Boris johnson employs a literal nazi.

Watch
Ferrograd
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#1
Report Thread starter 1 month ago
#1
Andrew Sabisky supports eugenics, argues blacks have lower IQ than whites, and that they should be stereilised. Now what does that sound like to me......
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...-a9338671.html
1
reply
DiddyDec
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#2
Report 1 month ago
#2
Show me his arm band and I might believe the claim.
0
reply
mqb2766
Badges: 17
Rep:
?
#3
Report 1 month ago
#3
(Original post by Ferrograd)
Andrew Sabisky supports eugenics, argues blacks have lower IQ than whites, and that they should be stereilised. Now what does that sound like to me......
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...-a9338671.html
Views like that are abhorrent, but surprising common in the first half of the 1900s. A large number of academics / governments (in the uk) believed in eugenics.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=paFuyPV8HJU
1
reply
Ferrograd
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#4
Report Thread starter 1 month ago
#4
(Original post by mqb2766)
Views like that are abhorrent, but surprising common in the first half of the 1900s. A large number of academics / governments (in the uk) believed in eugenics.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=paFuyPV8HJU
Yes, I know, Cecil Rhodes was very similar to Hitler in his views yet they were considered typical of the time, and Hitler went on to praise Rhodes.
0
reply
mqb2766
Badges: 17
Rep:
?
#5
Report 1 month ago
#5
(Original post by Ferrograd)
Yes, I know, Cecil Rhodes was very similar to Hitler in his views yet they were considered typical of the time, and Hitler went on to praise Rhodes.
You're picking extreme examples of eugenics. It was surprisingly widespread and certainly not restricted to nazis or their sympathisers.
George Bernard Shaw, Bertrand Russell, Flinders Petrie, Darwin's son, ...
https://www.newstatesman.com/society...enics-disabled
0
reply
generallee
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#6
Report 1 month ago
#6
He isn't "literally" a Nazi really is he? I think the OP needs to look up the word literally to see what it means...

What he said (as opposed to what his opponents claim he said) is actually an interesting contribution to the wider debate on whether there ARE links to race and intelligence, one that has been stifled on the grounds of political correctness for many years.

Consider the case of the Ashkenazi Jewish population. Is their intellectual prominence (described below) nothing to do with genetics? Really?

"Jews are remarkably over-represented in benchmarks of brainpower. Though never exceeding 3 percent of the American population, Jews account for 37 percent of the winners of the U.S. National Medal of Science, 25 percent of the American Nobel Prize winners in literature, 40 percent of the American Nobel Prize winners in science and economics, and so on. On the world stage, we find that 54 percent of the world chess champions have had one or two Jewish parents.

Does this mean that Jews are a nation of meinsteins? It does not. Their average IQ has been measured at 108 to 115, one-half to one standard deviation above the mean. But statisticians have long known that a moderate difference in the means of two distributions translates into a large difference at the tails. In the simplest case, if we have two groups of the same size, and the average of Group A exceeds the average of Group B by fifteen IQ points (one standard deviation), then among people with an IQ of 115 or higher the As will outnumber the Bs by a ratio of three to one, but among people with an IQ of 160 or higher the As will outnumber the Bs by a ratio of forty-two to one. Even if Group A was a fraction of the size of Group B to begin with, it would contribute a substantial proportion of the people who had the highest scores."

https://newrepublic.com/article/77727/groups-and-genes
2
reply
Quady
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#7
Report 1 month ago
#7
(Original post by Ferrograd)
Andrew Sabisky
Who? Is that Bojos real name?
1
reply
Rakas21
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#8
Report 1 month ago
#8
(Original post by Ferrograd)
Andrew Sabisky supports eugenics, argues blacks have lower IQ than whites, and that they should be stereilised. Now what does that sound like to me......
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...-a9338671.html
I read his eugenics article and there was nothing especially extreme there (indeed several people do support a liberal variant). According to his blogpost he was simply arguing that we should select advantageous traits which is something that anybody who advocates aborting the disabled or supports genetic engineering is doing.

