Zone1 Are Asian-Americans “The New Jews”?

[IM2]

Why do whites like Hector not understand how they are examples of how white racism still exists?

I'm surprised he can use a computer because he keeps repeating stuff that's been long discredited.

 

[Coyote]

The countries I consider to be Oriental are China, Korea, Japan, and Vietnam. North Vietnam does not exist any more. The War in Vietnam ended in 1975.

You are cherry picking your “Oriental” countries If you are attempting to define people by race.

 

[Hector12]

Why do whites like Hector not understand how they are examples of how white racism still exists?

I'm surprised he can use a computer because he keeps repeating stuff that's been long discredited.

It has been denounced, but not discredited. Negroes still tend to be less intelligent than whites and Orientals. They have much higher rates of crime and illegitimacy.

 

[Hector12]

You are cherry picking your “Oriental” countries If you are attempting to define people by race.

A person's race can usually be determined by appearance, and always by DNA analysis.

 

[Coyote]

A person's race can usually be determined by appearance, and always by DNA analysis.

So why are you excluding half the countries inhabited by “orientals”?

 

[Hector12]

It has been denounced, but not discredited. Negroes still tend to be less intelligent than whites and Orientals. They have much higher rates of crime and illegitimacy.

Coyote,

Please post data that affirms that the races are intrinsically equal.

 

[Hector12]

So why are you excluding half the countries inhabited by “orientals”?

By "Oriental" I mean China and nations that learned civilization from China. I can usually tell the difference between them and other Mongoloids. DNA evidence always can.

 

[JoeB131]

The countries I consider to be Oriental are China, Korea, Japan, and Vietnam. North Vietnam does not exist any more. The War in Vietnam ended in 1975.

Okay, so why don't Thailand, Indonesia, the Philippines, Cambodia, Laos, and Myanmar Count as "Oriental" in your eyes?

I mean, I can see why you'd exclude Persians, Indians and Arabs, as they are subsets of the Indo-European cultural group. (In short, you can count them as white when it bolsters your arguments, and discount them when they don't)

But why is a Filipino less "Oriental" than a Japanese? I mean, besides, their skin color is a little darker and they are dirt poor.

The reality is, of course, that the success of an Asian country is an inverse correlation to its domination by Europeans.

Japan was lucky enough to have completely avoided Western domination because of the Isolation by the Tukagawa Shoganate followed by the Meiji Reforms. (It helped the British see the Japanese as useful allies in East Asia and left them alone.)

China did a LITTLE better but still underwent the "Century of Humiliation" before the Communists took over.

Korea had the good luck of not being screwed over by Europeans but was still dominated by Japan and China.

The Philippines had the bad luck of being under the Spanish boot for 400 years followed by half of a century of America sticking it to them. Some Filipinos actually welcomed the Japanese as liberators, only to watch more of the bad behavior.

 

[JoeB131]

By "Oriental" I mean China and nations that learned civilization from China. I can usually tell the difference between them and other Mongoloids. DNA evidence always can.

Um, okay, here's the thing. China's influence was pretty wide, including nations like Burma, Laos, Malaysia, Singapore.

I was rather amazed to find out that Filipino (Or Pinoy) cuisine is very much like Chinese, because of the influence China has had via proximity. But it's pretty clear you don't consider Filipinos white enough.

Here's the thing about all your ranting about civilization. Most of it is dumb luck.

Human Being- Homo Sapiens - has only been around for 300,000 years. "Civilization" as you like to call it (I read the news and wonder when it's going to start) has only been around for about 6000 or so.

Did the Indo-Europeans and Asians do well because of Alleles or Evolution, or did they just luck out in getting favorable river basins to start with and the availability of beneficial animals to help them?

Take for instance, the Horse, of course, of course. Horses were a huge benefit to warfare, to agriculture, and to transportation. Completely unknown in the Americas or Sub-Sahara Africa. Or the Cat. Made agriculture possible by protecting the grain stores from vermin. Again, unknown in the parts of the world you consider "primitive" because they were a few centuries behind on technological development.

