I think there is something to the low IQ thing!
I am in a location that gets infrequent snow, and we happened to get a good bit over the weekend. County offices closed, businesses closed, and schools are now going to be closed for the third day in a row.
Local Facebook and NextDoor groups are blowing up with people outraged at the decision to close schools tomorrow, even though most roads are perfectly fine. I've been driving around since Monday (I do have 4x4).
The outrage goes something like this:
"I can't believe they're closing schools again, the road in front of my house is totally clear! It's ridiculous! This is an outrage!"
Well ok, the roads in front of YOUR house may be clear, but when you get to the hilly and more rural areas of the county--where school buses still have to drive--those roads are very treacherous right now. A school bus drove off a hill and flip just a few years ago when it it hit a large patch of black ice going around a curve. This is not a theoretical issue.
There is just a really large contingent of people who just cannot think in "what ifs" or beyond their immediate "right now" situation. (And to be clear, if they were saying "the schools should have had alternative plans for dangerous school bus routes" I would agree! It's just the idiocy of "me me me, now now now" that is striking.)
More than that, I'm pretty sure they're the majority.
It turns out, having an aristocracy/peasant divide in society makes perfect sense...the only real contention is how that dividing line gets drawn. I'm so tired of subhumans being treated like fully functional members of society. It's all a farce.
I'm not convinced that there's a significant difference between the aristocracy and the peasant class in terms of who can think in terms of "what if."
That's almost certainly true, but the point I'm driving at is that the position of aristocrat ought to be filled by those who can tell you about skipping breakfast whereas those that did have breakfast should be the ones toiling in the mines for their local lord.
Yeah, and an ideal aristocrat should also have an internal monolog and be able to visualize an apple in detail.
True enough.
We'd all like to be governed by philosopher kings, but unfortunately we get easily corruptible and manipulatable midwits instead, who are themselves corrupted and manipulated by delusional midwits.
As Heinlein said, "intelligence" or "science" doesn't provide moral wisdom or equate to competent leadership.
What people are really using various words for is to try and explain "good decision making" for problems that arise in the future. Which very easily slips to "I want someone to be able to tell the future"
Someone who's assessment of a situation and decisions that can turn a 50/50 good/bad decisions into a 55/45 in charge is what builds civilisations. Unfortunately there's no way to screen for that in any meaningful way.
Philosopher-kings are great, but its the sophists who gave Socrates the ol' hemlock tea, and it's hard to filter sophistry when seeking intellectuals.
The point of the aristocracy was that the day to day work of survival was removed, so people could be brought up to learn how to make decisions with good judgement. If your society is on a boat and everyone spends 24/7 trying to survive, no-one is steering. Having someone taken care of so their childhood can be spent learning how to navigate a boat, and learn the weather so they can make good decisions when it comes time to decide which way will avoid the storm is a really good idea. The idea that aristocracy is purely superfluous is a modern retroactive rewriting. Aristocracy meant you were born into a position of responsibility.
No it doesn't, we shouldn't have non thinkers to begin with, they'll eventually grow in number and kill us.
There are jobs that need to get done, and always will, where thinking is a clear detriment.
Name one. I can't think of one job where not thinking is better than thinking the right way, and that includes jobs like "suicide bomber"
It's more like... Thinking too much could be detrimental. Consider worker bees. They just work and don't think about a year from now, or next week. Same with people. Maybe they can envision the weekend, but most only think about the immediate.
Those people are a threat to our survival.
Water misplaced is a threat to your survival. As is everything.
The guy who holds the stop/go signs on roadworks, when the radio tells him, he flips it.
The distribution curve exists and needs to be accounted for. Denying its existence is a retarded strategy. You can't just wave your hands and make a society devoid of these individuals because more will keep spawning in until the end of time, even if you get a eugenics program off the ground.
I agree with the first half and question the second half. If we say, got rid of 90% of the people without inner monologues, what do you think the subsequent generation would be comprised of? Do you think after like five generations it would rebound back to 60-80%?
Regression to the mean. It would take a long time to change that distribution curve. I'm thinking it would be measured in centuries. A good 600 years at least before we can start to breath easier about letting up on the eugenics. That also assumes you start with a White population and not a bunch of third world animals.
So you don't think having enough mental capacity to consider positions you aren't is has much to do with genetic predispositions?
See my other comment about it taking centuries to start seeing results. Even then, you still have a distribution curve even if it shifts to the right. The retards may spawn in lower numbers but they'll still spawn.
yeah i fully agree. especially in light of these grifting 3rd worlders in government leader positions. An aristocracy or monarchy even would be infinitely better than the bureaucracy the west has now.
I would even debate that a christian monarchy is the best form of government, one whose leaders are groomed from birth to answer to God, and would not be swayed by (((others))) at the expense of their own citizens. At the end of their life, they will stand before God and be judged
I swear, personal theory, it's linked to people who have no inner monologue.
It's probably about 85% of a "normal" population distribution. So when you consider Whites are what, 6% of the planetary population? Yeah, we're cooked.
Among white people that's probably not true. Worldwide? Without a doubt.
All you have to do is get on the beltway during rush hour to understand that there is a large portion of the population that is physically incapable of thinking three seconds into the future. They aren't people, they're bipedal animals that can speak.
Getting rid of nonwhites would massively improve that problem. Not letting subhumans externalize the negative consequences of their behavior would help as well.
Non-Whites and women. It's especially bad in this region though because of just how many foreigners there are here.
There’s always that person riding my ass when I have a huge line of cars in front of me. As if them getting so close to me I can’t see their headlights will make the line as a whole go faster.
There is no concept of there being cars in front of you influencing them, there is only you in front of them not going fast enough. If you get out of the way you will then observe that they proceed to tailgate the next person in the line of cars, with no sign of them even realizing their error. It's disgusting to watch and fills me with unfathomable contempt.
Those same people are often also completely oblivious and inconsiderate to anyone who might be driving behind them.
I take pleasure from them merging into another lane and then coming back within thirty seconds because the grass wasn't greener on the other side of the fence after all.
A friend of mine with a low tolerance for bullshit once noticed another driver tailing him on the highway over several miles. My friend reacted by slamming on the brakes, and the other guy smashed into him. The guy's front bumper was ruined but my friend's truck had barely a scratch. You may call him reckless, foolish, impatient, road raged...I call him the hero we need but don't deserve.
I've got a good trick for tailgaters, pisses them off even more than having their car totalled.
Go the speed limit.
Not sure how it works in the States, but Canadian speeding tickets don't mean shit until you're doing at least 20km/h over the limit, hence 19km/h over the limit is the generally acceptable speed to go.
So, whenever I get someone up my ass, I just let off the gas til I'm going the actual speed limit. Either they pass (in which case I don't care about them anymore) or they have an aneurysm right then and there.
My friend and I used to cruise all around the city (decades ago when gas was cheap and joy riding was fun), him in his car me in mine. We'd usually drive tandem. But occasionally someone tailgate us. We basically worked out a system to alert the other driver and would switch to driving side by side and deliberately go slow to piss off the other driver. Even better, we alternate speeding up and slowing down. One would speed up just enough to lure the tailgater to switching lanes, them hoping they'd pass us. Then we'd switch to coasting, the other guy would speed up and do the same thing just to fuck with them. The poor dipshit would frantically change lanes left right left right desperately trying to pass us. We'd be on our cells fucking dying of laughter.
We have all fantasized about doing that, but your friend was properly equipped and had the will to live the dream. Tell him thank you for me.
Where I am I've started visiting the more rural parts of my state. One of those "one way in, same road out" sorta deals. Whenever I see a slow car in front of me, I actually nudge my car towards the left or right edges of the lane I'm in (I'm still legally in the lane btw, not crossing over lanes) and I try to crane my neck around that car to see what is slowing it down.
Most of the time, it's good to give the person in front of you the benefit of the doubt that someone in FRONT of them is driving slow.
Once I figure out whether it's a line of slow cars or just this one motherfucker driving halfway below the speed limit, that's when I put on the GAS GAS GAS to pass them.
People really are bad at judging situations in these type of roads, especially tourists and city folks.
The same at the store. I've had people ask me to scoot up. Whether they are ten feet or twenty feet from the cash register, they are still 5th in line. What's an extra 18 inches going to matter? People really are retarded.
I lived and commuted there for several years. Good riddance! I never knew whether my commute would take 20 minutes or 1.5 hours...
I have had to quit jobs over the commute being unsustainable before. This place is a special kind of hell.
And most of them speak in (((corpo))) buzzwords, (((pop psych))) cliches or just straight ooga booga bix nood ape-jabber.
But I DID eat breakfast!
https://akarlin.com/stupid-people
It's truly alarming how retarded the "average" normie is, and why "democracy" was considered an objectively awful idea until some ~100ish years ago (we all know why)
Very good read, thanks for linking. Part of me finds it hard to believe that a lot of Asia and Europe couldn't score higher on those Level 5 and 6 problems. I wonder how standardized the test taking environments were, how motivated they were, etc. I know most normies are retarded but the numbers shown in that article go well beyond that given how easy the problems are.
That's nuts, I was expecting to see calculus or something after seeing the failure rates, but it was just basic math that most people were failing because they couldn't pick out information based on instructions or manage a problem with multiple steps.
I can't judge this particular instance, but people are rightfully mistrustful of he government. You're talking about school closings in a country where there were teachers' groups that said that schools need to remain closed until the police is defunded. Or because of monkeypox.
That's absolutely true. Mistrust of the government is a good thing. Along a parallel line, I don't think the ICE riots in Minnesota are going to cause any lack of confidence in the government among those constituents. They will, no doubt, want MORE government to solve the problem.
The number of people making rational arguments (e.g., our kids need socialization and learning) is minimal. It's mostly blathering about "Well, MY road is fine!"
Of course any time you get into any discussion about school buses, the topic gets dicey fast. Rich kids (read, white kids) get driven to school, poor kids (read black brown PoC) have to take the bus. Racism! I rode the bus in elementary school. 4th and 5th grade were brutal with a coterie of black kids who just ruled the roost. (To be fair, there were plenty of non-black bullies--the school bus was just the place where racial differences seemed to be 100% fair game.) This is a common theme in school buses across the US. Do they commonly use school buses in many parts of Europe?
I wonder WHY they simultaneously hate the government (ICE) but will always vote for more government 🤔
But I did dun eat da rice and bananas.
It's not all bananas and rice...
Luckily, we live in a world where the state of the roads outside some randos house affect school plumbing.
Oh wait, we don't 🙄
textbook lack of empathy
Women and fags turned "empathy" into "brown good White bad" to the extreme of fetishizing criminals and punishing the citizens who make society possible. There's a reason they used to be kept in their place by necessary force.
Many parents treat public school as free childcare. They are mad they have to take care of their children. You don’t have to be dumb to be selfish.
"Food comes from the store"
What time do they announce if it is a snow day?
It must be a nightmare to arrange for childcare professionals on these days.
I wonder if they have surge pricing
Unless you have a stay at home parent...
Oh, sorry, that's so insensitive of me, I should be more sympathetic to the people sacrificing their child so they can make more money losing said money!
For most people a public school is their free day care to drop of their kids while mommy goes to be someone else's work wife. It ain't about the schooling. Parents blow through stop signs on my neighborhood every morning on school days rushing their own kids to school almost killing every other kid crossing the street. It's okay to plow into Emily so long as mommy can rush back home and day drink and pretend to be important.
The people around me don't behave like that...
/s
I still don't understand why the answer to that question isn't always just: "Hungry".
But to the rest of your point, we intentionally do not educate people in public school with the concepts of introspection, long-term-time-preference, stoicism, and multi-perspective analysis.
That's the midwit answer at best. Not being able to comprehend a hypothetical is the worst, but giving a "magic spell" answer isn't much higher up.
Actual consideration yields different answers. If you ask after lunch how I would feel if I didn't eat breakfast, the answer is "the same."
I don't' see how missing a meal and being hungry because you missed the meal is a "magic spell" answer.
If you are asked how you would feel if you hadn't eaten breakfast, after you had eaten lunch, I don't think you can assume it would be the same. If you ate the same size lunch, you would probably still be a little hungry, as opposed to "full".
Because I know the size of the lunch I ate earlier would have be determined by if I had previously eaten breakfast or not. I'd answer after thinking through the hypothetical. The problem I have with "hungry" as a default answer and default answers in general are that they don't demonstrate thought.
"How would you feel if you didn't eat breakfast?" "Hungry."
"How would you feel if you didn't eat breakfast yesterday?" "Hungry."
"How would you feel if you didn't eat breakfast a week ago?" "Hungry."
It's the "always" part of your suggestion that I don't like. "But I did eat breakfast" shows a lack of comprehension. Giving a rote answer masks a possible lack of comprehension. I'm not sure which is worse.
It's not a rote answer when you change the question. The question was "How would you feel if you didn't eat breakfast?" Which implies "... breakfast today."
If you change the question, the answer, by definition is likely to change.
That's fair, but I still stand by my point that you won't always be hungry.
Certainly not.
You're missing the point here. The people failing that question lack the ability to consider any position other than the one they're currently in, making them incapable of both empathy for others and future planning for themselves.
Yes, but people who also can answer that question lack the ability to consider any other position as well.
But it's true that people are basically conditioned into that level of ignorance.
Whoa, how did you know I haven't yet?
When the school bus looks like a monster truck...