Has anyone here read this?
Yes, why?
>>17975278What did you think about?
>>17975260I have
>>17975260>Gee, forcing people from difference races and religious groups to live together caused people to self isolate and communities to disintegrate, nobody could have predicted this!
>>17975415Fuck off, retard.
>>17975439Multilculturalism is a failure.Everyone self-segrgates.Muslims live with majority Muslims.Blacks with majority blacks.Whites with majority whites.Indians with majority indians.People prefer to live around their own, so well done on creating isolated communities and destroyed social trust.
>>17975439That's the conclusion Putnam comes to in the book though.He of course handwaves it away as "okay multiracial society isn't exactly working out right now but in THE FUTURE it will" with no argument to back it up.
>>17975468Okay dad
>>17975494Lol it will work out in the future because races will be bred into a singular mutt race with no real discernable differences. This is the logical endgame of cohabitation. Eventually some start fucking each other, and no matter what over time the "whiteness" or "blackness" will be fucked out into a cappuccino brown. So yes , maybe then, when everyone looks the same, it will work. But that's a long way away.
>>17975575>a long way away
>>17975494Post the quote.
>>17975575>Lol it will work out in the future because races will be bred into a singular mutt race with no real discernable differences.This won't happen. There will remain ethnic pockets. Take South America as an example. The elites there, for the most part, only mix with light skinned people. The darker your skin, the more likely you are to be part of the underclass.Become a mutt is for the plebs, most elites will always want white/european features because they know genetics is a real thing.
>>17975260I read it. I actually took a seminar with him as an undergrad on social capital. He's a super nice guy, actually.But yeah, no shit, diversity leads to decrease social cohesion. His latest work says the same shit, from what I've read of it, and he hesitated to publish it because of the implications.
>>17975575>Lol it will work out in the future because races will be bred into a singular mutt race with no real discernable differencesWhen will this meme die? Miscegenation is incredibly uncommon, especially with Whites.
>>17975575You're so stupid that your mere existence is painful to me.
>>17975826He also published an article in the NYT that basically demonstrates that African-Americans have been doing progressively worse since the passage of the 1964 Civil Rights Act. He dresses that up with some mystical nonsense about "I" and "We," but it should be clear to anyone with sense what he actually wants to say.
>>17975819South Africa as well.Whites and blacks live separately, even after Apartheid. Very low race mixing.
>>17975843There was a British geneticist (if I recall correctly) who spent many years of his life in Africa and came to the conclusion that the project of successfully integrating them and expecting them to be like Western Europeans is basically impossible for genetic reasons and doomed to failure.There is no discenrable improve in black behaviour, anywhere in Western Europe or America, in 70 years. In fact, it is even worse now than before we pumped in billions.
>>17975843Did he give a reason for why they are doing worse?
>>17975843I think the libertarians blame the welfare state for the decreasing quality of black life since the Great Society, a la Thomas Sowell.It's funny how people can't see the forest for the trees. I was definitely in that camp as a younger man, eager to learn and ramped up to fight for what's right, but not particularly thoughtful or critical of what I was being taught. And the more time you spend in academia/the media/the mainstream, the more time your taught beliefs are reinforced in that giant echo chamber and the less capable you are at seeing what's right in front of your nose. Like Diversity clearly not being a Strength for anyone who is not ruling over a divided population.
>>17975880>I think the libertarians blame the welfare state for the decreasing quality of black life since the Great Society, a la Thomas Sowell.Which is total bullshit.The welfare state has been a massive success in Western Europe. Places like Sweden were paradise on earth before mass immigration.
>>17975893The welfare state works in those countries because they're overwhelmingly white, so the amount of freeloading is minimized. When you offer "gibs" to Africans, they're going to choose them over working hard for more money, decreasing their quality of life in the long run. It has NOT been a massive success in America because you're dealing with a very different population group.
>>17975920Proving my point.The problem isn't the welfare state, but the genetic makeup of black Africans.
>>17975866>>17975880The trouble with this idea is that there were discernible improvements in the state of African-Americans before that. They just stopped and began to reverse with the 1964 Civil Rights Act.>>17975871>some mystical nonsense about "I" and "We,"It is impossible to openly criticize the 1964 Civil Rights Act in America.>>17975920The United States does not even have a proper welfare state, so I'm not sure what you're talking about. You also have to account for the fact that the sectors in which African-Americans were predominantly employed, e.g. manufacturing, have been hollowed out, leaving behind large industrial wastelands in cities like Oakland populated by the indigent and unemployed. Also, if you look at white areas that have experienced the same hollowing out, you will see that the people there display the same proclivities in terms of dysfunctional behavior and familial breakdown.
>>17975929Ah, we're arguing the same point. My bad.Like I wrote above, people can't see the forest for the trees. Libertarians look at American failures and can't see it's because of race, not some other farcical or mythologic factor from microeconomics. Or America ranks so high in violent crime/so low in education/so high in infant mortality because of X,Y, and Z, when in reality, it's because we have 30 million Africans living in our country.Everything makes more sense once you start looking at the world via the lens of race.
>>17975952The same patterns exist everywhere, even with different dynamics.Blacks>underachieve>cause disproportionate crime>low economic activityDude, you can go look at papers published by African professors, tenured ones, and it's stuff you'd write in undergrad.
