2
0
🎂

Had the Zulu not chased the British out of Kenya over a Century ago


 invite response                
2018 Jun 28, 8:27am   2,975 views  31 comments

by Tenpoundbass   ➕follow (7)   💰tip   ignore  

Kenya and many African Nations would be the world's cheap tech centers today. Instead of India and Asian countries.

India and China got the cultural aptitude for it, I believe as a direct result of being subjugated to the British where Order required their subjects get a classic education and follow the Church doctrine.

Had the British settled South Africa and not the Bower. The black population in SA would be an educated lot today, that would not be calling on genocide of the White Farmer.
They would have had more of a role in managing and farming land, than just sitting on side lines as paupers watching the rich white folk rake in the dough.

Had the Dutch subjugated India, they would not be prevalent in high tech IT fields today.

Comments 1 - 31 of 31        Search these comments

1   lostand confused   2018 Jun 29, 3:57am  

Zulu are south African not Kenyan. India and China were world superpowers before the west rose due to the industrial age and then decayed for a long time. Chinese did invent gun powder. Christopher Columbus found America because he was looking for an easier route to the riches of India. India and China have a rich history of kingdoms, navies , colonies, armies. The muslims came first and then British. China wa snever officially captured, but subjugated. Until WW2 Japan wa sneevr captured and has a very rich history too.

I was visiting Jordan a few years ago. A local guide was showing me the silk route and joked nothing changed-back then China produced a bunch of goods and "shipped" it to Europe and they do the same now!
2   lostand confused   2018 Jun 29, 4:21am  

America should take a good long look at China and India and see their centuries of decline-which is longer than we have been alive as a nation-and see what we can do to not follow suit. Trump may be our last hope. Liberlas will defnitely turn us into a Venezuela style hell hole and all of us may be clamoring to immigrate outwards. Lots of Europeans migrated to s.a frica-probably wished they stayed in Europe-or now maybe not.

I think there is a thing as becoming too civilized-where we live in our heads in some delued egalitarian ideal world and ntor eality and that is probably how the terms barbarians at the gate came about.
3   CBOEtrader   2018 Jun 29, 4:21am  

Tenpoundbass says
Had the British settled South Africa and not the Bower. The black population in SA would be an educated lot today


The degree that IQ is environmental vs genetic is not known. However the high estimate of 82 for sub saharan africa is less than the 83 minimum required to join the US army, for example. Uncle Sam wont allow this level of intellect to serve messhall slop. They're fucked
https://ieet.org/index.php/IEET2/more/pellissier20120307
4   lostand confused   2018 Jun 29, 4:33am  

CBOEtrader says
Tenpoundbass says
Had the British settled South Africa and not the Bower. The black population in SA would be an educated lot today


The degree that IQ is environmental vs genetic is not known. However the high estimate of 82 for sub saharan africa is less than the 83 minimum required to join the US army, for example. Uncle Sam wont allow this level of intellect to serve messhall slop. They're fucked
https://ieet.org/index.php/IEET2/more/pellissier20120307


They have the highest fertility rate. In the west, smart women are not having babies or low fertility rate.
5   bob2356   2018 Jun 29, 4:40am  

Damn that's funny shit tpb. Who makes this up? Seriously, where can I read this, it's really amusing stuff.

Tenpoundbass says
India and China got the cultural aptitude for it, I believe as a direct result of being subjugated to the British where Order required their subjects get a classic education and follow the Church doctrine.


Yep the Raj sucking all the wealth out of india while treating indians as sub human and British conquering china ports to sell them massive quantities of opium was great for the education of the people.

Tenpoundbass says
Had the Zulu not chased the British out of Kenya over a Century ago

Tenpoundbass says
Kenya and many African Nations would be the world's cheap tech centers today. Instead of India and Asian countries

Tenpoundbass says
Kenya and many African Nations would be the world's cheap tech centers today. Instead of India and Asian countries


Other than the fact that zulu never lived in Kenya and the British didn't leave until 1963 it's a really good theory.

Tenpoundbass says

Had the British settled South Africa and not the Bower. The black population in SA would be an educated lot today, that would not be calling on genocide of the White Farmer.
They would have had more of a role in managing and farming land, than just sitting on side lines as paupers watching the rich white folk rake in the dough.


Like the British did in Zimbabwe? ROFLOL. This is really funny shit. Don't bogart your sources my friend, pass them over to me. .
6   bob2356   2018 Jun 29, 5:01am  

CBOEtrader says
he degree that IQ is environmental vs genetic is not known. However the high estimate of 82 for sub saharan africa is less than the 83 minimum required to join the US army, for example. Uncle Sam wont allow this level of intellect to serve messhall slop. They're fucked
https://ieet.org/index.php/IEET2/more/pellissier20120307


You are seriously quoting something based on IQ of Nations? That's actually embarrassing. Ever read it? Every time the data (which is basically a bunch of guesses) doesn't match up they go through all kinds of contortions to explain why it's different for this country or it doesn't apply to that country. It's pretty laughable stuff for anyone with an above room temperature IQ. Perfect for this thread.
7   CBOEtrader   2018 Jun 29, 6:20am  

bob2356 says
You are seriously quoting something based on IQ of Nations?


Every study ever conducted has had similar results.

bob2356 says
Every time the data (which is basically a bunch of guesses) doesn't match up


I'm sure averages amongst a sample within a population is very difficult for today's super computers. eyeroll
8   RC2006   2018 Jun 29, 6:44am  

TPB did you fall asleep while Black Panther was on.
9   MisdemeanorRebel   2018 Jun 29, 9:17am  

IQ Tests are stunningly accurate and fantastic predictors of accomplishment.

It doesn't matter how they're weighted or created, if they have enough questions it works.

IQ Tests have robustly stood up to all challenges over the past half century or more.

Of Course, in fairness, the Brain IS somewhat like a muscle - if you don't encounter regularized abstract thinking as a child, those parts of the brain won't develop. Just like if you flop around an x-box, eat sweets and don't exercise, even if you have the propensity to be a Jack LaLane, you won't be.
10   CBOEtrader   2018 Jun 29, 9:25am  

TwoScoopsOfWompWomp says
IQ Tests are stunningly accurate and fantastic predictors of accomplishment.

It doesn't matter how they're weighted or created, if they have enough questions it works.


That's the point!

I'm not pretending I know why sub saharan Africans show an average IQ less than our society's basic minimal functional level. I'm merely pointing out facts. Noone will be opening any technology offshoring businesses in south africa anytime soon.
12   indc   2018 Jun 29, 11:39am  

Do the IQ test takers take the test in "local language" or do they have to take it in english?

I dont think we should take the IQ numbers seriously for non english speakers. If language is also part of the IQ test then it should not be named "IQ test".

TPB, You need to change your thinking that "white men spread civilization". There is enough proof now that they destroyed older civilizations or caught some civilizations in midst of turmoil and used it to their advantage.

If you want proof you can check how much gold was looted from India and shipped to UK. Similarly we know how much gold was looted from american civilizations shipped by Spaniards.

Dutch made the first east india company and took over sri-lanka, indonesia and other places in Asia. But they lost to a small kingdom in India. After that english east India company became stronger. We would be having this discussion in dutch maybe, if not for that small kingdom...
13   lostand confused   2018 Jun 29, 11:49am  

indc says
utch made the first east india company and took over sri-lanka, indonesia and other places in Asia. But they lost to a small kingdom in India. After that english east India company became stronger. We would be having this discussion in dutch maybe, if not for that small kingdom...



Not to mention Spanish is not native to S America-it jsut spread there from the Spanish colonists.
14   Bd6r   2018 Jun 29, 11:57am  

indc says
"white men spread civilization"

With current attitude in West - soy boys, 3rd wave feminists, political correctness in hiring - South-East Asians in general or Chinese in particular will be spreading civilization here very soon.
15   bob2356   2018 Jun 29, 12:37pm  

CBOEtrader says
bob2356 says
You are seriously quoting something based on IQ of Nations?


Every study ever conducted has had similar results.


