Total Posts:77|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Hitler Gained Power by Appealing to the Dumb

jimtimmy
Posts: 3,953
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/8/2011 6:05:00 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
Hitler advocated National Socialism. This was basically a society where white Germans lived collectively and tried to expand their power. Hitler despised things like economic freedom and social freedom.

Hitler was the ultimate statist. Hitler gained power by appealing to people's primordial preference for tribal socialism. He gathered the struggling masses of white Germans and offered them an alternative, a racially cleansed collective society.

He created enemies: Capitalism, Jews, Marxism, etc. All of these enemies were things that threatened the primordial evolutionary instincts of the German masses... powerful people of a different ethnic background, large scale trade, ultra multiculturalism.

As most of you know, the less intelligent are more nationalist and more economically socialist. This is because human's default nature is tribal communism.

Things like diversity and free markets are "Evolutionary novelties"... that means they are not evolutionary defaults... they are more based in logic and reason, and less based in emotion and faith...

Hitler, as a national socialist, took power by appealing to these emotions... and fighting the other ones...
President of DDO
000ike
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/8/2011 6:13:28 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
"As most of you know, the less intelligent are more nationalist and more economically socialist. This is because human's default nature is tribal communism."

becoming more and more of a troll every day.
"A stupid despot may constrain his slaves with iron chains; but a true politician binds them even more strongly with the chain of their own ideas" - Michel Foucault
Lordknukle
Posts: 12,788
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/8/2011 6:31:06 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
Well considering the fact that capitalism was used by cavemen, I have high doubts that "communism" is their instinct.

EX. Caveman X gives Caveman Y a torch. Caveman Y gives Caveman X a big rock. This is capitalism.
"Easy is the descent to Avernus, for the door to the Underworld lies upon both day and night. But to retrace your steps and return to the breezes above- that's the task, that's the toil."
Wnope
Posts: 6,924
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/8/2011 6:34:09 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 11/8/2011 6:05:00 PM, jimtimmy wrote:
Hitler advocated National Socialism. This was basically a society where white Germans lived collectively and tried to expand their power. Hitler despised things like economic freedom and social freedom.

Hitler was the ultimate statist. Hitler gained power by appealing to people's primordial preference for tribal socialism. He gathered the struggling masses of white Germans and offered them an alternative, a racially cleansed collective society.

He created enemies: Capitalism, Jews, Marxism, etc. All of these enemies were things that threatened the primordial evolutionary instincts of the German masses... powerful people of a different ethnic background, large scale trade, ultra multiculturalism.

As most of you know, the less intelligent are more nationalist and more economically socialist. This is because human's default nature is tribal communism.

Things like diversity and free markets are "Evolutionary novelties"... that means they are not evolutionary defaults... they are more based in logic and reason, and less based in emotion and faith...

Hitler, as a national socialist, took power by appealing to these emotions... and fighting the other ones...

Were Americans smarter than the British for rejecting monarchy and centralized economy in favor of the American version of free trade?
jimtimmy
Posts: 3,953
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/8/2011 6:52:08 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 11/8/2011 6:34:09 PM, Wnope wrote:
At 11/8/2011 6:05:00 PM, jimtimmy wrote:
Hitler advocated National Socialism. This was basically a society where white Germans lived collectively and tried to expand their power. Hitler despised things like economic freedom and social freedom.

Hitler was the ultimate statist. Hitler gained power by appealing to people's primordial preference for tribal socialism. He gathered the struggling masses of white Germans and offered them an alternative, a racially cleansed collective society.

He created enemies: Capitalism, Jews, Marxism, etc. All of these enemies were things that threatened the primordial evolutionary instincts of the German masses... powerful people of a different ethnic background, large scale trade, ultra multiculturalism.

As most of you know, the less intelligent are more nationalist and more economically socialist. This is because human's default nature is tribal communism.

Things like diversity and free markets are "Evolutionary novelties"... that means they are not evolutionary defaults... they are more based in logic and reason, and less based in emotion and faith...

Hitler, as a national socialist, took power by appealing to these emotions... and fighting the other ones...

Were Americans smarter than the British for rejecting monarchy and centralized economy in favor of the American version of free trade?

Yes... clearly they were
President of DDO
OMGJustinBieber
Posts: 3,484
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/8/2011 7:23:11 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 11/8/2011 6:13:28 PM, 000ike wrote:
"As most of you know, the less intelligent are more nationalist and more economically socialist. This is because human's default nature is tribal communism."

becoming more and more of a troll every day.

It's sad how far this forum has fallen. Who are our top posters now? Probably inferno and jimtimmy. I generally don't even address these posts like the OP but they're becoming too common to ignore.
darkkermit
Posts: 11,204
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/8/2011 7:26:35 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 11/8/2011 6:31:06 PM, Lordknukle wrote:
Well considering the fact that capitalism was used by cavemen, I have high doubts that "communism" is their instinct.

EX. Caveman X gives Caveman Y a torch. Caveman Y gives Caveman X a big rock. This is capitalism.

That's completely false. Hunter gathering societies were communist in nature.
Open borders debate:
http://www.debate.org...
DetectableNinja
Posts: 6,043
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/8/2011 7:28:48 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 11/8/2011 6:31:06 PM, Lordknukle wrote:
Well considering the fact that capitalism was used by cavemen, I have high doubts that "communism" is their instinct.

EX. Caveman X gives Caveman Y a torch. Caveman Y gives Caveman X a big rock. This is capitalism.

I wouldn't say "communism" nor "capitalism." Humans are, contrary to popular belief, an empathetic species. One of the most simple evidences is our natural instinct to cringe when someone is hurt--we are primally empathizing with his/her plight.

Of course, there's a difference between communism and empathy, and clearly we aren't naturally communistic. But I wouldn't go so far as to say that we are naturally a capitalistic species.
Think'st thou heaven is such a glorious thing?
I tell thee, 'tis not half so fair as thou
Or any man that breathes on earth.

- Christopher Marlowe, Doctor Faustus
jimtimmy
Posts: 3,953
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/8/2011 7:38:26 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 11/8/2011 6:13:28 PM, 000ike wrote:
"As most of you know, the less intelligent are more nationalist and more economically socialist. This is because human's default nature is tribal communism."

becoming more and more of a troll every day.

look who's talking
President of DDO
DanT
Posts: 5,693
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/8/2011 7:40:42 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 11/8/2011 6:31:06 PM, Lordknukle wrote:
Well considering the fact that capitalism was used by cavemen, I have high doubts that "communism" is their instinct.

EX. Caveman X gives Caveman Y a torch. Caveman Y gives Caveman X a big rock. This is capitalism.

Actually Cavemen were communist. Product of the hunt were shared amongst the tribes, and personal possession was practically non-existent.

Some native American tribes are also communist, as they don't believe in personal ownership. such as Lakota.
"Chemical weapons are no different than any other types of weapons."~Lordknukle
jimtimmy
Posts: 3,953
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/8/2011 7:43:40 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 11/8/2011 6:31:06 PM, Lordknukle wrote:
Well considering the fact that capitalism was used by cavemen, I have high doubts that "communism" is their instinct.

EX. Caveman X gives Caveman Y a torch. Caveman Y gives Caveman X a big rock. This is capitalism.

Human's have a tribal communal nature... we evolved in tribal societies where all resources were held in common...

This couldnt work in the modern, globalized world... which is why free markets are the most practical thing now...

Also note that all versions of large scale, state sponsered communism/socialism have failed horribly
President of DDO
DanT
Posts: 5,693
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/8/2011 7:48:54 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 11/8/2011 6:05:00 PM, jimtimmy wrote:
Things like diversity and free markets are "Evolutionary novelties"... that means they are not evolutionary defaults... they are more based in logic and reason, and less based in emotion and faith...

Hitler, as a national socialist, took power by appealing to these emotions... and fighting the other ones...

Statism is like a religion.

Carl Jung, a Swiss psychiatrist, and the founder of Analytical Psychology, compared Hitler to Mohammed.

"We do not know whether Hitler is going to found a new Islam. He is already on the way; he is like Mohammed. The emotion in Germany is Islamic; warlike and Islamic. They are all drunk with wild god. That can be the historic future." ~ Carl Jung
"Chemical weapons are no different than any other types of weapons."~Lordknukle
jimtimmy
Posts: 3,953
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/8/2011 7:51:53 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 11/8/2011 7:23:11 PM, OMGJustinBieber wrote:
At 11/8/2011 6:13:28 PM, 000ike wrote:
"As most of you know, the less intelligent are more nationalist and more economically socialist. This is because human's default nature is tribal communism."

becoming more and more of a troll every day.

It's sad how far this forum has fallen. Who are our top posters now? Probably inferno and jimtimmy. I generally don't even address these posts like the OP but they're becoming too common to ignore.

Oh the sad Story of OMGJustinBieber.

Once, the politics forum on DDO was grand, filled with accepting, caring, and liberal people. Unicorns flew through the multicultural, egalitarian, candy filled sky and all was well. OMGJustinBieber was happy, as he should be...

However, the evil jimtimmy soon came to DDO and came to dominate the politics forum with his evil white nationalist, free market fundamentalist radicalism... He brought viscious racism to DDO...

The poor and virtuous OMGJustinBieber was at a loss... he tried fighting jimtimmy with his magical multicultural logic... But jimtimmy was a dumb libertarian racist, so he couldnt understand

Now, OMGJustinBieber has had the sad misfortune of watching jimtimmy, and his evil racist libertarian ideas, ruin the once great politics forum
President of DDO
OMGJustinBieber
Posts: 3,484
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/8/2011 8:24:03 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 11/8/2011 7:51:53 PM, jimtimmy wrote:
At 11/8/2011 7:23:11 PM, OMGJustinBieber wrote:
At 11/8/2011 6:13:28 PM, 000ike wrote:
"As most of you know, the less intelligent are more nationalist and more economically socialist. This is because human's default nature is tribal communism."

becoming more and more of a troll every day.

It's sad how far this forum has fallen. Who are our top posters now? Probably inferno and jimtimmy. I generally don't even address these posts like the OP but they're becoming too common to ignore.

Oh the sad Story of OMGJustinBieber.

Once, the politics forum on DDO was grand, filled with accepting, caring, and liberal people. Unicorns flew through the multicultural, egalitarian, candy filled sky and all was well. OMGJustinBieber was happy, as he should be...

However, the evil jimtimmy soon came to DDO and came to dominate the politics forum with his evil white nationalist, free market fundamentalist radicalism... He brought viscious racism to DDO...

