Category Archives: Individualism Vs. Collectivism

IQ & Aggregate Groups Differences

Individualism Vs. Collectivism, Intelligence, Race, Science

I said in the interview I gave our friend the Bad Eagle that

“Broad statements about aggregate group characteristics, provided they are substantiated by hard evidence, not hunches, are not incorrect. Science relies on the ability to generalize to the larger population observations drawn from a representative sample. People make prudent decision in their daily lives as to where to invest scarce and precious resources—to wit, one’s life and property—based on probabilities and generalities.”

Although most professional (read safe) individualists have yet to figure this out, individualism, ultimately, doesn’t mean denying aggregate group differences, but, rather, treating every individual on his merit.

Steve Sailer’s thoughts on James Watson underscore the same incongruity. On the one, hand most people refuse to acknowledge the less laudable aspects of diversity. On the other hand, the decisions people take to protect their prized possessions and promote their precious children demonstrate they are more than aware of these unacknowledged differences:

“In reality, American homebuyers (most of whom, I’m sorry to say, are not VDARE.com readers) are obsessively interested in the ethnic make-up of local public schools. Without my help, they appear to accept the “stereotype” that white and Asian students will provide a more studious peer group for their children than blacks and Latinos.

Thus, houses in districts with mostly white and Asian students often sell for tens or even hundreds of thousands of dollars more than in districts populated mostly by black and Hispanic students.

Moreover, many middle class parents are obsessed with getting their children into exclusive gifted and magnet public schools…

So, even though any MSM mention of average racial IQ differences is ferociously punished, as demonstrated yet again the forced retirement of Dr. Watson, home prices nevertheless show that the average American has somehow come to a rough but reasonably accurate understanding of the statistical realities.

How did he ever learn this without reading it in the newspaper? Apparently, as Yogi Berra once said, ‘You can observe a lot just by watching.’”

Also via Sailer is this comprehensive “exposition of the present state of scientific understanding concerning IQ and race,” courtesy of “Gene Expression.” It’s pretty unremarkable stuff. What’s remarkable is that these statistically significant intergroup differences (a standard deviation or more) are denied, downgraded in significance, or put down to a methodological artifact of the tests—their validity and reliability. Also buried in the denunciations is the correlation between intelligence and various socio-economic indicators.

IQ & Aggregate Groups Differences

Individualism Vs. Collectivism, Intelligence, Race, Science

I said in the interview I gave our friend the Bad Eagle that

“Broad statements about aggregate group characteristics, provided they are substantiated by hard evidence, not hunches, are not incorrect. Science relies on the ability to generalize to the larger population observations drawn from a representative sample. People make prudent decision in their daily lives as to where to invest scarce and precious resources—to wit, one’s life and property—based on probabilities and generalities.”

Although most professional (read safe) individualists have yet to figure this out, individualism, ultimately, doesn’t mean denying aggregate group differences, but, rather, treating every individual on his merit.

Steve Sailer’s thoughts on James Watson underscore the same incongruity. On the one, hand most people refuse to acknowledge the less laudable aspects of diversity. On the other hand, the decisions people take to protect their prized possessions and promote their precious children demonstrate they are more than aware of these unacknowledged differences:

“In reality, American homebuyers (most of whom, I’m sorry to say, are not VDARE.com readers) are obsessively interested in the ethnic make-up of local public schools. Without my help, they appear to accept the “stereotype” that white and Asian students will provide a more studious peer group for their children than blacks and Latinos.

Thus, houses in districts with mostly white and Asian students often sell for tens or even hundreds of thousands of dollars more than in districts populated mostly by black and Hispanic students.

Moreover, many middle class parents are obsessed with getting their children into exclusive gifted and magnet public schools…

So, even though any MSM mention of average racial IQ differences is ferociously punished, as demonstrated yet again the forced retirement of Dr. Watson, home prices nevertheless show that the average American has somehow come to a rough but reasonably accurate understanding of the statistical realities.

How did he ever learn this without reading it in the newspaper? Apparently, as Yogi Berra once said, ‘You can observe a lot just by watching.’”

Also via Sailer is this comprehensive “exposition of the present state of scientific understanding concerning IQ and race,” courtesy of “Gene Expression.” It’s pretty unremarkable stuff. What’s remarkable is that these statistically significant intergroup differences (a standard deviation or more) are denied, downgraded in significance, or put down to a methodological artifact of the tests—their validity and reliability. Also buried in the denunciations is the correlation between intelligence and various socio-economic indicators.

Quarantine, Yes Or No?

Classical Liberalism, Ethics, Individual Rights, Individualism Vs. Collectivism, The State

“I’m a very well-educated, successful, intelligent person. This is insane to me that I have an armed guard outside my door when I’ve cooperated with everything other than the whole solitary-confinement-in-Italy thing.”

So said the patient “with a form of tuberculosis so dangerous he is under the first U.S. government-ordered quarantine since 1963,” on returning from a transatlantic trip to celebrate his wedding. The trip took him from Atlanta to Europe—Greece, Italy, the Czech Republic, France—and back to Atlanta via Canada and New York. By the man’s telling, he came back not because he realized he had exposed others to a deadly, highly infectious airborne disease, but because “he was afraid that if he did not get back to the U.S., he would not get the treatment he needed to survive.”
“Health officials said the man had been advised not to fly and knew he could expose others when he boarded the jets from Atlanta to Paris, and later from Prague to Montreal… He knew he had a form of tuberculosis and that it was resistant to first-line drugs.” Apparently he was also told to wear a mask. That too he ignored. If Andrew Speaker—that is the patient’s name—is as smart as he professes, he ought to have known not to expose people without their consent to any TB, much less to a strain associated with a 50 percent mortality rate.

Speaker returned to North America via Canada, driving into the US, a fact that demonstrates consciousness of guilt: He avoided American airlines, as he had been placed on a “no-fly alert,” which, it transpires, was overlooked at the border crossing. I suspect this case is akin, legally, to an individual infected with HIV not informing his sexual partners of his condition.

I’m trying to think of a libertarian argument against coercively confining a man who knowingly and intentionally uses his body as a lethal weapon against unsuspecting innocents. I can’t come up with one. Can you? Another libertarian has expressed a preference for “home confinement with an electronic monitor. This would seem to strike the balance between protecting his liberty interests and the safety of the public.” I like home confinement, only I really do not believe the authorities acted illiberally up until now: they gave the patient the goods (the info), and left it up to him to comply voluntarily. Andrew Speaker, on the other hand, ignored the information and acted recklessly. Should be given a second strike? If he strikes out again, someone could die—especially individuals with a low T cell count (suppressed immunity). Armed and dangerous is how he ought to be regarded. Would an electronic monitor provide ample warning in the event he violated the quarantine? By the time the authorities locate the quarantine violator, he may well have infected a host of people.
In the meantime, Diane Sawyer, who grills her subjects only in the sense Larry King interviews his, has elicited Speaker’s story. It’s a maze of contradictions and dissembling, and is accompanied suspiciously with “sexy” poses of Innocent Andy and a woman with a blond head the shape of Paris Hilton’s, a forlorn look, and big implants. His new wife, presumably. The fact that this is an educated man—a lawyer, no less—doesn’t help his case.

‘Conservatives For Killing Terri’

Bush, Individual Rights, Individualism Vs. Collectivism, libertarianism, Neoconservatism

“I can think of only two occasions on which I agreed with George Bush. Both involved the upholding of the people’s negative, or leave-me-alone, rights.
The first was his refusal to capitulate to the Kyoto-protocol crazies. Not surprisingly, some conservatives denounced this rare flicker of good judgment. And I’m not talking a ‘Crunchy Con’ of Andrew Sullivan’s caliber—he does proud to Greenpeace and the Sierra Club combined. No less a conservative than Joe Scarborough commiserated with actor Robert Redford over the president’s ‘blind spot on the environment.’ (Ditto Bill O’Reilly.)
The other Bush initiative I endorsed was the attempt by Congress to uphold Terri Schiavo’s inalienable right to life—a decision very many conservatives now rue.
Upholding rights to life, liberty, and property is a government’s primary—some would say only—duty. But, bless their cruel little hearts, this cast of conservative characters is at least consistent. It relished the launch of a bloody war in contravention of fact, law, and morality, and now, fittingly, it’s atoning for its incongruent attempts to forestall a killing…”

The excerpt is from my new WorldNetDaily.com column, “Conservatives for Killing Terri.” Comments are welcome.