为什么我认为盎格鲁锡安集团有对东亚人和东欧人进行种族清洗的别有用心

当然,我又受了一点那个ChinaSuperpower之评论的影响,尤其是

I was born in Taiwan in a WSR family and grew up in the West. Growing up, I finally realized that whites intend to do genocide on East Asians and KMT are collaborators in that agenda. Including my own parents — they are traitors and collaborators too.

After finishing my last degree, due to total disgust with the West and my traitor family, I reverse emigrated and worked in mainland China. It’s been 10 years now. The agenda to do genocide against East Asians (starting with Chinese) is very much alive. KMT is a part of the agenda. DPP is part of the agenda. The only people fighting against the agenda are the leftist CPP! Not even the pro-reform rightist faction of CPP. They are a part of the problem.

For us, the leader against Western imperialism is Chairman Mao!

Today, we have Chairman Xi, who is doing a pretty good job too. The struggle is real and it is literally a life-or-death struggle for the East Asian race versus the Anglo race. To defend ourselves, we are willing to nuke anybody who gets in our way!

此翻译成中文为

我出生在台湾外省人家庭而在西方长大。长大的过程中,我终于意识到白人意图对东亚人进行种族灭绝而且国民党是合作与此。包括我自己的父母,他们也是叛徒及合作者。

读完学位以后,出于对西方和我叛变家庭的彻底厌恶,我返移民了,并且在中国大陆工作了。十年已过。 对东亚人(从中国人开始)进行种族灭绝的意图依然活活存在。国民党属于它。民进党也属于它。与此斗争的唯有中国共产党左翼!连中国共产党的改革右派都不算,他们是问题的一部分。

对我们,反西方帝国主义的领导是毛主席!

今天,我们有习主席,他也做的挺好。斗争是真实的,是原原本本东亚民族与盎格鲁民族你死我活的斗争。为了保卫自己,我们愿意核杀任何阻挡我们的人!

不用说,他说的有点情绪化,但是方向完全正确。为什么会这样?首先,盎格鲁民族骨子里就是自我优越主义占领他人土地清洗他人妄想称霸世界的民族,锡安主义者一样,是盎格鲁民族自然的盟友,而且盎格鲁世界好多一直被锡安主义控制了。针对东亚人和东欧人是因为这些是最有实力阻止盎格鲁锡安霸权世界的两大异类民族。说起异类,盎格鲁人不把东欧人当做纯粹的白人看,很多因为他们曾被蒙古人和鞑靼人征服过而留下一些所谓东方人的血统,也有一定的文化差异。东欧人是不西不东的,虽然好多特别想成为西方人,但是西方主流看来并不完全接受他们。

沙皇时代我不太清楚,反正俄罗斯帝国与西方列强也是不友好竞争对手,但是很明显看到从苏联建国以来,盎格鲁世界对其敌视入骨,试图各种方式导致其崩溃。一旦机会来了,美国为主得盎格鲁世界利用俄罗斯如戈尔巴乔夫和叶利钦的内奸将俄罗斯一点不留情的瓦解和毁坏。下面是我为苏联解体后俄罗斯的人口数据。


我们可以看到1992年到2006十五年的时间段,一直每年死亡率在1.5%左右,而每年出生率仅1.0%左右,那就是每年失去0.5%。而直到2013年出生数才与死亡数平衡,加起来死亡的比出生的多了1300余万,接近1992年人口的10%。当然,也可以看到实际人口减少的是少其一半多的500多万,那也只能说明前苏联其他地方被西方搞得比俄罗斯还差,好多人不得不跑的俄罗斯去。

盎格鲁媒体整天宣传斯大林时代死了多少人,最高的估计好像是来自于亚历山大·伊萨耶维奇·索尔仁尼琴的6000万,当时苏联也就2亿人,那还得了啊。比较靠谱的估计,就是大清洗在残酷也不可能超过100万人,你知道判死刑那么多人是什么概念吗?那代苏联人的确死的很多,但大多出于与纳粹德国的战争,应该归咎于希特勒而非斯大林。苏联和纳粹德国那场战争是人类最大规模的,最毁灭性的战争,苏联失去了他的人口的百分之十以上,德国也死了好几百万兵。从上人口数据来看,可以说苏联解体后盲目采纳西方那套对俄罗斯的毁灭程度经过二十年时间都接近了第二世界大战对整个苏联的毁灭程度。从某种角度更可怕的是,西方对俄罗斯与二战不一样,这次进行了一种慢杀,如以色列对待巴勒斯坦人一样,使得危机永久性而难以得以恢复。虽然俄罗斯现在有好转了,但是已大伤元气。而这次与二战很不一样的是,俄罗斯没有得到任何大战争的胜利及来自于此的国际地位和影响力,而却白白牺牲了那么多人的生命。