 

[Unkotare]

Not at all.... you guys have managed to scream "anti-Semitism" for even the most rational criticism.


Israel is hated in most of the world. There's a reason for that.

The reason is that there are still anti-Semitic scumbags like YOU in the world, hypocrite.

 

[Unkotare]

Okay, so why don't Thailand, Indonesia, the Philippines, Cambodia, Laos, and Myanmar Count as "Oriental" in your eyes?

I mean, I can see why you'd exclude Persians, Indians and Arabs, as they are subsets of the Indo-European cultural group. (In short, you can count them as white when it bolsters your arguments, and discount them when they don't)

But why is a Filipino less "Oriental" than a Japanese? I mean, besides, their skin color is a little darker and they are dirt poor.

The reality is, of course, that the success of an Asian country is an inverse correlation to its domination by Europeans.

Japan was lucky enough to have completely avoided Western domination because of the Isolation by the Tukagawa Shoganate followed by the Meiji Reforms. (It helped the British see the Japanese as useful allies in East Asia and left them alone.)

China did a LITTLE better but still underwent the "Century of Humiliation" before the Communists took over.

Korea had the good luck of not being screwed over by Europeans but was still dominated by Japan and China.

The Philippines had the bad luck of being under the Spanish boot for 400 years followed by half of a century of America sticking it to them. Some Filipinos actually welcomed the Japanese as liberators, only to watch more of the bad behavior.

Study some history, ignorant bigot.

 

[Hector12]

Did the Indo-Europeans and Asians do well because of Alleles or Evolution, or did they just luck out in getting favorable river basins to start with and the availability of beneficial animals to help them?

It is not so much that intelligent people start civilizations, but that civilizations select genetically for intelligence. Intelligent men tend to be more prosperous than unintelligent men. Until very recently they had more children who survived and reproduced.

Cold climates also select for intelligence. People living in cold climates needed to know how to build warm clothing and houses. They needed to store food for the winter months.

Agriculture began in the Fertile Crescent because the area had plants and animals that were useful to humans and which could be domesticated. However, once agriculture begins it has different population pressures than a Paleolithic way of life. Paleolithic people only need to plan for the next hunt. Agricultural people need to plan for the next planting season. They also need to be able to defer gratification. No matter how hungry they get they cannot eat the grain that is reserved for spring planting. They cannot kill and eat all of their farm animals. They need to preserve some so that they will have more in the next generation.

The non cosmetic differences between whites and blacks can be explained by the facts that whites began agriculture about ten thousand years ago. The Bantu began agriculture about four thousand years ago. Whites began civilization about five thousand years ago. The Bantu never developed indigenous civilizations.

When blacks and whites earn the same incomes whites are more likely to save money. Blacks are more likely to go into debt.

When Paleolithic people kill and eat an animal they will be elsewhere when the remains of the animal begin to decay. Agricultural people need to dispose of the remains of butchered animals, so that the remains do not spread disease. Those who visit black neighborhoods may notice a lot of litter.

 

[JoeB131]

It is not so much that intelligent people start civilizations, but that civilizations select genetically for intelligence. Intelligent men tend to be more prosperous than unintelligent men. Until very recently they had more children who survived and reproduced.

Until recently, um... infant mortality rates were higher. Only a very small section of the population lived in anything but abject misery. A few rich people lived in prosperity while the vast majority of people lived short brutish lives.

Cold climates also select for intelligence. People living in cold climates needed to know how to build warm clothing and houses. They needed to store food for the winter months.

Then where are our Eskimo Overlords? Oh, that's right, your full of shit.

Agriculture began in the Fertile Crescent because the area had plants and animals that were useful to humans and which could be domesticated. However, once agriculture begins it has different population pressures than a Paleolithic way of life. Paleolithic people only need to plan for the next hunt. Agricultural people need to plan for the next planting season. They also need to be able to defer gratification. No matter how hungry they get they cannot eat the grain that is reserved for spring planting. They cannot kill and eat all of their farm animals. They need to preserve some so that they will have more in the next generation.

Um, not sure what your point is here, and you leave off the part where they had fertile lands along rivers (Mesopotamia, the Nile, the Yangtze, the Indus Valley). The thing was, many of these civilizations collapsed under the weight of barbarian attacks. (The Bronze Age collapse of the 13th Century BCE, the Fall of Rome, etc.) It's Ebb and Flow, buddy.

The non cosmetic differences between whites and blacks can be explained by the facts that whites began agriculture about ten thousand years ago. The Bantu began agriculture about four thousand years ago. Whites began civilization about five thousand years ago. The Bantu never developed indigenous civilizations.

Um, actually, they did. The problem is the Europeans kind of fucked that up for them. For instance, the Congo had a pretty prosperous civilization until the slave trade started, and they found it was easier to trade people for goods than make them. Conversely, India was the wealthiest country in the world until the British came along, took advantage of political turmoil, and looted the country for everything it had. China was the world's largest economy (a perch they are reclaiming) until the western powers sold them opium and imposed unequal treaties on them.

Only you can look at the awful behavior of white people and think it's a virtue.

When blacks and whites earn the same incomes whites are more likely to save money. Blacks are more likely to go into debt.

When Paleolithic people kill and eat an animal they will be elsewhere when the remains of the animal begin to decay. Agricultural people need to dispose of the remains of butchered animals, so that the remains do not spread disease. Those who visit black neighborhoods may notice a lot of litter.

Why clean up properties you don't own? The problem is most of those neighborhoods; the properties are owned by slumlords who don't maintain them.

I saw this in the last condo association I lived in. Because they didn't pass an Owner'occupancy Rule, by the time it was finally bought out by an investor, they were at 56% renters (with about 13% being Section 8) and they simply did not give a fuck. Why should they? It's not their property.

Blacks are more likely to go into debt because a whole criminal banking industry targets them. White people will get favorable mortgages and credit card rates, blacks get preyed on by Payday Loan companies. I am amazed by your level of victim-blaming. Do you go to the Rape Crisis Center and tell those women they shouldn't have dressed like sluts?

 

[Hector12]

Then where are our Eskimo Overlords? Oh, that's right, your full of shit.

It is the combination of cold climates and civilization that select for intelligence, although civilization seems to be more important.

According to a 2019 study by researchers Richard Lynn and David Becker at the Ulster Institute, the highest average IQ scores in the world belong to the Japanese, with the citizens of Taiwan and Singapore close behind. The top 10 list appears below, and the full rankings appear in the table further down this page.

Top 10 Countries with the Highest Average IQ - Ulster Institute 2019:*​

1. Japan - 106.49
2. Taiwan - 106.47
3. Singapore - 105.89
4. Hong Kong (China) - 105.37
5. China - 104.10
6. South Korea - 102.35
7. Belarus - 101.60
8. Finland - 101.20
9. Liechtenstein - 101.07
10. Netherlands & Germany (tie) - 100.74

Countries by IQ - Average IQ by Country 2024

worldpopulationreview.com

Hong Kong and Singapore have warm climates, but they are populated by Chinese, who evolved further north.

 

[Lisa558]

It is the combination of cold climates and civilization that select for intelligence, although civilization seems to be more important.

According to a 2019 study by researchers Richard Lynn and David Becker at the Ulster Institute, the highest average IQ scores in the world belong to the Japanese, with the citizens of Taiwan and Singapore close behind. The top 10 list appears below, and the full rankings appear in the table further down this page.

Top 10 Countries with the Highest Average IQ - Ulster Institute 2019:*​

1. Japan - 106.49
2. Taiwan - 106.47
3. Singapore - 105.89
4. Hong Kong (China) - 105.37
5. China - 104.10
6. South Korea - 102.35
7. Belarus - 101.60
8. Finland - 101.20
9. Liechtenstein - 101.07
10. Netherlands & Germany (tie) - 100.74

Countries by IQ - Average IQ by Country 2024

worldpopulationreview.com

Hong Kong and Singapore have warm climates, but they are populated by Chinese, who evolved further north.

