Update # II: Support the Draft…

Foreign Policy, Government, Iraq, Military, Politics, The State

For politicians, bureaucrats, and their family members.

Serving in Iraq is a “potential death sentence,” a member of the foreign service moaned. I have “post traumatic stress disorder” after serving there for a year, another whined. Who will take care of our children if we (gasp) die, was a complaint one audacious emissary of the American state (in good times) sounded.

Now they know how soldiers and their families feel when subjected to back-door drafts in the form of indefinitely extended tours-of-duty; now the political parasites know how taxpayers feel about a war that is sapping their savings and making it hard for them to provide for their retirement and their children. (Ordinary Americans don’t have hefty, free pensions and perks for posterity, such as the blood suckers at the State Department enjoy.)

Update # I: In response to John Smith’s letter: Make sure you read your contract; it is the solemn duty of members of the foreign service to go where they are posted.

Update # II/Nov. 8: To those who keep wanting to spare the foreign service from hardship: if you’re a friend of freedom, and wish to see the state shrink—or at least cease availing itself indiscriminately of tax dollars for its endless exploits—you ought to stop coddling its recruits. Why on earth would you wish to create a risk-free workplace for privileged government workers? The riskier their endeavor the less likely they are to engage in callous and confiscatory practices. I say let as much of the state apparatus as possible shoulder the consequences of in Iraq policy.

Update # III: As you can see from his demands, John want’s to work for government, but at the same time be able to pick and choose to serve in the promotion of only those policies he supports. Unfortunately, given the excessive power unelected bureaucrats wield, they’ll probably get what they want.
On another matter, the public sector, incidentally, was never supposed to be able to strike; that’s a later socialistic privilege they were granted. In addition, government employee, politicians included, should not be allowed to vote. This is because they are paid from taxes garnished involuntarily from taxpayers, and will always vote to increase their own powers and wages.

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.

Update # III: Advice to South Africans Pondering Emigration

IMMIGRATION, South-Africa

I received the following missive from a South African reader.

“Hi Ilana

My wife and I might move from Johannesburg to the US within the next few months. I would very much like to communicate with you regarding plusses and minuses of leaving SA.”

South Africans in a similar predicament may find my reply helpful:

“Rationally and objectively, there are only plusses to being afforded the opportunity to leave South Africa. The facts about South Africa I’ve documented in many essays. These facts, oddly enough, are not always known, processed, or understood by South Africans.
The only question is really how you and your family cope with your good fortune. Some people can’t handle being away from family, friends, and place of birth. They would sooner risk death and a bleak future for their kids than leave. That’s irrational—to me and mine—at least. I am forever shocked at how many South Africans return to that hell hole.

So, it is not the objective facts you and your family must consider, but your psychological grit and resolve to be positive and realize you’ve been afforded a life-saving opportunity. My daughter kicked and screamed at the time—she was 12—but now thanks me for dragging her out of there.

That’s really the most important advice I can give.

Best of luck to those who leave and to those who remain behind, including members of my own immediate family.

Ilana

Update # I (Oct. 23): With respect to my comment hereunder about Dan Roodt’s dismissal of the emigration option for Afrikaners: It is one thing to contend that Anglos are far less attached to South Africa than Afrikaners, and assign the difficulties in departing to this attachment. That’s a valid and true argument. But to claim that immigration is not a life-saving opportunity because, decades down the line, the West will have been turned into another South Africa by its treacherous rulers—that’s wrong, illogical, and, hence, self-immolating.

Right now—and for decades to come— murder rates in suburban Canada, Australia, Europe and the US are negligible. The overall aggregate of 6 per 100,000 for the US (as opposed to between 89 and 120 per 100,000 for South Africa) is a function of factoring in the “contribution” of high-crime areas. When I moved into my home, I inquired at the local police station about the murder rate in my new American community, only to be told that, twenty years back, there was a family murder-suicide. (Since then there has been one Mexican-related brawl resulting in a fatality.)
To a rational person—to whom the sanctity of life is everything—these statistics say it all. I can rest assured that if I haven’t heard from my daughter—far more precious to me than allegiances to a country—she is just busy (or naughty).

A drop in the sea of mass immigration to the West, South African immigration, nevertheless, could help counter the influx from the Third World, and strengthen this part of the world.

There is another serious obstacle to South African emigration. I’m reproducing here the exchange I had on this aspect with Lawrence Auster:

“I asked Ilana Mercer:
If thousands of Afrikaner farmers are being brutalized and murdered like this how is it that they just remain on their farms waiting to be killed? Why haven’t they fled? Yes, it tells of people arming themselves to the teeth, but surely many must have fled, as in Zimbabwe.

She wrote back:
Americans do not understand how hard it is to immigrate. I find most Americans think that if you apply to enter, well then, the U.S., Canada, or Australia will let you in. NOT SO. It is virtually impossible to immigrate legally to the U.S., Canada, and Australia if you do not have the right qualifications or huge sums of money. This of course should make for commentary about our immigration system, which selects for law-breaking, venality, and risk taking, etc. I’ve dealt with that somewhat here [too]. Our refugee policies should favor the Boer, but we favor the likes of the “Lost Boys of Sudan”—more photogenic. Where do you think the Zim. farmers fled to? The U.S.? No. Most left for South Africa, as far as I know. Some might have had British passports. The Boers don’t have that.”

Update # II (Oct. 24): In response to the thoughtful comments of a friend about a possible defining battle for the West looming on the South-African front: I hate to be cynical, but there is no political framework for a fight. There is little hope of the Boers winning, as long as majority rule is the system in place. The only way the Boers (whose leaders relinquished power due the West’s pressure) can achieve self-determination is by seceding. Currently, the designated Afrikaner homeland is Oranje, a bleak, landlocked backwater in the Orange Free State. My friend seems to believe there is fight in the people. I’m pretty up-to-date about matters South African, and all I hear of is cooptation—having no option, the minority population has accepted the decay, and even joined it. A piece written by Dr. Roodt, in particular, even details considerable libertine excesses among a generation of young Afrikaners.

I’d also like to say something to suburban Americans preaching South African resistance: you don’t know what it is to live in fear of your life. Until you have experienced such fear—until you personally know people who’ve been hijacked, raped, murdered, or all of the above, don’t fight by proxy. How naïve and insulated are Americans! They routinely plunge (by proxy) other countries into chaos (Iraq), leaving their poor civilians mired in mayhem, while they continue their suburban existence far away on American soil. Don’t preach the merits of South Africans fighting the good fight until your beloved have been imperiled by killers, who’ll never be apprehended and who rule the roost.

Update # III (Oct. 31): Danie writes from South Africa: “Those who’ve already left have a responsibility to give us hope and not rub our noses in how bad we have it here.”

My answer: As a writer, I have only one obligation and that is to the truth. My mandate doesn’t include making people feel better in the face of reality—not about South Africa, Iraq, tyranny, the consequences of the national debt, etc.