Bloody shovel

Don't call it a spade

The Dunning-Krueger Spring

While I am what you could call the bookish type, I am not an academic. I lived among academics for some time but I never felt at ease in that culture. That tendency they have to make easy things sound so difficult. The funniest academic concept is the Dunning-Krueger effect. At first I thought it was some awesome intellectual breakthrough, like the Doppler effect or the Westermarck effect.  It must be double awesome because it took two academics to discover it! But of course the Dunning-Krueger effect is simply the academic way of saying the intemporal truism that stupid people are so stupid they don’t realise how stupid they are.

The DKE is bad as it is with individuals, and the illusion of equality democracy brought has made it much worse. Even the dumbest prole might understand after 40 years of failing that some people are smarter than he is, capable of doing things he is not. But our government propaganda is day and night telling him how everyone is equal and has the same rights. Well if we are equal when why do I suck while others don’t? Confusion ensues.

Now imagine that at the nation level. I was having dinner a while ago with a friend who goes often for business in the Middle East, knows the place well. I asked him about the political situation, with the Arab Spring and all that. He told me about Egypt. ‘Oh, it’s a mess’ he said. Business routinely stopped by new authorities shutting down anyone who dealt with the old regime, their owners arrested and jailed.  The cynical reactionary that I am, I asked him if my hunch about the opposition being just a bunch of astroturf groups bankrolled by Cathedral QUANGOs was right. To my surprise he told me no, people really wanted Mubarak out, the genuinely wanted regime change. Probably the start of the revolution was staged, but once it reached a critical mass everyone was out and joined it, at least in the cities.

But what do the people want? Egypt during Mubarak rule was a horrible basketcase, no doubt about that. Mubarak and his army cronies just ran a typical kleptocracy while the people kept breeding and breeding till they got the present 80 million peasants in the 30.000 sqm around the Nile. But what do the Egyptians think they are going to achieve by overthrowing Mubarak? Let’s face it, Egypt is a basketcase because Egyptians are stupid. And no possible form of government is going to change that.

My friend told me that young people in Egypt are all convinced that Egypt in the days of Anwar Saddat was earthly paradise, the people were cultured, modern yet devout to Allah, the economy was booming and the people were well fed. All changed when Sauron Mubarak came and Egypt, the natural leader of the Arab World, decayed into the hellhole it is today. And now that Mubarak is gone Egypt will again flourish and captivate the world. Next thing you know they are building pyramids.

I feel sorry for this people. It’s sad because they believe our bullshit, and they try to be like us, but it never works out. We are fueling their delusion, supporting them in their heroic endeavour in self-improvement. But they won’t improve. They can’t improve, not until a ruthless military commander puts some discipline in them by endless drilling. But it won’t happen, if it did, they wouldn’t like it, and even if they did, it wouldn’t amount to much. Egypt and all the neighbourhood is screwed. Instead of pushing them into trying to be like us, it would be more humane to let them be the chaotic hellhole they deserve, falling back into mindless following of Sharia. That they can do properly, and they can justify their lack of economic performance by rationalising it as “we focus in what really matters”.

I wonder if HBD could be a good sell with muslims. Yes, humans have biological constraints. Yes we are smarter than you are. But think about it. Allah made you stupid so you would not get uppity and betray him. You were made dumb so you would still love him and follow his law. Blessed are the retards because they will get the huris.


8 responses to “The Dunning-Krueger Spring

  1. asdf July 18, 2012 at 12:38

    Monogomy is a real key. When your guaranteed a wife, it isn’t the end of the world if you admit you aren’t elite. But when elites get all the pussy damn if your going to admit your second class genes.

    • spandrell July 18, 2012 at 14:37

      But it’s the end of the world for your wife if you admit your second class genes.
      Once the word spreads out that there are genes of various classes, how are women going to react?

      • asdf July 18, 2012 at 16:56

        Peasents have peasent wives. Nobles have noble wives. Women make the best of the situation they have. If being the third wife of a noble isn’t an option they will accept being the first wife of a peasent.

        Monogomy was a pact between alpha men and beta men to share pussy in exchange for beta labor. Betas admitted they were betas, didn’t challenge the alphas, and helped them built capital in exchange for a share of the pussy. Women accepted the deal because they didn’t have a say, and then did the best they could and learned to love it (women can love the guy that killed her husband and raped her, they are very adaptable. they learn to love what they’ve got, so long as they don’t think they can do better).

        • spandrell July 18, 2012 at 20:36

          Monogamy as a pact is like a country as a social contract. Didn’t happen.

          Peasant women married peasants because their ingroup was peasants, and they didn’t have the option to marry into a higher class. And they didn’t know that their men were genetically inferior to the upper classes, which made it bloody likely that their children would also never amount to much.

          We know now that. You think women are going to be happy with a peasant husband? No amount of game would work if HBD goes public.

          • asdf July 18, 2012 at 20:57

            Monogomy was enforced by the church and the state. Sounds like a pact to me. In places where there are no social norms enforcing monogomy it doesn’t happen naturally.

            Peasent women could be the concubines of nobles, which would be better then being married to a peasent. The Chinese Emporer had thousands of concubines and cut off the dicks of any man around him. By contrast Henry VIII had to invent a church just to remarry.

            Peasent kids became peasents. Women have always wanted their kids to come from nobility. Even bastard noble is better then peasent kid.

            • spandrell July 20, 2012 at 18:26

              Yes of course women were forced into monogamy.
              But even then they could fool themselves by saying they’d have awesome children with their useless husband.
              Now they can’t, so it would be a little harder to force them into marrying chumps.

  2. namae nanka July 26, 2012 at 15:32

    “Monogomy was enforced by the church and the state. ”

    and once women make up the state…

    “Children will, of course, be the greatest gift possible to the State, and the woman who produces them will provided for, protected, and honoured. After all, this is a question of education.”

    “My body my choice” is already the removal of “right of reproduction” from men as a class.

  3. namae nanka July 26, 2012 at 15:33

    “state and the church”

Please comment

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s