🇭🇷, political theory, history, demography. Founded @WhiteAtlasProj and collaborating with @Western_Tally.

Croatia
Marino Linich retweeted
Vance’s rhetoric: “Muh trad cath values and Europe is bad dur dur” Rubio’s rhetoric:
SECRETARY RUBIO: For twenty-five centuries since, the Parthenon has stood. Empires have risen and fallen beneath its shadow. And the progeny of the men who built it – the sons of Athens and Rome – have carried their civilization with them to the ends of the Earth. Two and a half centuries after the founding of the American republic halfway across the world from where I stand now, I stand here today – as the Secretary of State of that republic, and as the great-grandson of settlers who arrived in the new world from Spain – I stand here to testify to a debt that no lapse of time, no distance of space, can ever extinguish.
1
11
112
3,659
Marino Linich retweeted
Patriot.
Communist asked me for a photo at the October 7 rally in New York City then sucker punched me in the gut So I immediately delivered him an open hand to the face
9
19
457
6,954
Marino Linich retweeted
Known common DNA regions linked to IQ just passed 500. In UK Biobank, people have only a brief reasoning test, or none. But cognitive ability is embedded throughout our lives: what we eat, how safely we live, books we read, what we do for pleasure…. Imputing those missing scores from health, behaviour and other measures cut ascertainment bias and raised N from ~270,000 to >455,000. That lifted independent common loci from 390 to 550 (>40%). The rare-variant yield rose further: genes linked to lower scores went from 5 to 26, including 14 causing neurodevelopmental conditions. And the polygenic prediction score now approaches the limits of test reliability. The DNA signal is present from conception and transmitted across generations (cf. @gclarkecon). More strong work from @DMalawsky and @hilsomartin: technical innovation and scale. nature.com/articles/s41588-0…
4
13
109
14,645
A rite of passage for any rw public figure. "You've never even smacked a leftist's face before?"
Communist asked me for a photo at the October 7 rally in New York City then sucker punched me in the gut So I immediately delivered him an open hand to the face
11
606
"Why does Trump hate the EU so much?" Meanwhile the European Parliament (actually displayed in the EU Parliament):
2
2
23
498
As an EU citizen, I can safely say the EU is one of the least sexy things that exist in the world. It's a dementia-ridden, boomer asylum. This statue isn't funny or cool, it's cringe.
1
6
79
It's literally one of those exaggerated boomer caricatures in statue form. It's the kind of thing you'd see someone who likes "The Other 98%" on Facebook post.
3
42
Marino Linich retweeted
47
857
19,047
255,786
my answer to this is basically: 1) conditions for life are probably common in the universe 2) conditions for life sufficiently intelligent to produce advanced technology may be very rare 3) to the extent AI figures in this it seems what it probably tells us is AI never develops a survival instinct of its own and never becomes able to perfectly sustain itself without biological managers 4) as a result AI civilization remains essentially coextensive with biological civilization 5) FTL travel never occurs, so all forms of civilization are constrained the distance they can travel at a fraction of light speed within their lifespans 6) many civilizations experience collapses back to simplicity across million-year-timescales for all sorts of random reasons 7) thus at any given time there are relatively few technologically advanced civilizations in the universe and they face hard limits on their ability to spread across the universe beyond a few probes here or there 8) but the odds a tiny probe is even detected by earth-based tools let alone intercepted are miniscule
aliens keep popping up in rationalist literature about the AI apocalypse and that, for me, is like saying beetlejuice three times — yes I am here, and yes I have opinions
11
3
44
3,464
Underdiscussed: When the world globalizes, white people, as they become rare, will rise in demand like never before—without any cultural guardrails. Virtually anywhere they go, within the West or outside of it, they will be the most sought out and exotic race; and that will present a genuine challenge for those who wish to preserve it, because the deal will be genuinely good. A rich Chinese or Indian husband, a model Korean wife, an eager South Asian girlfriend (or, ehem, an Algerian goth girl), an athletic black guy (even if you're fat)—all of them with a tolerance slightly higher than what you'd get with a member of your own race. There will be very little cultural or even geographic friction, yet the demand will be there. I am saying this because, in a way, it's already happened. As a white person, whether man or woman, you get an enormous amount of attention the moment you step outside the borders of your country—and there's a degree to which this is starting to happen within the West too, the less common we become. I have heard stories about San Francisco, Seattle, Vancouver, and even have a personal anecdote of signaled interest from other places in Canada. There are immigrant communities in North America right now where people grow up barely even seeing white people.
globalization final boss: Maghrebi Goth Girls
22
16
351
21,712
Here's my list. There's a lot more to read. Looking forward to: - Bryan Caplan - Selfish Reasons to Have More Kids (2011) - Geoffrey West - Scale (2017)
*principles of population genetics*, *blank slate*, *fall of rome* and *in gods we trust* i would put on every list the others might swap out ... myninebooks.com/g/06d4e14baf…
1
3
228
Marino Linich retweeted
What does the pro-migration anti-natal crowd think the long game is? The native populations gradually die out and are replaced with immigrants, who presumably (and in fact) will converge on the same low birth rates. They also want to proselytize their ideas to the third-world source countries, send them condoms and birth control and porn. Then what? Humanity just ends? What is the goal here? Personal liberation from connection to the past and future at any cost, including extinction?
The decision to carry and raise a child can shape every part of a person’s financial life. @JessicaValenti joins Vox’s @AsteadWH to explain why abortion belongs in Democrats’ affordability message and what the party misses when it treats reproductive rights as a social issue.
38
12
301
9,316
ESTIMATES AND PROJECTIONS FOR THE BIGGEST HIGH TFR CHRISTIAN GROUPS IN THE WEST BY JAMES A note on projections: current growth is conserved, population estimates range wildly, and retention rates possibly aren't factored in. I would assume lower figures—always better to be conservative with expectations. I am more pessimistic than James, and note my doubts! - By 2100, you may expect 12 million Anabaptists (Amish, Mennonites, and others like Hutterites), almost entirely in North and South America. My own take: growth will slow in the transitional period between depopulation and rapid Anabaptist growth, as the agrarian model becomes less tenable with less available cheap land, and switching occupations leads to contact with the rest of society, which lowers retention and fertility. The current Amish model relies heavily on the Amish being too culturally distinct by the time they choose to be baptized, and needing years of catching up to fit into western society. - Also by 2100: 25 million Traditional Latin Mass (TLM) Catholics. However, even the naive extrapolation is possibly considerably lower, because current estimates of TLM suggest a shaky range of 500,000 to 5 million worldwide. You may be familiar with SSPX—they're TLM. A more conservative projection would have them at a couple million. - Russia, Ukraine, and Belarus host about 2-3 million high fertility groups, which, by my own vibe, would be likely to at least double or triple by 2100. These groups are composed of: (1) 500k-1m Old Believers, (2) 1 million high TFR groups attached to the Russian Orthodox Church, and (3) 500k-1m unregistered Baptists and Pentecostals, many of whom also live in the rest of Europe, especially Ukrainians. All of these groups genuinely have fertility rates in the 4+ range. They are the real deal! - Other groups include Laestadians (mostly Finland + USA), the Dutch Bible Belt (stagnating), the Quiverfull movement (Anglosphere), and others, but none of them are large enough to break the 1 million count. They are usually in the tens of thousands to hundreds of thousands of adherents.
Of course I will give it a go. As a note all of this is abject extrapolation. There is literally no way to predict the future with a high degree of certainty. But just going of current growth rates we are looking at 10-12 million high fertility Anabaptists in the Americas (North and South by that time). Nunitoria has written articles on a projected 25 million TLM Catholics by the end of the century (and the majority of practicing Catholics in the west) given their current growth. Again this is extrapolations. Some current estimates say currently only 1 million Trad Catholics, a recent article I read yesterday said it could be as high as 5 million. We will know more when a study on them is released at the start of next year. Russia/Ukraine/Belarus also have an order of at least 3 million fast growing high fertility Whites already (this may be a large underestimation). 1 million unregistered Baptists and Pentecostals. 1 million high fertility Old Believers. And at least 1 million high fertility groups attached to the canonical ROC. Additionally you have Quiverfull in the US which is anyone's guess as to how big that is. You also have a multitude of smaller high fertility groups whos retention rates are questionable for example Laestadians in both the Nordics and the US. In the US renetion seems good but numbers are smaller at approx 50k. These are most of the larger groups that will give you an idea. Obviously it may be substantially less than 50 million. No one really knows. But there are very positive dynamics, owing to the Tradionalist Christian belief of "as many as God sends", outlined in various passages of Scripture.
1
10
502
lol I just found a New York Times race bait article about Australia from 2018 complaining that Australia was too white I don’t agree with @curtis_yarvin on his solutions to everything but he’s fundamentally correct that the rest of the Western world was mentally colonised/one shotted by American race communism Only the US mainland actually had the domestic antibodies to fight against it
17
24
311
9,274
Americans grind selectively, usually at something they are either talented at already or passionate about. They don't grind generically and without direction. But they also don't appreciate idleness (talent w/o work). This is optimal, and different from Asian cultures.
i'll just say i think this is totally wrong. "nothing beats talent" is decidedly un-American. maybe this is just a Puritans vs. Cavaliers thing, but "talent with no grit" is something i was raised to see as disreputable, gross, and vaguely European in quite a bad way the distinctive american story is a mid-rate talent who through hard work and grit achieves greatness the wunderkind who by clever genius does great things but doesn't actually have to grind has virtually no place in American culture. he is anathema. i know a lot of modern European-ancestry Americans have basically forgotten Americanism and been brainrotted by European ethnic rightism... but the American heritage really is different. it really is about earning your place instead of inheriting. it really is about hard work. now as it happens i actually think the stereotypes about asians being so hard-working are largely wrong. sure at the top 1% you may have some super-grinders, but the 50th percentile of collegiate-parent-reared asian kid in america is actually not any more a grinder than the 50th percentile collegiate-parent-reared white kid in america. the evidence for this is written in steam account hours.
1
9
383
A lot of Asian grind culture is basically status competition, and in that sense it's fairly wasteful. We care a lot more about usefulness.
4
90
This post took off, and that's awesome, but over the course of the day, I slowly settled on a reasonable estimate. First of all, h² here is equal to .6. That means the heritability (regression coefficient) is 60%. That's certainly part of the IQ heritability range, but for adults, you may as well go for 70%. The other important part of the equation is the family mean, which is mentioned. Very few +2 SD people come from families that are average. We might assume a +1 SD (115 IQ) or so parental average. (Vibe-based assumption.) At this point, the expected regression on average is only 5 points. In other words, the average child's IQ will be 125. This brings us to something like every THIRD child being *smarter* than their parents. Half of the base estimate. Nonetheless—the lesson for everyone is: have more children than you intend to if you want to be impressed by your children.
Two parents with an IQ of 130 can expect about 6 children before one scores higher than they do. Caveat: In reality, the number of children required may be a little lower, due to family history. Regression to the mean regresses toward family mean, not overall population mean.
7
1
55
3,943
WHY IS FAMILY IMPORTANT? Copying my response from a DM: "Basically, the reason is that "an individual's observed score (phenotype) is an imperfect estimate of their underlying genetic value (genotype)." That's the crux of it. Grandparents are extra data points for understanding the genotype, because what you see in actual people is not purely their genes. Phenotypes are somewhat affected by the environment, and some genotypes are less visible than others when combined with other genotypes. So you don't actually fully understand the genome of the person based on outcomes. Actually, in practical terms, I'd look at: (1) Parents (2) Siblings (3) Grandparents Of course, siblings and parents only each share 50% of their DNA with the person, and grandparents only 25%. So there is a lot of space for variability."
1
2
154
TL;DR for those who liked the OP: more reasonable claim is that every THIRD child will be smarter than their parents. @RokoMijic @Smirkley @Indian_Bronson @HXMnCK @HEAVY_SLAYER @InfoAtJames @seanspriggens @efodix @IterIntellectus @williameijer
8
324
Two parents with an IQ of 130 can expect about 6 children before one scores higher than they do. Caveat: In reality, the number of children required may be a little lower, due to family history. Regression to the mean regresses toward family mean, not overall population mean.
44
48
1,245
76,935
This post took off, and that's awesome, but over the course of the day, I slowly settled on a reasonable estimate. First of all, h² here is equal to .6. That means the heritability (regression coefficient) is 60%. That's certainly part of the IQ heritability range, but for adults, you may as well go for 70%. The other important part of the equation is the family mean, which is mentioned. Very few +2 SD people come from families that are average. We might assume a +1 SD (115 IQ) or so parental average. (Vibe-based assumption.) At this point, the expected regression on average is only 5 points. In other words, the average child's IQ will be 125. This brings us to something like every THIRD child being *smarter* than their parents. Half of the base estimate. Nonetheless—the lesson for everyone is: have more children than you intend to if you want to be impressed by your children.
1
1,503