2010 September 27 Monday
Learning By Your Kid Getting Beaten Up

Some people are so thick they only start to get a clue when their kid gets beaten up repeatedly. Now this Danish lady has had her faith in multiculturalism beaten out of her kid. But she can't think her way out of her mental box.

She mentions several other frustrating examples of how immigrants donít live up to Danish standards ó like throwing rubbish in the street and noisy behaviour.

ďYou have to watch your mouth, though. I donít want to be accused of being a racist. But I live in a neighbourhood with a problematic mixture of inhabitants. There are ghettos in a lot of ways. When I get annoyed at young people running around and causing trouble I tell myself that it is not because they are immigrants. Iím annoyed by them because they cause trouble. But at the same time I have to say that 90 percent of the people who frustrate me because they donít behave decently, Ö they are not Danes. Iím not annoyed by them because they are not Danes, but because they donít behave like decent people.Ē

It is not because they are immigrants. But they are not Danes.

I think when we find ways to make our lives easy we should just maintain our lives and our societies in ways that make our lives better and seek to avoid changes that will mess up our lives. Unfortunately this view makes me a statistical outlier.

Share |      By Randall Parker at 2010 September 27 09:53 PM  Immigration Societal Decay

Mthson said at September 27, 2010 11:58 PM:

Their kids getting beaten up... that's what soft people get for engineering over the last 70 years the decline of the greatest civilization in human history.

James said at September 28, 2010 5:34 AM:

Last year we went to amusement park just outside Copenhagen called Bakken. What was striking was the absence of shall we say, old Danes. There were more immigrants there than native born Danes. I guess this is fine if this is want Danes want. A bad person would call this suicide.

eujin said at September 28, 2010 6:50 AM:

I used to live in Copenhagen in Denmark. I used to do most of my shopping at places run by immigrants. There were some stores run by Danes but they were almost always closed. I think they only opened for thirty hours a week or so while I was at work and never on weekends. I once managed to get in to a store run by Danes. It was a thrill to finally get inside, but there was nothing in there I wanted to buy. The shops and restaurants run by immigrants were open until late at night which was very convenient for me. The restaurants run by Danes were very expensive too. Not all native born Danes were like this though. I found a barber who could cut my hair and he did it very cheaply. He was a nice old man but he's probably retired by now.

Some of my Danish friends didn't like to go to Bakken even when it was full of old Danes, because they said it was very low class native born Danes who went there, mainly manual workers and their families.

eujin said at September 28, 2010 7:03 AM:

Oh addendum, the most expensive restaurant in Copenhagen (opened after I left) is Noma. It's almost impossible to get a reservation, probably because it has two Michelin stars and was voted best restaurant in the world by some UK magazine. I tried to get a reservation there this past summer to celebrate my friend getting her PhD but it was closed all summer. The owner is the son of a muslim immigrant. Not all restaurants run by immigrants in Copenhagen are cheap and open at convenient times.

James Bowery said at September 28, 2010 8:50 AM:

Eujin, if only Muslims had settled the new world instead of those perfidious alboins like the Wright Brothers and Henry Ford, we might have much better stores and restaurants!

Virtually Anonymous said at September 28, 2010 8:59 AM:

Think of it as evolution in action ... the selection effects are massive :-)

She is proving that morons like her do not deserve to leave descendants.

Abelard Lindsey said at September 28, 2010 9:54 AM:

I've been to Europe a few times for business. My understanding is that it is a much more socialistic economy than the U.S. and, by nature of that, Europe does not have the small to medium sized business culture that creates the bulk of jobs in the U.S. I have also heard that relatively high unemployment has been common in much of Europe since around 1980. Why did Europe take in these immigrants when there was not the economic and job growth to provide opportunities for them? What kind of work do these people do?