What studies are these? All I've seen is rehashes of IQ of nations. Feel free to post them. Avoid embaressment, check for the names Lynn and Vanhanen first, since that would be IQ of Naitons.

The only valid mulit national iq study, as in using scientific methodology and being reviewed, is from scientific american which links childhood infectious disease with IQ. They even compared US states and got the same linkage. VT,NH,MA are the high end, LA,MS are the low end.

CBOEtrader says

bob2356 says
Every time the data (which is basically a bunch of guesses) doesn't match up


I'm sure averages amongst a sample within a population is very difficult for today's super computers. eyeroll


ROFLOL times 10. Super computer? within populations? The book used results that were from 3 completely different studies using 3 totally different methodologies done on 3 different sets of countries that only covered 81 of the 185 countries. For 104 countries there was no IQ testing at all. They just made up a number based on countries around them. Or not around them. Kyrgyzstan's IQ is estimated by averaging the IQs of Iran and Turkey, neither of which is close to Kyrgyzstan. For some countries they estimated from the ethnic groups of other countries. Super computer??? That's really funny.

I read the book. I still have a copy that I'm looking at right now to get these numbers. The book is a total joke.
16   Reality   2018 Jun 29, 2:34pm  

bob2356 says
Yep the Raj sucking all the wealth out of india while treating indians as sub human and British conquering china ports to sell them massive quantities of opium was great for the education of the people.


Keep in mind, both Indians and Chinese had been conquered and living under foreign domination for hundreds of years when the British arrived (and even when the Portuguese and the Dutch arrived before the British).

Native Indians (of the Asian subcontinent) were living under Mughals (Islamized Mongols), and native Chinese were living under Manchu conquest, both for several hundred years. What the West (British, and Dutch VOC as well as Portuguese merchants before them) offered the native populations of India and China were far superior, modern and dignified terms than what the Mughal rulers and Manchu rulers offered the native population. That's why, in both vast geographical areas, people voted with their feet to migrate / flock to the trading posts / colonies set up by the western merchants, and those waves of migration were not due to any welfare offered by the colonial administrations either, but simply due to better opportunity and fairer trade terms (and individual rights and liberty, relatively speaking) than what had been available to the people living under Mughal rule or Manchu rule, where random execution on the say-so of government officials without trial was the norm.

Please don't take the above paragraph to mean that the West were original inventors of civilization. Indians achieved high levels of commerce and civilization circa 1700BC during the Hrappan period; they had widespread indoor plumbing, which was not evident in Rome until 1500 years later, only to be lost and re-invented another 1500 years later (i.e. those early colonial administrators of Dutch VOC and British East Indian Company actually did not grow up in a society furnished with indoor plumbing, something that Hrappans had 3000+ years earlier!). Likewise, Chinese achieved the peak of their civilization around 400BC, about the same time as the Ancient Greek City States (Athens and Sparta), when China was a geographical entity, not a unified state. Those were the time periods when many schools of original intellectual thoughts emerged from India and China, just like in Ancient Greece and Europe/America after Renaissance (i.e. modern time).

There seems to be a great cycle that all civilizations go through: commerce and division of labor bring forth prosperity, then kids growing up under prosperity become spoiled, and their parents send their kids to schools in order to let them have a leg up on the competition without the vagaries of the market place or battlefield; the kids then become emotionally fragile idealists that expect too much and cost too much to get anything done, They devolve into endless infighting as those "educated" kids don't have the originality from market experience and therefore unable to create real value but can only fight over the existing (and inevitably declining) prosperity. What comes next is invasion and conquest by barbarians at the gate.

We can see that in the well documented ancient Greek history: despite what we think of the great intellectual luminaries Socrates, Plato and Aristotle, what they really brought was catastrophe to their host society: all three and their schools were obviously result of rapidly rising prosperity due to commerce, yet, Socrates' educational effort brought forth Alcibades, who was the lynch-pin in the fall of Athens; Athenian society would have been far better off if Socrates had not diverted Alcibades from wine and sensual pursuits. Plato was an out-right advocate of totalitarianism. Aristotle, despite his rejection of Plato's totalitarian ideals, brought forth Alexander ("the Great") who finally put to death Greek Liberty by creating a large empire and bringing forth a dark age for classical Greece.

Similar historical pattern had taken place in India and China: Vedic invasion and conquest Indian subcontinent, reducing it from commercial success and highly sophisticated urban living (Hrappan) to a dark age under the caste system; "Chin" (another periphery semi-barbaric state, just like Vedic to India, and Macedon to Greece) conquest of "China" (which obviously wasn't known as "China" before the invasion and conquest by "Chin") likewise ushered in thousands of years of bureaucratic totalitarian dark age in that part of the world. Yet the real reason for such invasion/conquest was internal decay and helplessness of the "intellectuals" grown up in prosperity, knowing only in-fighting and submission to external conquerors . . . just like in the twilight years of ancient Greece and ancient Rome.

In the West, the post-Roman dark age was broken first by the commercial Italian city-states, then after the Ottoman blocked off sea-borne trade routes, Portugueses and Spaniads, then the North Sea coast/basin (Dutch and English) carried on the commercial tradition, eventually accumulating enough capital over time to ignite the carbonaceous fuel as source of industrial energy, far surpassing what had been available from the previous draft animal power and wind power (both for mills and for sail ships), eventually spreading this cycle of civilization to all corners of the world.

Politicians in India and China may want to nurse their "wounded pride" for contemporary political aims, but it would be silly to think living under serfdom in India and China were somehow superior to living under serfdom in central or eastern Europe (e.g. the Rumanian count notorious for copying Turkish methods).
17   CBOEtrader   2018 Jun 29, 2:49pm  

bob2356 says
I read the book. I still have a copy that I'm looking at right now to get these numbers. The book is a total joke.


I think you are missing the point. This is a QUALITATIVE concept that these people have less quantitative capacity. There are legit (or more legit) studies out there than the ones you mention, but I am certainly no expert. I thought it was obvious that IQ scores for nations would have many problems. That is why the link I chose offered a low end and high end estimates (65 to 82) from different studies. I gave benefit of the doubt and used 82.

Still though...82 IQ is someone who struggles to be a busboy. This is a real problem that the left would pretend doesnt exist.

At 65 IQ, you'd expect that population to live like this...
18   HeadSet   2018 Jun 29, 3:45pm  

There seems to be a great cycle that all civilizations go through

Yes, but they all stopped at a certain level. Rome, Egypt, India, and China all made strides in writing, constructions, arts, and commerce. The Roman Aqueducts, Egyptian Pyramids, and Great Wall are significant achievements. But why the arrest in progress? For example, the Roman Army had the same weapons and infantry tactics for hundreds of years. And why for a millennium of civilization, did China stay about the same level? Compare that to Western European civilization 1600-1900.

You mentioned the Mughals. In their day, they were the world's largest producer of firearms. But how these firearms were produced shows (IMO) why little techno progress was made. Like virtually all other cultures, the Mughals were a society of kings, priests, and serfs. The serfs. in addition to doing work to support themselves, were tasked with work for the overlords. Some serfs were weapons makers required to meet a quota or be killed. Fathers passed this "trade" to sons. In such a situation, there is no point on trying improvements. You were not going to get paid, and any improvement that did not work or was misunderstood could be risky.

The catalyst that caused the Industrial Revolution to occur in Western Europe was that Western Europe has progressed socially to where a serf could keep enough of the fruits of his labor to make improvements worthwhile. He still had excess rents and taxes, but at least if he made more, he could keep more. Another, more recent example is the old South. Not only did slavery help cause the Civil War, slavery was the reason the South lost. When you have a large portion of your people chained, they have no reason to produce beyond the lash. The North had a distinct edge in industrial productivity. Had slavery been abolished in 1776, devices like mechanical reapers and harvesters may have been invented sooner, and each field worker would have been more productive. Notice how fast the South progressed from 1865 to 1900, no small part due to the fact that free blacks are far more productive than slaves. Example, Elijah McCoy would never have created his engineering devices had he been a slave rather than free.
19   HeadSet   2018 Jun 29, 4:00pm  

CBOETrader, bob2356,

I am sure you both agree that no ethnicity has a lock on high or IQ. If you took the offspring of Korean Scientists or Jewish Physicists, and placed them in an environment where these babies came of age in sub-Sahara with disease, malnutrition, and low mental stimulation, these babies would show low IQ. Likewise, if you took a sample of babies away from those sub-Sahara lands and placed them in Western households, those babies would trend toward higher IQ.

