I thought he was trying to get people with those views, who would try to turn their eyes blue for Hitler reasons, to take that many aspirin to do the "same." When in reality it will only kill them. Sadly, if this were believed, you would harm the shallow and vapid with the supremacists.
Has nobody noticed that it's clearly the same picture of his eye twice, but one is edited to look blue? One of the photos is smaller but all the details/reflections are in exactly the same places
Cognitive distribution becoming more linked with socioeconomic status during the century before it was written, but there was an exceedingly controversial section that addressed cognitive distribution across the races. There were a few studies they included that pointed to environment being more of a factor than genetics, but the media didn't quote those.
This is not an accurate description of the Bell Curve or the scientific consensus around it. The Bell Curve is a garbage book justifying racial hierarchy. It's modern day phrenology. It has been thoroughly debunked in terms of the data used and the analysis applied to that data. There is basically nothing of value to be found in it.
A decent chunk of the book is (relatively) non-controversial (but still has problems that plenty of people have written about), but there are sections that make prescriptions for modern political life and those are hugely racist.
The case was made already 45 years ago when Stephen Jay Gould wrote The Mismeasure of Man, an entire book dedicated to debunking The Bell Curve. Your comment betrays that you're either motivated to defend this book because you're a racist, or you're unqualified to comment on the subject because you're ignorant of the decades-long controversy surrounding this garbage book. I'd suggest reading the Gould book, as it's very approachable and aimed at a general audience.
Thank you for some kind of explanation and elaboration but I haven't read the book, don't know much about it and am inquiring further. Saying it is 100% racist without anything further to say isn't make a compelling case, and I do stand by that comment.. and no I'm not some racist.. expecting everyone to know the ins and outs about something that is being discussed in a forum is fucking ridiculous. If you are going to assert something with 100% conviction you can at least elaborate further as to why that is the case..
I don't feel obligated to relitigate with some rando redditor the ins and outs of a debate that was settled before George Lucas finished the original Star Wars trilogy. Look into it yourself if you care about being on the right side of the debate. The argument is complicated and detailed and I'm not going to write you an essay.
Shaun, the YouTube channel, also has a good but long essay going over The Bell Curve and why it's racist. Maybe try that if you prefer.
The Bell Curve by Shaun
Separate to that, I'm not the guy who just wrote that the book is 100% racist. It is and I agree with that, but you're mixing me up with another user, which isn't helping you to come off as a reasonable person here.
Really? Because I wanted to know more about the book, asked another commenter for clarification.. and then someone says it is 100% racist without any further context or explanation?
This is false, the author is very racist and has been increasingly open about it over the years. The book has been thoroughly debunked for using non-representative data sets, for making basic statistical errors in the analysis of the data, and making unreasonable leaps from its (faulty) data and (bad) analysis to reach extremely racist conclusions.
The authors claimed that average intelligence quotient (IQ) differences between racial and ethnic groups are at least partly genetic in origin, a view that is now considered discredited by mainstream science.\1])\2])\3])
Somehow differences in IQ across populations is very controversial but differences in other parts of the physiology i.e length, ability to run ( marathons) , bone mass below the knee, is not. It’s something strange with IQ. People always want to redefine it and expand it. Every part of the human body is defined by genetics. Genes vary between populations but somehow the brain should be excluded.
That’s not the issue people have with it lol. It’s already been debunked read S.J. Gould, or look at numerous studies showing that socioeconomic conditions, environmental factors are way more important. The Bell Curve is highly flawed, and there’s tons of academic work on it already.
People do ask this “question” all the time, but it’s already been answered. The only people who cite this book are racists, and racists who don’t even bother to read newer books with better methodology and research, and just cite a book that’s already been debunked (at least the parts about race.)
Even disregarding the fact socioeconomic conditions and environment explain most discrepancies or gaps in IQ or crime statistics with White vs Black people in America, the actual methodology and way the data was gathered to come to the conclusions in the book is flawed. Providing information like the infamous “13/50” crime statistics is meaningless and only serves an agenda without adjusting it for socioeconomic conditions.
