Putnam is notoriously torn between his decent skills as a quantitative social scientist and his desire to avoid trouble with anti-science progressives who vehemently denounced Murray for co-authoring The Bell Curve. In a comic 2006 episode, Putnam admitted to Financial Times columnist John Lloyd that he had socked away for a half decade the results of his huge survey of American communities while he tried to figure out how to spin its finding that ethnic diversity was disastrous. Putnam memorably confessed to Lloyd:

The core message of the research was that, “in the presence of diversity, we hunker down,” he said. “We act like turtles. The effect of diversity is worse than had been imagined. And it’s not just that we don’t trust people who are not like us. In diverse communities, we don’t trust people who do look like us.” Prof. Putnam found trust was lowest in Los Angeles, “the most diverse human habitation in human history” … the more people of different races lived in the same community, the greater the loss of trust. “They don’t trust the local mayor, they don’t trust the local paper, they don’t trust other people and they don’t trust institutions,” said Prof. Putnam. “The only thing there’s more of is protest marches and TV watching.”

One obvious problem with doing Big Social Science with numerous grad students is that Putnam might reasonably feel reluctant to endanger their careers by mentioning anything terribly politically incorrect about what they found. (Murray uses fewer assistants, but two years ago the Eye of Sauron managed to hunt down a former one, Jason Richwine, for the crime of writing his Harvard Ph.D. dissertation on the IQ of immigrants.)

http://takimag.com/article/one_and_done ... z3WH8mA3yr

http://www.amazon.com/Bowling-Alone-Col ... 0743203046



http://www.superknjizara.hr/?page=knjig ... jiga=26760



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_D._Putnam

Ako je još nekome potrebno crtati u kakvom društvu živimo.

Jedan od najznačajnijih američkih sociologa priznao da je pola desetljeća oklijevao objaviti javno podatke koji su nedvojbeno upućivali na zaključak da etnička, rasna raznolikost djeluje pogubno na društveno povjerenje i socijalni kapital.

(A kako je lijepo mogao utješiti balkanska plemena da nisu oni prokleti Balkanci jer su prokleti Balkanci već zato što žive multikulturalnost i etničku razlolikost i izmješanost stoljećima...da je bilo više monokulturalnosti i etnički homogenih država najvjerojatnije bi Balkan danas bio nešto tipa Skandinavija.)

(Doduše time bi dvostruko utužio liberalne pa ajde...)

Očito je čovjek nekako uspio izmanipulirati znanstvene podatke da se uklope u prevladavajuću ideološku dogmu.







Lijepo da se bar jedan znanstvenik izvukao sa svojim znanstvenim radom, a da nije nastradao od ruke liberalne inkvizicije u našem slobodnom društvu.

Diversity — or Meritocracy?


A voracious and eclectic reader, President Nixon instructed me to send him every few weeks 10 articles he would not normally see that were on interesting or important issues.

In 1971, I sent him an essay from The Atlantic, with reviews by Time and Newsweek, by Dr. Richard Herrnstein. My summary read:

“Basically, (Herrnstein) demonstrates that heredity, rather than environment, determines intelligence — and that the more we proceed to provide everyone with a ‘good environment’ the more heredity will become the dominant factor … in their success and social standing.”

In a 1994 obituary, The New York Times wrote that Herrnstein, though he “was often harassed … and his classes at Harvard were disrupted,” never recanted his heresy. He wrote “I.Q. and Meritocracy” in 1973, and in 1994 co-authored with Charles Murray the hugely controversial “The Bell Curve: Intelligence and Class Structure in American Life.”

What brought this back was a piece buried in the “B” section of The Washington Post about the incoming class at Thomas Jefferson High School for Science and Technology in Fairfax County.

TJ High is an elite magnet school that admits students based on their academic aptitude and achievement and offers “courses in differential equations, artificial intelligence and neuroscience.”

According to the Post, 70 percent of the incoming freshmen are Asians, the highest percentage ever for a school already 60 percent Asian. Ten years ago, the student body was 32 percent Asian.

White students make up 29 percent of the school today, but are only 22 percent of the entering class. The class of 2019 will have 346 Asians and 102 whites, but only 12 Hispanics and 8 blacks.

Of the 2,841 applicants for 2015, one in four Asians was admitted and one in eight whites, but only one in 16 Hispanics and one in 25 black students. Of low-income students, only one in 33 applicants got in.

What do these numbers tell us?

Thomas Jefferson High is a meritocracy where the ideological dictates of “diversity” do not apply. Second, Asian students, based either on nature or nurture, heredity or environment, or both, are, as of today, superior in the hard sciences to other ethnic groups.

These numbers suggest that as Asian Americans rise from 5 percent of the U.S. population to 15, they are going to dominate the elite high schools and colleges devoted to STEM studies: science, technology, engineering, mathematics.

And in the professions built around expertise in science and technology, to which private and public capital will be directed, the social standing of Asian Americans is going to rise, leaving black, Hispanic, low-income and poor Americans further behind.

In the Post article, there is no breakdown of which Asian minorities excelled.

In international competitions among high school students, Chinese, Koreans and Japanese are the top scorers, above Filipinos, Vietnamese and Indonesians.

Two years ago, an activist group filed a complaint against Fairfax County with the U.S. Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights alleging that the admissions process at TJ High discriminates against blacks, Hispanics and the poor.

But as the white share of the student body at TJ High is falling fastest, if there is discrimination, the admissions process must be giving an unfair break to Asians. For it is Asians who are the biggest beneficiaries of what is going on at the school.

Why are Asian kids succeeding spectacularly?

Is it because they are naturally talented at STEM studies? Is it because they have a better work ethic? Is it because their parents demand they get their homework done and monitor their grades? Is it because far fewer Asians come from broken homes?

It cannot be that Asians have been more privileged.

Chinese laborers in the Old West were terribly treated. Japanese were excluded and put into camps during World War II. Chinese, Japanese, Koreans, Filipinos and Vietnamese here are largely from families that endured the hell of the Asian wars of the 20th century.

And while Fairfax County generously supports its school, it does not spend what D.C. does. And how are D.C. schools doing?

The Post reported yesterday: “Only 58 percent of D.C. students graduate high school within four years, and only about half of students are proficient in reading and math.”

So how is TJ High responding to its Asian problem?

Jeremy Shughart, admissions director at TJ, has a committee “reviewing the application process to improve diversity at the school.”

Says Shughart, “The committee is looking at a variety of admissions components and making recommendations for possible adjustments to future admissions cycles. … (We) will continue to work on increasing diversity at TJHSST and will continue to pursue outreach efforts to ensure talented underrepresented populations of students with a passion for math and science consider, apply to, and attend… Fairfax County Public Schools believes in the value of diversity.”

That is bureaucratic gobbledygook for saying they are going to start looking closer at the race and ethnicity of student applicants and begin using this criteria to bring in some — and to reject others.

Race discrimination, against Asians, is coming to Fairfax County.

http://buchanan.org/blog/diversity-or-meritocracy-15814

Welcome to America...

Pa dobro, nešto su inteligentniji od bijelaca, ali i dosta introvertiraniji od bijelaca i time prirodno okrenuti inžinjerskim poslovima, a ne ekonomiji, pravu, politici i slično.
Problem kod pozitivne diskriminacije je što je ona duboko nepravedna, i to iz pozicije da pozicije ne dobivaju najbolji, ali i da se ne poštuju razlike unutar rasa. Hmonzi su u jednakoj mjeri neprivilegirani kao ghetto crmci, no oni se niakda neće upisati na dobar fakultet jer će se broj mjesta za žute smanjiti i sve će otići Kinezima i Japancima, dok će se neki mali tyrone bez problema upisati jer je crni jer mu je konkurencija nikakva.

Ma nije to toliko bitno. I motiviraniji su, a bijelci nisu. Nisu Azijci ne znam šta u usporedbi sa Bijelcima, samo su oni gladni i grizu, a mi smo dekadentni.

Samo ih koristim za poantu.

Identity Controls in D.C.


In the wake of Open Borders Day, Ryan Cooper of The Week laments that for all the talk of inclusiveness and tolerance, rich white folk won’t let the hoi polloi into their neighborhoods. Apparently, this trend is especially prevalent in the nation’s capital, which is ostensibly home to pluralism-loving liberals. Cooper highlights that, according to a new report from the DC Fiscal Policy Center, cheap apartments are rarer than ever in the District. He writes, “affordable housing (which is to say, apartments at $800 per month or cheaper) has basically vanished from the private rental market in DC — public housing is about all that’s left, and there’s not remotely enough of it to satisfy demand.”

What’s the cause of the shortage in affordable housing? Cooper points out that apartment supply is increasing at “a breakneck pace.” So what’s the hold up? It turns out that not all housing is created equal — cue liberal outrage! — and the vast majority of apartments are built for the well-to-do class of bureaucrats and lobbyists. In fact, rents of high-end apartments actually decreased on the average in 2014 because of increased supply.

Not everyone can afford to shell out $1,700 a month for a one-bedroom apartment, however. Affordable housing remains a problem in DC because supply of cheap apartments has stagnated. And it’s all thanks to the rich denizens of chic neighborhoods who purposefully keep non-luxury residences out of their backyard. Cooper notes, “Developers would make a king’s ransom building apartments in Georgetown, but they can’t because their strength is nothing compared to the hysterical NIMBYism of the upper class.”

Oh, the horror! People living in neat, pristine communities don’t want to invite slovenly persons into their midst? Injustice is afoot; and the enemy is once again the pampered rich class, with their townhouses, bike lanes, boutique shops, and cobbled sidewalks. Maybe it’s time the proles grab their pitchforks and invade the land of silk milk and organic honey.

Community, for the liberal ideologue, means we can all be thrown in a pot together, and everyone will suddenly get along. Reality is far different. As Taki Mag’s own Jim Goad points out, diversity isn’t always peaceful. We may all be God’s children, but we have our own families, friends, neighbors, religion, and ethnicity. Is it too much to ask for them to be kept close?

http://takimag.com/article/identity_con ... z3WWdPjo11

Još malo o onom što znamo...

Više na: http://www.kormany.hu/en/the-prime-minister/the-prime-minister-s-speeches/the-next-years-will-be-about-hardworking-people

Viktor Orbán je preuzeo vlast 2010. Od tada je u Mađarskoj porastao broj rođenih i vjenčanih, a opao broj umrlih, razvedenih i pobačenih.

TFR je 2014. na najvišoj vrijednosti od 1997.

***

Godina. rođeni : umrli

Mađarska
2010. 90 335 : 130 456
2014. 91 500 : 126 100

Hrvatska
2010. 43 361 : 52 096
2014. 39 596 : 52 427

BiH
2010. 33 379 : 34 633
2014. 29 247 : 34 824

Najvisa vrijednost i to 1.4.
Jedna Srbija u tri puta gorem ekonomskom stanju se nikad nije spustila ispod 1.4.

Imaju pad broja stanovnika od 1981. Po tome vjerovatno prvi u Evropi.
858.000 manje od dostizanja maksimuma (10.707.000) do danas (9.849.000)
Da nema doseljavanja iz Srbije, Slovacke i Rumunije pad bi bio debelo iznad milion.

Nego, bas me zanima koliki je procenat Roma u broju rodjenih u Madjarskoj?

Hoćete se sad vi Srbi mrziti i sa Mađarima.

Njih još nisu uklonilii kao "razne svapske, poljske, ceske i ukrajinske kolonije".

Ali sad je vrijeme da se ide žaliti malo na agresiju Hrvata na suverenu zemljicu Srbiju na drugu temu.

" "

Uvijek je lako pronaći razlog. Kao za mržnju sa Makedoncima, Crnogorcima, itd....

http://takimag.com/article/10_reasons_w ... z3YvureWVQ







http://www.ijreview.com/2015/04/301448- ... -footwear/

pa ovo... ma.. neću ništa govorit

Više na: http://www.silkroadreporters.com/2015/04/19/tbilisi-concerned-by-islamic-state-recruitment/

ISIL-ovi borci iz Gruzije, po narodnosti Čečenci, potječu iz bogatih obitelji.

Liberalna misao dana.

http://takimag.com/article/liberalism_i ... z3bWlHCXcu

LUDILO POLITIČKE KOREKTNOSTI
Filozofi Brighouse i Swift: Obitelj je uzrok nejednakosti među ljudima, imati obitelj koja vas voli je ‘nepravedna prednost’


Jednakost i nediskriminacija su neka vrsta kamena mudraca za kojom tragaju filozofi, aktivisti, i općenito lijevo nabrijani ljudi. Potraga za prisilnom jednakošću nam je donijela komunističke diktature, teror, razne oblike ograničavanja slobodnog djelovanja pojedinca u ime jednakosti, a sad nam filozofi Harry Brighouse i Adam Swift donose novi prijedlog za ukidanje društvenih nejednakosti: ukidanje obitelji kao takve.

http://www.dnevno.hr/vijesti/komentari/ ... ost-801338

http://www.vecernji.hr/hrvatska/raspudi ... ce-1009714



http://www.tportal.hr/kultura/knjizevno ... mocna.html



http://takimag.com/article/wigger_pleez ... z3dDiky52x

Etnomazohizam, nacionalna samomržnja kao karakteristika modernih liberala i progresivnih duhova gdje god da obitavaju.

Hrvat, Nijemac, Amerikanac, svima im je zajedničko.

Ujedno i kognitivni poremećaj.

Nevjerojatno kako tu karakteristiku našeg vremena nismo osvjestili.

To je bolest.

Nema tu ničeg progresivnog ili plemenitog čemu bi prosvjećeni pojedinac trebao težiti.

Nisam znao do sad, iako sam po svemu mogao jako pretpostaviti da sam bio oštar i fokusiran, ali nisam bio.

Eugenics i prisilne kastracije "retarda" i "socijalnih slučajeva" u društvu su najviše propagirali i radili socijal-demokrati.

U nekim državama ostalo dugo, recimo u Švedskoj taj zakon ukinut 1975, u Švicarskoj tu negdje slično. U Švicarskoj socijal-demokrati nikad nisu bili jaki u državnoj vlasti u to vrijeme, ne da nisu morali koalicije praviti i imali jaku oporbu, ali kako su entiteti imali slobode oni su preko svojih regionalnih socijal-demokratskih vlada uveli prisilna steriliziranja "niže vrijednih slojeva", onih koji se po njihovom mišljenju ne mogu popraviti i postati "socijalni" i "normalni".

Zanimljivo komunisti su bili za to ali su socijal-demokrate pozivali na suzdržanost dok se ne napravi "besklasno društvo". Jer su ispravno prepoznali da će gubiti izbore, na udaru sterilizacija i oduzimanja djece od države najviše bila radnička klasa.

Uspjelo je u nordijskim državama svim, najjače i najviše u Švedskoj. Uspjelo u Švicarskoj, iako je katolička crkva kategorično bila protiv toga. Uspjelo u manjem omjeru u Njemačkoj, jer je jedan dio katoličke crkve koketirao sa strankom koja je predala taj zahtijev. To su pokrenuli njemački socijal-demokrati (iako je jedna druga stranka predala prijedlog), bili najljući zagovornici Eugenics i poslije Hitler samo preuzeo taj prijedlog zakona i proširio ga. Dok su socijal-demokrate htjeli istrijebiti (prisilna sterilizacija žena to jest) one sociološki nepodobne, bolesne, pijance, siromašne svih rasa i nacija, Hitler je to okrenuo na Arijevizam.

Nije uspjelo u UK, Nizozemskoj, Francuskoj. Jer su imali jake liberale kao oporbu socijal-demokratima, i rezolutno su bili protiv takvog petljanja države u živote pojedinaca i privatnu sferu.

Da, ima jako logike sve to. Socijal-demokrate tradicionalno žele jaku državu, totalno petljanje države u živote pojedinaca od rođenja do groba, da država odgaja djecu za buduće nad-ljude, ne roditelji pogotovo ako su roditelji jedni od tih iz "lošijih" klasa društva, jak kolektiv, individualac je nebitan i nepoželjan, u nekim slučajevima štetan i mora ga se odstraniti svim sredstvima. Dok su liberali uvijek bili za osobne slobode i da se država što je manje moguće petlja u živote pojedinaca.

Zato ih danas ne treba miješati, jer su to dvije jako različite stvari.

Eugenics = rasna higijena, protokola radi.

Da se nadovežem. Današnji Eugenics primjer u Europi je EU i Brisel. Ne više kroz prisilne kastracije žena (iako oduzimanja djece su i danas masovna u nekim državama), ali..

Postoji ta elita socijal-demokrata u Briselu koja je "retardima" i "onima za kastraciju" oduzela pravo demokratskog izbora i jednostavno zaobišla parlamente nacionalnih država. Ta klasa "nad-ljudi" iz višeg sloja u Briselu koja misli da su niži slojevi naroda "retardi" i glupi da sami odlučuju o svojoj sudbini.

Čitava ta Eugenics furka kod socijal-demokrata je počela zbog nataliteta. Bili su se prestravili da će klasa onih "viših" koji su vladali tako dugo vremena izgubiti vlast jer se siromašni i problematični više razmnožavaju. Sve je to počelo uvođenjem demokracije i parlamentarnih izbora.

Jedino mi nije jasno kako se u to sve uklapa masovan uvoz migranata sa Bliskog Istoka. Njihovi founding fathers, pioniri socijal-demokracije, se sad u grobu okreću.

S tim da je danas i u Europi iskrivljen pojam liberala, pod utjecajem Amerike. Europski klasični liberali su današnji libertarijanci. Tako je ispalo. Jer se američki socijal-demokrati nazivaju liberalima. A konzervativci republikancima.

Mislim da ti se ta socijaldemokratska furka bazira prije svega na "jaki smo koliko nas najslabiji clan". (tako te citam, inace sam mislio da je to vise desnicarski momenat)

A ove migrante uzimaju za neki versus mode "odozdo".