It is true that the further a country gets from the equator, the higher the average IQ (with a few exceptions).

Could part of the explanation be that the people who originally set out to explore were more motivated and capable? And that their descendants inherited these qualities? (And yes, motivation is a heritable trait.)

 

[Hector12]

Until recently, um... infant mortality rates were higher. Only a very small section of the population lived in anything but abject misery. A few rich people lived in prosperity while the vast majority of people lived short brutish lives.

In A Farewell to Alms: A Brief Economic History of the World, Gregory Clark demonstrated by using church records in English churches that going back to the twelfth century exceptional men rose in a single generation, and had many children who survived and reproduced. However, the economy was stagnant, so there was limited room at the top. Most of the children of exceptional men experienced downward social mobility. As they declined, they pushed others down lower. Poor people did not replace themselves. By the beginning of the nineteenth century virtually everyone in England was descended from those who had risen in the past. This increased the average IQ of the English, and made the industrial revolution possible in England. ​

Professor Clark speculated that the same process was working in other European countries, but records were not kept as extensively as in England.

 

[JoeB131]

It is the combination of cold climates and civilization that select for intelligence, although civilization seems to be more important.

According to a 2019 study by researchers Richard Lynn and David Becker at the Ulster Institute, the highest average IQ scores in the world belong to the Japanese, with the citizens of Taiwan and Singapore close behind. The top 10 list appears below, and the full rankings appear in the table further down this page.

They also invest in education.

Up until 1949, 60% of the Chinese population was illiterate. Then, the Communists invested in education. They also had the good sense to simplify the written language from some 50,000 characters to a mere 8000.

Same thing with Japan. Before the Meiji restoration, most of the population couldn't read.


The US made progress in education for a while, then decided it wasn't a priority. The affluent had private schools and the rest of you can fend for yourselves.

 

[Hector12]

Um, not sure what your point is here, and you leave off the part where they had fertile lands along rivers (Mesopotamia, the Nile, the Yangtze, the Indus Valley). The thing was, many of these civilizations collapsed under the weight of barbarian attacks. (The Bronze Age collapse of the 13th Century BCE, the Fall of Rome, etc.) It's Ebb and Flow, buddy.



Um, actually, they did. The problem is the Europeans kind of fucked that up for them. For instance, the Congo had a pretty prosperous civilization until the slave trade started, and they found it was easier to trade people for goods than make them. Conversely, India was the wealthiest country in the world until the British came along, took advantage of political turmoil, and looted the country for everything it had. China was the world's largest economy (a perch they are reclaiming) until the western powers sold them opium and imposed unequal treaties on them.

China has always been prosperous compared to the rest of the world. Until the Italian Renaissance and the Age of Discovery China was more advanced than Europe.

It simply is not true that the Congo or anywhere in Sub Saharan Africa, except for Southern Africa settled by European, ever had a prosperous economy.

 

[JoeB131]

It is true that the further a country gets from the equator, the higher the average IQ (with a few exceptions).

Could part of the explanation be that the people who originally set out to explore were more motivated and capable? And that their descendants inherited these qualities? (And yes, motivation is a heritable trait.)

Again, no. The period of exploration, colonization and imperialism was actually BAD for most of the world, capping off with the World Wars when the empires largely destroyed each other because they were too fucking greedy.

The reality is, the "dominance" or Euro-centric culture is only a blip in history, Before Columbus, the big economies were India and China. China and India are starting to reassert their rightful positions. Ebb and Flow.

 

[Hector12]

They also invest in education.

Up until 1949, 60% of the Chinese population was illiterate. Then, the Communists invested in education. They also had the good sense to simplify the written language from some 50,000 characters to a mere 8000.

Same thing with Japan. Before the Meiji restoration, most of the population couldn't read.


The US made progress in education for a while, then decided it wasn't a priority. The affluent had private schools and the rest of you can fend for yourselves.

Washington, DC has one of the best funded public school systems in the United States. It also has the highest percentage of Negroes in the schools and the lowest test scores.