Why HBD Means More Socialism, Not Less

Francis Meville writes:

I have been following your blog for quite a long time. One thing I don’t understand about you: you admit there are intellectually and morally inferior people like most Negroes, who are so because of their genetic makeup, of their racial inheritance.
You also admit there are superior people in terms of IQ and gratification inhibition such as the Jews, the Northern Germanic, the Northern Chinese; on the other hand you are a socialist and oppose a society of classes such as India always was, such as Southern Confederacy used to be, such as post-modern America strives to be. You seem to hate India with an especial fervour.
My opinion is that the African Negro race has been given to us by nature as the proof writ gigantic of the utter inanity of all humanistic equalitarian theories, and of the necessity of maintaining social segregation and revenue inequality not only between blacks and non-blacks, but also between less visible but nonetheless important biological factors of discrimination.

Actually I have never said that the low IQ of Blacks is due entirely to their genes. I have said that I do not know what is causing it and not only that, but I do not particularly care what is causing it.
I never said that Northern Germanic people are more intelligent or have longer time preference than other Caucasians. Maybe it’s true, maybe it isn’t.
I never said that the Northern Chinese are more intelligent or have longer time preference than other Asians.
I never said that Jews have longer time preference than other Caucasians.
Actually, my opinion is that HBD increases the argument for socialism and decreases the argument for capitalism. If all races were equal, then that would increase the argument for capitalism and decrease the argument for socialism.
The reason is this. If all races inherited the same biological disposition and were all equal at the starting gate, so to speak, then absent major discrimination, they should all be capable of equivalent levels of achievement in all areas. Races that did better in some areas would do so only because they tried harder, had better morals and culture, and worked harder. Races that did more poorly would do so because they didn’t care and hence didn’t try, would rather be lazy than work hard, or had low morals or lousy cultures. In other words, it would all be down to willpower. Willpower and free will equals responsibility.
In a society where free will determined which races did better and some did worse, you could more easily justify a rigid caste system. The high achievers would have gotten there only be being better people, trying harder and making sounder decisions. They would have well and truly achieved everything that they gained in life, which would be much deserved. The low achieving races would get their by making idiotic decisions, being worse people and being lazy. All of their shortcomings would be their own damn fault and they would deserve every bit of pain their suffered for their wrongful behavioral choices.
Instead, HBD says that the race isn’t even fair at the starting gate. You have some races who get to dope up and do steroids, while this is banned of others. Some races are hindered by being forced to race in wheelchairs or run with crutches. Obviously people would say that the winners cheated in this race and don’t deserve their trophies, and the losers lost because the whole charade was unfair to start with. The losers would have no responsiblity for their undeserved losses.
So with HBD, the races performing better may be doing so largely because they lucked out in the genetic lottery. So what! So you got lucky, big deal. Why should your getting lucky mean that everyone else be hindered.
Furthermore, your lucking out implies that you haven’t really earned any of your achievements. Instead, they were handed to you on a silver platter. Everything you gained is more or less theft and a big fraud.
The races with more problems on the other hand would bear no responsibility for their lagging behind. The only reason they lag is because someone dumped a handicap on them and they never had a chance in the first place. They do not deserve any of their failures. In other words, their shortcomings are not their fault in any way whatsoever.
It seems extremely wrong to reward some races heavily because they lucked out and got a lot of undeserved achievements while totally screwing over others who just happened to draw the wrong cards and hence lost the round.
Since the excess wealth and possessions of the achievers are utterly unearned, they do not deserve all their groovy stuff. We need to take some of their undeserved wealth away from them and give to the others who lagged behind via no fault of their own.
Are you following? Undeserved achievements and undeserved failures means more socialism, not less.
If you think this website is valuable to you, please consider a contribution to support the continuation of the site.

Please follow and like us:
error0
fb-share-icon20
Tweet 20
fb-share-icon20

0 thoughts on “Why HBD Means More Socialism, Not Less”

  1. I believe in people taking responsibility. Capitalism is not unfair to any specific race because it will still allow the intelligent people of all races to succeed. It only hinders the average or below average in the cases you mention, not the exceptional.
    I don’t think intelligent people from lower performing nations should have to share too much or be hindered by the less intelligent countrymen. They should be allowed to shine and prosper above the rest. If they are forced to share everything, they can’t shine and everything averages out to nothing. They have no means to prove themselves and no reward for generations of hard work and careful breeding.
    Your argument fails when you say long standing high achieving or intellectual families from countries below the average should be considered handicapped or less than morons from higher performing countries due to the concept of nation. How is someone from a long line of educated or intelligent people from a lower IQ country handicapped or inferior? It doesn’t make sense.

  2. People that believe in HBD-based social policies ultimately want racial separation. That’s the only logical conclusion that social policy based on HBD would bring you to. Every race would live in their own nation, stay out of one another’s affairs and any prosperity that arises will be due to their own effort and capability.
    In the case of a place like America, long-term inequality between the races will always be a source of tension. To America’s credit, I think we’ve managed it incredibly well for the most part. Especially when you think about all the flashpoints in history where the country could’ve burned to the ground over racial matters, e.g. assassination of MLK, Rodney King riots, Tulsa Riots, school desegregation rioting. I’m really surprised we even made it this far without a full-on race war. Since blacks are going back to Africa, Mexicans aren’t going back to Mexico and Asians aren’t going back to Asia, It’s in our best interest to try and promote as much economic and social equality between the races as possible. The WN pipe dream of separate territories for the races is pie in the sky nonsense. It will never happen. It’s like some of the more extreme manosphere guys that talk about taking the vote away from women. Or the people who talk about rounding up all illegals in the country and sending back home. Yeah, it ain’t happening so better to find more feasible long-term solutions.
    HBDers will argue that minorities are a drain on whites. I don’t know if that’s factually true or not(if minorities cost more money in taxes than they pay in). I truly have no idea, I’ve not looked into it one iota and it would be quite an undertaking to figure out. But for the sake of argument let’s say it’s true. Okay, so now what? We know that blacks aren’t going back to Africa. We know that there aren’t going to be separate territories for races in America. So the HBDers will say, end any form of social welfare, TANF, child healthcare, school lunches, section 8, etc. Of course many poor whites will be hurt by this as well. But since more blacks are poor, they will be hurt more. Okay so now the black underclass has the safety net removed. So what will we get? Like I said, they aren’t going to pack their bags and move to Africa. You will likely get a sharp rise in crime. America’s ghettos may turn into favelas like you see in Brazil and Venezuela, with kids sniffing glue so they can venture out and rob people. And hillside shanty towns with 3rd world level poverty. I’m not saying all blacks will end up like this, but some of the most impoverished pockets in the country may end up like that. And of course white rural poverty may start to resemble some 2nd world country like Moldova.
    I can understand why people don’t like paying taxes to subsidize others. That’s a normal human reaction, especially if you feel you produce at a greater level than others. But what is the realistic alternative? America for the most part is a safe country. Even the major cities. Los Angeles and NYC have pretty low murder rates by global standards. A rise in inequality would move us closer to a society that resembles Brazil. I think it’s in all of our best interest to keep inequality from becoming to extreme just for the sake of keeping America stable.

    1. Most HBDers simply believe in moving away from non-whites, to say Idaho or something. Therefore, what the federal government does (redistributing wealth to ease social tension) is of no concern to them.

    2. “Every race would live in their own nation, stay out of one another’s affairs and any prosperity that arises will be due to their own effort and capability.”
      I don’t believe in racial separation but if you do take this view, there is no reason why the more prosperous continental populations should not help Africans in Africa. There may be no intermarriage but why not help out of the goodness of your heart? there’s no logic why not; only selfishness and meanness.
      Its probably going to be a better world if we just embrace the concept of the human family, say fuck it and allow whatever mixing to happen. If the Chinese have a genotypic IQ of 110 or even 105 and Africans have a genotypic IQ of 85 or 90 (and the population sizes are about the same) and everybody mixes to the fullest extent, then the two pretty much cancel each other out and meet around 97, close to the European IQ. Maybe it will be a better world if we just say fuck it and mix and we all just get along. Africans have some positive personality traits and physical traits to contribute to the mix- they are outgoing and vibrant and athletic. Maybe the ingredients are there for us to mix up and balance each other out and make the perfect desert, a world of Cauca-blasian ninjas.
      A note about America: Latinos are more native American than white Americans so if we are going to talk about everybody returning to their continent, then the white Americans are headed this way to the mother continent where white people are from and the Latinos have the best claim to the Americas ha

      1. US Latinos in California are 1/2 Indian and 1/2 White. The one in the other states tend to be more White than Indian – 60-70% White and 30-40% Indian. Miami Cubans are very White.

