Results 1 to 4 of 4

Thread: Genetic Equality is a Lie

  1. #1
    Senior Member Godwinson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Last Online
    Thursday, September 27th, 2018 @ 03:29 AM
    Ethnicity
    English
    Ancestry
    English, Anglo-Saxon
    Country
    England England
    Location
    South Coast
    Gender
    Family
    Married
    Occupation
    Self Employed
    Politics
    Fascist
    Religion
    Pagan
    Posts
    3,294
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    249
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    581
    Thanked in
    280 Posts

    Genetic Equality is a Lie

    The New York Times Admits Genetic Equality is a Lie


    The New York Times published an important article a few days ago, admitting that genetic equality was a lie.

    Over 99 percent of our DNA is identical in all humans, but researchers focused on the remaining 1 percent and found thousands of DNA variants that are correlated with educational attainment. This information can be combined into a single number, called a polygenic score. In Americans with European ancestry, just over 10 percent of people with a low polygenic score completed college, compared with 55 percent of people with a high polygenic score. This genetic disparity in college completion is as big as the disparity between rich and poor students in America.
    Of course, the NYT tries to put a “progressive” spin on this fact.

    How can the power of the genomic revolution be harnessed to create a more equal society?

    Discovering specific DNA variants that are correlated with education can help us in two ways.

    First, these genetic results reveal the injustice of our so-called meritocracy. As a nation, we justify stark inequalities with the idea that people who stayed in school deserve more than people who didn’t finish high school or college — more money, more security, more health, more life.

    But success in our educational system is partially a result of genetic luck. No one earned his or her DNA sequence, yet some of us are benefiting enormously from it. By showing us the links between genes and educational success, this new study reminds us that everyone should share in our national prosperity, regardless of which genetic variants he or she happens to inherit.
    Although the author doesn’t make it explicit, this amounts to a genetic argument for Communism. It says hard-working people don’t deserve the prosperity their hard work brings them; they just lucked out with their “hard working” genes. This justifies taking their wealth and redistributing it to those cursed with “lazy genes” or “hard work disinclination genes”.

    This is a diabolical Anti-Life ideology that abnegates all personal effort and all moral choice. If you made an effort, if you made the right choice, it was only because were gifted with the genes that made it possible. Nothing you do is meritorious.

    Evolution, the Life process, rewards those with the attributes that lead to success; but Equality mongers think that the Life process has somehow got it wrong; and we should systematically seek out failure and reward it wherever we can, plundering the successful to finance misfits and losers.

    Of course, it is in relation to race differences or immigration policy that genetic inequality really gets interesting. If we can find polygenic markers that predict educational and economic success, why not apply it to prospective immigrants? And are these “polygenic markers” equally distributed among races?

    Alas, progressive science can’t help us out here, it seems.

    Because researchers focused on differences within an ancestrally homogeneous group of people, their results have no implications for understanding racial disparities in education.Also, when researchers looked at African-Americans, the genetic variants only minimally predicted educational outcomes.
    They deliberately limited their research to white people. To avoid stumbling on unpleasant truths? And when a few negroes were looked at, the predictive process somehow broke down. Too few “polygenic markers” to count?

    Even assuming this was not a lie, wouldn’t it prove that race was real? If the process works for white people but not blacks, that proves there is some significant genetic difference between white people and blacks, does it not?

    And note the cute phrasing used to talk about race without acknowledging that race exists: “ancestrally homogeneous”. We could use that phrase too. Of course, it could be deconstructed in exactly the same way that “race” has been deconstructed by challenging its boundary definitions and arguing that blurred boundaries render the concept meaningless. But the fact that researchers constantly feel the need to come up with coy synonyms for race indicates that the words point to some significant underlying reality.

    Overall, this article amounts to the taking up of a fallback position for the Left, a retreat from an indefensible frontier as the forces of reality advance on their Castles of Illusion. But the fallback point isn’t defensible either. Reality is what it is; and research will eventually uncover it. Sooner or later, someone will look into the differences between non-ancestrally homogeneous groups. And then the walls of the castle will crumble too.


  2. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Godwinson For This Useful Post:


  3. #2
    Senior Member Aelfgar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2018
    Last Online
    17 Hours Ago @ 11:37 AM
    Ethnicity
    English
    Ancestry
    8/16 English, 1/16 Scott. English, 3/16 Irish English, 4/16 Irish
    Country
    United Kingdom United Kingdom
    Location
    England
    Gender
    Politics
    Nationalist / Eclectic
    Religion
    Agnostic
    Posts
    550
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    437
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    347
    Thanked in
    225 Posts
    when researchers looked at African-Americans, the genetic variants only minimally predicted educational outcomes
    Maybe because African Americans are about 22% European on average, and African genes are very diverse to begin with - there's no such thing as a black race.

    Although the author doesn’t make it explicit, this amounts to a genetic argument for Communism. It says hard-working people don’t deserve the prosperity their hard work brings them; they just lucked out with their “hard working” genes. This justifies taking their wealth and redistributing it to those cursed with “lazy genes” or “hard work disinclination genes”. This is a diabolical Anti-Life ideology that abnegates all personal effort and all moral choice. If you made an effort, if you made the right choice, it was only because were gifted with the genes that made it possible. Nothing you do is meritorious. Evolution, the Life process, rewards those with the attributes that lead to success; but Equality mongers think that the Life process has somehow got it wrong; and we should systematically seek out failure and reward it wherever we can, plundering the successful to finance misfits and losers.
    The DS writer is jumping the gun here and being a drama queen. We already know people are not born equal and we reward high intelligence, good health and good looks - luck of the draw. Obviously, a builder works as hard as a top civil servant, if not harder, but he'll never earn as much. Maybe in future, genetic engineering will give everyone a high IQ.

  4. #3
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2017
    Last Online
    7 Hours Ago @ 09:59 PM
    Ethnicity
    Anglo-American
    Gender
    Posts
    92
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    10
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    16
    Thanked in
    12 Posts
    DailyStormer wasn't the site which published this article, and quite frankly, it's not even the best source for interpreting the mainstream press.

    A parallel to this obviously Communist conduct can be seen in Christianity. The Church is gradually forced to make concessions to science in order to persist in the modern world and when it can no longer deny it, it will then try to monopolize the science, race, etc., twist it to it's own advantage, and claim it as it's own merit. But it's in spite of the Church that modern man makes progress.

    Although the author doesn’t make it explicit, this amounts to a genetic argument for Communism.
    The following wasn't pointed out in the DS article, but this is blatant support for Communism:

    She joins a long tradition of left-wing thinkers who considered biological research inimical to the goal of social equality. Lenin himself wrote that “the transfer of biological concepts into the field of the social sciences is a meaningless phrase.” But this is a mistake. Those of us who value social justice should instead be asking: How can the power of the genomic revolution be harnessed to create a more equal society?
    Who invokes the radical Lenin as an authority?

    And the subsequent narrative proves my earlier point.

  5. #4
    Senior Member Aelfgar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2018
    Last Online
    17 Hours Ago @ 11:37 AM
    Ethnicity
    English
    Ancestry
    8/16 English, 1/16 Scott. English, 3/16 Irish English, 4/16 Irish
    Country
    United Kingdom United Kingdom
    Location
    England
    Gender
    Politics
    Nationalist / Eclectic
    Religion
    Agnostic
    Posts
    550
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    437
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    347
    Thanked in
    225 Posts
    Scientific findings are often ignored or half-ignored by politicians. The current trend for equality doesn't include wealth, surprise surprise, which is becoming more concentrated in fewer hands.

Similar Threads

  1. Genetic Nationalism: 'On Genetic Interests' (Frank Salter)
    By Nordhammer in forum Strategic Intelligence
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: Thursday, January 5th, 2006, 06:28 AM
  2. Equality Before the Law
    By Carl_Rylander in forum Law, Ethics, & Morals
    Replies: 26
    Last Post: Tuesday, April 20th, 2004, 01:19 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •