Eugenics: Why are "racist" white countries so much richer?

These are two separate things. You can have a Nationalist government which allows a largely free market. I think you want to slap "totalitarian" on nationalism and "free" on internationalist governments using the anecdotal case of Burma. Of course this is a false association as each can be either. Actually I would say the more local the government the more free people are, in most ways.

I would like to see rule by the best. Some kind of test should establish that. Not rule by whoever screws people best in the market place.

I don't need to define "unique character" because the meaning is obvious. If you can't understand the obvious and see what is right in front of your nose, and if you want to play silly semantic games trying to deny what is self evident, I will not waste my time debating. There is a unique Japanese character. You deny this. It is absurd.

No you are wrong about the definition of Capitalism. Some property rights allow for some form of Capitalism. A needle and thread is a "means of production". If I pay someone in China 1 dollar to darn my sock (spending 50 to send it there, but you get the point), this is a form of International Capitalism. It makes no difference if some other guy in the world has property rights or not.

 

No, you cant. You can have a nation that has nationalist tendencies but a "Nationalist government" will not be able to be nationalist and have a free market.

Yet you are opposed to democracy. I'm not the one defining Nationalist government as totalitarian - you are.

What's "the best"?

No you do need to define it - the meaning is non existent until you do.

The reality is it isnt self evident at all. I'm not playing games - you are just talking nonsense which you cant justify and even now as I test you you run away.

What is the "unique Japanese character"? Define it. Justify your assertions.

"Some form of capitalism" will not be capitalism. Look up any definition of capitalism and it will include property rights and more often than not a free market.

It isnt if the chinese worker cannot freely sell his labour in making a sock or whatever.

Yes it does. If you have no poverty rights you cannot own the product of your work, and you cannot utilize is in the market efficiently. There are billions of dollars worth of property in the third world that could be utilized by their poor owners, however due to the lack of integrated property rights the poor cannot harness the potential of these basic assets. Furthermore, without a free market, they are unable to freely and thus fairly compete in the market place - unable to form unions, choose and leave a job etc etc. Saying capitalism exists within those set of circumstances is like saying democracy existed under Nazi Germany.

 

You can have a democratically elected Nationalist government. Just because I support Nationalism and oppose democracy doesn't mean the two are inherently linked. You can have a totalitarian Internationalist government. You are making false associations.

The Japanese character is the culture and race associated with the area of Japan. Do you feel as stupid reading that as I do writing it? Will you keep wasting time asking for definitions of simple things?

Whether the Chinese laborer can sell his labor is separate from whether he has property rights. You assert that "ALL people" need property rights for international capitalism to function. This is absurd. All you need is one person with property rights in one country, and one person with property rights in another country, with both of those people having the right to send and receive goods and payments internationally, and the right to profit from their own work in some degree. Whether some other guy has property rights is irrelevant.

 

Not at all, I'm simply pointing out that a government that seeks a Nationalist policy platform will inevitably cut back on civil and economic liberties, simply because the free market and civil freedom are inherently tended towards internationalist structures.

WHICH IS WHAT?

Your clear avoidance of a description is evidence to my point. The "Japanese character" is in no way definable except as it is bound to geography, which renders it a meaningless and useless concept for political debate. In a globalized world such as our own, cultures are far to diverse and varied, internally, than they differ externally based on preconceived nationalisms. What's something iconic of Japanese culture? Cartoons/manga. Yet these are made worldwide now, so they clearly arent Japanese anymore. One might call democracy a greek invention, but clearly a plethora of non-Greek communities have built, sustained and expanded upon their ideas, so democracy can hardly be called greek anymore. The list goes on. The only thing they can be described as, is human. One person's nationalism is almost never the same as everybody elses - its an entirely relative, subjective and individual concept and thus an invention. So whilst you continue to ignorantly utilize this terminology of "Japanese character" I will correspondingly question what the hell that means because it clearly has no objective meaning other than the most vague and pointless of geographical associations.

No it isnt, its the definition of capitalism. You can have state-capitalism, but that wont be capitalism.

Prove ONE economic journal or dictionary that states this entirely bull(*)(*)(*)(*) claim.

Actually it is entirely necessary. You cant have a free market if it isnt free. You cant say you have capitalism when you have only one person exercising it. By that logic we can call the US communist because one man gives the majority of his wealth to others. Total nonsense.

 

No. The one thing has nothing to do with the other. If anything reducing government produces more individual freedoms. Whether or not "freedoms and liberty" are a good thing is a separate question.

The Japanese culture and race is set of behaviours (language, food habits, hobbies etc.) and genes which form a cluster around the area of Japan. It is not based on arbitrary geographic designations, but on the fact that there is a significant discontinuity in the correlations of behaviours and genes between Japan and Korea. Of course in this case there happens to also be a natural geographic boundary (which causes the discontinuity), but there doesn't have to be. The designation is drawn from correlations in these behaviors and genes. A person from North Japan and a person from South Japan are more likely to share behaviour patterns and genes than a person from South South Korea and South Japan, despite a greater geographic distance. Thus we can speak of a "Japanese Character".

