Reverse Snobbery Redux

Discussing this topic again.

I have previously discussed the issue of reverse snobbery on the Right, particularly the Far Right, which I define as attacks on so-called “experts,” praise for the accomplishments of non-experts, and populist disdain for academics and others with official degrees (“credentials”). Leading the attack against “credentialism” – against the emphasis on “credentialed” experts and academic expertise – are the HBDers, who always engage in ad hominem to respond to “experts” who call out HBD's pseudoscience, errors, and ludicrous assertions.

The more that the Right attacks experts and academics, the more they alienate such people, and the more we see that academia is dominated by the Left. And the more academia becomes increasingly leftist, the more it is attacked by the Right, and a negative feedback loop therefore emerges, driving more and more educated people, STEM people, academics, and other experts out of rightist politics. This is obviously a destructive, self-defeating process.

People with a "credentialed" background in the scientific “big three” – biology, chemistry, physics – are rare on the Right, particularly the Far Right. Examples to the contrary (like Pierce) stand out so much precisely because they are so rare – the exceptions that prove the rule.  Mathematicians, astronomers, and other STEM-related backgrounds are also rare on the Right (and academics in general are underrepresented on the Right).

There are reasons for this, and I have discussed this issue here previously. The emphasis on religion and traditionalism on the Right leads to hostility to science and materialist empiricism. The populist strain on the Right, even by snobbish elitists like William Buckley, also feeds into this. Buckley famously stated that:

I would rather be governed by the first 2,000 people in the Boston telephone directory than by the 2,000 people on the faculty of Harvard University.

I leave it up to the reader to decide whether William Buckley actually believed that, and whether he spent more time hobnobbing with Ivy League academics or with the first 2,000 people from a big city telephone directory. Indeed, this populism can go too far, and its hypocrisy is revealed when someone's own personal interests are at stake.  If such a populist needed open heart surgery, I’m sure they would prefer it performed by a leading cardiovascular surgeon at a major hospital, rather than by their local butcher who claims to have learned much by dissecting cow hearts.

Do experts make errors? Of course they do. Sometimes these are technical errors, more often they are due to ideology (“there is no such thing as race”) or self-interest (“that is not gain of function”). The problem is that non-experts not only make the same ideological and self-interest errors, but also often make errors because they simply don’t know what they are talking about.  Gross ignorance, misinterpretation, cherry picking, etc. lead to real “whoppers” and if so-called experts point that out, then we observe ad hominem claims of “credentialism.” Thus, non-experts are even more likely to make errors than are experts, and then they respond to critics with personal attacks. 

Even Johnson had the sense to state that science (unlike cranks) is self-correcting (although ideology and self-interest can delay this for a time); however, HBD pseudoscience and other cranks do not self-correct because they reverse the normal scientific method - they attempt to prove, rather than disprove, their hypotheses, and they start out with the chosen conclusion of a "confirmed" hypothesis and then cherry pick data and invent explanations to justify that, rather than subjecting their ideas to a rigorous proofing process and discarding their ideas if they are falsified. Thus, errors by (scientific) experts are typically discovered and reversed (eventually), usually by other experts, while many non-experts will continue to spew falsehoods and respond to corrections by experts with populist cries of "credentialism."

What of the reverse, what of the likelihood of positive accomplishment?

It is sometimes claimed that non-experts, who are allegedly more open-minded and less beholden to rigid dogma, are more likely than are experts to make great discoveries or produce world-changing inventions. It is true that some great discoveries and inventions have been made by non-experts. But there are caveats to this observation. First, there is confirmation bias; people tend to remember famous cases of non-expert discoveries and inventions, but ignore the myriad non-expert failures, while also ignoring discoveries and inventions made by experts.  Second, some non-expert discoverers and inventors were highly educated people expert in some (sometimes, related) field, but simply not in the specific narrow field of their famous accomplishment. Third, many cases of famous non-expert accomplishments occurred in the past, when there was much more “low hanging fruit” of basic things ripe for discovery and invention, and when the barrier to accomplishment was lower than in today’s more specialized, technologically advanced age. Fourth, even when genuine novel discoveries and inventions of great importance have been accomplished by non-experts (of whatever type), experts were and still are necessary to confirm, defend, apply, and extend these non-expert accomplishments.

Both experts and non-experts are important in discovery and invention, and in the role of explanation and application. Experts should not engage in snobbish rejection of non-expert contributions; while non-experts should eschew the reverse snobbery of populist cries of “credentialism” and consider that expert input and criticism may sometimes be both well-intentioned and correct.  As non-expert reverse snobbery is more prevalent on the Right, where I am situated politically – and in which I am often made to feel like an alien due to an “expert” STEM background – that is the major focus of my critique here.

You, dear reader, should not be fooled by HBDers, anti-vaxxers, and others who try populist appeals to your vanity with talk of how “we” non-experts are morally superior and more open-minded than “they” experts. Cries of “credentialism” are often nothing more or less than self-interested ad hominem attacks against legitimate critics. Don’t fall for that con job. All ideas, arguments, products, etc. need to be evaluated on their own merits.

Testing: Caveat Emptor

Admixture caveat.

The ancestry testing companies essentially are doing supervised admixture analysis, comparing customers to reference samples. If a reference population is admixed, then customers from the same, or similar, populations will match the reference, and will not necessarily exhibit admixture in the test, even if they are in fact actually admixed. Thus, if admixed population “X” is a reference, representing “100% X” and if a customer of the same (or similar) ethnic background is tested against that reference, then the customer will get a result of approximately 100% X. The customer can in fact be admixed, but if the type and levels of admixture is similar to that of the reference population that they are being compared to, then the admixture (subsumed within the definition of “X”) will obviously not be represented in the results. If the admixture in the reference population is relatively old, and is today considered part of the genome of that population, then it is not going to be recognized as admixture; even if the company has “quality control” algorithms to attempt to “weed out” admixed individuals from the reference populations, that is going to really work only for relatively recent admixture. So, it is entirely possible for individuals with actual admixture to test as “100% pure” if the yardstick against which they are measured is also similarly admixed. On the other hand, customers with little to no actual admixture can be represented as “admixed” if they are not compared against good reference population matches, and, hence, are having their ancestries approximated as mixtures of whatever reference samples exist in the database. 

When customers have their "results" changing +/- 15-30% (or whatever other outrageously high level) every time companies update their databases, it is clear that these tests are completely and laughably inaccurate and imprecise.  Wild fluctuations in results suggest  that the databases lack the proper reference samples and customers are having ancestries assigned to whatever samples are being added to those databases. Combined with high levels of "unassigned ancestry" at high confidence levels, identical wins getting different results, people getting radically different results with different companies (as well as radically different results with the same company after updates, as discussed above) these facts demonstrate that every single of the extant ancestry tests are virtually useless with respect to accurate and reproducible results (at least for individuals deriving from ethnies not well represented in databases).

Thus: Caveat Emptor.

I cannot recommend any of the extant ancestry tests; indeed, I, at the current time, heartily discourage their use - they may work reasonably well for those of British Isles descent (sometimes) and Ashkenazi Jews, and possibly some other ethnies both well represented in their databases and relatively genetically homogeneous, but fail miserably for others. Fetishist retards who breathlessly discuss results (a behavior I recently mocked) demonstrate their own ignorance and/or mendacity.

If this situation is remedied, then my recommendation may change, but it is important to note that improvements must be stable over time. Results that drastically change with each update are unstable and, hence, imprecise and likely inaccurate (after all, if there are drastic changes, it cannot be true that both the original or the update are correct - and in this case, there's no guarantee that future changes will not occur, putting into question additional data sets).

Risk Averse Irony

Irony and hypocrisy.

The flubros perceive a societal over-reaction to covid-19, and they typically ascribe that over-reaction to a dastardly globalist conspiracy to take away their "freedoms." However, to the extent that there has been any over-reaction, that is for the most part due to the fact that we live in a feminized, risk averse society. Essentially, society demands a 100% guarantee of absolute safety and absence of risk in everything, which is neither feasible nor desirable, and, hence, the treatment of covid-19 as if it is Captain Trips from The Stand (but, of course, the opposite view - that the disease is just "the flu" or "a cold" - is just as absurd).

The irony is that the flubros behave in exactly the same effete risk averse manner when it comes to the covid vaccinations (and for the more extreme anti-vaxxers, all vaccinations) - they demand an unrealistic 100% guarantee of absolute safety and absolute zero risk and absolute zero probability of side effects. That fear is no less hysterical than some blue-haired fatty demanding masking for two year old children in daycare. If the flubros, whining like scared women about "experimental vaccines" and "toxic jabs," are too cowardly and risk averse to get vaccinated like the rest of us, then they have no right to ridicule the risk aversion of others (e.g., lockdowns and masks). Perhaps hypocrisy is a better word for flubro behavior than is irony.

And the screeching about "freedom" is just a cover for rank cowardice. When the government forcibly integrates their neighborhoods and neighborhood schools, floods their areas with refugees and illegals, discriminates against them with "affirmative action," and engages in race replacement immigration, they don't say or do a damn thing about that, so now they should just shut up, roll up their sleeves, take the "jabs," and stop crying like menstruating co-eds.

Odds and Ends, 7/25/21

In der news.

Look at this stupidity. That is no doubt a White man. How can a race defend itself if its male members are agonizing over humane ways of killing insects? How can we depend on White men to kill enemies of our race in a war if they agonize over killing bugs?  Can you believe it?

Tucker Carlson was right. Where are the snarky leftist comments now?

Can you believe it? Finally, a rational comment left at Counter-Currents:

Anti-vaxxism is probably the single dumbest stance the Dissident Right could take, the one most guaranteed to alienate from us the kinds of thoughtful and sober minds we must convert if we are to achieve political victory – and thus have a chance at preventing white extinction.

That is exactly what I've been writing at my blog for - what? - years now. The covid situation is just the latest iteration of anti-vaxxism. Earlier, it was that "Jew doctors" were sodomizing "our babies" with MMR shots and "giving them autism."

Now, let's quote some flubro retardation (also from Counter-Currents) and then I'll answer it. Retard:

...these particular vaccines are not properly tested. Furthermore there are serious questions as to the need to vaccinate so aggressively against the relatively harmless Covid-19, not to mention the incredible harms done by vaccine reactions, lockdowns and mask wearing. Furthermore why is the effectiveness of natural antibody immunity being ignored in favor of these vaccines?

Answer:

1. In the midst of a pandemic, there is obviously no time to go through the full and lengthy process of optimized vaccine testing, which can take years. The vaccines were tested, but not to the same extent as vaccines for long-established diseases. The vaccines in America were "fast-tracked" in "Operation Warp Speed" by Der Movement's demigod Trump, who wants it called a "Trumpcine," not by "Jew doctors" or "globalists." Even Trump recognized the need to do so.

2. Covid-19 is not "relatively harmless" unless you are comparing it to smallpox or to "Captain Trips" from The Stand. It has killed hundreds of thousands in America alone, hospitalized large numbers, and even "mild" cases can result in "long covid" disorders. The unvaccinated, in which viral loads can build to high levels, constitute a reservoir in which the virus can further mutate.

3. There have not been "incredible harms" by either vaccines or masks. Lockdowns have caused harm, but if you are angry about that, blame China. Remove the Chinatrix strap-on from your ass, and blame those responsible.

4. Err...to get "natural immunity" you have to be infected, which runs the risk of morbidity and mortality, as well as generating the high viral loads that make infecting others more efficient. "Natural immunity" arguments can be used against all vaccines - is that the message? And "natural immunity" against original covid may be less effective against some of the newer strains than the vaccine, although the "vaccine hesitant" may be brewing new strains to evade the vaccines completely as well. Thanks a lot, retards.

5. A scenario - imagine The Holy Orientals from The Land of the Gods cause a lab leak of a "Captain Trips"-like highly deadly viral stain, with the potential to wipe out most of humanity. Let us further assume that somehow an experimental but highly effective vaccine is developed in time to stave off this disaster, but we would need to have everyone vaccinated ASAP before further mutation. Would we allow anti-vaxx flubro retards to do their same antics then? No doubt they would try and do so - evade the "toxic jab."

6. Just like in an emergency in war, you get drafted. I'll enrage the Right now and say that the covid vaccine should be mandatory for everyone except those with a legitimate medical reason that requires avoiding it. Otherwise, shut up and get "jabbed." Instead of dropping your pants for Ms. Wei Fuk Yu, roll up your sleeve and just get the shots.

One could make a legitimate argument that there has been some degree of societal over-reaction to covid, particularly with lockdowns. The problem is that the flubros oppose any and all reactions - they oppose lockdowns, masks, and vaccination. They seem to have no answer other than to make believe the disease is "only the flu" or "only a cold" and should be completely ignored. Do we wonder why Der Movement has no appeal to the White masses as well as no appeal to educated, STEM people?

This here is how European rightists see 2021 America.  The reality of 2021 America is shown here.

The Axis of Queervil

Concerns

Is this true?

topimpanation

Looks like William Regnery II didn't have any kids. Hmmm...

Radical Runner topimpanation

He was gay.

topimpanation Radical Runner

I figured.

I do not know if that accusation is true, or merely another example of misguided, wrong, “movement” gossip, this time from Amren commenters (although the picture here makes one wonder).  But the status of Regnery’s private preferences is not the real issue here. The issue is not with one person, but has to be looked at from a broader perspective. Considering the Beltway/Virginia-Georgia-Florida “movement” axis, the Florida and Georgia components have been enriched (past and present) with individuals either rumored to be gay, or definitively known to be gay.  

I have previous discussed how I was warned in the early 2000s (by an individual who shall go nameless here, but who was positioned to know) about a gay cabal in the “movement,” and that was directed toward the aforementioned “movement” axis. Various incidents and revelations and speculations since then have conformed the validity of that warning.

One can wonder further. Was the rapid rise of Richard Spencer in the “movement” influenced by the private preferences of leading “movement” figures?  I need to be very clear here, to prevent misinterpretation and misquoting of what I am saying here by the Nutzi peanut gallery. I am not – repeat NOT – saying that Spencer himself (a man with a history of heterosexual relationships, including marriage and children) is homosexual (or bisexual).  Repeat – I am not saying that.  But it is certainly plausible that “movement” gays – including prominent “closeted” aging homosexuals – gave a boost to Spencer because they liked the “cut of his jib,” so to speak. That would be in addition to Spencer’s inherent advantages due to Der Movement’s ethnic affirmative action program. Liddell’s jibe that a certain Alt Righter hates Spencer because of a “bitter gay crush” takes on new meaning here as well.

That’s all mere speculation. It may have no basis in fact (although Spencer’s elevation, particularly at NPI, without any real credentials, is a matter of record, regardless of the reasons).  However, “where’s there’s smoke, there’s fire.” There have been so many repeated comments, speculations, warnings, revelations, etc. about the cabal within the axis – an Axis of Queervil – that it is highly unlikely that such does not exist. After all, the Pilleater Chronicles tape mentioned a Facebook group, suggesting that at least some fire does accompany the smoke.

If this cabal exists and is influencing the direction of pro-White activism, at least in America, then this is an issue that needs to be considered and addressed.

I Got the Counter-Currents Blues

Johnson must be held accountable.

Look at this ignorant drivel from the grifter site Counter-Currents.

Let's count the misrepresentations. First, not all vaccines provide sterilizing immunity, so the covid-19 vaccines (no scare quotes) are not unusual in this regard.

Second, no one denies that the covid vaccines did not go through the full, long process of certification, but they have been tested, and were fast tracked (in America by Der Movement's beloved God Emperor) for emergency use. Funny how the conspiritards never demand the same level of testing and evidence for the stupidities that they promote.

Third, anyone who talks of "microchipping" should be considered to be the paranoid retards that they sound like.

Fourth - don't like the current situation? Blame China. But, alas, with a Chinatrix strap-on shoved so far up your rear that it's tickling your cecum, such blaming is a bit difficult for you, no?

It is because of these anti-vaxx scum that this pandemic will go on and on, as the unvaccinated serve as a reservoir for efficient transmission, high viral loads, and further mutation into variants that can eventually completely evade the protection of the current vaccines.

These people are not just merely misguided. They are evil. Johnson is evil for hosting this crap on his site, but we already know that about Gaslighting Greg, chief panhandler, don't we?

Johnson needs to be held accountable for this.

Odds and Ends, 7/23/21

In der news.

The System may try to lessen White American demographic anxieties about reduction to minority by redefining "White" to include HAPAs, mulattoes, mestizos, NECs, etc. That's another reason to be more precise in group identity as "European-Americans" and/or to specifically define "White" in the European sense, and to reject a "one drop" definition of European. European-Americans are people derived from Old World European immigrants, and that's it.

A typical Gab retardate:

The government of France has just informed its people that they may no longer buy food if they refuse to take the vaccine.

The only thing that’s prevented Biden from pulling that here in the US thus far is the fact that we’re locked, loaded and would not comply with such tyranny.

Still think this was about a virus?

Wake the fuck up.

Wake the fuck up! Those Jew doctors want to sodomize you with a covid vaccine needle, and taint your precious bodily fluids! Locked and loaded! Freedom! Of course, the fact that you can't sell or rent your property to who you want, you can't control who lives in your neighborhood or attends your child's school, your country can't defend its borders, you are subjected to genocidal mass immigration, you have no freedom of association and your free speech rights are being eroded - who cares about that? Gotta be locked and loaded to prevent that "toxic jab!" Praise Jaysus!

What kind of drooling retardate would not only reject a free vaccine during a pandemic but then think that their ability to refuse such is indicative of "freedom" in a country in which White people lack the most fundamental human rights and are discriminated against by both law and custom?

Yes, indeed, wake the fuck up, you stupid bastards.

While I have not seen details of the specific research in question, speaking generally, as a STEM person who knows of what I speak, Paul is correct and Fauci is wrong. In general, gain of function in biomedicine is the addition of a property ("function") that did not previously exist as such; for example, by adding expression of a gene that was previously not expressed, by increasing expression of an endogenously expressed gene, by expressing an altered version of the gene, or in some cases by doing the opposite (you could in theory make a virus more virulent by inhibiting the expression of some gene), etc. If research is being done to increase the infective range of a virus, make it more pathogenic, or whatever to add new or increased properties - that is gain of function research. Of course, officially, in a purely semantic sense, NIH can define "gain of function" in any way they want, so technically speaking, actual gain of function research is not covered by their narrow, mendacious redefinition, but that doesn't alter the facts.

Someone can decide to redefine "White" to mean any person who is not a sub-Saharan African and - presto! – there is no racial crisis and the world is overflowing with 'Whites," but that does not alter the actual on-the-ground reality. Administrative redefinitions of terms by NIH or whomever else does not alter the actual technical details of the research that is being done, only how it is labelled. Realistically speaking, any alteration of a virus to make it more infective, pathogenic, virulent, increase host range, etc. is gain of function. Is anyone so naive not to think that The Holy Orientals weren't doing that (likely for military purposes)? And your tax money was funding it. 

I no doubt will be accused of cherry picking pro-Asian comments from Amren, while ignoring anti-Asian comments. My response is this: One can find anti-Asian comments at many "movement" sites - such comments are common and therefore do not distinguish one site from another; however, slavishly pro-Asian comments are typically only found at sites like Amren, sites associated with the HBD-Nordicist-ethnonationalist alliance. It is therefore legitimate to highlight those particular comments, since they represent something distinctive about Amren (and similar sites).

This applies to the “movement” as well; activists stick to a failed “movement” because they’ve invested so much of their time and effort (and money, eh?) on the grifters and Quota Queens.  I pulled the plug; you should do so at all.

Another “benefit” from immigration?