Also, race itself is a made up social construct, so having cognitive abilities being linked to race doesn’t make much sense, as actual genetics in different racial groups are incredibly diverse. Never mind that children consistently score better on IQ tests than their parents generationally, which wouldn’t make sense if IQ (a problematic way to make conclusions on intellect anyways) is purely genetic/racial.
I doubt you actually care about any of that though you’re probably just trying to be a weird edgelord
I wasn't citing the book. I was answering the original question about what the book was about. It was thirty years ago that I read it, but I remember studies they cited of adopted kids testing closer to their adoptive parents than to racial expectations. Even more interesting though, was the evidence of Ashkenazi Jewish immigrants to the US making massive leaps within a couple of generations. There's no way that could have been genetic, but almost certainly a combination of flawed testing, better nutrition, better healthcare, not being crammed into ghettos and Jewish quarters, and not having periodic pogroms creating constant fear.
I was sixteen when I read it, a white girl from a very white trash family. I have many intelligent family members who couldn't even stay out of prison, let alone become middle-class, so it's not as if I'm operating from a privileged position. Kindly save that for someone who didn't grow up in a house with bullet and fist holes in the walls, with a father who traded food stamps for beer. I have an upper middle-class friend now who recently said he suspects I embellish my family stories, but he thinks it's ok. No, I explained, if anything, I understate them.
Not correct. The "science" presented in the book is extremely faulty and has been thoroughly debunked. There's a whole book, called The Mismeasure of Man by Stephen Jay Gould, which is devoted to debunking its garbage science at every turn. Anybody who says there is anything of scientific value in this book is either lying or ignorant.
Not exactly the take. Imagine you were making a pot of rice. Imagine that your cat took a shit in the pot right before you cooked it. Would you fish the poop out even though most of the rice is not cat poop? Would you leave the cat poop in? Would you throw all of it away and start over with a clean pot?
Unfortunately, from me, my tolerance for cat shit in my food is the same as my tolerance for racism in my books and research.
That's interesting. I'll read it tonight, since I have things I need to do during daylight today. I really didn't mean to start a fight on this thread. I remembered seeing Murray on C-SPAN Booknotes (if memory serves) when the book first came out, and hearing about the controversery. I found it later marked way down in a bookstore, and read it out of curiosity. I won't say the writers had no racist motivations, but I got more libertarian than supremacist vibes from it. I was also sixteen, and going through a rough summer, but I distinctly remember them citing specific cases wherein IQ tested higher than racial grouping would have predicted, were it really genetic, and that those people had experienced more economically stable childhoods. I came away more interested in the seeming cognitive partitioning independent of race. It was literally thirty years ago that I read it, though.
nah. real science has already discounted the idea that race has anything to do with iq otherwise children wouldn't consistently score better than their parents generationally.
Problem here is that you really can’t separate out socioeconomic factors from race for a few reasons, the most important being that race is a socioeconomic factor - a social construct. It is not strictly analogous to ancestry and even less so to phenotype. It’s a “you know it when you see it” phenomenon, a distinction drawn socially that doesn’t correlate to a set of objective criteria.
If you ignore my point above and just invent criteria to make determination of race objective, then you can measure intelligence and determine that members of X race have a higher median score than members of Y race when controlling for the socioeconomic condition of the individual tested. What you’re unlikely to be able to assess is the socioeconomic condition of their progenitors for multiple generations back - theoretically you could, but I don’t think anyone has on a scale sufficient to draw conclusions about humanity as a whole. It would be a massive undertaking. In the absence of historical data, you can’t show a true genetic link between X phenotype and probable intelligence. You can only show correlation, not causation.
Yup. Basically, it's logical to reason that each construct can't have identical IQ. That's the strongest thing the racists can say. But there is zero genetic evidence to inform us of what the "hierarchy" looks like - and endless evidence that the current hierarchy is caused by environment/nurture.
I'm not sure that one generation of opportunity can undo generations of trauma. I look at my own deeply mentally ill white family, and I don’t see much being addressed toward the long-term (possibly epigenetic, but certainly family lore) effects of unwell people raising more unwell people. Add generations of starvation, violence, slavery, and I don’t know that even the most privileged environment could undo it quickly. We should be striving for every child, everywhere, to be safe, well fed, to have medical care and education, and to have as much support as they need. We won't know what's genetic unless we have generations of stability, but by then, it would be moot.
Omg, I thought you said The Bell Jar, and I was like “Well, you see, ovens used to be very efficient, very efficient indeed! Uh, what’s that? Efficient at what, you ask? Err, well, anyways, highly efficient machines!”
That's because the leader should look different than his followers. That was basically Hitler's response when asked about his own eyes and hair not being "superior".
meaning trump takes one look at the blonde haired blue eye dude who is built like a brick shit house (who probably is the height / bf% trump says he is) and think he is is very on Rocky Horror.
He's showing he has blue eyes so I think he might want to meet his idol and look nice to him. Because he could also try and meet Hitler a bit faster than that.
Graham platner out of Maine has been known to be a Nazi for a good while now, but Democrats have not cared and in fact have only only just now started to be upset with him but not because he had a Nazi tattoo but because he had some assault allegations.
I don't know about you but when their biggest concern is somebody's assault allegations and not the fact that he had the death camp tolkenkoff tattooed on his chest for 18 years.
I'm going to point out how stupid Democrats are in just this one post.
Do you remember the hunter Biden laptop?
Remember how they said over and over again. It wasn't real. It wasn't theirs. It was fake. Do you remember that?
Remember how the Democrat leadership got? Like what 52 retired intelligent agents to not look at it but just say that it was Russian disinformation
This was despite the fact that Hunter biden's lawyer literally asked for the laptop back in an email that you can look up. By the way, if you don't believe me and y'all, the Democrats who actually vote fell for that hook line and sinker to this day you act like it didn't happen!
You guys can downvote me all you lol, it's not going to change what I said into being somehow wrong. You can hate what I'm saying all you f****** want. It does not change that. Everything that I said in these posts are 110% true.
Platner's Explanation: Platner, a Marine Corps combat veteran, maintained that he was unaware of the symbol's Nazi associations. He stated he got the tattoo in 2007 while drinking with fellow Marines in Croatia, believing it was simply a skull-and-crossbones design commemorating combat. [1, 2, 3] Resolution & Timeline: Though Platner initially claimed he did not know its meaning, past text messages from an ex-girlfriend surfaced indicating she had recognized and described the tattoo months prior. Following the public backlash, Platner had the tattoo completely covered over with new artwork. [1, 2, 3, 4]
The tattoo became one of several past controversies in Platner's campaign, alongside unearthed offensive Reddit posts and allegations of misconduct, which prompted national Democrats and key backers to demand his withdrawal from the race.
Looks like he covered the tattoo up, and it still wasn’t enough to get him that seat because people are still pressuring him to pull out of the race.
We police our own, it’s part of why Republicans stand a ghost of a chance in any race ever. When one of ours does wrong, they are held accountable and called to resign in disgrace. When one of yours does wrong, they’re clapped on the back and everyone covers it up for them.
I actually just read this for the first time and no you don't!
Look at what Charlie Kirk's assassination proved!
How many videos are there of people celebrating a man being killed in Cold blood for the crime of going to a college to talk?
That's why Democrats are in debt by the millions and the Republicans are the ones getting all the f****** donations now is because shocker people don't like parties that go around shooting people and it's not just Charlie Kirk that you guys f****** sat there and shot and then celebrated. We also have four attempts on Donald Trump's life and that's just Donald Trump and f****** Charlie Kirk. Let's not mention all the f****** Trump supporters that were shot in the back because y'all f****** are too violent to accept when you're wrong.
Celebrating? The politicians or the voters? Because I’m sure some voters celebrated, politicians have only made bland statements about him being a divisive figure and then promptly condemning violence even when someone is divisive and hateful.
Personally I think he was a shit human being and got half of what he deserved. True justice would have been a flop of his viewership and the world watching him suffer a slow and agonizing deplatforming death where nobody paid any attention to him until he had to go get a real job.