Studies do objectively suggest that Orientals have a higher average IQ than Caucasians and that in turn we have a higher average IQ than Africans. That's not really racist or extreme, it's just frowned upon to say because some people like to select statistics subjectively.

I have read other stuff of his though which suggest that he is indeed a bit of nutter however Cummings has hired him because of his political nous, not his ability to tick politically correct boxes. He apparently has a very high degree of ability to forecast political events correctly (turns out there is a test for it).
0
reply
BlueIndigoViolet
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#9
Report 1 month ago
#9
(Original post by Ferrograd)
Andrew Sabisky supports eugenics, argues blacks have lower IQ than whites, and that they should be stereilised. Now what does that sound like to me......
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...-a9338671.html
employed by Cummings - no surprise there, slime attracts slime
1
reply
Ferrograd
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#10
Report Thread starter 1 month ago
#10
(Original post by generallee)
He isn't "literally" a Nazi really is he? I think the OP needs to look up the word literally to see what it means...

What he said (as opposed to what his opponents claim he said) is actually an interesting contribution to the wider debate on whether there ARE links to race and intelligence, one that has been stifled on the grounds of political correctness for many years.

Consider the case of the Ashkenazi Jewish population. Is their intellectual prominence (described below) nothing to do with genetics? Really?

"Jews are remarkably over-represented in benchmarks of brainpower. Though never exceeding 3 percent of the American population, Jews account for 37 percent of the winners of the U.S. National Medal of Science, 25 percent of the American Nobel Prize winners in literature, 40 percent of the American Nobel Prize winners in science and economics, and so on. On the world stage, we find that 54 percent of the world chess champions have had one or two Jewish parents.

Does this mean that Jews are a nation of meinsteins? It does not. Their average IQ has been measured at 108 to 115, one-half to one standard deviation above the mean. But statisticians have long known that a moderate difference in the means of two distributions translates into a large difference at the tails. In the simplest case, if we have two groups of the same size, and the average of Group A exceeds the average of Group B by fifteen IQ points (one standard deviation), then among people with an IQ of 115 or higher the As will outnumber the Bs by a ratio of three to one, but among people with an IQ of 160 or higher the As will outnumber the Bs by a ratio of forty-two to one. Even if Group A was a fraction of the size of Group B to begin with, it would contribute a substantial proportion of the people who had the highest scores."

https://newrepublic.com/article/77727/groups-and-genes
I am currently having this same argument with someone on twitter. As I have said there, the europeans became advanced because they needed to trade and were constnatly meeting groups of other people like arabs.

In todays society, african people are only behind because of socioeconomic factors like them facing material and cultural deprivation.
2
reply
Ferrograd
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#11
Report Thread starter 1 month ago
#11
(Original post by generallee)
He isn't "literally" a Nazi really is he? I think the OP needs to look up the word literally to see what it means...

What he said (as opposed to what his opponents claim he said) is actually an interesting contribution to the wider debate on whether there ARE links to race and intelligence, one that has been stifled on the grounds of political correctness for many years.

Consider the case of the Ashkenazi Jewish population. Is their intellectual prominence (described below) nothing to do with genetics? Really?

"Jews are remarkably over-represented in benchmarks of brainpower. Though never exceeding 3 percent of the American population, Jews account for 37 percent of the winners of the U.S. National Medal of Science, 25 percent of the American Nobel Prize winners in literature, 40 percent of the American Nobel Prize winners in science and economics, and so on. On the world stage, we find that 54 percent of the world chess champions have had one or two Jewish parents.

Does this mean that Jews are a nation of meinsteins? It does not. Their average IQ has been measured at 108 to 115, one-half to one standard deviation above the mean. But statisticians have long known that a moderate difference in the means of two distributions translates into a large difference at the tails. In the simplest case, if we have two groups of the same size, and the average of Group A exceeds the average of Group B by fifteen IQ points (one standard deviation), then among people with an IQ of 115 or higher the As will outnumber the Bs by a ratio of three to one, but among people with an IQ of 160 or higher the As will outnumber the Bs by a ratio of forty-two to one. Even if Group A was a fraction of the size of Group B to begin with, it would contribute a substantial proportion of the people who had the highest scores."

https://newrepublic.com/article/77727/groups-and-genes
Jewish People are not "genetically more intelligent". It all stems from the fact that they were basically made to handle money and collect taxes in the Roman Empire as nobody else wanted to do it. They became skilled in this area as such and as a result Jewish people are often in the intellegentsia.
1
reply
LiberOfLondon
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#12
Report 1 month ago
#12
Surely the first sign should have been his love of the word ”society” and his blaming of ”society” for unplanned pregnancies.

