Recent debates on here reveale the absurdity of the assimilation debate. Assimilation is something that takes place over the course of multiple generations, if ever at all. It is a slow, laborious, boring, difficult process of acquiring new norms and abandoning old cultural practices.
It has absolutely nothing to do with attending a football game. It isn’t when you listen to hip-hop. If that’s literally all that it meant, then it wouldn’t be important or worth talking about.
The view that large numbers of immigrants will undermine political support for the welfare state seems like another one of those ideas developed in the version of the country with a 75-90% white majority that makes no sense after mass immigration
I became aware of who Rep. Crockett is early on because, for some reason, her office has always and frequently sent me press releases. Now, I'm not an apolitical person, but receiving PR from a politician is quite rare for me, because my main job is writing celebrity profiles.
"In particular, I do not want Anthropic to control the world's most powerful artificial intelligence or AGI. To put it dramatically, I consider the stakes comparable to Hitler obtaining the atomic bomb before the allies."
The trick leftists use to deceive you (and, most importantly, themselves) is to focus solely on proximal causes rather than intermediate and distal causes. Leftists do so because proximal causes look plausibly environmental, and the solution to environmental problems is more power to themselves.
In truth, the modern environment is strongly influenced by genetics. It is one of the most replicable within-country findings in behavioral genetics. It is also what the between-country economic data show from 500 years of human migration.
As for the ancestral environment, it shaped population genetics at a time when the environment was less malleable than genes.
In economics, this leftist trick translates into Acemoglu winning the 2024 Nobel Prize for the idea that institutions [proximal cause] are the fundamental cause of wealth, even while the Committee for the Nobel Prize acknowledges that his empirical strategy cannot disentangle the effects of inclusive institutions from the independent effects of the European settlers' human capital [intermediate cause].
The truth is that populations with the biopsychological traits conducive to large-scale cooperation, such as honesty toward strangers, cognitive ability, and patience, tend to be better at developing strong institutions and thus richer.
It used to be that we could tell the truth in academia, but leftist capture means we now need to post on X
So, basically, Robert Kraft and the heads of the NFL think Macklemore is more subversive — i.e. a threat to the status quo — than Kendrick Lamar… Kinda crazy, no?
Cities are engines of innovation and failing to police them makes us poorer.
Cities are great because of agglomeration—firms, innovators, creatives, etc. being close.
In a landmark study published earlier this year, @StuartBDonovan found that crime disrupts urban agglomeration:
I met Larry Ellison’s right hand man and he told me when he met Holmes he knew she was a fraud. When I asked him how so many powerful men could fall for her shtick, he said “She had a very pretty asshole.”
"We must stigmatize the theory that violent criminals are victims by virtue of their genetic profile. It is profoundly illiberal, and more importantly profoundly unjust."
About 20 years ago, Camille Paglia told me that she had to waste time in her art courses teaching basic Biblical literacy to her students, so they could understand the pictures. She sd the only students who had any clue were her black ones.
A culture where a man sees his killers outside
but is too proud to tell the security to call the cops
Would rather be killed than be mocked by a few idiots who treat criminal culture like Religion..