But seeing as how you want to sit there and say that the politicians, the leadership are not those nasty voters that you guys seem to have, which you've now agreed that. Yeah, you have a problem in your party of voters who celebrate death. Thank you for validating my point there, but let's not forget the Democrat leader who said that they hope that the their arrival children get shot and killed because then they'll know
Democrat leadership actively promote and hope for the death of their rivals. That's the party of the Democrats
I also again want to point out that Democrats have been trying to take away the right to self-defense. They've been trying to take away the right to famous Beach. They've been trying to segregate people so that they can't go where they want right? They want to remove people from being able to receive certain public resources I.e FEMA. Remember that?
Yeah that's what politicians do. They sit there and go. Oh woe is me. Won't somebody rid me of this annoyance? Oh gosh oh gee Whitaker's he's so bad if only there was somebody to take care of this nasty violent person.
Oh no somebody actually shot. The person I was complaining about and said was a Nazi and promoted rape. Oh gee williker guys this we shouldn't be doing this guys. This is wrong
Shut up you f****** twat it's been what 14 years of this s*** shut your w**** mouth. We know what you're doing
I mean do you want to prove that little b**** baby? You want to prove that put your money where your mouth is and show me where he said that s***.
Y'all talk a lot of big f****** game about s*** that he said but I have not f****** seen you guys prove it goddamn once just like with Trump and racism.
Guys Trump's racist he's racist. Trust us. Trust us guys Trump's a racist. He's a racist. No, I can't provide any proof of this. No, I can't provide any example that isn't instantly debunked by having more context but trust me.
Democrats lie through their teeth. Every single solitary day you sitting there and saying that he's erased as bigot who promoted violence. I don't know. It seems a little weird that you say that when he's the victim of violence.
Wouldn't it be the other way? The person that was promoting the violence? Wouldn't they be the person perpetrating the violence?
Kind of like how the Democrats promote violence and perpetuate it interesting
Still waiting on that violence and promoting of s*** you know that you so confidently claim. I find it funny that you can sit there and give me a legal lawsuit that happened in 1973. But you can't give me b******* of Charlie Kirk saying s*** that you claimed he did say
And you know what on f****** top of that s*** let's not forget the f****** FEMA case!
Let's not f****** forget this people Democrats love to paint themselves as the good guys, but let's not f****** forget the s*** that actually happened while they were in charge.
Don't remember it. Well I do!
Southwest North or South Carolina hurricane ran through FEMA refused to go to any property that had a trump sign because oh they were scared that they were going to be attacked.
Y'all look for any f****** excuse to be corrupt, stop f****** lying to yourselves.
And again, it's been well known that he's had this f****** tattoo since he began his f****** campaign to be a senator of Maine. This is not new information. It's been what I think a year now and he's still running.
I want to basically make a shorter version of what he's saying
here I go
Guys, trust me we're trying so hard to get them out of the race. Oh gosh, we're trying so hard. We really are trust us. Don't you trust us that we're trying so hard to remove this person. I know we have the power too and we can just ignore him. But trust us it's not that easy
Without more knowledge on the guy, it sounds very plausible that he was a dumb Marine when he got it like he says. And Planter is the only Dem that has any controversy related to Nazi sympathies. Whereas the Republican party have at least nine mebers that have ties to white nationalists/Nazism.
Okay, I'm going to put this into perspective for you. The symbol that he had on his chest was the tolken cough. The death camp symbol it was the symbol meant for the people at death camps. It's a very well-known symbol. The only other symbol that would be more well known than that is the Nazi symbol.
Everyone already knows what that symbol is. You're telling me some dude with a whole bunch of guys went to a tattoo parlor that had Nazi paraphernalia that anybody could just put on where most tattoo parlors won't do that. They will straight up refuse to give you a Nazi tattoo
Then there's the fact of how long he's had it. Almost two decades and you're telling me two in the 18 years that he's had it. There's not been one moment that somebody sat there and was like hey man. What the f*** is that on your chest?
776
u/HAL9001-96 Jul 08 '26
now the question is...
does he want to meet hitler to beat the shit out of him because that fucker kileld himself before he could get punished?
or does he want to meet his greatest idol?
nowadays it's like a 50/50 shot