Andrew Neather said at September 28, 2010 11:16 AM:

MOST of the 3rd worlders in Denmark don't actually work at all, and haven't done so for generations.THey rely on taxpayer funded welfare.So much for that stupid, dumb-ass liar above 'Eujin' (who is almost certainly a 3rd world invader of Europe himself#.
In fact it's been oficially claculated that each 3rd worlder costs the dAnish taxpayer no less than 300,000 Euros in subsidy over a lifetime, as they are so economically useless, nay destructive.
When you multiply this enormous sum by the hunderds of thousans of 3rd worlders foisted upon the poor Danes, then you get some pretty mind-bogglingly astronomical sums - and the words 'Economic Madness!' screaming at you.
At long last the Danes have awoken from their slimber and voted for DPP #Danish People's party#, that will hopefully start clearing the trash out.
They've already stamped on the nasty paki practice of importing spouses ad infinitum, thereby bolstering immigrant ethnic genetic interest.

Mike said at September 28, 2010 2:02 PM:

In addition to the fact that de-industiralisation has made working class third world immigrants a liability, westerners seem to forget that stores and restaurants don't create wealth, they only recycle wealth made in other areas of the economy. As Marx put it, all wealth comes from production.

Even if immigrants do work very hard and have nice stores and restaurants, and this only applies to some immigrant groups like middle class indians, this doesn't necessarily do much for the economy. In fact to the extent that third world immigration improves the service economy it probably makes the overall economy worse, as it increases the temptation for spent thrift whites to spend money rather than save it.

In New Zealand, I've noticed that we had a crap service economy in the 1960s when we were one of the West's richest countries with a virtually non-existent level of unemployment and a high savings rate. Now it has a excellent service economy with plenty of great restaurants, but not enough people who can afford to make use of them.

Jehu said at September 28, 2010 4:32 PM:

Hopefully her son will learn to be an extreme racist like myself--i.e., he'll learn that it's ok to stand up for his group interests as a white Euro Dane, and that anyone who says otherwise is his enemy. Hopefully he'll also learn from his Moslem assailants the practice of taqiyya until the time comes to stick the shiv into his elite overlords.

no i don't said at September 30, 2010 1:53 PM:

I think this is more a matter of adolescence and social class than about race.

I'm generalising of course, 'cause I mean, there are also lots and lots of noisy and agressve white adults all over the world, specially the white trash, white collar and rednecks of the U.S. who live on shouting in restaurants, fighting in bars, shaking the ground on their super loud Harley bikes, narcissit high-school coaches, kick-ass marines shouting "on the ground!!" to people who don't even speak English, airport security chubby clowns shouting "next!!!" when you are just setting foot in the country, etc, etc, etc. Blacks in the U.S. have learnt to be loud from the whites, cause black Africans are a little more sober and educated.

So I really think Jehu is kind of dumb and maybe a little affraid. I would never dare say what race is the quietest, but it seems to me that the red Native American Indians would come very close.

Kudzu Bob said at September 30, 2010 2:47 PM:

"Blacks in the U.S. have learnt to be loud from the whites"

American blacks learned to be louder than American whites are from American whites. Got it.

Do you get called stupid a lot?

Jehu said at September 30, 2010 4:54 PM:

Poor and lower middle class white Danes form gangs and regularly attack with 10:1 numerical superiority? Not in this reality, although perhaps they'll need to in the future. See, ethnic cleansing an area is a team sport and most white people don't understand that, or maybe they do but are afraid of the social fallout from revealing the fact they they do get it.
I make no bones about the fact that I'm concerned---even 'afraid'---of the consequences of what may happen if my group loses demographic hegemony. History has shown it's rarely pretty. So I don't give a damn if you call me a racist or evil, or what have you. I'll call you something far more meaningful, my enemy.

Kudzu Bob said at September 30, 2010 5:39 PM:

Jehu, the American political activist Bob Whitaker has what he calls "the Mantra," a handy and surprisingly effective rebuttal to charges of racism:

"In your opinion, I'm a racist. You're just calling me that because I'm White. Anti-racist is a codeword for anti-White."

There is more to his Mantra, but the above is the part most relevant to this thread. Other useful stuff here for use in discussions related to race. If the Mantra ever catches on, it could make a real difference in our ongoing political and cultural struggle.

Jehu said at September 30, 2010 8:31 PM:

I personally prefer not to dispute the term racist and/or whether I am one. I don't control the cultural battlespace, nor do I expect to any time soon. What I do control, assuming I know the person in question and that they need the relationship with me more than vice versa, is the social battlespace, and going on the attack is more my natural mode anyway. I simply inform them that I don't care what they call me, but if they insist on working against me defending the interests of me and mine (and I've got a really, really cute little redheaded boy to represent the 'mine' part of that) that they will become my enemy and should expect no consideration from me in the future at least until they reconsider the position. Basically social blackmail---the left has been doing this for at least a century, and I'm not unwilling to totally write people off on the basis of something I consider existential. Once the frame is back to me, THEN, I'm willing to point out that I'm merely doing what that EVERY OTHER ethnicity has been doing since the dawn of history. If I'm feeling particularly sadistic, I'll point out the hypocrisy inherent in their entire lifestyle, but usually I'm not feeling that unkind.

Mthson said at September 30, 2010 10:35 PM:

Kudzu Bob & Jehu,

I find it works best to beat them by being more reasonable than them. Don't take things so seriously... things are, after all, out of our control. At worst, society declines but rationalists still do fine for themselves.

Kudzu Bob said at September 30, 2010 10:50 PM:

Mthson, people don't choose their politics for rational reasons, so your strategy is a non-starter.

Still, good luck with the whole doing-fine-for-yourself thing while the ship you're on sinks. I'm sure it will be fun until the water starts lapping at your ankles.

Mthson said at October 1, 2010 2:43 AM:

Kudzu Bob,

That's fine that most humans don't choose their politics and thoughts for rational reasons. That's what allows rationalists to outcompete them.

Kudzu Bob said at October 1, 2010 4:14 AM:

Mthson, aren't you the intellectual giant who recently argued for free trade because it would be in "the best interest of everyone except the portion of 1st-worlders who are sub-100 IQ," entirely unaware that you put forth impoverishing half the population as some sort of brilliant public policy? When it comes to my contention that people don't choose their politics for rational reasons, you serve as Exhibit A.

Engineer-Poet said at October 1, 2010 6:47 AM:

I'm with Steve Sailer:  we should be looking out for the interests of our citizens who have sub-100 IQs.

One of their interests is having a society which can afford to look out for them, implying that they have an interest in having children whose IQs are higher than theirs... as do the rest of us.

Another interest is not having dumb, violent or hostile immigrants brought in to compete with them.  Close the border!

Jehu said at October 1, 2010 9:12 AM:

I've got a little redheaded toddler who has interests that are paramount to me. In addition, I've a little girl that is negative 6 weeks old. Her interests are also paramount. Lastly, I have another child or two who are as yet notional. Their interests are also incredibly important to me. Looking ahead, as my wife and I both have the future time orientation levels commensurate with our overall level of intelligence, we also have a large number of grandchildren and great-grandchildren who have interests that are vital to us (particularly as we're a homeschool family, and such families enjoy a substantially enhanced total fertility rate). Very clear majorities of the population support my position, albeit they won't state it so transparently. The task therefore is building enough anger among the non-elite that they're willing to tell the elite to their face that they are traitors and they need to surrender this issue or face its resolution by 'other means'. Struggles like this are necessarily ugly, but my side does in fact have the numbers, but not the will to use them. I'm working to give them the will to use them by spreading my memes regardless of the costs to relationships or social cohesion. Think of a game of soccer for the all important goods of position in the status hierarchy and demographic hegemony. The referees only call 'hands' penalties on the red team, and the blue team cheats all it pleases without the referee calling them on it, except in a few egregious cases. If the stakes of the game are high enough, the red team will have to change the mode of the conflict, perhaps from soccer to something more akin to 'urban brawl'.

Mthson said at October 1, 2010 2:19 PM:

Kudzo Bob,
We only have so many lower class whites today because they've been rapidly breeding for generations. Just because a semi-illiterate person has 7 dysgenic offspring, why would you and I suddenly be personally responsible for them?

Giving dysgenic people charity so they can spend their lives watching sports and trash TV shows, collecting STDs, drinking, and basically doing everything except thinking and being productive in the modern world seems counter-productive.

That's good to hear you're raising a large, home-schooled family. I hope to do that as well in the future.

Jehu said at October 1, 2010 4:26 PM:

Bob no doubt recognizes that regardless of whether you feel responsible for the present lower class Americans (and unless I infer Bob's position inaccurately, he's probably referring most prominently to lower class Black Americans, who have had their levels of employment rather devastated by the tidal wave of illegal and legal immigration, as well as lower class White Americans), you're stuck in the same democracy with them. If you create a circumstance where they have dismal prospects when they 'play by the rules', insofar as their endowments and temperments permit, you shouldn't be too terribly surprised when they reliably vote for leftist politicians that present a long range existential threat to you and yours. That said, I'm strongly against the redistribution of total fertility within our country---i.e., I'm strongly against asking one group to subsidize the multiplication of another group, particularly if it comes at the expense of their own. Any sort of public assistance ought to come with various strings of that sort---don't like the strings, convince a real person---preferably of your own group, like a pastor of your church or the like to help you. No doubt he'll have words as to your habits (the Mormons btw do a really good job of this---they're so heretical that they're a totally different religion, like Islam, but their orthopraxis is solid).

If you eliminate incentives to behave irresponsibly and shut the taps almost completely on illegal & legal immigration, the lower class will improve. Blacks in the US, for instance, as recently as the 1960s had legitimacy rates that topped 75%. The welfare state plus opening the floodgates of immigration has really done a number on the American Family. Doing so will also start to raise the sexual market value of the provider archetype back towards what persisted for most of US history.

Kudzu Bob said at October 1, 2010 4:59 PM:

Jehu got it exactly right. Even if you lack the decency to give a rat's ass about the left half of the Bell Curve, Mthson, you at least ought to be smart enough to see that if you don't manage to create a place for them in society, then eventually they'll elect some left-wing nutjob that makes Obama look like Ludwig Von Mises to the White House and he'll confiscate every penny you've got. Or maybe a mob of jobless proles will decide to eliminate the middleman and simlply drag you screaming out of your shiny new Japanese luxury car and tear you to pieces. But apparently you're too busy preening over how "rational" you are to think in terms of enlightened self-interest.

PS. "We only have so many lower class whites today because they've been rapidly breeding for generations. Just because a semi-illiterate person has 7 dysgenic offspring, why would you and I suddenly be personally responsible for them?"

Riiight. When's the last time you saw a family that had seven white kids in it? You and that Whiskey dude who posts on Sailer's blog ought to get together sometime: He likes to make shit up, too.

Mthson said at October 1, 2010 5:35 PM:

Kudzu Bob,
Yes, it's good to maintain some stability in society, but I doubt not utilizing cheap labor, so that iPhones cost $4000 instead of $400, is the best way to build American prosperity and the future of humankind.

I did once date a Mormon who had 6 siblings other than herself. Anyway, I doubt anyone disputes that differential fertility rates in wealthy nations have been dysgenic since long before NAMs became one of the central societal challenges.

As a side note, since it was brought up, I dislike useless luxury goods, and I think it's good to bring rationalism into discussions, even if folks have different visions of it.

It sounds like you believe the situation can be improved notably through legislation.
1. I don't doubt conservatives can come into power, similar to how they've done in the past, but I doubt they can achieve anything more than they achieved in their previous temporary claims on power.
2. Even if we had multiple conservative presidencies in a row, which seems virtually impossible, I doubt anything short of a technological re-working of human biodiversity (genetic tech, neuro tech) can notably counteract the mediocre destiny of society.

Instead of railing against elites because it's the only option we have, I think it's much more useful (for ourselves and society) to make ourselves elite.

Jehu said at October 1, 2010 7:56 PM:

The problems could in fact be substantially reduced by way of legislation, but very doubtfully through either present major party. To do what I'm talking politically, you need bona fide reactionaries, not 'conservatives' (I don't consider myself a conservative, honestly more a counter-revolutionary). More likely any improvement will result from an angry population after a hard economic and political collapse and from simply running out of other people's money. I get the impression you're holding out for the Singularity. For that to happen you need a relatively stable US until probably at least 2030 or so. To get that you seriously need Operation Wetback II and some decidedly illiberal measures on immigration (you can't have people having to totally disappear at the advice of the FBI over 'Draw Mohammed Day'). Should you wish to see the Singularity (and I remain agnostic as to whether we'll have one, or an 'age of failed dreams instead'), and live to rival Methesulah, your rational self-interest coincides with mine. I invite you to embrace it without being ashamed of it.

Engineer-Poet said at October 1, 2010 10:12 PM:
you seriously need ... some decidedly illiberal measures on immigration (you can't have people having to totally disappear at the advice of the FBI over 'Draw Mohammed Day').

A government which actually looked out for Americans would already have tracked the sources of the death threats.  It would be tracking their Internet and phone traffic and have their mosques already infiltrated or bugged.  A few months from the event, raids would come down in concert with wholesale revocations of US residency visas followed by immediate deportation of all non-citizens involved and prosecution of the rest.  Anyone protesting over "chilling effects" would be investigated in decidedly uncomfortable ways.

This has as much chance of happening in today's PC multi-culti environment as the tissue-paper dog had of chasing the asbestos cat through Hell.

Randall Parker said at October 2, 2010 9:53 AM:


If rationalists are a declining portion of the population I have a hard time seeing how they will avoid being affected in a variety of undesirable ways. The quality of voters will decline. Society will splinter into lots of groups who feel no sense of obligation to society as a whole and therefore we'll have less volunteer efforts to investigate governments and fix problems. We'll have more Robin Hood voting. We'll have more destructive policies because fewer people will be able to recognize the harm from bad policies.

The idea that all this stuff can go wrong and yet you'll be unaffected is laughable. You'd have to be really rich to insulate yourself from so much dysfunction. Or you'd need to emigrate.

Kudzu Bob said at October 2, 2010 11:38 AM:

Mthson obviously plans to get himself re-engineered into an immortal Transhumanist supergenius and move to a space colony so that he can exist outside time. Custer also had a plan.

no i don't said at October 2, 2010 3:16 PM:

"Do you get called stupid a lot?"

Ha, ha, ha... projections so soon?

Or are you simply going to try and complete a full idea?

no i don't said at October 2, 2010 3:27 PM:

"Mthson obviously plans to get himself re-engineered into an immortal Transhumanist supergenius and move to a space colony so that he can exist outside time. Custer also had a plan."

What is this?? Yet another middle schooler playing with his laptop.

C'mon Kudzu, time to clean up your room, gather your toys and do your homework...

Mthson said at October 2, 2010 3:34 PM:

Regarding the singularity, reprogenetics is all we need to re-work human biodiversity. The timeframe for reprogenetics seems much more concrete (http://www.futurepundit.com/archives/007346.html), whereas the timeframe for AI revolutionizing society (the singularity) seems very difficult to predict. Thank you for the invitation.

Yes, restricting immigration is clearly a net gain. I'm also putting emphasis on:
1. Using our intelligence to better our own situation instead of relying on a society that will have a mediocre destiny until we re-work human biodiversity.
2. Keeping an eye on reprogenetics as the only real solution to society's dysgenic problem, of which the immigration/NAM problem is only one part. (And I think Engineer-Poet previously made a good point that this is also very humanitarian.)

Thanks for the discussions.