同样,盎格鲁媒体也天天宣传毛泽东为大杀人犯,甚至用genocide(种族清洗)这个词形容。的确中国那三年人口有了负增长,但是总的来看,中国从1949的大约4.75亿长到了1976年的9.30亿,接近翻倍了,这还能叫“种族清洗”?这还是忽略了当时美国的经济封锁大大阻碍了中国人民的生活条件的进步的背景。

面对着像斯大林和毛泽东那样的伟大领袖所代领带领的敌对大国,他们不得不无所不用其极的在经济科技封锁的同时支持政治渗透和分裂活动,最终对苏联成功了,可是对中国没有成功,不过中国在苏联解体后对自己体质的自信也面临了低谷。从目前美俄之间的更加对峙形势,盎格鲁锡安对待东欧的不彻底征服而不休的姿态明摆眼前。他们有把俄罗斯毁而分裂至不可挽救的地步的愿望和行动。对待中国,姿态也是一致的,此具体例子实在太多,感争议此的中国人肯定是汉奸,是美国对中国政治渗透及分裂所利用的工具,在中国整掉这些人将是一场你死我活的,决定民族兴亡的残酷政治斗争。

归根结底,中国现在的政治问题源于百年的落后挨打。大英帝国打进中国大门之后又支持了腐朽的满清政府对太平天国的镇压,加深了阻止中国现代化的情形。辛亥革命之后,盎格鲁世界为主得西方列强也支持了中国的军阀混战。北伐之后,它又鼓励支持了蒋介石国民党背叛民族的转向,直到共产党打下了江山才赢得真正的民族独立和主权,后又以朝鲜战争大大巩固和证实。这毫无疑问也是盎格鲁锡安对中国人恨之入骨的根源,因为中国人民选择了为民族赢得独立和尊严的共产党而没有选给他们做傀儡的国民党。

在还不到七十年的时间,中国从一穷二白的农业国成为了按某指标经济第一的,具备独立基本工业体系的世界强国,而它依然还快速发展,走进着科技的世界前沿,走向着与西方文明的全面较量。同时,中国和俄罗斯重建了密切的联系与合作,面对着咄咄逼人,杀人如麻的西方帝国主义。在这种情况下,为了保卫自己的世界地位盎格鲁锡安集团会不得不做出一切他们所能对中国人为主的东亚人和俄罗斯人为主的东欧人进行种族和文化清洗。

如何对待此现状?我的经验告诉我与帝国主义者和汉奸争论是浪费精力的,而最重要的是巩固自己,排除内奸。一定要积极学习对自己有利的外来的先进的知识和技能,但学习它必须是为了提升自己的水平,根本还是为了自己的利益,而不是为了崇洋媚外或者跟外人混在一起。据我的经验,大部分美国人和犹太人的政治立场是与中国的直接矛盾,其渗透和干扰势力必得警惕。同时,帝国主义也有它们的弱点,要抓住一切机会用自己的优点对付敌人的弱点,要学会脱离盎格鲁锡安集团为自己利益而制定的国际标准,如当年毛主席说的,你打你的,我打我的。

How East Asian males in America can attain more status and power

I read through some comments of wokeAZN on Reddit and I actually created a page where I began to collect his quotes. Of course, what he says many already know, but few will actually say, for obvious reasons. I think that yes, East Asian males really need to confront the reality and change certain flawed attitudes, and this is most easily done if the realities however unpleasant are laid bare before us.

Let me briefly list some of main points, far from inclusive.

  • the American system set up for the interest of privileged whites
  • Asian women making Asian men look like losers by marrying white men who give them a white voice on Asians via their media power
  • the bamboo ceiling set up by whites to guard against highly intelligent, hardworking, and high achieving Asians
  • big, dominant, assertive Asian men auto-triggering fragile white men on a regular basis
  • physical inferiority of Asian males
  • highly competent Asians ending up mostly working for white owners
  • Asian parents training their kids to be passive hard workers for the white man who don’t complain or fight for themselves
  • Asians not working out enough
  • The Anglo world’s having pretty much conquered the East

All this is really quite obvious to me, but maybe it isn’t to a lot of people. There is also that Asian-Americans cannot win under the current system, and how much because of that the powerful Chinese in America are mostly from China.