>>17975986That doesn't sound right to me. African-American families were more stable than white families up until the 1960s or so, and every city had a thriving black business district, for instance. What we are dealing with is not race, but bad government.
>>17975952>The trouble with this idea is that there were discernible improvements in the state of African-Americans before that. They just stopped and began to reverse with the 1964 Civil Rights Act.I'm saying that is the libertarian argument: black were making improvements UNTIL the welfare state, which reversed that progress.>The United States does not even have a proper welfare stateIt might not be as developed as Europe's, but it certainly is a welfare state, picrel. And you're absolutely correct, "industrial wastelands" lead to indigence, no matter the race involved. I'm not sure what your point is, though. Are you arguing that race is not important in how people respond to economic depression? Please clarify.
>>17976004Ok, I see what you're arguing. Ignore my "please clarify" from >>17976013Bad government affects whites, blacks, whoever, absolutely man. But the less capable a population is, the harder they're going to get hit by downturns, simple as. If you're trying to argue that blacks and whites are equally capable, that might be outside the purview of this thread.
>>17975260Yes, many years ago, and incidentally I had bowled alone before even knowing about the book and it freaked me out.
>>17975920>It has NOT been a massive success in America because you're dealing with a very different population group.Imagine thinking you have a welfare state in America when you don't even have basic healthcare.
>>17975986I can find papers published by White professors, tenured ones, and it's stuff you'd write in undergrad. Retards with successful careers is not a race-blind phenomenon.
>>17975260Yeah I used it as a backdrop to quantitative analysis in humanities regarding trust once.
>>17975952>Also, if you look at white areas that have experienced the same hollowing out, you will see that the people there display the same proclivities in terms of dysfunctional behavior and familial breakdown.Yes, but to a much lesser degree. Please don't pretend that impoverished white & black areas are comparable in terms of crime and single motherhood... We all know they aren't.
>>17976295>Imagine thinking you have a welfare state in America when you don't even have basic healthcare.Imagine trying to implement universal healthcare in America, picrel.
>>17976344>whites make nonwhites takewhy are you proud of being a wagecuck, whiteboi?
>>17976376Does not matter if they're proud or not of their class, the reality is as plain as black looters and teenapers.
>>17976376Hello, Juden. I'm proud to belong to the only race that has ever produced anything of benefit to the planet.
>>17976408The Chinese and Middle eastern races did pretty good desu.
>>17976426Certainly more than Africans or Jews, to be sure. But instead of typing all this out, I'll copypasta some shit I wrote in another /lit/ thread a few weeks ago:>Again, IQ is an imperfect measure of overall mental ability. And mental ability is not the only measure of "worth," no matter how you define it. Let's compare and contrast Europeans, Jews, and Asians. East Asians score higher on IQ tests than whites. One could take this as being "smarter" than we are. They do better on average than we do in our own economies, having higher average incomes, higher levels of education, etc. But what have they invented? What have they created? Gunpowder 1000 years ago that they never put to use? They have taken technology developed by westerners and transformed their countries with it, raising their standards of living and even making relatively minor technological advancements themselves. But they are responsible for very little innovation overall. It was Europeans that developed the math and science (and the transmission of this knowledge over centuries and spans of geography!) that led to the mind boggling innovations in communications (radio, television, telephones, computers, the internet), medicine (antibiotics, prosthetics, robotics, even basic sanitation procedures and surgery), transportation (trains, planes, and automobiles), name it brother. The east Asians have adopted our technology remarkably well, but have developed very little of it themselves. They generally lack some sort of creative spark that is more common in our genotype, something that causes innovation and not merely adoption. Hence their stereotype as "bugmen" or highly functioning robots: they can learn the rules and play the game well, but do very little thinking outside the box. Jews also outperform whites pretty drastically. Without getting into /pol/tier bullshit, Jews are highly successful in western nations. Like Asians, they do better in most intelligence/economic metrics than we do. But a cursory examination of Jewish history shows their defining peculiarity: they are a people in diaspora. The majority of Jews have spent the majority of history outside of their Jewish homeland. Even when "given the chance to return," as now and under Darius, half/most choose to stay in other lands, enjoying their success in America/Babylon/wherever. Being highly successful in their host countries, they have little incentive to return to their own home, where they have failed time and time again to thrive and create a "Jewish civilization." Instead of building a great nation of their own people, Jews tend to live in nations built by others, and tend to rise to the top of the economic/power ladders in these countries. Hence their stereotype as "parasites" than must live off a host nation.
>>17976453I also imagine that we (whites) evolved to have higher levels of trust and social cohesion (to bring the conversation back to OPs book) due to environmental factors: cooperation and trust are more necessary to populations evolving in harsher conditions, such as Europe and other northern climates, than those evolving in "softer," more lush conditions with less stringent survival requirements.
>>17975575>will be bredBy whom?
>>17976499Well, China and the middle east also have some pretty harsh climates that would require long term planning. It's not a mistake that agriculture emerged there first.Many black Africans don't even need to farm to get food, there was so much eatable stuff constantly available. Not so much in Iraq or China.
>>17976611Oh yeah man, I'm not saying all non-whites are worthless. Hell man, Jazz is a fucking unbelievable contribution to world culture, even Africans have done SOME good. And obviously, there are smart and good men in every race. That doesn't mean we can all be smooshed together in a society and continue to live normal, natural lives.https://www.bartleby.com/246/1129.html