We are all distinct and unique individuals. Items like race and gender are just attributes.
20   CBOEtrader   2018 Jun 29, 4:31pm  

HeadSet says
I am sure you both agree that no ethnicity has a lock on high or IQ.


not only that, but variation within ethnicities is so high that prejudice would be a poor model for the world.

Theres evidence suggesting over a lifetime, genetics overcome environment. Keep in mind these are twins raise in different US households by loving families, how different could these environments be? https://www.madinamerica.com/2014/12/studies-reared-apart-separated-twins-facts-fallacies/

HeadSet says
If you took the offspring of Korean Scientists or Jewish Physicists, and placed them in an environment where these babies came of age in sub-Sahara with disease, malnutrition, and low mental stimulation, these babies would show low IQ.


Yup. Are you familiar with the flynn effect? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flynn_effect "Test score increases have been continuous and approximately linear from the earliest years of testing to the present. For the Raven's Progressive Matrices test, a study published in the year 2009 found that British children's average scores rose by 14 IQ points from 1942 to 2008.[2] Similar gains have been observed in many other countries in which IQ testing has long been widely used, including other Western European countries, Japan, and South Korea.[1] " 14 points is a full standard deviation higher.

Frankly, the flynn effect COULD account for the entire difference between 82 in the congo and the UK. That would be about equivalent to the UK 100 years ago.

Now ask yourself this, is the UK 100 years ago or modern day Zimbabwe a better environment to foster mental growth?
21   MisdemeanorRebel   2018 Jun 29, 5:24pm  

indc says
Do the IQ test takers take the test in "local language" or do they have to take it in english?

I dont think we should take the IQ numbers seriously for non english speakers. If language is also part of the IQ test then it should not be named "IQ test".


Obviously IQ tests are given in the native language although most parts of the test aren't interested in language skills at all.

You can offer different question matrices, more geometry and less compare and contrast, it doesn't matter. Even when people (individuals AND populations) take entirely different test formats, the results are stupid close, pardon the pun.

100% Environment, 0% Innate Tabula Rasa Leftists have been trying to knock down IQ tests forever, and they've never succeeded.
22   MisdemeanorRebel   2018 Jun 29, 5:27pm  

indc says
If you want proof you can check how much gold was looted from India and shipped to UK. Similarly we know how much gold was looted from american civilizations shipped by Spaniards.


The Industrial Revolution, not Colonialism, created the growth both in investment and science.

Spain is actually a great example. They drowned in gold, but all the Spaniard wanted was a Hacienda and a title. China and parts of India were far richer than the West in 1600 overall, but the boom didn't start there.
23   Reality   2018 Jun 29, 6:32pm  

HeadSet says
There seems to be a great cycle that all civilizations go through

Yes, but they all stopped at a certain level. Rome, Egypt, India, and China all made strides in writing, constructions, arts, and commerce. The Roman Aqueducts, Egyptian Pyramids, and Great Wall are significant achievements. But why the arrest in progress? For example, the Roman Army had the same weapons and infantry tactics for hundreds of years. And why for a millennium of civilization, did China stay about the same level? Compare that to Western European civilization 1600-1900.


Necessity is the mother of all inventions. The arrest in progress/evolution was simply due to lack of competition: the respective state/civilization had developed into a "Universal State," occupying the entire "known world" or logistically reachable world and became a bureaucratic empire. The F-35 fiasco is the first major generation of fighter researched and developed under an environment where the US Air Force has no real peer competitor. The rapid development of Europe between 1600 and 1900 was due to fierce competition among various European states and numerous wars checking the cancerous growth of bureaucratic monopoly. Why did China stay about the same for a millennium? Because their culture embraced "grand unification and orderly peace under heaven" starting in the 11th century instead of advocating competing sovereigns like in Europe; from about 1300 to 1900, it was one unified "universal state" after another in that region of East Asia, with one bureaucratic monopoly after another; state-to-state wars became push-over affairs and mass slaughters of civilians instead of head-to-head competition between armies. When regional self-rule via "warlordism" finally returned to China in the first half of 20th century, its military quickly advanced from 14th century standards to 20th century standards in about 50 years. A similar pattern could be seen in Japanese history: the Sengoku Jidai ("Warring State Period") during early16th century saw Japanese military advance from peasant militia to mounted knights (Taketa Shingen's army) to mass infantry array using fire-arms (Oda Nobunaga's army) in one generation! covering the military technological development that took nearly 1000 years in Europe (from the fall of Western Roman Empire, rise of Knights, to French victory in the Hundred Year War via fire arms); then quickly forgotten after the establishment of Tokugawa Bakufu, followed by 200+ years of idealistic sword play! until they were rudely awakened by Commodore Perry. Just in case anyone thought Japanese people lived an idylic kumbalaya life under the sword-playing pretend-warriors during Tokugawa Bakufu: it was a Samurai's right to kill any commoner who offended him or for the simple purpose of testing his newly forged sword! Commoners of course were not allowed to have swords, and nobody was allowed to have fire-arms, although fire-arm armies had been deployed on a massive scale 200+ years earlier during the Sengoku Jidai ("Warring State Period") wars of unification.

The purpose of the above paragraph is not to glorify the efficiency of war-making technology, but war-making (/ self-preservation) is the fundamental function of a government, any government, so it is there one can find the maximum efficiency a given governmental system can deliver. Technology relating to living standards likewise can be retarded by a centralized state. For example, people in Cuba and North Korea are/were not allowed to have personal computers or cell phones, never mind internet. It is only competition among various states/countries in much of the rest of the world that give people the liberty to enjoy personal computers, cell phones and internet.

The European former serfs (mostly burghers by the eve of industrialization, as grain import had made agricultural serfdom in Western Europe unprofitable) were able to have some resources left over after tax and rent, precisely because they were able to run away to a different jurisdiction nearby if their lords squeezed them too hard. If there is a large unified state, everyone is a serf/slave of the bureaucratic monopoly. The bureaucrats can always have reason and find ways to raise tax/rent. Given half of American adults today can not cobble together $1000 in an emergency, how far do you think the modern tax/welfare state is from serfdom anyway? Industrialization most likely couldn't take place in today's environment.
24   Reality   2018 Jun 29, 7:57pm  

HeadSet says
If you took the offspring of Korean Scientists or Jewish Physicists, and placed them in an environment where these babies came of age in sub-Sahara with disease, malnutrition, and low mental stimulation, these babies would show low IQ. Likewise, if you took a sample of babies away from those sub-Sahara lands and placed them in Western households, those babies would trend toward higher IQ.


There are major problems with that assumption. Decades and billions of dollars spent in federal government sponsored "Head Start" program has unintentionally proven that IQ and genetics are real to a person's smarts and ultimate achievement potential: "Head Start" may have short-term effect on a student's grades in the first few years of schooling, but has little to no effect in the long run. That experiment went much further than leveling nutrition (although the program usually does deliver breakfast/lunch/dinner when need) but went so far as to leveling educational opportunity! Yet, the help doesn't make up for genetic deficiency.

CBOEtrader says
Are you familiar with the flynn effect?


I have a different interpretation of the Flynn Effect, especially in light of the latest report that the Flynn Effect is in reverse after the generation born around 1975 (i.e. those born later are not having rising IQ, but declining IQ!); i.e. Flynn Effect peaked in the generation born in the early 1970's.