So naturally, if Asians in America want to go beyond where they are right now, they should try to develop more connections with powerful people from their home countries. That means they should seek out Chinese VCs with connections to important people in Chinese companies.

Here, I’ll use Asian to mean East Asian. Indians will be excluded, because they are kind of white the dark skin notwithstanding by virtue of both their appearance, their culture, and their mannerisms, as well as the bamboo ceiling not really applying to them as much. Also noteworthy is that India has already been fully conquered by the Anglo world. In some sense, they’ve already lost, whereas East Asians still have hope of creating an independent entity competitive with what the West, whites have.

I’ll start with some essential historical context. First that the Japanese shattered much of the perception of inherent white, Western supremacy. It started with the Russo-Japanese War. (By the way, Russians were conquered by the Mongols in the 13rd century, so they’re not fully white. Still, Russians are pretty white, even if the Anglo-Saxons hardly identify with them.) Then, there was how during WWII, the Japanese defeated without much difficulty the British in Hong Kong and Singapore and demonstrated their ability against America too. Even though Japan eventually lost, it was much due to their small size along with their overextension. Clearly, they were extremely formidable in a combination of their technology and fighting prowess.

Back then, it was only the Japanese who could be considered honorary whites in this sense. The Chinese were extremely backwards and weak and suffered much from Japan for this reason, and the Koreans were colonized by Japan for over 30 years. There was obviously a penalty against Japan by the white, Western powers who were too proud to treat Japan as an equal. After Japan defeated China militarily in 1895, the Western powers only felt more entitled to extract more out of China, the indignity of which culminated in the Boxer Rebellion.

To everybody’s great surprise, China stood up not long after the Japanese invaders surrendered and left. Remember how on the declaration of founding of the People’s Republic of China on October 1st 1949, Mao Zedong in front of Tiananmen Square said, “the Chinese people have stood up.” People in China who view history honestly will sort of laugh at it. Chinese back then were incompetent weaklings, so one Chinese army evicting another doesn’t really prove much. It was during the Korean War when China really stood up. It managed to do what the Japanese couldn’t, which was to defeat white, Western countries in a war. Of course, the Chinese fought using relatively primitive means, with minimal use of air force, but even so, they kicked the US led UN Army out of North Korea and maintained that position for almost 3 years, eventually pressuring the US to sign an armistice acknowledging its inability to defeat the Chinese army. I heard somewhere that after that, the Japanese would no longer refer to Chinese using the derogatory 支那.

Because of that, China could not trade with the United States and found it very difficult to trade with other Western countries. Until, China developed nuclear missiles among other things, finally forcing America to give up again.

Among ethnic Chinese who dislike the PRC, some of whom will say 反共不反华 (anti-communist but not anti-Chinese), from the historical context, they are best perceived as Chinese who are anti-Chinese in a half-closeted way. They will point to all the failures under Mao and the poverty in mainland China relative to the other East Asian countries under American patronage, but the reality is evidently that it was the Chinese communists who won the highest international position and power among Asians. Moreover, they did so in a very sustainable way, unlike Japan, which took it too far and eventually lost, losing all hope of becoming a world military power under the post WWII arrangement. Of course, Japan did scare America a bit with its cars and electronics. Their science and Nobel Prizes too, except that can’t change its status as an American, white vassal state. I guess once China becomes powerful enough, Japan may dump America and shift towards China, but that’s still a fair ways away.

So Asians indignant about the status of the group in America and internationally can best advance it by supporting China. Swallow the pride and sense of superiority inculcated under colonialism, it’s pathetic. The fact that America can get Chinese in Taiwan, Hong Kong, Singapore, and in the West to feel superior to and even utterly contemptuous their counterparts in mainland China is a sign of their surrender and lack of self-confidence. If you support America, you’ll be mostly viewed by white American elites as a useful tool to keep down their most threatening competitor. On the other hand, if you support China enough, China will eventually treat you as one of their own.

There are already very few Chinese in America rising to a position of power by virtue of the bamboo ceiling. Even if you do, you are there as a minority, and so you have much less power than a white guy in the same official position. You defeat a system by boycotting it not by hard struggle within its rigged game.

The American media and culture loves to degrade the self-confidence and self-respect of Asian men. Well, you can do what you can to ignore it. Instead, immerse yourself in some Chinese communist culture and promote it to your other Asian friends as well. For sure, that’s much better for a masculine Asian identity than what America has to offer. Learn the Chinese language well enough and develop some connections in and from China for a chance of making some career there. For as long as you’re stuck in America, do what you need to do to make a living that doesn’t harm the group interest much and outside that, maybe try to connect with some other like minded Asians to start an independent enterprise. You can also try to influence the American media, culture, and politics to your favor, and maybe try to gain more stakes in power institutions such as Hollywood too. Don’t expect too much there though, as America is a country run by whites with a white majority. In any case, if Asians as a group want to win under the current system in America, they’ll almost certainly have to gang up with money and power from China. Remember that unless you immigrated after age 18, you ended up here not by choice. So you have every right to choose not to identify with America as part of a politically marginalized minority group too different to truly assimilate. You need not let the American media and education cage your mind, and you don’t have to give a damn about what the white majority thinks as long as you can get by. Instead, feel lucky to be of the same blood as a rising superpower who you and your posterity can truly be part of and do all you can to take advantage of and contribute to it in return.

Why Chinese-Americans are hopeless as a group

Today appeared on one of my news feeds a column titled Indistinguishable Asians from the Cornell student newspaper. I won’t really bother to summarize. You can easily read it for yourself. Basically the whole Chinese-Americans are smart, hardworking, but quiet and lack leadership quality. So there are implicit quotas and differentiated standards on them in college admissions to account for the hurdles they’ll face in the workplace blah blah blah.

Chinese-Americans are a really weak group politically. They are extremely scattered too. You have first of all the immigrants and the Americanized. Even among those you have mainland Chinese, Taiwanese, Hong Kongers, etc. Moreover, there is also that the Chinese who come to America tend to be those selected for their academic ability via graduate school, not the political big fishes. Face it, nobody really wants to be led by a minority group culturally and physically very different. The few Chinese in America who are “leaders” can be roughly split into two different categories. There are those who are followed for their technical excellence and those promoted to act as a minority agent for primarily white ethnic interests. If Chinese-Americans want to seriously advance their group interest, they won’t really succeed as a minority in America. Their minority status will render them forever in a subordinate position here, unless China becomes so powerful that it manages to gain substantial indirect control over American society, which I cannot foresee happening.

As for myself, I didn’t really come here by my own choice. But I have to live with it. I can of course try to find a way to go back but it won’t be that easy. I think Chinese are best off just staying in their home country.

I find it quite sad the race problems that America is increasingly mired in now. There was already the black and Hispanic problem. Now Asian-Americans are joining in on SJW like activism too.

I hate to say it but this is a nation founded on dispossession and white supremacy. As far as dispossession is concerned, even though the pure Native-Americans have been rendered almost invisible by now, Hispanics are part Native-American blood, and there’s not going to go away. Blacks in America is a legacy of the slave trade, which whites are, face it, responsible for. There was back then another side of racism that was against slavery much for its enabling permanence of blacks in America.

It is multiracialism that has engendered in Western culture this what I would regard as a fake left liberal SJW element ever more mainstream. I guess it took root much during the Cold War when America had to make some compromises to blacks in order to not lose too much support from the formerly colonized and oppressed countries of the world. It’s fair to say that Hitler’s defeat and the rise of the Soviet Union as a superpower gradually pressured attitudes towards race in the Western world towards the opposite direction.

I once said to my white American friend how I feel sad for him that there won’t really be a place in the world of just his breed. Seriously, I’m Chinese and I want whites to have a homeland. Like, this is a real bastardization of culture.

His reaction to this was one of

I’m not super happy about this. I’d very much like a white homeland. Hell, I’d be pretty happy with a “people who moved out of Africa around 85K-50K BCE” homeland.

People work better and more efficiently with those like themselves in race, culture, language, and values. Across groups, especially ones very culturally and linguistically different, there is a high communication cost. America used to be predominantly white and Christian. The talented immigrants from Europe owing to WWII were white and easy to assimilate into mainstream American culture. Now, the ever increasing racial, cultural, and political diversity in America is becoming ever a liability. Through the Anglo language and culture, preeminent in the world today, it infects gradually to Europe as well.

