I don't know about Murray's new book itself, but the article is a mixed bag. The discussion of IQ is fine, but then there is stuff like this.
abandonment of the American principle of a meritocracy and treatment of citizens as individuals, not members of a race, ethnic group, or tribe.
That's only been an "American principle" since the 1960s, if ever. See the Naturalization Act of 1790. It's revisionist history to say that America was a "color blind" meritocracy at its founding. This is a faction of liberals trying to appeal to American traditions that never existed.
Their vision for America will result in a multiracial society with an East-Asian upper class, white middle class, and black and mestizo lower classes. How do you get blacks and mestizos to accept "their place" in the resultant hierarchy? I've yet to see anyone who advocates for "IQ nationalism" offer any worthwhile insight as to how to get there. Also, how do you stop the elites from mobilizing the lower class against the middle class? This is already happening with BLM and has a long history with other race riots.
I also question what all this "meritocracy" is supposed to accomplish. What's the point of such a diverse nation? If I wanted to be ruled by Asians, I'd move to China or Japan.
Meritocracy is an laudable goal. However, like all laudable goals it is bastardized and weaponized against Europeans. The European man is judged on his individual accomplishments in the here and now. Those accomplishments are then measured against some ambiguous accomplishments of blacks as a whole spanning over 400 years of slavery because everyone knows they built everything. Somehow the European man must measure up to the ethereal accomplishments of the black race when without the direction of European masters they'd still be in Africa selling off their brothers, sisters and daughters to the highest bidders.
I don't know about Murray's new book itself, but the article is a mixed bag. The discussion of IQ is fine, but then there is stuff like this.
That's only been an "American principle" since the 1960s, if ever. See the Naturalization Act of 1790. It's revisionist history to say that America was a "color blind" meritocracy at its founding. This is a faction of liberals trying to appeal to American traditions that never existed.
Their vision for America will result in a multiracial society with an East-Asian upper class, white middle class, and black and mestizo lower classes. How do you get blacks and mestizos to accept "their place" in the resultant hierarchy? I've yet to see anyone who advocates for "IQ nationalism" offer any worthwhile insight as to how to get there. Also, how do you stop the elites from mobilizing the lower class against the middle class? This is already happening with BLM and has a long history with other race riots.
I also question what all this "meritocracy" is supposed to accomplish. What's the point of such a diverse nation? If I wanted to be ruled by Asians, I'd move to China or Japan.
Meritocracy is an laudable goal. However, like all laudable goals it is bastardized and weaponized against Europeans. The European man is judged on his individual accomplishments in the here and now. Those accomplishments are then measured against some ambiguous accomplishments of blacks as a whole spanning over 400 years of slavery because everyone knows they built everything. Somehow the European man must measure up to the ethereal accomplishments of the black race when without the direction of European masters they'd still be in Africa selling off their brothers, sisters and daughters to the highest bidders.