The poor and virtuous OMGJustinBieber was at a loss... he tried fighting jimtimmy with his magical multicultural logic... But jimtimmy was a dumb libertarian racist, so he couldnt understand

Now, OMGJustinBieber has had the sad misfortune of watching jimtimmy, and his evil racist libertarian ideas, ruin the once great politics forum

That actually cracked me up when I read it. If it makes you feel any better you've reached the point where your posts become more funny to me rather than offensive.
000ike
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/8/2011 8:27:41 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
I think its starting to get to him how his views are considered racist. If he's racist from need to feel superior, then I have no pity, but if he's racist from not understanding whats wrong with his beliefs, perhaps he's just, well, stupid.
"A stupid despot may constrain his slaves with iron chains; but a true politician binds them even more strongly with the chain of their own ideas" - Michel Foucault
jimtimmy
Posts: 3,953
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/8/2011 8:36:23 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 11/8/2011 8:24:03 PM, OMGJustinBieber wrote:
At 11/8/2011 7:51:53 PM, jimtimmy wrote:
At 11/8/2011 7:23:11 PM, OMGJustinBieber wrote:
At 11/8/2011 6:13:28 PM, 000ike wrote:
"As most of you know, the less intelligent are more nationalist and more economically socialist. This is because human's default nature is tribal communism."

becoming more and more of a troll every day.

It's sad how far this forum has fallen. Who are our top posters now? Probably inferno and jimtimmy. I generally don't even address these posts like the OP but they're becoming too common to ignore.

Oh the sad Story of OMGJustinBieber.

Once, the politics forum on DDO was grand, filled with accepting, caring, and liberal people. Unicorns flew through the multicultural, egalitarian, candy filled sky and all was well. OMGJustinBieber was happy, as he should be...

However, the evil jimtimmy soon came to DDO and came to dominate the politics forum with his evil white nationalist, free market fundamentalist radicalism... He brought viscious racism to DDO...

The poor and virtuous OMGJustinBieber was at a loss... he tried fighting jimtimmy with his magical multicultural logic... But jimtimmy was a dumb libertarian racist, so he couldnt understand

Now, OMGJustinBieber has had the sad misfortune of watching jimtimmy, and his evil racist libertarian ideas, ruin the once great politics forum

That actually cracked me up when I read it. If it makes you feel any better you've reached the point where your posts become more funny to me rather than offensive.

that makes me feel a little better
President of DDO
jimtimmy
Posts: 3,953
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/8/2011 8:38:34 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 11/8/2011 8:27:41 PM, 000ike wrote:
I think its starting to get to him how his views are considered racist. If he's racist from need to feel superior, then I have no pity, but if he's racist from not understanding whats wrong with his beliefs, perhaps he's just, well, stupid.

I just don't consider my own views racist...

I think if you took a close look at my views you would just consider me an unusual libertarian/anti statist who bases his views on the way humans are... and sees that reality as less egalitarian and peaceful than most people think...

I don't see any races as being superior to any others... just different
President of DDO
Wnope
Posts: 6,924
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/9/2011 2:04:29 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 11/8/2011 6:52:08 PM, jimtimmy wrote:
At 11/8/2011 6:34:09 PM, Wnope wrote:
At 11/8/2011 6:05:00 PM, jimtimmy wrote:
Hitler advocated National Socialism. This was basically a society where white Germans lived collectively and tried to expand their power. Hitler despised things like economic freedom and social freedom.

Hitler was the ultimate statist. Hitler gained power by appealing to people's primordial preference for tribal socialism. He gathered the struggling masses of white Germans and offered them an alternative, a racially cleansed collective society.

He created enemies: Capitalism, Jews, Marxism, etc. All of these enemies were things that threatened the primordial evolutionary instincts of the German masses... powerful people of a different ethnic background, large scale trade, ultra multiculturalism.

As most of you know, the less intelligent are more nationalist and more economically socialist. This is because human's default nature is tribal communism.

Things like diversity and free markets are "Evolutionary novelties"... that means they are not evolutionary defaults... they are more based in logic and reason, and less based in emotion and faith...

Hitler, as a national socialist, took power by appealing to these emotions... and fighting the other ones...

Were Americans smarter than the British for rejecting monarchy and centralized economy in favor of the American version of free trade?

Yes... clearly they were

So, if we were to take national IQ tests around the late 1700s, early 1800s, we should find average IQ rankings as so:

1. America
2. France
3. Britian
4. Germany

Should we expect this order to change in 100 years if, in terms of relative EF/ID, they stay the same? (That is, no matter how much freer France becomes, America is still freer. No matter how much freer germany becomes, britian is still freer than that, etc).

Finally, should we consider the Puritans and Quakers to have a lower IQ than later Protestant and Catholic immigrants who moved away from P and Q's more communal form of agriculture and economics?
Wnope
Posts: 6,924
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/9/2011 2:09:45 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 11/8/2011 8:38:34 PM, jimtimmy wrote:
At 11/8/2011 8:27:41 PM, 000ike wrote:
I think its starting to get to him how his views are considered racist. If he's racist from need to feel superior, then I have no pity, but if he's racist from not understanding whats wrong with his beliefs, perhaps he's just, well, stupid.

I just don't consider my own views racist...

I think if you took a close look at my views you would just consider me an unusual libertarian/anti statist who bases his views on the way humans are... and sees that reality as less egalitarian and peaceful than most people think...

I don't see any races as being superior to any others... just different

You don't think the civil rights movement was supported by the majority of blacks. You argue that arabs and africans are all stupider than whites. You argue that European countries have a distinct trajectory from "asian" and "african" countries which shows superiority via history. You find it questionable that blacks would be better off without southern segregation. You argue that restaurants should have been allowed to keep out black patrons. You argue that any country with a different economic policy from libertarianism has stupid inhabitants. I so much as mention the mosque system, and you say "but arabs are stupider on average anyways."

Now, it's that civilizations which do not follow a trajectory towards libertarianism are more "primitive."

Remember how I talked about "one red flag means nothing, but a dozen do?"

You keep throwing red flags in the air and then pointing to each and saying "but look, that flag by itself shows nothing."
jimtimmy
Posts: 3,953
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/9/2011 3:05:41 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 11/9/2011 2:04:29 PM, Wnope wrote:
At 11/8/2011 6:52:08 PM, jimtimmy wrote:
At 11/8/2011 6:34:09 PM, Wnope wrote:
At 11/8/2011 6:05:00 PM, jimtimmy wrote:
Hitler advocated National Socialism. This was basically a society where white Germans lived collectively and tried to expand their power. Hitler despised things like economic freedom and social freedom.

Hitler was the ultimate statist. Hitler gained power by appealing to people's primordial preference for tribal socialism. He gathered the struggling masses of white Germans and offered them an alternative, a racially cleansed collective society.

He created enemies: Capitalism, Jews, Marxism, etc. All of these enemies were things that threatened the primordial evolutionary instincts of the German masses... powerful people of a different ethnic background, large scale trade, ultra multiculturalism.

As most of you know, the less intelligent are more nationalist and more economically socialist. This is because human's default nature is tribal communism.

Things like diversity and free markets are "Evolutionary novelties"... that means they are not evolutionary defaults... they are more based in logic and reason, and less based in emotion and faith...

Hitler, as a national socialist, took power by appealing to these emotions... and fighting the other ones...

Were Americans smarter than the British for rejecting monarchy and centralized economy in favor of the American version of free trade?

Yes... clearly they were

So, if we were to take national IQ tests around the late 1700s, early 1800s, we should find average IQ rankings as so:

1. America
2. France
3. Britian
4. Germany

Should we expect this order to change in 100 years if, in terms of relative EF/ID, they stay the same? (That is, no matter how much freer France becomes, America is still freer. No matter how much freer germany becomes, britian is still freer than that, etc).

Finally, should we consider the Puritans and Quakers to have a lower IQ than later Protestant and Catholic immigrants who moved away from P and Q's more communal form of agriculture and economics?

Strawman... not gonna bother responding to this kind of strawmanning
President of DDO
jimtimmy
Posts: 3,953
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/9/2011 3:08:04 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 11/9/2011 2:09:45 PM, Wnope wrote:
At 11/8/2011 8:38:34 PM, jimtimmy wrote:
At 11/8/2011 8:27:41 PM, 000ike wrote:
I think its starting to get to him how his views are considered racist. If he's racist from need to feel superior, then I have no pity, but if he's racist from not understanding whats wrong with his beliefs, perhaps he's just, well, stupid.

I just don't consider my own views racist...

I think if you took a close look at my views you would just consider me an unusual libertarian/anti statist who bases his views on the way humans are... and sees that reality as less egalitarian and peaceful than most people think...

I don't see any races as being superior to any others... just different

You don't think the civil rights movement was supported by the majority of blacks. You argue that arabs and africans are all stupider than whites. You argue that European countries have a distinct trajectory from "asian" and "african" countries which shows superiority via history. You find it questionable that blacks would be better off without southern segregation. You argue that restaurants should have been allowed to keep out black patrons. You argue that any country with a different economic policy from libertarianism has stupid inhabitants. I so much as mention the mosque system, and you say "but arabs are stupider on average anyways."

Now, it's that civilizations which do not follow a trajectory towards libertarianism are more "primitive."

Remember how I talked about "one red flag means nothing, but a dozen do?"

You keep throwing red flags in the air and then pointing to each and saying "but look, that flag by itself shows nothing."

Lol, this whole idea that I am saying that whites are superior is stupid... neve claimed superiority... just difference...

ANd, societies that are less libertarian are more primitive, in general... Support for Libertarianism is based on logic, not emotion as socialism is...

So, stop being retarded
President of DDO
Wnope
Posts: 6,924
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/9/2011 3:08:17 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 11/9/2011 3:05:41 PM, jimtimmy wrote:
At 11/9/2011 2:04:29 PM, Wnope wrote:
At 11/8/2011 6:52:08 PM, jimtimmy wrote:
At 11/8/2011 6:34:09 PM, Wnope wrote:
At 11/8/2011 6:05:00 PM, jimtimmy wrote:
Hitler advocated National Socialism. This was basically a society where white Germans lived collectively and tried to expand their power. Hitler despised things like economic freedom and social freedom.

Hitler was the ultimate statist. Hitler gained power by appealing to people's primordial preference for tribal socialism. He gathered the struggling masses of white Germans and offered them an alternative, a racially cleansed collective society.

He created enemies: Capitalism, Jews, Marxism, etc. All of these enemies were things that threatened the primordial evolutionary instincts of the German masses... powerful people of a different ethnic background, large scale trade, ultra multiculturalism.

As most of you know, the less intelligent are more nationalist and more economically socialist. This is because human's default nature is tribal communism.

Things like diversity and free markets are "Evolutionary novelties"... that means they are not evolutionary defaults... they are more based in logic and reason, and less based in emotion and faith...

Hitler, as a national socialist, took power by appealing to these emotions... and fighting the other ones...

: Were Americans smarter than the British for rejecting monarchy and centralized economy in favor of the American version of free trade?

Yes... clearly they were


So, if we were to take national IQ tests around the late 1700s, early 1800s, we should find average IQ rankings as so:

1. America
2. France
3. Britian
4. Germany

Should we expect this order to change in 100 years if, in terms of relative EF/ID, they stay the same? (That is, no matter how much freer France becomes, America is still freer. No matter how much freer germany becomes, britian is still freer than that, etc).

Finally, should we consider the Puritans and Quakers to have a lower IQ than later Protestant and Catholic immigrants who moved away from P and Q's more communal form of agriculture and economics?

Strawman... not gonna bother responding to this kind of strawmanning

Just to be clear though, you DO believe Americans had a higher IQ than the British because they rejected the British monarchy.

Let's be more simplistic. If America and Britian kept the same RELATIVE levels of EF for the past few hundred years (meaning absolute growth in EF for both but relatively America remains a constant amount ahead of Britian), should we expect the IQs of Americans to be higher than the British?
Wnope
Posts: 6,924
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/9/2011 3:14:17 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 11/9/2011 3:08:04 PM, jimtimmy wrote:
At 11/9/2011 2:09:45 PM, Wnope wrote:
At 11/8/2011 8:38:34 PM, jimtimmy wrote:
At 11/8/2011 8:27:41 PM, 000ike wrote:
I think its starting to get to him how his views are considered racist. If he's racist from need to feel superior, then I have no pity, but if he's racist from not understanding whats wrong with his beliefs, perhaps he's just, well, stupid.

I just don't consider my own views racist...

I think if you took a close look at my views you would just consider me an unusual libertarian/anti statist who bases his views on the way humans are... and sees that reality as less egalitarian and peaceful than most people think...

I don't see any races as being superior to any others... just different

You don't think the civil rights movement was supported by the majority of blacks. You argue that arabs and africans are all stupider than whites. You argue that European countries have a distinct trajectory from "asian" and "african" countries which shows superiority via history. You find it questionable that blacks would be better off without southern segregation. You argue that restaurants should have been allowed to keep out black patrons. You argue that any country with a different economic policy from libertarianism has stupid inhabitants. I so much as mention the mosque system, and you say "but arabs are stupider on average anyways."

Now, it's that civilizations which do not follow a trajectory towards libertarianism are more "primitive."

Remember how I talked about "one red flag means nothing, but a dozen do?"

You keep throwing red flags in the air and then pointing to each and saying "but look, that flag by itself shows nothing."

Lol, this whole idea that I am saying that whites are superior is stupid... neve claimed superiority... just difference...

ANd, societies that are less libertarian are more primitive, in general... Support for Libertarianism is based on logic, not emotion as socialism is...

So, stop being retarded

If I was ask you "here is population A of humans and here is population B. Which is superior?" could you answer that question?

If I told you "population A and population B are identical in every respect EXCEPT the members of B have higher IQs than the members of A" would you still be unable to say whether A or B is superior?

If so, what information would you need in order to give your answer?
jimtimmy
Posts: 3,953
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/9/2011 3:15:05 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 11/9/2011 3:08:17 PM, Wnope wrote:
At 11/9/2011 3:05:41 PM, jimtimmy wrote:
At 11/9/2011 2:04:29 PM, Wnope wrote:
At 11/8/2011 6:52:08 PM, jimtimmy wrote:
At 11/8/2011 6:34:09 PM, Wnope wrote:
At 11/8/2011 6:05:00 PM, jimtimmy wrote:
Hitler advocated National Socialism. This was basically a society where white Germans lived collectively and tried to expand their power. Hitler despised things like economic freedom and social freedom.

Hitler was the ultimate statist. Hitler gained power by appealing to people's primordial preference for tribal socialism. He gathered the struggling masses of white Germans and offered them an alternative, a racially cleansed collective society.

He created enemies: Capitalism, Jews, Marxism, etc. All of these enemies were things that threatened the primordial evolutionary instincts of the German masses... powerful people of a different ethnic background, large scale trade, ultra multiculturalism.

As most of you know, the less intelligent are more nationalist and more economically socialist. This is because human's default nature is tribal communism.

Things like diversity and free markets are "Evolutionary novelties"... that means they are not evolutionary defaults... they are more based in logic and reason, and less based in emotion and faith...

Hitler, as a national socialist, took power by appealing to these emotions... and fighting the other ones...

: Were Americans smarter than the British for rejecting monarchy and centralized economy in favor of the American version of free trade?

Yes... clearly they were


So, if we were to take national IQ tests around the late 1700s, early 1800s, we should find average IQ rankings as so:

1. America
2. France
3. Britian
4. Germany

Should we expect this order to change in 100 years if, in terms of relative EF/ID, they stay the same? (That is, no matter how much freer France becomes, America is still freer. No matter how much freer germany becomes, britian is still freer than that, etc).

Finally, should we consider the Puritans and Quakers to have a lower IQ than later Protestant and Catholic immigrants who moved away from P and Q's more communal form of agriculture and economics?

Strawman... not gonna bother responding to this kind of strawmanning

Just to be clear though, you DO believe Americans had a higher IQ than the British because they rejected the British monarchy.

I don't know what their IQs were

Let's be more simplistic. If America and Britian kept the same RELATIVE levels of EF for the past few hundred years (meaning absolute growth in EF for both but relatively America remains a constant amount ahead of Britian), should we expect the IQs of Americans to be higher than the British?

I don't know... America has also always been an individualistic culture... so we would expect more EF here... So, idk
President of DDO
Wnope
Posts: 6,924
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/9/2011 3:18:44 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 11/9/2011 3:15:05 PM, jimtimmy wrote:
At 11/9/2011 3:08:17 PM, Wnope wrote:
At 11/9/2011 3:05:41 PM, jimtimmy wrote:
At 11/9/2011 2:04:29 PM, Wnope wrote:
At 11/8/2011 6:52:08 PM, jimtimmy wrote:
At 11/8/2011 6:34:09 PM, Wnope wrote:
At 11/8/2011 6:05:00 PM, jimtimmy wrote:
Hitler advocated National Socialism. This was basically a society where white Germans lived collectively and tried to expand their power. Hitler despised things like economic freedom and social freedom.

Hitler was the ultimate statist. Hitler gained power by appealing to people's primordial preference for tribal socialism. He gathered the struggling masses of white Germans and offered them an alternative, a racially cleansed collective society.

He created enemies: Capitalism, Jews, Marxism, etc. All of these enemies were things that threatened the primordial evolutionary instincts of the German masses... powerful people of a different ethnic background, large scale trade, ultra multiculturalism.

As most of you know, the less intelligent are more nationalist and more economically socialist. This is because human's default nature is tribal communism.

Things like diversity and free markets are "Evolutionary novelties"... that means they are not evolutionary defaults... they are more based in logic and reason, and less based in emotion and faith...

Hitler, as a national socialist, took power by appealing to these emotions... and fighting the other ones...

: Were Americans smarter than the British for rejecting monarchy and centralized economy in favor of the American version of free trade?

Yes... clearly they were


So, if we were to take national IQ tests around the late 1700s, early 1800s, we should find average IQ rankings as so:

1. America
2. France
3. Britian
4. Germany

Should we expect this order to change in 100 years if, in terms of relative EF/ID, they stay the same? (That is, no matter how much freer France becomes, America is still freer. No matter how much freer germany becomes, britian is still freer than that, etc).

Finally, should we consider the Puritans and Quakers to have a lower IQ than later Protestant and Catholic immigrants who moved away from P and Q's more communal form of agriculture and economics?

Strawman... not gonna bother responding to this kind of strawmanning

Just to be clear though, you DO believe Americans had a higher IQ than the British because they rejected the British monarchy.

I don't know what their IQs were

Let's be more simplistic. If America and Britian kept the same RELATIVE levels of EF for the past few hundred years (meaning absolute growth in EF for both but relatively America remains a constant amount ahead of Britian), should we expect the IQs of Americans to be higher than the British?

I don't know... America has also always been an individualistic culture... so we would expect more EF here... So, idk

I don't know what British or American IQs are either.

However, you say national IQ causes greater EF. With that information, shouldn't we conclude Americans have a higher national IQ than the British?

How much would "being an individualistic culture" influence a country's EF independent of IQ?

Also, didn't you say that individualistic culture (libertarianism) is caused by higher IQ as opposed to more primitive/emotional communal culture?
jimtimmy
Posts: 3,953
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/9/2011 3:37:12 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 11/9/2011 3:18:44 PM, Wnope wrote:
At 11/9/2011 3:15:05 PM, jimtimmy wrote:
At 11/9/2011 3:08:17 PM, Wnope wrote:
At 11/9/2011 3:05:41 PM, jimtimmy wrote:
At 11/9/2011 2:04:29 PM, Wnope wrote:
At 11/8/2011 6:52:08 PM, jimtimmy wrote:
At 11/8/2011 6:34:09 PM, Wnope wrote:
At 11/8/2011 6:05:00 PM, jimtimmy wrote:
Hitler advocated National Socialism. This was basically a society where white Germans lived collectively and tried to expand their power. Hitler despised things like economic freedom and social freedom.

Hitler was the ultimate statist. Hitler gained power by appealing to people's primordial preference for tribal socialism. He gathered the struggling masses of white Germans and offered them an alternative, a racially cleansed collective society.

He created enemies: Capitalism, Jews, Marxism, etc. All of these enemies were things that threatened the primordial evolutionary instincts of the German masses... powerful people of a different ethnic background, large scale trade, ultra multiculturalism.

As most of you know, the less intelligent are more nationalist and more economically socialist. This is because human's default nature is tribal communism.

Things like diversity and free markets are "Evolutionary novelties"... that means they are not evolutionary defaults... they are more based in logic and reason, and less based in emotion and faith...

Hitler, as a national socialist, took power by appealing to these emotions... and fighting the other ones...

: Were Americans smarter than the British for rejecting monarchy and centralized economy in favor of the American version of free trade?

Yes... clearly they were


So, if we were to take national IQ tests around the late 1700s, early 1800s, we should find average IQ rankings as so:

1. America
2. France
3. Britian
4. Germany

Should we expect this order to change in 100 years if, in terms of relative EF/ID, they stay the same? (That is, no matter how much freer France becomes, America is still freer. No matter how much freer germany becomes, britian is still freer than that, etc).