So everyone in the world must be free for capitalism to function at all at an international level? How silly.

 

From a Nationalist perspective, they are not a primary goal, hence the inevitable conflict and the tendency toward regulation and control.

So you are saying "Japanese character" is a cultural and a genetic phenomenon? This would mean only people of Japanese ancestry can have this character and only in this culture? Can you define this culture specifically? You say language, food habits and hobbies, but a lot of Japanese language is taken from China, as are many food habits which have been further influenced by and shaped western cuisine. Whats more as I pointed out Japanese hobbies are hardly unique. Manga is a universal phenomenon, as are Japanese sports, most being universally practiced activities.
So again, instead of a vague and entirely useless description of "Japanese character" as a socio-racial concept which you haven't defined in any serious manner, can you go the next step and give specific real world detail as to how Japanese character is defined, because all I see is an arbitrary application of a few words over vague tendencies that do not substantiate your claims in the slightest.

Describe these please.

Could you provide the scientific details about the "genetic differences"?

See, I think that is just a complete load of bull(*)(*)(*)(*), and you have to substantiate your claim with scientific (for the racial element) and sociological (for the 'culture' part) evidence before ANYONE can take you seriously in any way.

Correct.

How is that silly? Are you 5 years old? Saying 'oh that's silly' isnt an argument used outside a preschool.

 

Now are telling us all "Nationalist's Goals" are to reduce freedom. You cannot know this.



http://dienekes.blogspot.co.uk/2011/12/chinese-korean-japanese-genetic-edition.html

I'm beginning to wonder how familiar you are with East Asia. Any Japanese or Korean reading will be laughing right now. Japanese is an Altaic language, like Korean and is distinct from Korean. Totally unintelligible. Therefore in this trait the majority of Japanese are similar and distinct from the majority of Koreans. In Busan and Seoul they eat more chilli and pork, while in Fukuoka and Tokyo they eat more wasabi and salmon. Another discontinuity. There are many, many others, too many to list. And far fewer that straddle this divide. Please list some if I am wrong. One? All of these correlations are the "Japanese Character".

 

Yes, I can. Nationalism, as an ideology, inevitably means a restriction of freedoms. If nationalism is opposed to internationalism, and international is required for real freedom, then national has to inevitably find itself in conflict with freedom at some point.

I see so someone has to eat wasabi and salmon, speak only Japanese, have Japanese ancestry and then they will have "Japanese character"? This would mean a lot of Japanese citizens do not have 'Japanese character'

 

So why did William Wallace shout "freedom" in Braveheart? Nationalism has no inherent connection to "freedom". You just falsely associate "freedom" with internationalism because you are biased towards towards internationalism. What about the "freedom" to not have you country swamped with foreigners? "Freedom" is a silly rhetorical word in this context.

Those things are part of the "Japanese Character". There are many things. You cannot list one that crosses the boundary. What does that tell us? If a Japanese does not like wasabi, they will still have "Japanese Character", but less. If they do not speak Japanese, maybe they do not have "Japanese Character". If they do not have Japanese ancestry, they may still have some "Japanese Character", but less. Most people in Japan have full on "Japanese Character". I like this. You don't.

 

Because Mel Gibson read it off the script? Sorry, is this a joke?

Fair enough, one should define freedom. Well if we define freedom, as I do, as simply the rational consideration of interests of all sentient beings, then yes we can say national is inevitably poised to conflict with freedom as I just defined it because it inevitably means the "nationalists" will unfairly and immorally subject the interests of others to the pursuit of their own without valid reasoning. Internationalism is the inevitable result of this equal consideration.

But you need to define "Japanese character" if you are going to apply the term.

Oh, hehe, I see, so I have Japanese character then, because I can speak some Japanese, eat Japanese food etc? Can you not see the inevitable futility of such a concept?

So you weight Japanese language as high in Japanese character? Why?

Again, why is this less important?

If you like, I wont make any barriers to you acquiring Japanese character as you choose. But I will fight against you imposing a "character" which you arbitrarily define, upon groups of people.

 

I defined Japanese Character very clearly and now you are feigning ignorance.
I provided examples of traits. You failed to example one discordant trait.
It is obvious that eating wasabi is more variable between nations, but speaking a language is not. Therefore language has a higher weight. This is intuitive and borne out by predictive validity.

It is more likely you that wishes to eradicate character through unrestrained immigration, than I wanting to impose it.

The debate is over.

 

Indeed you said wasabi and salmon eating, Japanese speaking and racial ancestry. Now you are saying each has varied 'weighting' within the 'character' to the extent even I can be said to have 'Japanese character' because I has some of these traits. The result is that by your own very clear definition, the notion of a 'national character' is essentially 'international correlation'

Explain how unrestrained immigration would eradicate character. We just determined national character is an individual performed certain actions and acquiring certain traits. Now if everyone is given personal liberty as I said previously, there is absolutely no reason particular characters cannot persist forever - all the require is individual preference to have such character qualities.

