Lion of the Blogosphere

“Eugenics” in the NY Times

with 35 comments

In China, Eugenics Determines Who Plays in School Bands is the name of the article.

But there was absolutely nothing in there about eugenics. I think the writer is confusing eugenics with anthropometry. Don’t the journalists at the NY Times have dictionaries? Aren’t there editors that read over the stories and look for mistakes? This is pretty pathetic. This is this the kind of mistake I’d expect to find in “fake news” and not the NY Times.

Written by Lion of the Blogosphere

December 1, 2016 at 6:01 pm

Posted in Politics

35 Responses

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. I like how at the end he makes sure to tell us that his daughter is part of the genetically superior group. It’s like those liberals who write about how standardized tests are meaningless and always make sure to tell us they got great scores on the SAT.

    Hepp

    December 1, 2016 at 6:12 pm

    • I think the writer is confusing eugenics with anthropometry. Don’t the journalists at the NY Times have dictionaries?

      Eugenics is a code-word/click-bait term. It’s used the way racist, White supremacist, Hitler, Nazi etc are used.

      It creates fear, panic and interest.

      You linked to the empty article. More clicks for them.

      Why use boring, obscure terms when scare words will work better?

      Rifleman

      December 1, 2016 at 9:07 pm

  2. Ever notice the way the average IQ of journalists at major MSM outlets is dropping….

    #nepotism kills.

    Hard to measure verbal intelligence. Easy to measure bloodlines.

    The Philosopher

    December 1, 2016 at 6:16 pm

  3. I can’t believe that fucking tool Paul Ryan. Trump announces Matis as Sec Defence and Ryan has co-signed a petition along with Bill Kristol, Sheikh Masoud, Paul Wolfowitz, Richard Perle, Den Senor, Huma Abedin and Mia Khalifa to have him removed and replaced with John McCain.

    Lindsey Graham is apoplectic about the whole thing. He said on Fox that Mattis has no experience starting wars!

    Unbelievable stuff.

    The Philosopher

    December 1, 2016 at 6:31 pm

  4. The NYT is fake news.

    Rosenmop

    December 1, 2016 at 6:34 pm

  5. The Chinese are a terrible people. They expect egalitarianism and morality from Westerners, when living abroad, yet they do not practice the same.

    JS

    December 1, 2016 at 7:10 pm

  6. Jimmy Dores smashing it out of the ballpark lately.

    The Philosopher

    December 1, 2016 at 7:23 pm

    • They’re just trying to splain away their own hypocrisy and double standards.

      destructure

      December 1, 2016 at 8:40 pm

      • He accepts that there are two sets of standards and that under Trump we’ll have better ones that what we have under Obama.

        magnavox

        December 2, 2016 at 7:57 am

  7. New York Times is fake news now.

    XVO

    December 1, 2016 at 7:32 pm

    • It’s fake news in the sense that it’s not perfectly accurate. It’s not fake enough to make that a smart comment.

      magnavox

      December 2, 2016 at 8:11 am

  8. The Rolling Stones is fake news. They ran a bogus story about a fraternity rape hoax.

    destructure

    December 1, 2016 at 8:29 pm

  9. As eugenics is closely related to the subject of immigration, I have debunked the libertarian position that trade and immigration are similar –

    https://pragmaticallydistributed.wordpress.com/2016/12/01/rhetorically-immigration-is-not-comparable-to-trade/

    These have both been the subjects of wrong thinking by too many conservatives and libertarians. In their minds they see immigration and trade as analogues.

    To Hamiltonians they are no such thing, not even as rhetoric.

    This is so, firstly, because in the case of immigration there is no exchange of populations between the West and non-West while there is in trade usually an exchange of goods between nations. For various reasons white Westerners cannot immigrate for work and citizenship in non-Western nations as non-Westerners can do in the West. Or, at least, those Westerners who do immigrate permanently outside the West are so small in number that they should be, for policy reasons, considered to be zero in number.

    In fact, modern immigration cannot be compared to any example of unfair trade practices. Immigration is best compared to a One-Sided Trade War – a situation where a trading nation allows its goods to be completely banned from export to a protectionist state while the free trading nation allows in all imports from the protectionist one.

    The field of economics has no real world example of a One Sided Trade War – a total trade war initiated by one side for whatever reason is always soon met with retaliatory measures by the other party.

    In the real environment of trade, unfair trade practices short of complete import bans are usually not made so obviously one-sided by protectionist governments. The methods preferred by protectionist states are much subtler in appearance, making them harder to label as clear violations in international trade forums.

    And yet this ridiculous arrangement is exactly what Western immigration amounts to.

    Without an exchange of labor forces, white Americans are placed in an impossible position regardless of the quality of their skills. Immigrants have the option of competing with their fellow citizens in their homelands for jobs; they also have the option of competing with white Americans in America for jobs. White Americans on the other hand cannot nearly so easily “export” themselves to immigrant exporting nations to compete for overseas jobs, if they can leave at all.

    The Undiscovered Jew

    December 1, 2016 at 8:49 pm

    • Can you link on the frontpage and/or retweet my article shooting down a favorite Libertarian talking point?

      The Undiscovered Jew

      December 1, 2016 at 9:00 pm

    • Here’s a reappraisal of open borders by libertarians. You’ll see this view in the book Democracy: The God that Failed.

      ttgy

      December 1, 2016 at 9:54 pm

      • Lew Rockwell, Russian double agent provocateur and fake news impresario according to George Soros.

        I like some of his ideas, but he looks like such a try hard with those spectacles on.

        Two in the Bush

        December 1, 2016 at 10:44 pm

    • No idea why so few seem to understand these obvious points. Maybe they’re not as obvious as I think they are. Immigration has radically more ramifications than importation, and is not balanced, indeed cannot be balanced, when it is between rich and poor countries.

      Peregrino Nuzkwamia

      December 1, 2016 at 10:44 pm

    • Here’s a reappraisal of open borders by libertarians. You’ll see this view in the book Democracy: The God that Failed.

      I’ve seen excerpts of Hoppe’s book years ago, though I haven’t read it.

      Unfortunately most of the pundit libertarians are, unlike Hoppe, still weak minded creatures who need further brutalization to convert them into world conquering Capitalists.

      The Undiscovered Jew

      December 1, 2016 at 10:47 pm

    • Did Hoppe support, even if he didn’t vote, for Johnson or Trump?

      The Undiscovered Jew

      December 1, 2016 at 10:49 pm

      • I am not sure. I’ll have to see if I can find out.

        ttgy

        December 2, 2016 at 1:36 am

    • Immigration has radically more ramifications than importation, and is not balanced, indeed cannot be balanced, when it is between rich and poor countries.

      The Left has become careless because, in power, it can afford to no longer put up a plausible political front with a Roosevelt, Keynes or Sinclair. Meanwhile the Right – sans the all knowing Hamiltonian Right whose platform Trump ran on but which the mainstream right is too dim to figure what the hell he did and too arrogant to thank him for it – is weak, stupid, confused, and ineffective.

      The Undiscovered Jew

      December 1, 2016 at 11:17 pm

  10. China’s one-child policy was eugenics by another name. Only the well-off could afford to pay the fines for having additional kids. Children born out of wedlock and their mothers faced daunting penalties.

    Mark Caplan

    December 1, 2016 at 9:04 pm

    • Not intentional, though. The policy came about because China was convinced by those 70s arguments by Paul Erlich of imminent catastrophe due to overpopulation.

      Peregrino Nuzkwamia

      December 1, 2016 at 10:46 pm

      • China has horrifying water and food issues because of it’s population and their one child policy is one of the primary causes their living standards improved.

        LOL, anti-Malthusian thought is so moronic because for the thesis to be wrong, you need infinite resources, point at which the government can nationalise everything and give us everything we want for free because efficiency and limits to production no longer exist. Libertarian cornucopia lovers are so weird.

        Pwn

        December 5, 2016 at 9:34 am

      • I’m not an anti-Malthusian. Malthus had an important insight, but the panic Erlich created was insane. The one-child family policy was crude, and probably unnecessary. Other East Asian countries that had no such policy also reduced family size by as much or more during the same period.

        Peregrino Nuzkwamia

        December 5, 2016 at 8:11 pm

  11. i hate libertarians.

    james n.s.w

    December 1, 2016 at 11:08 pm

    • Are there ANY of them not on the autism spectrum?

      Too bad if a person is autistic/has Aspergers but they need to stick to star wars trivia on other harmless stuff and leave political policy and serious issues to others.

      Rifleman

      December 2, 2016 at 1:12 am

    • Hoppe criticizes a lot of the libertarians in his book. He says that many are just people who want to take drugs etc.

      Real libertarianism requires morals and responsibility, not a libertine lifestyle, which is really what most libertarians today view it as.

      I am kind of interested in the Mises Institute and guys like Tom Woods. These guys are different than the mainstream libertarians on things such as immigration, and secession.

      I kind of like the idea of breaking govt down into the smallest manageable areas as possible with very little federal govt involvement. It would be like Italy before it became one country or Germany before it unified,

      I would like to see this country broken up into many countries, but that would be very complicated. For example, would they still allow people from Texas to move to NY even if they became countries.The Irish still have a right to move to the UK when they want even though they became a separate country.

      What if California allowed mass immigration? Would those immigrants be allowed to move to Colorado if they are distinct countries?

      Would we even break up as completes states? Maybe eastern California would want to be separate from LA.

      ttgy

      December 2, 2016 at 2:17 am

      • The libertarian movement has two major wings. One is composed of the Libertarian Party, Reason Magazine, Gary Johnson, the Randians, etc. This group is primarily liberal on social issues and usually accepts a realist foreign policy. The other group are the paleolibertarians. They’re disciples of Rothbard and Von Mises. This group includes, Hoppe, Rockwell, Woods, and Ron Paul. They tend to be conservative on social issues and many of them are religious. They’re also anarcho-captialists and are isolationists.

        Lewis Medlock

        December 2, 2016 at 11:25 am

      • Real libertarianism requires morals and responsibility, not a libertine lifestyle, which is really what most libertarians today view it as.

        I am kind of interested in the Mises Institute and guys like Tom Woods.

        But even Hoppe’s anarcho-libertarianism leaves much to be desired as an economic system. If the state is reduced to nothing, private actors will then have to set rules for the common business conditions. In that position their profit motive would conflict with their political responsibilites to create a fair (as much as humanly feasible) environment for all, even their competitors. Imagine the chaos of private banks being tasked with setting up their industry’s accounting regulations.

        As politics, localization is a weak opponent. Localization a strategy is by definition the task of a divided opposition. It has proven easy prey to a Federal government that has been steamrolling state’s rights since 1932.

        Capitalism is the correct conservative position, not Utopian Lew Rockwellism.

        The Undiscovered Jew

        December 2, 2016 at 6:58 pm

      • “But even Hoppe’s anarcho-libertarianism leaves much to be desired as an economic system. If the state is reduced to nothing, private actors will then have to set rules for the common business conditions. In that position their profit motive would conflict with their political responsibilites to create a fair (as much as humanly feasible) environment for all, even their competitors. Imagine the chaos of private banks being tasked with setting up their industry’s accounting regulations.

        As politics, localization is a weak opponent. Localization a strategy is by definition the task of a divided opposition. It has proven easy prey to a Federal government that has been steamrolling state’s rights since 1932.

        Capitalism is the correct conservative position, not Utopian Lew Rockwellism.”

        The Feds do steamroll state’s rights, but that is a reason to get rid of the federal govt.

        I know it’s not going to happen anytime soon, so it is Utopian.

        I would like to see one state try to secede. That would be very interesting.

        The govt is force as they describe, which I don’t like, but I also am weary of corporations too.

        I think much of the regulations are just the govt covering for business. Many of the laws are actually written by corporate lawyers.

        According to Rockwell the US is a combination of big business and big govt against the rest of us.

        The auto industry benefits from govt road building, oil subsidies and zoning, which has turned out to be a complete waste.

        The medical industry is really dubious in many ways. They do do some good things, but there also is probably over treatment and useless drugs.

        The FDA actually can legitimize the medical industry. People will think something is legit if the FDA approves it.

        ttgy

        December 2, 2016 at 11:29 pm

      • The Feds do steamroll state’s rights, but that is a reason to get rid of the federal govt.

        I know it’s not going to happen anytime soon, so it is Utopian.

        I would like to see one state try to secede. That would be very interesting.

        If anarcho-libertarians are too weak to hold back the Federal government they’re too weak to get a secession movement going.

        According to Rockwell the US is a combination of big business and big govt against the rest of us.

        If he had his way and government were eliminated, big corporations would fill the vacuum and become the government.

        Rockwell, Hoppe and the others make interesting economic points but they have no useful advice for opposing a very centralized Left. Decentralization against progressivism in practice has meant the right is divided and always on the defensive.

        The Undiscovered Jew

        December 3, 2016 at 11:37 am

  12. Phrenology (a bogus type of anthropometry) and eugenics both trace back to Galton. That’s the connection.

    Anthony

    December 2, 2016 at 2:26 pm


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: