The NYT doxxing Scott Alexander for no real reason was wrong, but most of the defenses of SSC that I've read recently disgust me about as much as the original article did because they're all playing dumb: Alexander was clearly sympathetic to the idea of Race-IQ differences.
-
Show this thread
-
The modern liberal worldview is large, but cannot survive the revelation that there are racial differences in IQ. Any respectable outlet that indirectly promotes this viewpoint is an existential threat and it is rational for liberals to seek these out and destroy them.
11 replies 14 retweets 170 likesShow this thread -
In other words, according to the modern American consensus all published writers adhere to, Metz's attack on a rising threat would be commendable (other than the doxxing). It's only distasteful if you are sympathetic to Race/IQ connections, as most of his defenders secretly are.
1 reply 1 retweet 96 likesShow this thread -
The real point is this: soft "HBD" type people like Charles Murray themselves often play dumb about the implications of their work. There is no way reconcile it with liberalism and if liberals were smart they would be doing even more they currently are to wipe it out.
14 replies 6 retweets 120 likesShow this thread -
Replying to @crimkadid
Is IQ really that important? Apart from extreme cases, successful people seem to be upper-mid level intelligent & are just excellent at focusing on rather boring things.
3 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
This Tweet is unavailable.
>most of us bring little value to the table, even hotshot professional lawyer/exec types The only reason you say can say something like that is because you don't see the reality of living in a low average IQ society. The friction introduced is staggering in effect.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.