“asians (not jungle asians) are richer, smarter, more stable, less degenerate. they are objectively better than white and black men.”
There is racial thinking and there is white supremacy. This is undoubtedly an example of the former but the latter? "White supremacy" be definition cannot postulate other races as being superior. The lin…
“asians (not jungle asians) are richer, smarter, more stable, less degenerate. they are objectively better than white and black men.”
There is racial thinking and there is white supremacy. This is undoubtedly an example of the former but the latter? "White supremacy" be definition cannot postulate other races as being superior. The linked article confuses the two because on the left the first is indistinguishable from the second--ANY discussion of race is of course rooted in white supremacy.
That's just wrong on any number of levels. The trivial counterexample would be to point out that racial thinking is itself extremely common in Asia, Africa, etc.
"And for conservatives who hold up the purported Asian American success story as an example of how the American dream “still lives,” this only serves to obscure the institutional racism baked into our country’s policies."
'"White supremacy" be definition cannot postulate other races as being superior."
You're not accounting for the intellectual dishonesty of white supremacists. They can readily believe that they are somehow innately superior, while allowing for other groups to superficially appear superior in certain ways, such as IQ. That's especially true when there are just-so stories to justify why this supposed innate superiority hasn't made itself fully manifest, such as conspiracy theories about "International Jewry."
If you think that Dylann Roof, who said in his manifesto, "I have great respent [sic] for the East Asian races," isn't still a white supremacist, I don't know what to tell you.
“asians (not jungle asians) are richer, smarter, more stable, less degenerate. they are objectively better than white and black men.”
That is a pretty unequivocal statement. Not better in terms of IQ, just better. Maybe it doesn't represent the mainstream of white supremacist thinking, whatever that is, but the fault here lies with the writer in that case for including it and thinking that it somehow bolsters his case.
And do you mean "superficially" superior in terms of IQ to mean that Asians don't really have higher IQ scores? Or that the quality of intelligence isn't really what makes one race superior to another?
"And do you mean "superficially" superior in terms of IQ to mean that Asians don't really have higher IQ scores? Or that the quality of intelligence isn't really what makes one race superior to another?"
Neither one. The latter option is *almost* what I have in mind, but I'd replace "quality of intelligence" with "IQ score." Not everyone equates "IQ" with intelligence, especially if they are motivated not to do so. Given that white supremacists are not known for their intellectual honesty, I would expect them to be (*ahem*) "flexible" in their interpretation of IQ, depending on whether it makes whites look good. For example, whites having a higher average IQ than blacks would show that they are superior to them, but Asians having a higher average IQ than whites would just mean that they're book-smart or nerdy. Don't expect consistency from white supremacists.
"Maybe it doesn't represent the mainstream of white supremacist thinking, whatever that is, but the fault here lies with the writer in that case for including it and thinking that it somehow bolsters his case."
You may be right, but it's interesting to see what other replies there are to the /pol/ thread "East Asians have a higher IQ than whites" (https://archive.is/TyZMz):
"Maybe, but the [racial slur for Asians] webms prove that they have no souls."
"no sh-t
we still have bigger dicks than [racial slur for Asians], and are superior to [racial slur for those with brown skin] and n-----rs"
"Only Japan was able to build a civilization worth anything that didn't constantly fall apart without heavy western influence and direction, and even they got the majority of their scientific base from Dutch studies"
"Why is the [racial slur for Asians] unable to create anything with their high iq"
"The IQ in the West decreases for 30 years, I don't think East Asians have better genetics for intelligence"
"It's cute that you're saying that when they're doing a test devised by a white man, whit a pen invented by a white man, while dressed with clothes tailored by a white man, while cheating on their phones created by yet another white man... We own this world and the souls of everyone who live inside it shill."
"Add to that decades of jewish brain washing and degeneration and we are still superior.Asians are close and maybe peers but not the cream of the crop."
Notice a whole lot of downplaying the importance of the IQ of East Asians, while finding various ways to affirm the superiority of whites.
Actually I think most of these quotes support my argument more than yours.
"Why is the [racial slur for Asians] unable to create anything with their high iq" seems to me to be more of a denial of those IT test scores--i.e. "they can't be that smart because they haven't invented anything".