  3. Non-whites in America have no incentive for creating separate states, only WNs do. Non-whites benefit heavily from the federal government, and money from the economy. On their own, their poverty would be much worse than it is now, despite the fact a lot of poverty exists now.

  4. Great post. I think it’s safe to say that world is a terrible place. People suffer in all possible ways because of the things they have no chance of changing, some born ugly, some born with low intelligence, some born disabled etc. and all these inequalities cause lots of suffering. I think only way forward is scientific/technological development. High tech will be able to reduce suffering greatly.

    1. That’s why i believe in eugenics. It is unjust that some men and women are born ugly. IF we could make people more attractive by changing their genome, then that would be progress. Eugenics is fundamentally a progressive policy.
      Right now we live in a world in which the endowment of the mother and father determines one’s life outcomes. This is an extremely regressive world that is at odds with out notion of “hard word” and fairness. No amount of hard work is going to help a beta who can’t get laid because he’s too ugly.

  5. Imagine in a tribe if the intelligent members got everything and the less intelligent members got hardly anything. That would be a cruel tribe. A good tribe would look after everybody as fellow family members. It not their fault they aren’t so smart. The same principle can be applied to society or the world….there is a human family…it is just easier for people when they can’t see the hard done by and don’t have to live alongside them.
    This article shows goodness. The only thing i’d say is I don’t agree the winners didn’t deserve it AT ALL. You always need talent plus hard work to succeed. And the loser might still have some responsibility if they are lazy as well as stupid. But still there will be large scale patterns due to intelligence differences and your overall logic is good. I know you was slightly simplifying to make a point and establish a principle.
    This is an important point about the clever and not so clever within races too and a good argument for socialism even in a racially homogeneous society.
    This fella who wrote the comment, why does he think you need to maintain revenue inequality? As if there is something wrong with helping people. Everybody gets help in their lives. You are helpless and lack adult intelligence as a child but you still have the same capacity to suffer and need help to have a happy life. Anyway, what does he mean by it? He could mean: a) have a system where people have different income levels as now b) don’t give black people any welfare. The latter is just mean spirited and cruel and there is really no justification for it following from natural differences in IQ. Nothing is achieved by it except causing people to suffer.
    Besides, if there are natural differences in ability, there will be revenue inequality anyway. Socialist aren’t necessarily arguing for exact equality so everybody has the exact same pay. There can be a moderate amount of inequality to reward hard work and talent.. The problem arguably is the obscene inequality of epic proportions.

    1. Yes that article was meant as a provocation against the Libertarian HBD’ers, who are, after all, very, very cruel and mean-spirited, no matter what they say.
      I have a low income, but I think I deserve more money than some guy whose only skill is ditch-digger. I have a BA in one field, a teaching credential and an MA in another field. I am soon to be a published author. I do all sorts of things for money – therapist, arbitrator, middleman/broker, copy editor, writer, sell information – and a lot of that stuff requires some pretty good skills that worked extremely hard and long in acquiring. When I work, I often charge between $20-40/hour and I get it pretty regularly. That is a lot more than most folks earn, but I think I deserve it.
      So the article was not completely serious. On the other hand, if I really start making a lot of money, I need to be forced to share some of that money with truly poor people via taxation.

    2. In third world nations it means the intelligent and talented have to be brought down to a level of third world living standards in a socialist economies. Elites in poor countries just want a first world standard of living but people like you think they don’t deserve it just because of the people who surround them.
      Why do you deserve a first world standard of living but not them? Why is it so corrupt and horrible to keep what you actually earned yourself? Also paying people to breed is only dysgenic and makes the talented outnumbered by the untalented.

  6. The presence of a minority population that cannot integrate, one that drags down averages and rarely contributes anything on the upper end of the bell curve is the equivalent of a ball and chain. The reason that the US has so far failed to start a colony on Mars is simple. You are pouring your patrimony into the black ghetto.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *