« I'm sick and tired of racist-tinged comments about Sotomayor's intelligence | Main | A New York story »

June 06, 2009

Comments

It will be fascinating to see how HBD will affect the justice system.

If criminals are caught for petty theft, will they be given an automatic test for MAOA?

If they have the gene, will we give them longer sentences on the assumption they are likely to commit worse crimes than theft?

Will we pay them to have a vasectomy so they cannot have children?

Will we test potnetial immigrants for this gene?

You may be onto something. From Wikipedia:

"Although Māori make up only 14% of the population [of New Zealand], they make up almost 50% of the total prison-population."

Interestingly, New Zealand is the only country in the world besides the United States to use a "one drop rule" in determining racial origin.

When I lived in NZ it was revealed that one prominent Maori activist was 0% Maori. He turned out to be Irish.

I wonder if cops are more likely to have this allele of the MAOA gene too?

I remember watching a program a long time ago that claimed that cops and gang members had the same psychological make up. I wonder if there's a similarity on the genetic level too.

I also wouldn't be surprised if the allele was common with soldiers too.

[HS: A lot of cops like the POWER of being a cop, but there's no such similar thing for soldiers who spend most of their time drilling and rarely if ever are in a position to lord it over the enemy, or even to discharge a weapon in combat.]

if i actually knew how to work the HapMap data set stuff online, I could do an analysis on this

gotta catch up with my independent learning first.

According to the paper cited below the frequency of the 4-repeat allele in Anglos, Asia-Pacific folks, Hispanics, and US Blacks is
65%, 38%, 71%, and 36%.

BTW to Billare: the hapmap data does not tell us about VNTRs, but there is a nearby SNP that might be informative.


Journal Title - Human Genetics
Article Title - A functional polymorphism in the monoamine oxidase A gene promoter
Volume - Volume 103
Issue - 3
First Page - 273
Last Page - 279
Issue Cover Date - 1998-09-04

Author - S. Z. Sabol
Author - Stella Hu
Author - D. Hamer
DOI - 10.1007/s004390050816
Link - http://www.springerlink.com/content/ruvatc6nkuldw0y6

I still think HDB is more political than scientific. Most people who are HDBers advocate HDB because they have a certain political view.

Maori - or MAOri? Ironic eh?

That MAOA variant has a decent amount of evidence linking it to antisocial behavioural and criminality (and also ADHD iirc) although I'm not sure how relevant that is to prison stats. After all, African Americans are disproportionately represented in prisons too. Presumably not because of MAOA. It could be because of racism and all that annoying sociological stuff.

"I still think HDB is more political than scientific. Most people who are HDBers advocate HDB because they have a certain political view."

You need to make up your mind. Remember yesterday?

"I am willing to say blacks and hispanics have lower IQs than whites and that this is due to genetics..."

Listen, Hell Kaiser, you need to stay consistent. Otherwise, people are going to think you are full of shit.

It seems that you are linking to a criticism of the referenced study in your second link rather than the study itself.

Speaking of violent behavior...check this out (note the censorship by the Baltimore Sun)

Sigma, HBDers need to fight this censorship; your readers should email the publisher of the Sun

http://www.amnation.com/vfr/archives/013361.html

I think this is one case where culture can sometimes overrule genetics. The Māoris were close relatives of another Polynesian people called the Moriori, who probably also had more or less the same genetics. But the Moriori were extremely peaceful, to each other and to outsiders, which led to their downfall.

http://robertlindsay.wordpress.com/2009/02/28/the-moriori-and-the-dangers-of-pacifism/

Here was my original comment:

“There is no need for that type of hyperbole, but it is clear that many commenters here do have a deep-seated contempt for NAMs. Of course, the term is used pejoratively, since it basically means "low IQ ethnic groups." Why not us LIQEG instead, although "NAMs" just looks better.
I am willing to say blacks and Hispanics have lower IQs than whites and that this is due to genetics, but I am not willing to focus on it, and make it a personal hobby. I am not willing to broadcast this unremarkable "insight" to others or find people who openly share this "insight."
I am sure many people believe that "NAMs" or whatever you want to call them have lower IQs, but they do not broadcast it because they do not have contempt over them”

To me, HBD is not about whether a certain race has a higher or lower IQ than another race. Anyone could believe that, and I would not consider them a HBDer. I only consider people who obsess about it to be HBDers (e.g. Steve Sailer and most of the commenters here).

It also seems that many people on Half Sigma aren't really concerned about limiting low IQ immigration (largely because it does not affect them in a significant way. Sure they might pay higher taxes, but they are not in direct competition with them.) All they want to do is complain about them, and show that they are superior because they allegedly have higher IQs. They seem to hate affirmative action more than immigration so they focus on AA instead of immigration when they talk about politics.

I pointed out that the best way to influence public opinion so it could be against “NAM” immigration (and possibly for deportation of Hispanics) is to give the white working class more political power since they are in direct competition from “NAMs” and it is in their best interest to remove that competition. However, even the people here do not like the white working class and show utter disdain with the idea of working with them.

"I think this is one case where culture can sometimes overrule genetics. The Māoris were close relatives of another Polynesian people called the Moriori, who probably also had more or less the same genetics. But the Moriori were extremely peaceful, to each other and to outsiders, which led to their downfall."

New Zealand has a substantial number of people from other Pacific islands, such as Tongans and Samoans, and from what I understand they're not quite as dysfunctional as the Maori despite being generally similar from a genetic standpoint.

I strongly suggest you watch my video on this subject, as I reviewed many studies concerning this gene and race. YouTube deleted my previous account when I posted it, but I seem to have outsmarted them for now.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7hSQDArsn_4&feature=PlayList&p=E55C3431C1E754B2&index=0&playnext=1

"I am sure many people believe that "NAMs" or whatever you want to call them have lower IQs, but they do not broadcast it because they do not have contempt over them"

Unfortunately, this unpleasant fact has to be broadcast, not so much out of hate, but moreso out of concern for disasterous policies that are implimented based on the assumption that there are no meaningful genetic differences among the races. HBD covers not only immigration and AA, but also education policy, health policy, law, foreign policy, etc. If you want contempt, then mosey on to Vdare, Amren, or Stormfront. Plenty of contempt there; here, not so much eventhough there may be a few posters that have some hangups about the "NAMs".

"It also seems that many people on Half Sigma aren't really concerned about limiting low IQ immigration (largely because it does not affect them in a significant way. Sure they might pay higher taxes, but they are not in direct competition with them.) "

You forget crime. That effects most people who do not live in gated communities. The posters here are not majority working class or majority super-rich, so eventhough they are not in competition for jobs with the NAMs, they cannot insulate themselves from things like streetcrime like the super-rich. Where most of us part with the Vdare types is that we don't believe in the hype that every non-white is going to destroy us and rape our women. They cannot keep their passions in check and that is why we call them proles.

"I pointed out that the best way to influence public opinion so it could be against “NAM” immigration (and possibly for deportation of Hispanics) is to give the white working class more political power since they are in direct competition from “NAMs” and it is in their best interest to remove that competition. However, even the people here do not like the white working class and show utter disdain with the idea of working with them."

Hardly. Why give them power if they are clearly not mature enough to handle it? You are also assuming that the WWC is informed enough to arrive at the correct conclusion. They are not. They need their hands held. The elites tell them what to think and they accept it even if they don't fully understand it because they are too lazy to do their own research. For example, take a look at all of those white racists who erroneously think abortion is weakening the white race.

I understand your concern about the unpleasantness of HBD. It is indeed unpleasant, but it is necessary. Too much of it can lead some to think that no black or Hispanic can possess a high IQ (Obama & Sotomayor), but people like that need to be called out on their speculative bullshit every now and then. But you also need to get your head out of your ass and realize that just because some people publicly admit that on average, blacks are not as smart as whites, that doesn't mean we think they are less than human and don't deserve to live a good life. Also, if someone really is interested in finally closing the achievement gap between blacks and whites, if there is indeed a way to do it, it will only be possible through the study of HBD. Ironic, isn't it?

"However, even the people here do not like the white working class and show utter disdain with the idea of working with them."

Aside from white proles having a Protestant Work Ethic and sense of responsibility which the average NAM lacks, they're cut from the same (anti-)intellectual, lowbrow cloth. Why are you surprised that the idea of empowering them, for any reason, doesn't appeal to the average intelligent North American?

If you really don't get it, watch the movie "Idiocracy," and observe how the 100-IQ "genius" there is treated by our future proles of all creeds and colors.

Personally I'd freeze the U.S. and Canadian borders to all immigration (or at least to anything except high-IQ immigrants, with preference given to unmarried-and-childless applicants) for the next two decades. But that's just me.

Regarding foreign policy, I oppose the Iraq War, and I think one could oppose it using arguments without any recourse to HBD.

I sometimes go to VDARE, but I do not see "contempt." I suppose I only read the columns by Paul Craig Roberts and Pat Buchanan.

I did not say give the white proles unlimited political influence. I said that giving them more power is one way to make sure anti-immigration policies go through. I also like it because one does not have to invoke HBD. They do not care about the IQs of NAMs, but they do know that the unskilled labor market is a zero-sum game, and it is in their best interest to remove competitors (such as Hispanics and deporting them.) (What other interest group would be against NAM immigration? Country club Republicans? SWPL "progressives" who voted for Obama?) But it seems that in order to be against immigration, you have to say that NAMs are stupid etc. and provide evidence through psychometrics that they are.

Yes, I know how white proles are basically dumb... just look how popular creationism is in the US. Again, I only stated that they should have influence in limited areas such as immigration policy.

Also, I do regard HBD as a normative political position. Sure, blacks might have a low IQ, but HBDers lack any concern for their welfare. (They might occasionally talk about how stopping Hispanic immigration might help them, but I largely hear rants against AA more often saturated with contempt for blacks.) HBD is a manifestation of the just world hypothesis; it is the position that society is "just" despite the failures of the NAMs because they have a low IQ. HBD is a defense of the status quo and current status hierarchies (defending the order of whites > hispanics > blacks) except that it usually argues for the abolition of AA and less NAM immigration. There doesn't seem to be any moral imperative from HBDers to improve the world or their lives.

Hell Raiser Keio,

Go away, troll.

Nobody wants to hear your leftist boilerplate about how we don't care about NAMs.

We don't care what leftists think. Just go away.

"Regarding foreign policy, I oppose the Iraq War, and I think one could oppose it using arguments without any recourse to HBD."

Yes you can, but if HBD was widley accepted, the case against intervention (war and foreign aid) would only become stronger. Although arguing against the initial invasion of Iraq could have been made without recourse to HBD, we are still in Iraq trying to make it into a democracy because of HBD-denial.

"I sometimes go to VDARE, but I do not see "contempt." I suppose I only read the columns by Paul Craig Roberts and Pat Buchanan."

Roberts rarely talks about immigration anymore and Pat Buchanan does show contempt towards NAMs but not very often. You can find contempt in many of the other articles and blog posts at Vdare if you care to check them on a regular basis.

"I said that giving them more power is one way to make sure anti-immigration policies go through."

We don't need to give them power. They are followers and if we package a message that isn't so narrowminded like the way Vdare sells itself, it will not only appeal to the proles but the upper middle as well. Even red herrings like the Hispanic nanny/housekeeper issue can be handled in a way as to assuage the fears of upper middle whites who "depend" on those services. By pandering to proles we scare off the upper middle (e.g. Sarah Palin) but if we take into account the concerns of the upper middle, we won't scare off the proles, especially on an issue such as immigration.

"Also, I do regard HBD as a normative political position. Sure, blacks might have a low IQ, but HBDers lack any concern for their welfare."

I can't speak for everyone but I'm sure that applies to some HBDers. However, there are some HBDers who do care about blacks, obviously not to the same extent as their own ethny, but they would like their situation to improve. And let's face it, AA as it is implimented now doesn't benefit the blacks that are the most in need, it benefits blacks that are already wealthy or well-connected.

As for the moral imperative of HBD, if you were to call it that, I always thought the focus was on society and making it more efficient. Basically, improve the services we already enjoy and save some money instead of trying to waste it on social engineering experiments that end up being colossal failures (see Iraq).

I know you have training to be a lawyer, but you can't treat human theories like a court case.
When you say "HBD has been proven" it seems kinda... Prole. Especially to any social scientist. If you wrote that in a dissertation, you'd get it back with a big red mark through it (even if the 'proven' topic was, indeed, proven).
HBD or any theory about human behavior can't be "proven" only disproven or supported by evidence.
"This adds further support to HBD" is a more sophisticated and intelligent way of saying it, in my humble opinion. Dare I say more gentlemanly?

THIS IS NOT A THREAD ABOUT IMMIGRATION.

"It seems to me that the authors of that article are in possession of the information of whether or not the bad variant of that gene occurs more frequently in the American black population, but they declined to discuss that topic."

I think there were some studies from the 90's on Gene Expression a while ago about MAO-A and distribution amongst populations.

Certainly, according to the Moffit study those who experienced childhood maltreatment were far more likely to be aggressive later on if they had the low activity variant of the gene.

Here's a new study looking at gang membership:

The low MAOA activity alleles conferred an increased risk of joining a gang and using a weapon in a fight for males but not for females. Moreover, among male gang members, those who used weapons in a fight were more likely to have a low MAOA activity allele when compared with male gang members who do not use weapons in a fight.

Monoamine oxidase A genotype is associated with gang membership and weapon use (May 2009, Comprehensive Psychiatry Article in Press, Corrected Proof)

If you classify Vim as a "troll," then I proudly accept being a troll at Half Sigma.

I hope that Vim would come back and comment on this blog. He was one of the few people without a political agenda on this website.

"I still think HDB is more political than scientific. Most people who are HDBers advocate HDB because they have a certain political view."

You're hypothesizing about our motives in order to take attention away from the truth of HBD. This is a classic argumentative technique employed by the politically correct: Appeal to emotional bias instead of scientific fact.

We don't hate NAMs, we hate unfair policies based on an absurdly false premise of racial equity.

"HBD is a defense of the status quo and current status hierarchies"

No HBD is a scientific fact which effectively undermines the discrimination, racist model of NAM underachievement. We support HBD because it provides immense explanatory power for why the "status hierarchy" is the way that it is (and you forgot about Jews and Asians above whites). And god forbid we oppose low IQ immigration. I don't understand how anyone could actually not oppose it.

J Levin,

According to Sabol et al, 59.1% of African-Americans have the 3-repeat allele, which is about the same percentage as Asian-Americans/Pacific Islanders. However, 3 hormones seem to affect MAOA expression, and levels of all 3 favor higher MAOA expression in Asians relative to blacks. IQ may also play a role via anterior cingulate regulation of the amygdala. It is also important to be aware of the rare 2-repeat allele, which Sabol et al somehow did not come across. It gives a stronger violence predisposition. Rosenberg et al found that African-Americans had more rare MAOA alleles, which was corroborated by having more of the associated rare haplotypes. This also fits what one would expect based on the Founder effect. Widom and Brzustowicz found that “non-whites” had more of the 2-repeat allele and fewer of the other rare alleles. The “non-whites” category included African-Americans, Pacific Islanders, Hispanics, American-Indians, and “others,” but made no mention of continental Asians. Again, look at my video with the link above if you want more specifics.

Last time MAOA was making rounds in the blogosphere, I cam across this comments (scroll down to two posts from "mapper"): http://hiberniagirl.blogspot.com/2008/07/genetic-link-to-violence-and.html

Intrigued, I looked up Widom and Brzustowicz's paper. Turns out, "mapper" made it more complicated than it is. Widom and Brzustowicz paper clearly states that the cohort examined in their paper is the same as in Widom's previous study entitled "The Cycle of Violence" (Science, 1989, 244(4901):160-6). And that 1989 paper clearly states demographics:

"Among the abused and neglected group, there are ... more whites than blacks (67 versus 31%). ... The controls are well matched to the abused and neglected subjects ... although slightly more controls are black (35%)".

Hence, there is no doubt that "others" in Widom and Brzustowicz means blacks (save for 2% of non-whites and non-blacks).

So there you have it - the literature is replete with data showing that blacks have higher frequency of low expressing alleles (mainly 3R) than whites do AND there is limited data that shows that blacks have much, much higher frequency of the ultra-low expressing allele (2R) that is linked to the most extreme antisocial behaviour.

Regarding white proles and political power...

I do not envisioning them getting political power directly. I thought giving them political power would lead people such as Pat Buchanan having positions of political power. BTW, Pat Buchanan's policies would benefit white proles and they would gravitate towards him: he is against free trade and immigration. Proles, of course, do not have a long term time horizon, but Pat Buchanan does.

And do people consider Peter Singer to be a HBDer? We basically share the same views.

And here is what Vim has to say:

"When they say 'human biodiversity', people mean variations in humans as relates to supporting racism, sexism and xenophobia. In other words, they use genetic research as a foundation for bigotted attitudes. This is evidenced by the large amount of hostility have for those they find genetically inferior. They also care very little about variation in traits that don't contribute to dominance. (Obviously, actual scientists would care about all variation not just some variation.)

Their interest in science is usually subordinate to an interest in proving some larger point about 'political correctness', welfare reform, immigration or libertarianism.
...

No offense but you completely missed the point of what I was saying. I was considering the nature of the topics that HBDers usually talk about. You know, what attracts their interest ... it's not biology or biological variation ... they don't have any interest in non-human species, the full panopoly of population genetics or variation or even non-political human biodiversity ... All they care about is the political applications of the more salacious bits. It's a simple notion with simple and predictable consequences.
...
I think my definition about what HBDers are interested in, was a fair one. It's definitely not about the science. "
http://www.halfsigma.com/2008/09/mccain-better-for-h-bd-realism.html

I wonder if the "diversity recession" thesis from HBDers can explain what happened to Iceland and Ireland. I suppose people will use environmentalist arguments to explain that, while when they talk about poverty in Africa, they use genetic arguments.

>"Their interest in science is usually >subordinate to an interest in proving some >larger point about 'political correctness', >welfare reform, immigration or libertarianism."

Or affirmative action.

Don't you think that policy should be informed by empirical data on human nature, not blank slate ideology?

Don't you think it is disgusting that politicians and journalists rule such information off limits? Policy has to be grounded in reality.


>"I wonder if the "diversity recession" thesis >from HBDers can explain what happened to Iceland >and Ireland. I suppose people will use >environmentalist arguments to explain that, >while when they talk about poverty in Africa, >they use genetic arguments."

Posted by: Aki_Izayoi | June 07, 2009 at 06:55 PM"

Countries like Ireland give millions in aid each year to African countries. The reason why intelligence is looked to as a factor is because it has considerable explanatory power:

Rindermann, H. (2008a). Relevance of education and intelligence at the national level for the economic welfare of people. Intelligence, 36, 127-142.

Rindermann, H. (2008b). Relevance of education and intelligence for the political development of nations: Democracy, rule of law and political liberty. Intelligence, 36, 306-322.

Why do these theories exist? Because the traditional social science model, which rejected genetic explanations during the first two decades of the 20th century, has failed.

Gene-free theories cannot fully explain why civilizations arose when and where they did, why some advanced and others regressed.

During the 1950s, experts predicted a great economic boom for the resource-rich, newly independent countries of tropical Africa, and gloom and doom for China, India and other overpopulated Asian countries.

When a scientific paradigm consistently fails to explain and predict even the most fundamental phenomena, we must question its fundamental assumptions. The genetic theories make reasonably specific predictions about differences in allele frequencies between human populations and can therefore be tested by the study of allele frequencies in living and fossil populations. Science is based on the falsification of theories.

Nanonymous,

Thanks for pointing that out. Actually, after looking at both studies, I see that the original 1989 cohort had 1575 people. For the 2006 study, Widom and Brzustowicz interviewed an additional 1196 people and combined this second phase with the original cohort. Only 631 submitted to DNA analysis, and the study only analyzed 617 total individuals who were 62.9% white. However, it is still possible that the non-white sample is heavily weighted towards blacks. I think Widom and Brzustowicz really wanted to cover their tracks from the PC police.

"Hell Raiser Keio,

Go away, troll.

Nobody wants to hear your leftist boilerplate about how we don't care about NAMs.

We don't care what leftists think. Just go away.

Posted by: The Undiscovered Jew | June 07, 2009 at 12:13 AM"

I'm guessing that "The Undiscovered Jew" is a 24-year old virgin with a mediocre job and a non-existent social life who can't deal with the truth that while HBD may be true, its followers are motivated first by contempt. So he lashes out like the immature hagfish that he is.

If this came as a suprise, you should read http://www.crimetimes.org/.

It's worth a check.

The genetic factors influencing varied predispositions and human behaviour are very well described in old age scriptures, only that we ignored it

The comments to this entry are closed.