Jehu said at October 2, 2010 8:35 PM:

Let's say, come 2020, a pill is developed that a pregnant woman can take in the first week that will substantially upgrade the genetic potential of her child---say by adding an average of a standard deviation to all commonly quantified attributes that are substantially heritable. You still have to keep stable till around 2040 for them to begin to have a significant impact on advancing your society. Frankly, you're better off hoping for benevolent AI overlords---the timeframe of them acting could be substantially sooner. I think 2020 for such a pill is hyper optimistic also, plus you have the biological and social fact that people want children that are spawned of them, which makes this sort of protocol a tough sell even if you have it in the form of an easy to take pill. More likely you'll have something in very crude alpha around 2025 or so wherein you use a variant of preimplantation genetic diagnosis to select which of a few tens of potential children you could implant that has the best genetic odds (by interrogating a number of sperm and eggs in the prospective parents). It'll probably be done in some place like Singapore or China though, the opposition to germline manipulation is pretty strong here, although it'll collapse because it is unstable against successful defectors once the technology proves itself. So as you can see, even a really optimistic take on the Singularity leaves your rational self and group interest in line with me. Embrace it.

Randall Parker said at October 2, 2010 9:47 PM:


I do not see reprogenetics making a big impact on quality of life for 25+ years. Here's why:

- First we have to discover a large fraction of the many genes that influence intelligence, personality attributes, and other cognitive attributes.

- Then genetic tests of embryos have to be developed and, quite possibly, approved by the FDA.

- Then a substantial fraction of those making babies have got to opt for IVF with embryo selection guided by genetic testing.

- Then we've got to wait 25 years for the kids to develop to the point where they get trained, enter the labor market, and start making a real economic impact.

Therefore I do not see a bottoming out of US labor market quality until 2040 at the earliest. We are on a long trip down.


A drug that boosts intelligence of developing fetuses would face enormous (perhaps ginormous - a combination of gigantic and enormous) scientific and regulatory obstacles before coming to market. I expect IVF with pre-implantation genetic testing for embryo selection to happen decades sooner.

Kudzu Bob,

I would really like to have a way to put myself in stasis until rejuvenation therapies become available.

Kudzu Bob said at October 3, 2010 12:14 AM:

"I would really like to have a way to put myself in stasis until rejuvenation therapies become available."

Then I would suggest reading any of New York Times columnist Thomas Friedman's books. By the second chapter you will be in a stupor so profound that only the advanced science of distant futurity could ever revivify you.

Jehu said at October 3, 2010 2:10 PM:

Indeed they would face enormous obstacles. My scenario is out on the at least 3 or 4 sigmas levels of optimism, and it STILL requires stability until 2040 at minimum (probably 2050 honestly, because 20 year olds aren't usually the center of mass of your society, even if they are superior). On the obstacles though, I think they'd disintegrate fairly fast---probably in no more than 10 or 15 years, as soon as it became clear that defecting from the cartel agreement on using genetic enhancement was very advantageous. That's why performance enhancing drugs are so common in high level competition after all.

Randall Parker said at October 3, 2010 2:54 PM:


I'm saying the decline stops around the time the smarter kids hit 25, not that there's a big improvement at that point. So I think we are pretty close in our positions.

Other ways we could in theory slow the descent:

- Rejuvenation therapies that would keep smarter people functional longer. Brain rejuv would really help a lot.

- Economic incentives for dummies to delay procreation and smarties to have more kids. I suspect it is easier to use incentives to delay than to increase procreation.

- A radical shift in immigration policy in favor of smarties and against dummies.

I expect the publishing of detailed results showing which genes influence IQ will cause a shaking up of the political landscape. But it is not clear to me that the shaking will be profound enough to alter our course. I expect we'll know a great deal by 2015 about the genes that influence IQ. At that point IVF with embryo selection could become eugenic if the genetic tests are allowed to be available.

Post a comment
Name (not anon or anonymous):
Email Address:
Remember info?

Web parapundit.com
Go Read More Posts On ParaPundit
Site Traffic Info
The contents of this site are copyright ©