"It's cute that you're saying that when they're doing a test devised by a white man, whit a pen invented by a white man, while dressed with clothes tailored by a white man, while cheating on their phones created by yet another white man... We own this world and the souls of everyone who live inside it shill." See above.
"The IQ in the West decreases for 30 years, I don't think East Asians have better genetics for intelligence". An explicit rejection of the idea that genetics are responsible for higher IQ scores in Asian populations.
"Add to that decades of jewish brain washing and degeneration and we are still superior.Asians are close and maybe peers but not the cream of the crop." An explicit rejection of the idea that whites are second banana to Asians in terms of IQ. Environmental factors have degraded white test scores which provides a convenient explanation as to why genetics cannot favor Asian populations. Ironically that is what liberals argue when faced with lower IQ scores in the black community.
These quotes aren't downplaying the IQ of Asians, they're rejecting the thesis of higher IQ scores outright. That, it seems to me, is consistent with white supremacy. That idea that any white supremacist is going to be content to fall into the #2 position compared to another race is just ludicrous. And isn't it interesting how both they, and the political left, are eager to turn to environmental arguments as a means of discrediting the idea that genetics could be a factor?
"white supremacist is going to be content to fall into the #2 position compared to another race is just ludicrous."
Which is why they try to do a two-step where (1) on the one hand they try to appear respectable and not *really* white supremacist by acknowledging that the average Asian IQ is higher than the white one, but (2) asserting that whites really are still superior by finding reasons why that doesn't matter.
"And isn't it interesting how both they, and the political left, are eager to turn to environmental arguments as a means of discrediting the idea that genetics could be a factor?"
It's no more interesting than the fact that a stopped clock is right twice a day.
1) Except that they're not acknowledging higher Asian IQ scores in the quotes that you have provided, they are denying them. Maybe the dynamic that you are talking about is occurring but it doesn't seem to be borne out by the quotes that you have produced.
2) Nobody knows for certain the effect of genetics on IQ scores across races. Attempts to discredit genetics as a possible explanation are essentially trying to prove a negative. Why the desperate attempt to disprove something that nobody, as of yet, is seriously attempting to advance?
“asians (not jungle asians) are richer, smarter, more stable, less degenerate. they are objectively better than white and black men.”
There is racial thinking and there is white supremacy. This is undoubtedly an example of the former but the latter? "White supremacy" be definition cannot postulate other races as being superior. The linked article confuses the two because on the left the first is indistinguishable from the second--ANY discussion of race is of course rooted in white supremacy.
That's just wrong on any number of levels. The trivial counterexample would be to point out that racial thinking is itself extremely common in Asia, Africa, etc.
Plus this pretty much gives it away:
"And for conservatives who hold up the purported Asian American success story as an example of how the American dream “still lives,” this only serves to obscure the institutional racism baked into our country’s policies."
'"White supremacy" be definition cannot postulate other races as being superior."
You're not accounting for the intellectual dishonesty of white supremacists. They can readily believe that they are somehow innately superior, while allowing for other groups to superficially appear superior in certain ways, such as IQ. That's especially true when there are just-so stories to justify why this supposed innate superiority hasn't made itself fully manifest, such as conspiracy theories about "International Jewry."
If you think that Dylann Roof, who said in his manifesto, "I have great respent [sic] for the East Asian races," isn't still a white supremacist, I don't know what to tell you.
“asians (not jungle asians) are richer, smarter, more stable, less degenerate. they are objectively better than white and black men.”
That is a pretty unequivocal statement. Not better in terms of IQ, just better. Maybe it doesn't represent the mainstream of white supremacist thinking, whatever that is, but the fault here lies with the writer in that case for including it and thinking that it somehow bolsters his case.
And do you mean "superficially" superior in terms of IQ to mean that Asians don't really have higher IQ scores? Or that the quality of intelligence isn't really what makes one race superior to another?
"And do you mean "superficially" superior in terms of IQ to mean that Asians don't really have higher IQ scores? Or that the quality of intelligence isn't really what makes one race superior to another?"
