a liberal assumption is absolutely intellectually dishonest.
Jared Diamond is an absolute fucking hack.
>>74806223
Here's your (you) buddy. Enjoy it.
>>74801970
I thought it was not bad.
Of course /pol/ will rage about it because there's a bunch of big babies on here that are triggered by anything that doesn't confirm to their tiny little perception of reality.
>>74811205
Yea, had a fair few critiques of it at the time but can't remember them now. Worth a read though.
Reminder that well adjusted adults read a wide variety of view-points and form their own world view based upon those arguments that most resonate with them, while sad little basement dwellers form their world view entirely upon the arguments that correspond with the memes of a certain website for sharing pictures of mongolian cave paintings.
>>74813023
>North Korea
>105+ IQ
KEK......?
The person who made this chart basically bucket filled nearby countries with similar colors. Put more effort in next time.
>>74805874
>I really believe that the development of sea travel was what made Europeans to think more mathematically.
Yep. As early as the 15th century, Europe's naval capability absolutely shit on the rest of the world's. No country outside of Europe could have projected power like Portugal did with its trade empire. Europe's success comes from its unmatched naval traditions. It's what led to Europe discovering the new world and all the riches it brought with it.
Which of course brings up the question, why? That's a bit more complex.
>>74815032
Portugal couldn't even project power into Africa or India in the 15th century. They didn't gain any semblance of control until the cartazes of the 16th century and even then the Africans and Indians told them to fuck off.
>>74801970
He ignores lots of otherwise intellectually honest answers in his book, like differences in culture, and yes IQ differences in population groups.
His explanations aren't wrong, just probably not sufficient explanation for the differences.
His best point is the Germs one. Huge swaths of the native population in America was wiped out by diseases that came across the ocean. Many people were lost likely without having ever seen a white person.
>>74801970
You mean >Guns, Germs and New Guinea
Ithe was ok except for the vast swaths of the book where the author jerked himself off about all the time he spent with the abos.
>>74815407
>His explanations aren't wrong
Some of his explanations are outright wrong, particularly his explanation of Qing China. When someone says that Qing China lacked dissidence movements or that they didn't even TRY to technologically adjust, you know he's full of shit and has no idea what he's talking about.
>>74812927
You thought that nations were becoming more diverse by the fucking 1900s?
Are you fucking retarded?
Threadly reminder:
>American education
>>74813109
Not an argument.
>>74813659
North Korea does remarkably well despite being under a highly unstable post-revolutionary communist totalitarian regime.
How many countries have even half the space program that NK does?
>>74815597
Not him, but they were. Colonial expansion during the 19th century meant a huge influx of non-native populations into Europe. The United States imported loads of Chinks and Japs to build railroads in the west, plus the expansion into Mexico in the mid 19th century. Nearly every nation in the 19th century became more diverse than their 18th and 17th-century counterparts. I can understand your confusion if you're comparing it to the "diversity" of today, but you're delegating history from the present. A pretty good reminder is that American servicemen from the South were particularly shocked during both WWI and WWII that niggers and Indians in the service could go where they pleased instead of being kept out of white areas.
>>74816111
Right.
>>74801970
I've never really understood why, but both commies and right-wingers alike seem to hold the idea that Diamond's ideas are mutually exclusive to Human Bio-diversity, when it seems obvious that they are in fact perfectly compatible with each other.
I think you could even make a compelling argument that they support one another, in the sense that technological progress is endogenous with respect to growth of genetic intelligence.
>>74816111
Oh yeah, ID system means that you don't need to identify yourself, I can tell who's who.
>>74816192
>40,000 poo in loos in Britain in 1850
>Not more diverse than Britain before the 17 years war
Lad... On top of that, India gained independence before 1851 and thus most of their poo in loo population returned to India. Cherry picking at it's finest.
>>74816322
>1851
1951.
>>74816192
And how many British Indians do you think were in the UK in say 1700?
>>74816322
The point is that it's an extremely small number compared to the 50 million that lived in the UK at the time. To attribute the rise of leftism to their arrival is bullshit and you know it.
>>74816368
See here: >>74816368
>>74816449
Whoops, meant here: >>74816422
>>74816422
Not only that, but to attribute the loss of white IQ to them is beyond ridiculous.
>>74816422
>The point is that it's an extremely small number compared to the 50 million that lived in the UK at the time
Irrelevant to the argument at hand, that is whether Britain became more diverse before the 20th century which is something you proved yourself, and it also doesn't include niggers, egyptians and other colonial subjects that ended up in Britain. You said the world didn't become more diverse before 1900. You BTFO yourself with your own argument.
>>74816551
>white IQ
National IQ over time and it isn't.
>>74816551
>Not only that, but to attribute the loss of white IQ to them is beyond ridiculous.
I don't believe anybody did this.
>>74816422
>To attribute the rise of leftism to their arrival is bullshit and you know it.
well, it's conflating cause and effect at any rate
But in the long run, immigrants really do vote communist.
The problem with you Singaporeans is that your country is run like a family owned business, with EXTREMELY selective immigration, and a very harsh penal code to back it up. Which works marvelously frankly, props to your first monarch lee yua kuan for making multiculturalism work.
But what you don't understand, is that in western sclerotic dysfunction democracies we let ourselves be colonized by third world savages, with predictably devastating effects. The western model of multiculturalism is NOTHING like the Singaporean model; if you don't understand the difference, you can't possibly understand why we take the issue so severely.
>>74816673
They did. See the latter of those two, and the former for context.
>>74803366
>>74812927
>>74803137
>westerners aren't creative
>literally won the Cold War and is secure as the number 1 civ in the world due to services, arts, and humanities
Viper...
>>74816627
A group of forty to eighty thousand people aren't going to dent the figures that heavily, especially considering that the nature of immigration from India is that only the best and brightest get out of the country. A crab bucket, as Terry Pratchett would refer to it.
>>74816974
>using the cold war as an example
>a standoff between two western nations
>civ
Buddy...
>>74803015
Yeah no, red foxxes still aren't comparable with dogs and cats.
>>74817042
Over a hundred and fifty years between 1860 and the present? Yes, that will bring it down considerably. He wasn't implying that 14 point drop was solely between 1860 and 1900, you illiterate mongoloid.
>>74816805
>immigrants really do vote communist.
Are there voting records that show that kind of correlation somewhere? Not trying to be aggressive; I genuinely want to know.
>>74801970
It's a lovely example of macro-historical explanation.
If you treat it as a big "what-if" it is pretty good. "What if people were all exactly the same everywhere in the world... how could observed variation have arisen by accident?"
But people aren't all exactly the same, the people at the West and East edges of Eurasia are way smarter than everyone else. And other factors have caused human evolution even in the short term (for example, genes for clannish behavior become established very quickly wherever cousins marry and disappear wherever cousin marriage is forbidden).
So while Diamond's attempt is interesting, it is largely false, and if you take it too seriously you'll be seriously misled. For example, Diamond's account suggests that a small initial lead in urbanization and writing created a snowballing technological lead for early adapters. But in reality, a lot of the most interesting ancient technology was invented in the illiterate steppes, where high-IQ pastoralists domesticated horses and came up with a whole panoply of inventions to take advantage of that... and quickly spread out to conquer everything from Bengal to Ireland.
Then it happened again three thousand years later when the best ships in the world were invented by an illiterate people living in rural Scandinavia. At nearly the same time, the collapse of a highly urbanized, organized civilization had ushered in an era of... intensive experimentation with agriculture, windmills, and optics in rural northwest Europe.
pic unrelated
>>74817200
There's no need to lose your temper.
And yes, he quite clearly was.
>>74802242
first post best post: the post
>>74817150
>russians
>western
>>74817357
Why isn't Russia western? It certainly isn't Asian.
>>74801970
>>74816805
>The problem with you Singaporeans is that your country is run like a family owned business, with EXTREMELY selective immigration, and a very harsh penal code to back it up. Which works marvelously frankly, props to your first monarch lee yua kuan for making multiculturalism work.
So why don't you guys implement such a model?
>
But what you don't understand, is that in western sclerotic dysfunction democracies we let ourselves be colonized by third world savages, with predictably devastating effects. The western model of multiculturalism is NOTHING like the Singaporean model; if you don't understand the difference, you can't possibly understand why we take the issue so severely.
Which groups constitute as savages?
>>74817317
>one discusses the IQ drop in the West between 1860 and the Present
>the other blames it on diversity
How is that implying it was solely between 1860 and 1900?
>There's no need to lose your temper
Haven't lost it yet, but I'm going to get there if you keep being this willfully retarded.
By invoking a geographical determinism argument, Diamond not only doesn't erase racism, he confirms it as something immutable and timeless: Europeans were be better than Africans because their geography dictated that Europeans became technologically advanced more quickly, and the technological lead is too great for Africa to overcome without help from Europeans. It's practically a self-writing argument for colonialism, with all the "uplifting the savage" and "White Man's Burden" philosophy which underpins that mentality.