The nutritional explanation of Flynn Effect, while sounds sweet and hopeful, doesn't make sense: the most nutritious food for baby during brain development is mother's milk. If a population is so malnourished that the mother is not producing enough milk, and the population in general is chronically starving, the IQ of the population would actually rise due to the deaths of those less intelligent and unable to gather enough resources for their children! That's precisely how humanity acquired intelligence: not by learning, but by starvation of those didn't have it! As harsh as it sounds, that's just how evolution works: giraffes with short necks starved to death (or couldn't find girlfriends), likewise lions that couldn't fight didn't have offspring, zebras coudn't run became lion food before breeding. In the same way, human ancestors that moved to colder climates developed higher IQ simply because those who were not smart enough to save seeds over winter starved to death! The free-food-all-the-time tropics didn't help IQ development (because in that environment higher IQ is not as important as bigger muscle or being more thuggish or simply having a bigger penis; i.e. becoming r-selected like horses and rodents that have food everywhere free for the taking, instead of K-selected like lions and wolves that have to hunt in order to eat) .

My explanation of Flynn Effect in the first 3/4 of 20th century was Women's Hypergamy (facilitated by mobility technology of the 20th century). Before 20th century, women mostly mated with their neighbors, a much smaller pool of men to choose from. In the first 3/4 of 20th century, trains and then automobile followed by airplane for long-distance relocating, as well as general social mobility, enabled an average woman to meet up and pick from a much larger pool of men. Think what going to college did in the MRS-degree era. The result was much more optimized mating and baby-making (from the woman's perspective). More children were born to men of higher intelligence because the social mobility in a relatively free market place translated the high IQ genotype into a phenotype visible as higher wealth and higher status.

The reverse of Flynn Effect for western population born after 1975 was the result of the welfare state: more children are born to women who (accidentally) get pregnant by losers, and can look forward to being supported by the welfare state. Cue movie Idiocracy intro:


www.youtube.com/embed/-N9nVLXMhPc
25   indc   2018 Jun 29, 9:30pm  

TwoScoopsOfWompWomp says
indc says
If you want proof you can check how much gold was looted from India and shipped to UK. Similarly we know how much gold was looted from american civilizations shipped by Spaniards.


The Industrial Revolution, not Colonialism, created the growth both in investment and science.

Spain is actually a great example. They drowned in gold, but all the Spaniard wanted was a Hacienda and a title. China and parts of India were far richer than the West in 1600 overall, but the boom didn't start there.


Do you think having machines is enough to create market. The cloth was 4 times more costly than hand made cloth.
British went around the country cutting off weavers hands and braking the looms in India.
They forced indians to buy imported salt.

Why do you think only parts of India were rich? What do you mean by boom did not start there? You mean west's boom?
26   CBOEtrader   2018 Jun 29, 11:06pm  

Reality says
i.e. Flynn Effect peaked in the generation born in the early 1970's.


Really cool. Thanks for sharing. Do you study this stuff? Seems like an esoteric topic on which to be authoritative
27   CBOEtrader   2018 Jun 29, 11:08pm  

Reality says

The reverse of Flynn Effect for western population born after 1975 was the result of the welfare state: more children are born to women who (accidentally) get pregnant by losers, and can look forward to being supported by the welfare state. Cue movie Idiocracy intro:


This is a brilliant observation. Someone get Freakanomics on the phone.
28   MisdemeanorRebel   2018 Jun 29, 11:45pm  

indc says
Do you think having machines is enough to create market. The cloth was 4 times more costly than hand made cloth.


Afluenza, just like people are buying wierd yellow salt today. Until a few decades ago, white fine crystal salt was the epitome of salt. Now that we've solved salt extraction, that's boring.

Handmade shit is of varying quality. Shit made by machine is of even, reliable quality.

I need a source for cost. Manufacturers seldom choose to use a production method 400% more expensive.

Muslim Mughals did plenty of exploitation as well, so let's not cry too much and act like the British were exceptional. The Chinese also demanded Tribute from subject states/tribes. Ghandi's dad was the Prime Minister of some tiny state (a fact his worshippers avoid mentioning because it takes away from the Holy Man of Peace baloney). Subhose Chandra Bose, not Ghandi, and the British Indian Army/Navy strike is largely responsible for Indian Freedom. Not wimpy Congress and not Ghandi.