It was over as soon as I began refuting you. We all know you have no argument here, just an extremely ignorant and backward perception of humanity coupled with a hugely totalitarian mindset.

 

Feel free to delete and rewrite that post because I edited before you put it. I will do the same.

 

Yes you can have some Japanese character. But most people in Japan are very high on the Japanese Character scale. You can never be if you don't have Japanese ancestry. You could be culturally Japanese. Not a full part of the "Japanese Character".

I'm not sure what you mean by "international correlation". I spoke of a cultural and genetic discontinuity between Japan and Korea. Thus we speak of the "Japanese Character" to talk about this.

In reality immigration reduces the existing character. This is beyond question.

You have not refuted me, merely asserted this.

 

Liberal faced with facts: denies reality exists and says "u ignorant".

 

Genetic Ancestry Highly Correlated With Ethnic and Linguistic Groups in Asia

These groups of correlated genetic ancestry and culture are called "nations". The set of their distinctive characteristics is called their character. For example the "Japanese Character".

 

I can be said to have 'Japanese character' because I has some of these traits, then? The result is that by your own very clear definition, the notion of a 'national character' is essentially 'international correlation.'

I dont need to. Pointing out the clear flaw in the examples you provide is enough.

So it about the rarity of a particular practice? Ok, but that means high school kids have a high Japanese character if they learn Japanese?

Explain how unrestrained immigration would eradicate character. We just determined national character is an individual performed certain actions and acquiring certain traits. Now if everyone is given personal liberty as I said previously, there is absolutely no reason particular characters cannot persist forever - all the require is individual preference to have such character qualities.

It was over as soon as I began refuting you. We all know you have no argument here, just an extremely ignorant and backward perception of humanity coupled with a hugely totalitarian mindset.

 

I can just copy paste the other reply

"Yes you can have some Japanese character. But most people in Japan are very high on the Japanese Character scale. You can never be if you don't have Japanese ancestry. You could be culturally Japanese. Not a full part of the "Japanese Character"."

This thread is too messy. I'm taking a break.

 

But for those who arent, I, an Australian male, have more "Japanese character"?

So its racial?

So, if someone is born in Japan, then what?

But we have identified the fact that you can essentially be Japanese if are culturally so, and if you are born there you can be less Japanese then a Korean as long the Korean has the cultural qualities. So its a correlation to what you define as 'Japanese character.'

Ok, explain how it reduces character.

Yep.

 

Read this slowly.

It's a combination of ancestry and culture.

Got it now?

 

Which combination? Any? That would again leave the concept meaningless, since it would apply to so many people with absurd variety.

 

Just because race or ethnicity does not always have clear demarcations does not mean it does not exist. Race might just be a convenient classification of much more complex genetic variations between different populations of humans. That does not necessarily mean race should just be ignored.

 

Actually, for the most part, racism ought to be ignored in political social debates.

 

Off into an alternate reality. I have still yet to see an unbiased IQ test.

Now look again at your own map. You will notice that those countries shown in the lightest color are those in which industrialization was deliberately retarded by an oppressive government, often foreign, that forbade the proper development of ecconomic and educational infrastructe.

You lose.

________________________________

Feast on this:



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IQ_and_Global_Inequality

[/QUOTE]

 

No, correlation does not imply causation. These countries have lack of economic and political freedom because they are poor to begin with. When most of the population is poor, the people demand economic protections, and do not have the luxury of "liberal markets". And when the people are poor, and there is plenty of widescale violence, oppressive governments are more likely to come to power.

Also to mention, race itself may be a factor contributing to the existence of oppressive governments in the first place, either directly or indirectly. To blame global racial inequality on bad governments is not much different from blaming bad governance on race. There are different levels of altruisticness and trustworthiness in different populations of people. Why did it seems that the African nations did better when they had white-controlled governments?

There certainly are other factors at work, but it is obvious that race/ethnicity is one of the big factors. Now again, part of this may be cultural, part of it biological, and some of the biological factors may be influencing the cultural. I think a large scale experiment should be done. Bring in economic experts and pump in large capital funds to a tiny Black province somewhere in Africa. Something like this.

It is quite a coincidence that all the prosperous nations are white or northeast asian. Or take a look at the northeast asians that have immigrated to other countries. Why are their children/descendants still so much wealthier and more responsible than certain other minorities?

Even Che Geuvara, a leftist revolutionary who was fighting to achieve economic equality in Latin America made this observation:
"The black is indolent and a dreamer; spending his meager wage on frivolity or drink; the European has a tradition of work and saving, which has pursued him as far as this corner of America and drives him to advance himself, even independently of his own individual aspirations."

It might well be more about personal responsibility and self-control than intelligence.