>>74817480
>Of course what they're not telling you is that these nations have become more "diverse" in that time...
>nations have become more "diverse" in that time...
>in that time...
>in
>that
>time
Are you sure about that? No one's being retarded; everybody makes mistakes.
>>74817150
Why are people from Singapore the biggest faggots on the board? If you really think the Cold War was between western civ, than your retarded.
But you totally got people with that "American education" bit.
I mean you do realize that we fought the engagements of the Cold War in Southeast Asia right?
>>74817225
Here in the USA, the democratic party is almost literally the party of blacks and hispanics (and single white women). When you look south of the border and see endless cycles of Argentina, Venezuela, Brazil, etc., it's pretty obvious that they'd come here and vote for the same policies that destroyed their inglorious third world democracies.
Democracies and immigration don't work. It takes a formidable statesman, like Lee Kuan Yew, to make it work; you need a tough penal code and an economic system that keeps people busy. An idle mind is the devil's playground.
Consider, for example, that when the Irish immigrated en mass during various periods in the 18th and 19th centuries, the welfare net consisted of essentially "get busy working or starve"; and the penal code was pretty much "make any trouble whatsoever and we'll hang you". It worked for them; it can work for other 3rd world savages as well. The problem is that democracy doesn't allow that to happen, at least in our current Brezhnev-emulated state.
>>74817423
literally everything past the urals in russia is not european nor western which is the vast majority of russia
>>74817643
>1860 to present
>IN THAT TIME BETWEEN 1860 AND PRESENT
Christ on a cracker.
>Are you sure about that
Positive, because I'm capable of basic reading comprehension.
>No one's being retarded; everybody makes mistakes
You're being willfully retarded here to cover your ass. Admit you were wrong or shut the fuck up.
>>74801970
It's a shit book and historians don't agree with it. It's a leftist conspiracy theory at best; and not one that has solid grounding.
>Diamond
Is he a kike?
>>74817672
Yes, in communist nations. You also fought in Central Asia, Africa, and across the globe. The point is that it was between two western nations; the US and China.
Three if you count China, but they didn't really lose.
>>74817182
>at least 10,000 years of dogs living with humans isn't comparable to 50 years of russians fucking around with foxes
no fucking shit retard
>>74817782
yes diamond is jews
>>74817738
He never specified present. That time implied he was referring to the 1900s, and it certainly doesn't imply present.
>>74802377
yea I stopped reading around the beginning I thought it was dumb when he said there is no difference in intelligence between any race and then he goes on to say that abos are smarter than whites because the dumb one will die in their harsh environment. Its like he just wanted to use every point possible that he didn't care if they contradicted each other and didn't put in the effort to at least space them out between different chapters.
>>74817729
But the population of Russia is mostly concentrated on the European side.
>>74817905
>There is evidence of that, even a leftist newspapers published, Westerns were 14 IQ ahead one century and a half ago
>one century and a half ago
>150 years
>1866-Present
Basic math.
>>74817811
Your English is a bit off. So something's getting lost in translation I think. I've grown up being taught, and believing, that communism is against the typical ideals of western civ (as practiced by : Greece, rome, Britain, and us). Communists don't teach the same concepts of citizenship. Citizenship is at the core of western ideology
>>74805488
I can get you educated in two: A Farewell to Alms and the 10,000 Year Explosion.
>>74818076
I was under the impression that it was a more geographic classification.
Also English was my first language.
Here's what the 2012 election would look like if only white people voted:
>>74802464
This, it doesn't agree with the evil colonial approach to everything, and instead focuses on the role of the environment.
For instance, Diamond argues (in another book) that Easter Island collapsed because they exploited the environment. That theory is now "racist" because it doesn't acknowledge the evil colonial aspects.
>>74818072
Alright, my bad.
>>74818341
The delusion is real
>>74818076
>Communists don't teach the same concepts of citizenship
That's wrong. The only "communist" nation that really applied to was the former Soviet Union; all the other communist states in the world since have been nationalistic as fuck.
Unless you consider "communism" to mean communion with Moscow, which pretty much rules out Mao, Che Guevara, and many, many others. Which is of course absurd.
>>74818605
What's delusional about it? Do you think the exit poll data was fabricated?
>>74818341
At the same time, Sanders is getting the white vote.