Now, since this post was supposed to be on Chinese-Americans, I’ll point out that America is somewhat of a destination for Chinese who are much averse to the mainstream system and values in mainland China, which of course represents the overwhelming majority of Chinese. Yes, wishful Westerners can entertain the belief that most Chinese hate their “repressive” government but can’t do anything about it, but come on, the fact that it could come to power in the first place indicates that it won support of the majority. You only win a civil war when you’re better than the other side at getting people to fight for you. Yes, the ones who hated it who could escaped to Hong Kong, Taiwan, and Southeast Asia too. Now, those people are often not considered true Chinese by those in mainland China. They could of course gain much more for themselves by assimilating into that culture and consequently winning the trust of the mainland Chinese, but they have strong enough of their own cultural and political identity now. When it was decided that Hong Kong would return to China, many Hong Kongers immigrated to the West, with Vancouver, Canada, a notable destination of that group. Once China seizes control of Taiwan, which is pretty much inevitable, many of those die hard Taiwanese loyalists will leave as well to join more Chinese in the Anglo world where they will then experience life of a politically marginalized minority deemed unsuitable for leadership positions. The human rights liberal faction in the West will probably grant some political asylum spots, which would only contribute to more ethnic diversity and potential racial tension that they will continue to sweep under the rug. Once in the West, they may feel they are different from the other Chinese, but remember, American society views Asians as “indistinguishable.” They will still be easily be mistaken for Chinese in mainland China. And they and their children by virtue of physical difference unalterable will never truly assimilate. It’s just too bad for them that they feel so strongly politically. Their ancestors were for the most part lackeys of colonialism, and they will continue to be in America subordinated and promoted only to the extent that they are useful. It’s really quite a pitiful position to be in.

Really, overall China gets not a bad deal. They have political undesirables. Those people, if they are able to, can leave. Go to America, Canada, Australia, etc. There are, too, many ethnic Chinese in Hong Kong and Taiwan who resent mainland China and its influence on their lives. Those people will also have to either live with it or get out. How much better they will fit in in America is questionable. Certainly, they’ll add more diversity and eventually engage in some SJW behavior too, once they are indignant enough of discrimination and political invisibility. America will become even more of a racial spoils cesspool. And in some sense, China can remain “the last man standing” with its political misfits ejected out at a competitor’s irreversible expense. In case you haven’t noticed, China mostly leaves other people alone, other than to do business with them. Its political activities abroad are mostly targeted towards ethnic Chinese, hoping to keep them loyal towards the PRC as opposed to Taiwan, which it considers a domestic affair, a legacy of the unfinished civil war. Really, the only political condition that China will be adamant on when doing business with others is acceptance of Taiwan as part of China. The ideal future for China is one where there is full control of Taiwan, with those there actively anti-China out. Less trouble at home and those misfits as a minority in the West will become but more politically impotent, with the burden of dealing with them shifted to whites on the other side of the world.

A guy I know from China once told me that “ABCs are the worst off, because while they can never truly be American, they also lose their opportunity to be Chinese.” I believe he is very much right on that one. My advice to those conscious of this but stuck in America by birth or parental immigration is to learn Chinese well enough to come across as a real Chinese. You don’t have to buy the American cultural garbage. I didn’t and I managed to learn Chinese well enough, much on my own, such that I have written a fair bit on the Chinese internet, including on this blog, and can mix in easily with the real Chinese. With that, you can potentially move back to China, where your children won’t have to suffer the indignity of being part of a minority group with a grossly incoherent and confused identity. Or at the very least, you can exert a political pressure and voice in a direction that is much more likely to work than what most Chinese-Americans are doing right now. Seriously, putting pressure on American society and media to accept more of the Chinese Chinese narrative is going to be much more effective than begging under a discourse and culture designed by and for the white majority.

 

What’s wrong with the Ivy League

Very recently, a Chinese-American Yale undergrad cold emailed me expressing approval of this blog, and we not long after began to talk regularly.

A few days ago, in an email to Steve Hsu, me, and some others, he wrote:

I think the Ivy League is best understood as a giant money-making organism. Attached to it like a leech is a seminary for training priests and spreading the gospel of the American progressive religion. Attached to that leech is an even smaller leech which actually contains smart people doing good technical work. And gmachine1729 is right that the average Ivy student is not that great (but the top end does represent the best of the best).

Relatedly, I just saw an essay on Zhihu in Chinese by Yale finance professor Zhiwu Chen on the matter of 中国人那么优秀,为什么美国人还是更喜欢印度人?(Chinese are so exceptional, why do Americans still like Indians more). The essay was one of Chinese are smart and hardworking but modest, passive, conformist, filially pious per the Confucian tradition and emphasize hard skills at the expense of soft skills, while Indians, like Americans, are assertive and confident with strong leadership qualities. The comments, of which there were 27, were mostly dismissive. The first one, and the most memorable one was

你对比下毛主席和甘地还不能明白点?