”There is no such thing as ”society” - Baroness Margaret Thatcher, ex-Prime Minister and leader of the Tory Paryy
0
reply
nulli tertius
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#13
Report 1 month ago
#13
I think you have problems when the Daily Mail's BTL posters are to the left of you

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...w-adviser.html
1
reply
Reality Check
Badges: 22
Rep:
?
#14
Report 1 month ago
#14
(Original post by Ferrograd)
Now what does that sound like to me......
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...-a9338671.html
A moron.
0
reply
Johnny Tightlips
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#15
Report 1 month ago
#15
Even if you put his race comments aside (which are very debatable) he's said a lot of vile things that imply that even for the Tories he's too right-wing. (He's not really a Nazi though is he)

I also read somewhere that he's heavily into BDSM so he's a perfect choice for f*cking the country over :lol:
Last edited by Johnny Tightlips; 1 month ago
0
reply
Burton Bridge
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#16
Report 1 month ago
#16
Oh god :facepalm:as I keep saying, with the rate Nazi get shouted about lately we will need to come up with a new word for the actual Nazi's.

BTW he has resigned - next non story please
Last edited by Burton Bridge; 1 month ago
0
reply
NotNotBatman
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#17
Report 1 month ago
#17
Where's the constant news articles reminding us of this?
They didn't take a breath when they were making claims about Corbyn hanging around antisemites.

I mean it's not surprising since Boris Johnson, a man who has described black people as picaninnies with watermelon smiles, works with such a vile man.

But that doesn't matter because as we've seen Boris Johnson and the Tories can do whatever he wants because of apathy and the racist undertones rampant in the UK.
1
reply
Ballon D’Or
Badges: 8
Rep:
?
#18
Report 1 month ago
#18
(Original post by NotNotBatman)
Where's the constant news articles reminding us of this?
They didn't take a breath when they were making claims about Corbyn hanging around antisemites.

I mean it's not surprising since Boris Johnson, a man who has described black people as picaninnies with watermelon smiles, works with such a vile man.

But that doesn't matter because as we've seen Boris Johnson and the Tories can do whatever he wants because of apathy and the racist undertones rampant in the UK.
Couldn't have been worded better!
0
reply
Ferrograd
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#19
Report Thread starter 1 month ago
#19
I called him a "literal nazi" because the term Nazi, for better or for worse, is generally now a contempoary term for anyoen who is far right. And he goes beyond far right in my view. Antisemitic does not mean Nazi, many argue that groups like Muslims and black people are the new Jews, given the Jews have largely left Europe and now there are millions more vulnerable people to attack.
0
reply
butternut123
Badges: 11
Rep:
?
#20
Report 1 month ago
#20
This is all assuming that IQ is an accurate representation of intelligence. While, obviously, it does have some use, the fact that there are people who practice and compete for higher scores show you that it's not as fixed of a determinant as we think it is. I believe the reason for the disparity in IQ scores is likely a matter of education- people from certain ethnic groups (e.g east Asian, Jewish) place a much higher value on education, which encourages critical thinking. As the brain is something that can be developed by forming new connections, this has led me to the conclusion that people who spend more time doing intellectual activities will perform higher on IQ tests. This could explain why certain demographics that are more likely to come from a lower socio-economic background and from cultures that don't value hard work to the same extent are less educated and thus achieve lower IQ scores. I'm no neuroscientist or psychologist but I do strongly believe this to be the case.
0
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Back
to top
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

Do you think non-essential uni exams should be cancelled?

Yes, they should be cancelled altogether (214)
52.58%
No, they should still go ahead (57)
14%
They should be cancelled for everyone but final year (136)
33.42%

Watched Threads

View All