Neither one. The latter option is *almost* what I have in mind, but I'd replace "quality of intelligence" with "IQ score." Not everyone equates "IQ" with intelligence, especially if they are motivated not to do so. Given that white supremacists are not known for their intellectual honesty, I would expect them to be (*ahem*) "flexible" in their interpretation of IQ, depending on whether it makes whites look good. For example, whites having a higher average IQ than blacks would show that they are superior to them, but Asians having a higher average IQ than whites would just mean that they're book-smart or nerdy. Don't expect consistency from white supremacists.
"Maybe it doesn't represent the mainstream of white supremacist thinking, whatever that is, but the fault here lies with the writer in that case for including it and thinking that it somehow bolsters his case."
You may be right, but it's interesting to see what other replies there are to the /pol/ thread "East Asians have a higher IQ than whites" (https://archive.is/TyZMz):
"Maybe, but the [racial slur for Asians] webms prove that they have no souls."
"no sh-t
we still have bigger dicks than [racial slur for Asians], and are superior to [racial slur for those with brown skin] and n-----rs"
"Only Japan was able to build a civilization worth anything that didn't constantly fall apart without heavy western influence and direction, and even they got the majority of their scientific base from Dutch studies"
"Why is the [racial slur for Asians] unable to create anything with their high iq"
"The IQ in the West decreases for 30 years, I don't think East Asians have better genetics for intelligence"
"It's cute that you're saying that when they're doing a test devised by a white man, whit a pen invented by a white man, while dressed with clothes tailored by a white man, while cheating on their phones created by yet another white man... We own this world and the souls of everyone who live inside it shill."
"Add to that decades of jewish brain washing and degeneration and we are still superior.Asians are close and maybe peers but not the cream of the crop."
Notice a whole lot of downplaying the importance of the IQ of East Asians, while finding various ways to affirm the superiority of whites.
Actually I think most of these quotes support my argument more than yours.
"Why is the [racial slur for Asians] unable to create anything with their high iq" seems to me to be more of a denial of those IT test scores--i.e. "they can't be that smart because they haven't invented anything".
"It's cute that you're saying that when they're doing a test devised by a white man, whit a pen invented by a white man, while dressed with clothes tailored by a white man, while cheating on their phones created by yet another white man... We own this world and the souls of everyone who live inside it shill." See above.
"The IQ in the West decreases for 30 years, I don't think East Asians have better genetics for intelligence". An explicit rejection of the idea that genetics are responsible for higher IQ scores in Asian populations.
"Add to that decades of jewish brain washing and degeneration and we are still superior.Asians are close and maybe peers but not the cream of the crop." An explicit rejection of the idea that whites are second banana to Asians in terms of IQ. Environmental factors have degraded white test scores which provides a convenient explanation as to why genetics cannot favor Asian populations. Ironically that is what liberals argue when faced with lower IQ scores in the black community.
These quotes aren't downplaying the IQ of Asians, they're rejecting the thesis of higher IQ scores outright. That, it seems to me, is consistent with white supremacy. That idea that any white supremacist is going to be content to fall into the #2 position compared to another race is just ludicrous. And isn't it interesting how both they, and the political left, are eager to turn to environmental arguments as a means of discrediting the idea that genetics could be a factor?
"white supremacist is going to be content to fall into the #2 position compared to another race is just ludicrous."
Which is why they try to do a two-step where (1) on the one hand they try to appear respectable and not *really* white supremacist by acknowledging that the average Asian IQ is higher than the white one, but (2) asserting that whites really are still superior by finding reasons why that doesn't matter.
"And isn't it interesting how both they, and the political left, are eager to turn to environmental arguments as a means of discrediting the idea that genetics could be a factor?"
It's no more interesting than the fact that a stopped clock is right twice a day.
1) Except that they're not acknowledging higher Asian IQ scores in the quotes that you have provided, they are denying them. Maybe the dynamic that you are talking about is occurring but it doesn't seem to be borne out by the quotes that you have produced.
2) Nobody knows for certain the effect of genetics on IQ scores across races. Attempts to discredit genetics as a possible explanation are essentially trying to prove a negative. Why the desperate attempt to disprove something that nobody, as of yet, is seriously attempting to advance?