Finally, should we consider the Puritans and Quakers to have a lower IQ than later Protestant and Catholic immigrants who moved away from P and Q's more communal form of agriculture and economics?

Strawman... not gonna bother responding to this kind of strawmanning

Just to be clear though, you DO believe Americans had a higher IQ than the British because they rejected the British monarchy.

I don't know what their IQs were

Let's be more simplistic. If America and Britian kept the same RELATIVE levels of EF for the past few hundred years (meaning absolute growth in EF for both but relatively America remains a constant amount ahead of Britian), should we expect the IQs of Americans to be higher than the British?

I don't know... America has also always been an individualistic culture... so we would expect more EF here... So, idk

I don't know what British or American IQs are either.

I looked it up... Americans average 98.... vs 100 in GB

However, you say national IQ causes greater EF. With that information, shouldn't we conclude Americans have a higher national IQ than the British?

It is A cause.. A cause... and, the economic freedom is only a little bit higher in America... so other factors play a role...

But, here is an interesting fact... the two highest IQ nations in the world are Hong Kong and Singapore... It just so happens that these two nations are also the top two in economic freedom according to every index...

That doesnt prove anything, but it does speak to a correlation

How much would "being an individualistic culture" influence a country's EF independent of IQ?

I dont know

Also, didn't you say that individualistic culture (libertarianism) is caused by higher IQ as opposed to more primitive/emotional communal culture?

It is A cause.... there are other causes of libertarianism outside of IQ... but higher IQ is a cause of libertarianism
President of DDO
Wnope
Posts: 6,924
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/9/2011 3:51:49 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 11/9/2011 3:37:12 PM, jimtimmy wrote:
At 11/9/2011 3:18:44 PM, Wnope wrote:
At 11/9/2011 3:15:05 PM, jimtimmy wrote:
At 11/9/2011 3:08:17 PM, Wnope wrote:
At 11/9/2011 3:05:41 PM, jimtimmy wrote:
At 11/9/2011 2:04:29 PM, Wnope wrote:
At 11/8/2011 6:52:08 PM, jimtimmy wrote:
At 11/8/2011 6:34:09 PM, Wnope wrote:
At 11/8/2011 6:05:00 PM, jimtimmy wrote:
Hitler advocated National Socialism. This was basically a society where white Germans lived collectively and tried to expand their power. Hitler despised things like economic freedom and social freedom.

Hitler was the ultimate statist. Hitler gained power by appealing to people's primordial preference for tribal socialism. He gathered the struggling masses of white Germans and offered them an alternative, a racially cleansed collective society.

He created enemies: Capitalism, Jews, Marxism, etc. All of these enemies were things that threatened the primordial evolutionary instincts of the German masses... powerful people of a different ethnic background, large scale trade, ultra multiculturalism.

As most of you know, the less intelligent are more nationalist and more economically socialist. This is because human's default nature is tribal communism.

Things like diversity and free markets are "Evolutionary novelties"... that means they are not evolutionary defaults... they are more based in logic and reason, and less based in emotion and faith...

Hitler, as a national socialist, took power by appealing to these emotions... and fighting the other ones...

: Were Americans smarter than the British for rejecting monarchy and centralized economy in favor of the American version of free trade?

Yes... clearly they were


So, if we were to take national IQ tests around the late 1700s, early 1800s, we should find average IQ rankings as so:

1. America
2. France
3. Britian
4. Germany

Should we expect this order to change in 100 years if, in terms of relative EF/ID, they stay the same? (That is, no matter how much freer France becomes, America is still freer. No matter how much freer germany becomes, britian is still freer than that, etc).

Finally, should we consider the Puritans and Quakers to have a lower IQ than later Protestant and Catholic immigrants who moved away from P and Q's more communal form of agriculture and economics?

Strawman... not gonna bother responding to this kind of strawmanning

Just to be clear though, you DO believe Americans had a higher IQ than the British because they rejected the British monarchy.

I don't know what their IQs were

Let's be more simplistic. If America and Britian kept the same RELATIVE levels of EF for the past few hundred years (meaning absolute growth in EF for both but relatively America remains a constant amount ahead of Britian), should we expect the IQs of Americans to be higher than the British?

I don't know... America has also always been an individualistic culture... so we would expect more EF here... So, idk

I don't know what British or American IQs are either.

I looked it up... Americans average 98.... vs 100 in GB

However, you say national IQ causes greater EF. With that information, shouldn't we conclude Americans have a higher national IQ than the British?

It is A cause.. A cause... and, the economic freedom is only a little bit higher in America... so other factors play a role...

But, here is an interesting fact... the two highest IQ nations in the world are Hong Kong and Singapore... It just so happens that these two nations are also the top two in economic freedom according to every index...

That doesnt prove anything, but it does speak to a correlation

How much would "being an individualistic culture" influence a country's EF independent of IQ?

I dont know

Also, didn't you say that individualistic culture (libertarianism) is caused by higher IQ as opposed to more primitive/emotional communal culture?

It is A cause.... there are other causes of libertarianism outside of IQ... but higher IQ is a cause of libertarianism

So, let's say, then, that we wanted to determine how much of Britian versus America's economic freedom is directly attributable to IQ differences.

Assume we do a survey and it turns out that for the past 20 years Britian has been throwing all their funding into building schools and colleges and such. During that period in America, our educational infrastructure kept a constant, but lower, growth. We give IQ tests to both countries at the end of the 20 years period.