Seewhatimsayingherevoteforsanderspleasehesstillintheelectionhejustneedstowincaliforniareeeeeeeeeeeeeeee
>>74802430
RARE
>>74818181
Citizenship is defined by two main aspects: right to the soil and right by blood. People only focus on the former nowadays, as talk of ancestral claims is considered racist in the West. See: "What is being British?" or "America is Indian land / America is Mexican land" to understand why the latter is lost in modern political discussions.
>>74803137
The most generic theory is purely empirical - East Asians have slightly higher IQs, overall. But if you look specifically at the analytic and spatial sub-scores (which tend to be balanced in most populations around the world), CJK populations average a much higher visual score and a relatively low analytic score. If you focus on analytic IQ sub-score, GDP/capita in East Asia falls into line with other global GDP, and there is no further mystery. Go to the Griffe du Lion if you want to read more.
My pet theory is that European culture encouraged high-IQ people to focus on intellectual pursuits instead of pursuing wealth/power and having kids by multiple wives and concubines. The European approach milked a ton of technology out of the smart people, but the East Asian approach was a bit more eugenic.
(Biggest problem? The European country with by far the most accomplishments, England, also has the highest native IQ and a well-studied eugenic drift, at least prior to 1800.)
Other people have mentioned the European IQ collapse theory, but I'm a little skeptical of that.
>>74818744
No; he's getting the under-30 white vote. And here's the thing about under-30 white people: they talk the talk, endlessly signaling their superior holiness, but in the end, they don't freakin' vote.
>>74818847
But didn't you just say he's getting their vote?
>>74818961
for the ones who actually bother to show up on election day, yes.
Which, fortunately, is not many.
>>74801970
I totally respect this book, I don't see why /pol/ would hate it.
It's a totally honest account of what would have to be true, for the leftist consensus to be true. It's written by someone who takes things seriously, and has written a detailed apologetic.
And you can see exactly what's wrong with it. At the very start of the book, he immediately dismisses the possibility of racial IQ differences, because "I have friends that are natives of PNG". That's it. The whole book rests on that assumption.
>>74801970
He has a good argument but then goes full retard I read for a while kind of regret it
>>74819054
>fortunately
>>74819144
what he meant is:
>"I have a nice high-status job and don't want to be fired and blacklisted from academic work for the rest of my life"
>>74819273
Exactly, he pretty much said it.
It's like getting mad at a mathematician for explicitly assuming a certain axiom you don't believe at the start of a proof.
You can at least enjoy it as an intellectual exercise.
>>74801970
>>74819219
For someone who lives in what is essentially a glorious family owned-and-operated city-state, you sure have some weird (and dangerous) affections for democracy.
Be thankful that the Democracy Index rates Singapore as a "flawed democracy", same as South Africa. And unlike Singapore, thing's ain't exactly doing too swell right now in the "rainbow nation", last time I checked. What's the difference? Sure as hell ain't the democracy.
>China got writing from the Near East
>come from a family of linguistic professors so I immediately know this bullshit
Haha no. I stopped reading right there in the book.
Also, if you talk to any experts when it comes to the indigenous peoples of Mexico/Peru they were killed because of a whole host of reasons but the biggest reason was the mistrust and hate they had created between themselves and their subjects. That has nothing to do with geography, guns, germs, and steel.
>>74819651
Things are going pretty well here. What would you be referring to?
>>74801970
Enjoyed a lot.
>>74802753
I've never even read the book. Does he really try to bring up Smallpox blankets? that shit happened ONCE and it was during the Pontiac uprising with the birts trying to use it against an enemy native tribe. It was long after the vast majority of the natives had died from disease.
>>74817478
>So why don't you guys implement such a model?
Because that would be rayciss and intolerant and hateful. And we just gotta love and be free man.
>Which groups constitute as savages?
Anyone that can't act fucking civilized. Niggers that come and shoot each other up. Muslims that come and rape children and chop people's heads off. Spics that come and shoot everyone else up.
>>74819752
Yeah, that's my point; Singapore is one of the most well-run regimes in the entire world. Hopefully for the sake of Singapore it stays that way, and the parasite of democracy, in all of its forms - communism, republicanism, whatever - stays the hell away from Singapore.
I mean, the Democracy Index labels South Africa or Argentina as more "democratic" than Singapore, but where would you rather live? The Democracy Index can go fuck itself.
>>74817357
>western
They're not geographically western but they absolutely are culturally western.
>>74818804
NEW
>>74801970
>Diamond