Salt was the best way to tax a huge mostly rural population without resorting to head or income taxes. It's still debatable as to whether the British made a dime off colonialism.

Note that Norway, Luxemborg, the various Italian States, the Germans etc. had no colonies (or came very late and left the game very early with the slimmest pickings) but still industrialized and got rich.
29   bob2356   2018 Jun 30, 5:11am  

Reality says
bob2356 says
Yep the Raj sucking all the wealth out of india while treating indians as sub human and British conquering china ports to sell them massive quantities of opium was great for the education of the people.


Keep in mind, both Indians and Chinese had been conquered and living under foreign domination for hundreds of years when the British arrived (and even when the Portuguese and the Dutch arrived before the British).


Which has nothing to do with TPB believing british conquest brought the concept of education to backward people.

Under the Mughal's India was a powerhouse. Something like 25% of the worlds GDP if I remember correctly Which doesn't matter because the Marathas had defeated the Mughals centuries the British showed up. The Marathas were originally allies with the British but then defeated by them. Marathas weren't conquers, they were native to the Indian sub content and drove the muslim Mughals out.

The Manchu weren't foreign either. They were one of the largest ethnic groups in China through out history. The earlier Jin dynasty was Manchu or at least Jurchens who became the Manchu..
30   Reality   2018 Jun 30, 6:29am  

bob2356 says
Under the Mughal's India was a powerhouse. Something like 25% of the worlds GDP if I remember correctly Which doesn't matter because the Marathas had defeated the Mughals centuries the British showed up.


The British East India Company was founded in 1600, and arrived in India shortly after that. That was during the reign of Akbar "the Great," the very prime of Mughal Empire (the claim of Mughal India accounting for 1/4 of world's GDP was precisely regarding the early 17th century; i.e. early 1600's), decades before Shah Jahan commissioned the building of Taj Mahal, which was a huge waste of money and started the decline of Mughal Empire but probably contributed to the meaningless GDP statistic loved by GDP-fetishists. The Maratha Empire didn't even formally exist until 1674. Persian sacking of Mughal capital Delhi (signalling rapid decline of Mughal Empire) didn't take place until 1739, mid 18th century.

bob2356 says
The Manchu weren't foreign either. They were one of the largest ethnic groups in China through out history. The earlier Jin dynasty was Manchu or at least Jurchens who became the Manchu..


The Manchu (formerly known as Jurchens) was a foreign tribe to native Chinese living in China proper, with their tribal place of origin far north of either one of the two Great Walls (built around 200BC and 1400AD respectively). They became conquerors of China the same way as Mongols did; the difference is in subsequent action: they stayed for nearly 300 years (did not integrate during their rule of China, as they lived in segregated cities-within-cities). Manchus integrated and submerged into the general Chinese population only when/after their dynasty fell in the early 20th century and the Manchu population had to escape massacre and revenge for previous Manchu government policy of racial/ethnic persecution.

bob2356 says
Which has nothing to do with TPB believing british conquest brought the concept of education to backward people.


The real contribution of British was not education per se or even civil service exam, but the commercial opportunity and relative freedom brought on by a relatively hands-offish Thalassocracy. What the British trade ports brought to India and China was essentially the equivalent of "Free Cities" like Bremen and Hamburg in medieval central Europe (i.e. surrounded by mostly serfdom everywhere else); or the equivalent of Venice and Genoa (with their own fleets dominating the seas) building colonies (trading posts) all along Mediterranean and Black Seas . . . i.e. the bringer of the Renaissance.
31   bob2356   2018 Jun 30, 7:20am  

Reality says
The Maratha Empire didn't even formally exist until 1674. Persian sacking of Mughal capital Delhi (signalling rapid decline of Mughal Empire) didn't take place until 1739, mid 18th century.


The british didn't involve themselves in military actions until well after the Mughal were gone. They were traders only. The east india company was a private stock holdings intitially and only become intertwined with the government and involved in conquest later.

Please register to comment:

api   best comments   contact   latest images   memes   one year ago   random   suggestions