If we found that British have a much larger high school graduation rates than Americans, would it completely screw up the explanatory power of individual IQ if we used "graduation rates" as a control factor?

Or would the resulting number more accurately reflect how much IQ differences influence the differences between people in Britian versus America?
jimtimmy
Posts: 3,953
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/9/2011 4:14:00 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 11/9/2011 3:51:49 PM, Wnope wrote:
At 11/9/2011 3:37:12 PM, jimtimmy wrote:
At 11/9/2011 3:18:44 PM, Wnope wrote:
At 11/9/2011 3:15:05 PM, jimtimmy wrote:
At 11/9/2011 3:08:17 PM, Wnope wrote:
At 11/9/2011 3:05:41 PM, jimtimmy wrote:
At 11/9/2011 2:04:29 PM, Wnope wrote:
At 11/8/2011 6:52:08 PM, jimtimmy wrote:
At 11/8/2011 6:34:09 PM, Wnope wrote:
At 11/8/2011 6:05:00 PM, jimtimmy wrote:
Hitler advocated National Socialism. This was basically a society where white Germans lived collectively and tried to expand their power. Hitler despised things like economic freedom and social freedom.

Hitler was the ultimate statist. Hitler gained power by appealing to people's primordial preference for tribal socialism. He gathered the struggling masses of white Germans and offered them an alternative, a racially cleansed collective society.

He created enemies: Capitalism, Jews, Marxism, etc. All of these enemies were things that threatened the primordial evolutionary instincts of the German masses... powerful people of a different ethnic background, large scale trade, ultra multiculturalism.

As most of you know, the less intelligent are more nationalist and more economically socialist. This is because human's default nature is tribal communism.

Things like diversity and free markets are "Evolutionary novelties"... that means they are not evolutionary defaults... they are more based in logic and reason, and less based in emotion and faith...

Hitler, as a national socialist, took power by appealing to these emotions... and fighting the other ones...

: Were Americans smarter than the British for rejecting monarchy and centralized economy in favor of the American version of free trade?

Yes... clearly they were


So, if we were to take national IQ tests around the late 1700s, early 1800s, we should find average IQ rankings as so:

1. America
2. France
3. Britian
4. Germany

Should we expect this order to change in 100 years if, in terms of relative EF/ID, they stay the same? (That is, no matter how much freer France becomes, America is still freer. No matter how much freer germany becomes, britian is still freer than that, etc).

Finally, should we consider the Puritans and Quakers to have a lower IQ than later Protestant and Catholic immigrants who moved away from P and Q's more communal form of agriculture and economics?

Strawman... not gonna bother responding to this kind of strawmanning

Just to be clear though, you DO believe Americans had a higher IQ than the British because they rejected the British monarchy.

I don't know what their IQs were

Let's be more simplistic. If America and Britian kept the same RELATIVE levels of EF for the past few hundred years (meaning absolute growth in EF for both but relatively America remains a constant amount ahead of Britian), should we expect the IQs of Americans to be higher than the British?

I don't know... America has also always been an individualistic culture... so we would expect more EF here... So, idk

I don't know what British or American IQs are either.

I looked it up... Americans average 98.... vs 100 in GB

However, you say national IQ causes greater EF. With that information, shouldn't we conclude Americans have a higher national IQ than the British?

It is A cause.. A cause... and, the economic freedom is only a little bit higher in America... so other factors play a role...

But, here is an interesting fact... the two highest IQ nations in the world are Hong Kong and Singapore... It just so happens that these two nations are also the top two in economic freedom according to every index...

That doesnt prove anything, but it does speak to a correlation

How much would "being an individualistic culture" influence a country's EF independent of IQ?

I dont know

Also, didn't you say that individualistic culture (libertarianism) is caused by higher IQ as opposed to more primitive/emotional communal culture?

It is A cause.... there are other causes of libertarianism outside of IQ... but higher IQ is a cause of libertarianism

So, let's say, then, that we wanted to determine how much of Britian versus America's economic freedom is directly attributable to IQ differences.

Assume we do a survey and it turns out that for the past 20 years Britian has been throwing all their funding into building schools and colleges and such. During that period in America, our educational infrastructure kept a constant, but lower, growth. We give IQ tests to both countries at the end of the 20 years period.

If we found that British have a much larger high school graduation rates than Americans, would it completely screw up the explanatory power of individual IQ if we used "graduation rates" as a control factor?

Or would the resulting number more accurately reflect how much IQ differences influence the differences between people in Britian versus America?

Thats just it... this hypothetical does not reflect reality... smarter countries have higher graduation rates
President of DDO
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/9/2011 4:20:52 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
Look everyone, we know he is a troll. Feeding them only makes them come back. Of course, once we stop feeding him, there will still be a few followers that join in for the frequent "statism is ebil" or "whites are smarter than blacks" circle jerk, but that too will pass in no time.
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
000ike
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/9/2011 5:18:14 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 11/9/2011 4:20:52 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
Look everyone, we know he is a troll. Feeding them only makes them come back. Of course, once we stop feeding him, there will still be a few followers that join in for the frequent "statism is ebil" or "whites are smarter than blacks" circle jerk, but that too will pass in no time.

I wouldn't call that feeding the troll. More like, educating the troll, and who knows, Wnope just may get through to him.
"A stupid despot may constrain his slaves with iron chains; but a true politician binds them even more strongly with the chain of their own ideas" - Michel Foucault