Message from @Pepe the Impaler - DC Area
Discord ID: 304700539600502784
We also have plenty of studies to pull from showing that diversity leads to more dissatisfaction and worse outcomes for democracy.
Spencer should be able to pull from all of our combined knowledge. We need to make a list of every question he was asked and build a template of responses and ways to improve the next speech. Introducing the speech with a hate fact clinic of figures and studies is a good idea. It would only take 5 minutes to build get a decent enough number of statistical points made so that you can move on to the esoteric stuff.
The counter to anybody that mentions "Guns Germs and Steel" should be to mention "A Farewell to Alms." It's a direct rebuttal that focuses on the industrial revolution. I would follow this up with a point on how advanced societies are now aging at an alarming rate while inequality explodes as a counter to the "But everything is always getting better" point.
Well, that young man cared.
Agreed on most counts.
Though I think the best response to the guns Germs and steel question is in fact "who the fuck cares"
It's an incoherent question. We are coevolutionary with our environment
Asking "what if we were in a different one" is just like saying "well what f u were a black African"
Nonsense
But this is about conversions, not speaking to the choir.
The next speech should be essentially the same middle and end but the beginning should address a lot of these points that I'm bringing up in more detail.
I just want hate seminars fam
Throw up 6 million facts
Go down the list
Or like "common counterpoints" etc.
"But there's more genetic variation within the races!"
See: lewontin fallacy
I'm skeptical of the premise that facts are the best way to persuade
I am too, but there should be a mixture of some sort.
Depends on the audience tbh
But he's gotta mix in redpills, or at least not flub questions like the "facts" one
He thinks he's talking to an auditorium of his own people but he's not, many of these squares haven't even heard a hate fact in their life
1) bowling alone 2) heroin epidemic 3) tv is gay
Just those three are enough to support the argument and make him not look dumb
I think that the studies showing that diversity leads to less social trust are pretty powerful.
Agreed. But individualists need to value Social trust as an abstract first
That's why Doolittle's work is important as much as I hate giving him credit
this timestamp in particular is important
tl;dr more intelligent people are better at running abstractions of themselves through simulated environments, such that their ideas can die instead of themselves.
less intelligent creatures are unable to reproduce themselves via abstraction, and must therefore create replications of themselves ( reproduction ) to run through the same simulations
not that it's a conscious effort obviously but this it's the biological-instictual manifestation
but this ties in with r / K selection, and though it doesn't form a necessary and sufficient clause, it at least suggests all r selected species / peoples cannot abstract -- and this is obviously borne out in most of the scientific studies of abstraction power vs. IQ vs. race
but I think it's interesting in that it provides a sort of causal explanation, which does away with a lot of the handwaving surrounding IQ vs. reproductive strategy and provides a solid explicit link
because otehrwise there's not really a reason per se why high IQ species can't also be r selected
Kind of interesting but r/K selection seems to be unsatisfactory for looking at human political beliefs anyway.
Fag
fag