Why China isn't our hope

Seeing that the Cathedral has led the West into hopeless decadence, where women work while men clean, kids order while parents obey, foreigners rule while natives submit, deviancy is cherished while normalcy is derided. Yes, we are in deep shit.

But wait!, some say. Nature abhors a vacuum. The West is fucked, but someone will take our place and set things right. That's what evolution does. While the West is busy giving billions to gangsta rappers, fag designers and bastards on welfare, the Chinese are working hard, stoically building their industry, thriftily saving their money to invest in the long term. Oh Yes, the Chinese are the real deal. They've been for long, right? 5000 years. Their thrift and industry will bury us, and inherit the earth.

Well, hold your horses. I know the pictures of all those dark, muscular peasants building those awesome skyscrapers climbing bamboo scaffolds without helmets makes for an impressive picture. Way more wholesome than the white working class fatsoes parading their 200lbs bags of blub in Walmart to buy some more light beer. But that's not the whole story.

You can understand a lot of a country by looking at their celebrities. They represent what a country values in their people, what the nation regards as the people to respect and imitate. This is particularly true in China, where the media is state-owned and strictly controlled in a top-down fashion, not a loose coordination like the West. The celebrities that make it in China are there because the party wants them there. Period.

Well allow me to introduce one of the most famous singers in China. Han Hong 韩红.

Now I strongly recommend:

\[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n-k-\_jzcp7c\]

Listen at the female voice. Isn't it lovely? What a voice. Perhaps you're imagining a sweet, lovely Chinese maiden.

Now look at the video.

And look at some pictures.

Edmond Honda?

Yes, that's a woman. Well it's a gross, beastly lesbian ogre. Probably the ugliest lesbian this side of Michael Moore. And yes, she's big in China. Huge. She's on TV every other day, and she's been for more than a decade. She is a towering presence in Chinese show-biz, and is known for her insatiable appetite towards hot startlets. She used to fuck Vicky Zhao. Ugh.

Funny thing is she's Tibetan. Now Tibetans are known in the West for having achieved the incredible feat of transforming Buddhism into a savage slave-owning theocracy. But in China they're just one of many (55 to be exact) backward tribes. Now Chinese tribes are very literally backward; they have been inside China for centuries, and most of the more enterprising tribesmen simply took a Chinese name, took up farming or commerce and integrated easily into Han society, which never really cared much about race (Cantonese look indistinguishable from Vietnamese, while people in the Northeast resemble their neighbouring Koreans and Mongols). The tribes that exist are made of those tribesmen who were too dumb or just too stubborn to assimilate to civilisation.

As such they are a pretty useless bunch, but China is very much Soviet in their generous treatment of minorities. They upkeep their identity, and try to give them some national exposure. But on what? Minorities aren't very good at building rockets, or managing businesses, or making research. But they surely must be good at something! Well, they can sing. In the same way that blacks are superior singers and dancers, minorities in China are pretty good singers. They might as well be; it's all they do most of the time while the Han build skyscrapers. So China has made it public policy to promote minority singers and give them some spotlight on national TV. Of course they sing in Mandarin; they thus join their native cultural talent and blend it in vibrant harmony with the nation in the common language.

Hence the Tibetan Han Hong. But surely they could have found a better looking Tibetan girl? Somebody less taxing to the eyes? And someone who is not obviously a sexual deviant? Perhaps the most jarring thing about Western Progressivism is their public promotion of homosexuality. Reproduction being the most basic function of living organisms, it is also a major incentive focus of behaviour. Society depends in men being men, women being women, and in them achieving a division of labor and character that makes them desire each other and form families. Men work so as to get women they like, and women work so as to have children by men they like. If you disassociate sex from family formation, you get men that aren't men, women that aren't women, sex being something you do at home while staring at a screen, and the genders despising each other, creating vast amounts of depression, misery, PUAs and feminist blogs.

Well, China isn't replacing their people with lower IQ foreigners, but they allow minorities to outbreed the Han. They also don't allow fags to marry, but they give high status and influence on national TV. I'm sorry but I don't see these people saving mankind.

Well, there is a "lot of ruin in a nation", and all they have to do is be a little bit better than us. A low bar, indeed, but they may have the skill to get under it.

Most white people that say they admire Asians really mean, "my lazy kid won't study or do chores." It's not any deeper then that. They know nothing about Asia.

I don't know if "admire" is the proper word, but there are definitely things I like about Japanese culture that I find to be superior to the way things have gone in most parts of the US. For example, let me talk a little about customer service, both commercial and in various government offices - and I encourage you to keep in mind just how much of out public social interaction these "customer service" moments comprise. The near-universal level of courtesy, honesty, politeness, pleasantness, efficiency, work-ethic, competence, intelligence, self-motivation, willingness to, "go above and beyond the call of duty," and genuine consideration for the customer, even for a foreigner to whom they show considerable patience, has been an extremely agreeable experience for me. They'll profusely apologize to you for even the most minor delay or inconvenience. Even their appearance and demeanor tends to be satisfying - with most being slender, well groomed, and stylishly dressed. I don't have any attraction to Asian girls at all (who knows why), but I can still appreciate a general focus on maintaining a professional elegance. Now, compare this to your monstrous urban American functionary - hideous, surly, lazy, dull, bitter, corrupt, inattentive, apathetic, bothered, entitled, treating you like shit, looking for any reason whatsoever to get out of doing the job they're paid to do. You may say, "Well, that's because you can't fire those Americans," but the Japanese typically have just as much job security - many stay in the same job or office for life. In this respect, the Japanese remind of the culture that used to exist in the American Midwest of my youth, and still does somewhat in some places, but is rapidly disappearing. But that's what it is - culture. It's the acculturation and socialization that can happen in a homogenous setting where those things are taught from birth and reenforced by everyone in every circumstance without constant undermining and contradiction or "contamination" by crass anti-cultural influences. Conversely, no amount of career pressure short of absolute terror is going to be able to persuade the average Newark DMV worker to be a better worker or person. So, do I "admire" the Japanese? I certainly envy them this.

Agreed, but that's something specifically Japanese. God knows customer service in China isn't that good. And functionaries, hah. Oh my. I should make a post in how Japan acculturates its people, I've had in mind for quite some time.

Between Han Hong on one side and Lady Gaga, Nicki Minaj, Madonna on the other, I would still think that the former is a healthier role model. For one thing, she is really good at her job which is singing (and not looking "sexy" or "provocative"). In the West, music these days is less about singing and more about shocking.

Didn't you already do that. They destroy the individuality of their elite in order to create a better prole.

That's got nothing to do with my comment, but thanks for taking it personally.

I'm guessing you've seen this: http://www.edge.org/response-detail/23838 (linked by Sailer) Highly relevant (from the other side)

Point taken on Gaga, but Han Hong shocks me plenty. And of course she doesn't dress sexy, because she doesn't dress like a woman at all. She's just some dyke. Not very healthy.

Yes, I have. The BGI is awesome, and surely there are people inside China who are working hard for eugenics. But to say that "There is unusually close cooperation in China between government, academia, medicine, education, media, parents, and consumerism in promoting a utopian Han ethno-state." is patently false. He's just trying to scare people in the US towards researching on eugenics. Which is a great idea of course. Still if Deng intended for urban people to engage in eugenic assortative mating, they're doing it wrong. The fertility rate in Shanghai is 0.8. The peasants in Guizhou are still pumping out kids though. I wonder what will happen when the BGI research shows that the smartest people in China are in the Jiangnan area, while the north and west are lagging. The Han ethnicity is a fragile thing.

Solid objections to be sure (echoed over at GLP), but you're also right that the BGI project is an eye-opener: "Potentially, the results would allow all Chinese couples to maximize the intelligence of their offspring by selecting among their own fertilized eggs for the one or two that include the highest likelihood of the highest intelligence. Given the Mendelian genetic lottery, the kids produced by any one couple typically differ by 5 to 15 IQ points. So this method of 'preimplantation embryo selection' might allow IQ within every Chinese family to increase by 5 to 15 IQ points per generation. After a couple of generations, it would be game over for Western global competitiveness."

"I wonder what will happen when the BGI research shows that the smartest people in China are in the Jiangnan area, while the north and west are lagging." -- Hardly a secret already, surely? Worth adding that the Miller projection of cumulative 5-15 point generational IQ augmentation is obviously exaggerated (the Mendelian raw material for that simply doesn't exist), but a 10 point IQ jump across a large, smart society would suffice to change everything.

Would we like it though? Even Mustapha Mond knew a society of alpha means civil war.

Smart doesn't mean alpha. In fact it might mean the opposite. And there would still be variance, it's just raising the average.

Well the connoisseurs can see the pattern, but I don't think the people in the heartland would be amused if there were hard data on their inferiority. 10 points would be awesome of course, but who's to say it would be a Chinese exclusive? Once the data is out there you can offer some boss a Californian villa just across Steve Hsu's, and apply the findings. I'd think that if China were to really make a massive program of embryo selection (taking n eggs of ALL women in the country and analysing every single one of them. It's madness), brows would be raised in the West. You can't just go Brave New World secretly in a weekend.

> the Miller projection of cumulative 5-15 point generational IQ augmentation is obviously exaggerated (the Mendelian raw material for that simply doesn’t exist), wrong. avg sib-sib difference is maybe 8, ignoring gender (same for other 1* relatives). now take 20 'sibs' (if you are going to sequence five fertilized eggs, just sequence 20): their range should be perhaps a bit over /-sigma from the biparental mean. if you can only afford 10, well then

Sorry, lack of clarity on my side. Key word is 'cumulative' i.e. reiterated improvements of the 5-15% range over successive generations. Mendelian selection can only work on the material available, so whilst it's no problem agreeing to a first generation effect, the idea that this could be reiterated indefinitely in sheer magic (actually, a kind of statistical hypnosis). Unless the alleles are available to select, they can't be conjured into existence by a selection process.

Ugh! Last was candidate for worst sentence ever. Meaning: selection doesn't do genetic engineering (it simply tends to optimize from available material).

Better to think of it as stupidity culling -- the limits are more obvious.

the variance isnt going to decline that much in the second or third generations. 4th, 5th, you might be having more of an issue but it might only cut rate of progress in half or so. but quite soon you are talking about a ~150 society. further changes would be much slower, and not necessarily indefinite (certainly not on the basis of existing alleles alone), but the impact by that point would already be revolutionary. The issue is more whether you really can in fact get an ~60-80% prediction on the IQs of the ova.