Wednesday, May 30, 2012

The Alt-Right and its Failings, Part 2

In The Alt-Right and its Failings, Part 1, I wrote about how the alt-right prescribes regressive solutions to problems like college costs, essentially arguing for a drastic reduction in scope, and a return to IQ-based employer screening. What I did not mention is that this is based in a sort of hereditarian, elitist argument.

Unlike mainstream conservatives, alt-righters believe that well-adjusted, functional behavior is biologically ingrained, and that some groups of people (particularly blacks) are notoriously poor at it due to some kind of biological shortcoming. The alt-right's "objective" means for claiming this is the one-standard-deviation difference in IQ between whites and blacks.

The problem is that, as Robert Lindsay and others have pointed out, IQ scores are not a reliable means for predicting maladaptive behaviors. Yes, the White->Hispanic->Black hierarchy holds, but once you start throwing other races in, the picture gets much murkier. And then when you compare the IQs of, say, middle easterners to that of American Blacks, the latter actually score higher. Yet middle easterners commit far less crime.

This leads me to believe that the IQ theory of alt-righters is another just-so story that doesn't come close to explaining the full truth. It is true that blacks suffer more social dysfunction than whites, which is reflected in crime rates and the rates of single motherhood. But they should be doing far better if one takes their IQ into account.

I have an alternate explanation: Many of our problems in society are caused by underinvestment in infrastructure and other public goods. Blacks, who tend to be quite poor, suffer the most from this deficiency. How easy is it for them to get from point A to point B? How intellectually stimulating is their environment, or is it just a run-down ghetto? How good is their health care, and the quality of their food? By many objective measures, these areas are in dire need of improvement.

There is also the cultural aspect. How are the relations between the genders, and parents/children? Are kids seen as a society's future, or just something that a babymomma takes care of? Do women select for intelligent, caring men, or do they just go after thugs? This is all stuff that can be fixed with the right attitude (read: shaming.)

So while some black problems could be due to genetics, I think the vast majority of them are because of 1) a poor environment and 2) poor cultural attitudes, both internal and external. Alt-righters are not helping in this regard. They want to starve the state, which will cause poor black areas to crumble even more. They also promote the idea that most blacks essentially "deserve" their status, instead of it simply being a consequence of unfortunate coalescing forces.

I think this is one reason why the alt-right disparages the manosphere. You see, the manosphere is trying to fix the problems of societal decay, which begin with environmental and familial decay. Some prominent manosphere commentators are black, and have come from broken families. Yet the alt-right sees them as "blacks" instead of "men."

I don't think there is much in the alt-right sphere for people for actually want to improve the general well-being of society as a whole. Their prescriptions are all backwards, and won't do a lick of good for anyone in the long run.


  1. Who exactly is this alt-right you talk about? Some examples or links would help. As a reactionary myself, I think you are generalizing a bit. I couldn't care less about race. I support a negative income tax as a means for equality. I do hate the university system which I see as centers of liberal indoctrination. I went to an Ivy League university for 4 years and learned nothing other than that I hate liberals. I think whatever money is currently being spent on subsidizing university eduction (which is basically a middle-class subsidy) should be redirected to improving education through high school where it is really needed. And yes, I think the past was generally much better than the present, culturally and morally.

    1. I'm talking about sites like Mangan's (, Gucci Little Piggy (, and OneSTDV ( Their focus tends to be a blend of old-school conservatism and civil rights skepticism, combined with a very high level of suspicion of blacks. I don't think you really fit under those categories.

      I agree that the university system has many problems, but currently it is the only way for most people to get a decent job. Culturally, it is in need of serious reforms from the bottom up. Exactly how, I'm not sure. Feminism needs to be tuned out, but right now it is blaring from the rooftops.

      Improving high schools is a good idea too, not the least because they're in seriously bad shape. I think a good first step is to try and get them back up to first world standards. Then they should be improved to the point where the concept of an "associate's degree" is redundant. This, again, involves curtailing feminism and getting good teachers in, while also improving the funding situation.

      Long-term, I wouldn't be against a two-tiered system of strong vocational education and strong university education. One problem with that is we have shipped our manufacturing base overseas. Also, I'm not sure how relevant human-worker-based manufacturing will be in the future.

      Good ideas in general.

  2. As a black male perhaps my opinion may interest you. As you noted, Blacks score rather low compared to Asians, whites, etc in terms of IQ. If I remember correctly, its a median of 85 or so. I do think this does contribute to the behavioral problems of blacks; there are various studies correlating IQ with things such as restraint, sexual deviancy, etc. I'd say it makes sense that the lower your IQ is the more susceptible one might be to feral behavior, acting without thinking, more tribal-like mentality.

    Another problem I see is the welfare state and how it enables black women to survive without the direct support of men. Under this system it basically turns communities into a mini-matriarchy, ie. Africa. Ghettos are pretty much the urban version of this. Under this system all women basically become enable to be whores, having children out of wedlock and often by multiple fathers.

    The number of children out of wedlock was well over 70% last I checked. Stable society is built upon having a father in the household. It is probably the most fundamental basis for civilization. The white and hispanic demgraphic is just starting to experience this, with statistics around 40%. Fathers by and large prevent children and women from being feral. The fact support comes directly from a father instead of the welfare state or child support/alimony payments also provides incentive for the wife to behave and stay loyal as opposed to the sexual promiscuity so prevalent in blacks today.

    Before the introduction of the welfare state, black communities were not like this. The out of wedlock rate is extremely low and the ghetto/thug 'culture' and mannerisms did not exist. These behaviors arouse out of men needing a new way to attract women now that the provider role no longer really worked due to the welfare state.

    As you noted middle easterners tend to score even lower, but despite one might think of Islam and muslims they stay loyal to their own. They have a strong family unit. Blacks do not. Statistically the greatest amounts of fatalities to blacks are from....other blacks. There is little sense of kinship, family ties (rather hard when women and men go from partner to partner aka r-reproductive strategy). And then the low IQ compounds this - poor self control, no ability to plan long term, preoccupation with irrelevant things ("new shoes"!). You can also see it in black's "ebonics" - pure idiocy.