In translation,

Can’t you better understand the situation by comparing Chairman Mao with Gandhi?

I’m very happy to see this. It means that Chinese are no longer dazed by Ivy League credentials. They are beginning to think more independently, to have more confidence in themselves. Maybe in another decade’s time, non-STEM professor at Ivy will become an explicit negative signal among Chinese in China.

wokeAZN

I stumbled upon the reddit by the handle wokeAZN. Guessing from his handle, he advises Asian-Americans on how to fight for equal rights. One of his main points, which I’ve long realized and written about on this blog, is that in the current system, privileged whites have no incentive to not preserve their privilege, which necessarily means depriving Asian-Americans. A representative comment on that would be

Correct. Asian-American activism as of today is entirely focused on begging the predominantly white owners to change their ways without even considering to challenge or disrupt the ruling mechanisms to begin with. Their weapons of choice are politeness, copying SJW concepts that worked for other marginalized groups and political correctness. Good luck with that.

Look at the recent Harvard and specialized NYC HS admissions controversy for example. Asians loudly speak up in droves protesting the process changes yet none of them even thought about the need to challenge and dismantle the administrations and institutions that are in charge of the admissions processes. Same goes for any activism directed towards Hollywood and the Western media etc.

This was in response to the quote:

“Nobody in the world, nobody in history, has ever gotten their freedom by appealing to the moral sense of the people who were oppressing them.”- Assata Shakur.

This is nothing but obvious to me. Reminds me of how in essence, Gandhi’s nonviolent resistance signals nothing but weakness. India’s nominal independence didn’t really liberate India. She remained at her core still a British colony. I recall how Chinese Marxist philosopher Ai Siqi (艾思奇) wrote of Gandhi’s nonviolent resistance with disdain, a fact I had commented on before in Chinese. The Chinese communists on the other hand actually won a war against America in Korea, the reason they are so despised in the West. So yes, if Chinese-Americans want equal rights in America, they should go unambiguously more in the direction of the Chinese communists. It’s not about morality; it’s about leverage. I heartily hope that Asian-Americans can stop exhibiting a form of Stockholm syndrome manifested in the form of defensiveness and attachment towards a system that treats them as second-class citizens.

I’ve written the following:

You can probably tell that I want Chinese to obtain more position of power internationally. It would make a better world. By default Chinese have less sense of entitlement which also hinders their rise to the top. I used to blindly revere the top STEM people. Now I realize that not only should you be strong technically but you should also have the political awareness of what your technical strength is going into. Who is reaping the fruits of your labor. A guy I know told me he got promoted, with the help of someone higher up, after he sort of went on strike and only then did management realize how much he was needed. See this is leverage. There are a lot of eager earnest people churning out a ton of value for the company without demanding more and executives love that. Their existence lowers the leverage of the value creators. I’m thinking of what could possibly give Chinese-Americans more leverage. Little, as they’re for the most part unwelcome in positions of power in the US. Again many Chinese have false hopes of meritocracy. Yes, it’s meritocratic up to a certain point, but in terms of actual political power it’s far from it. The Chinese who do get promoted in the media and politically by the mainstream American establishment tend to be those who are against collective Chinese interests. Why do you think the successful Chinese entrepreneurs in America have a hardware focus. Because those require real expertise with high barrier to entry.

The struggle for socioeconomic position of Chinese-Americans I expect to be largely futile. It’s already very saturated at this point. Way more technically smart and well-trained Chinese than the system can tolerate. There are some rich Chinese who hit it big with entrepreneurship but they generally have far less political power than a white guy with the same net worth due to relative lack of elite networks. Those rich Chinese from China in the states have little actual power; all they can really do is make a dent on the real estate market, and fund some pro-Chinese activities there, though with that, there will only be increasing scrutiny. If Chinese are to gain massively, it would have to be based from what comes out of China. Basically become like the Jews. Develop a reputation of fuck with us too much and there will be consequences. To do so, China would have to play the extortion game very aggressively too. What leverage does China have now? For one, large market. This is why airlines have to accept demands to list Taiwan as part of China; if they don’t they lose a ton of business. What else? Potentially encourage the Chinese with hard to acquire expertise in critical STEM fields to stop working for American companies, go to China instead. Take it to the very extreme, if China/Chinese want to be truly feared on the international stage, they can once they’re adequately prepared to guarantee victory encourage North Korea to invade again as Stalin did in 1950 with a serious pledge to back them up, use anti-ship/anti-aircraft missiles to prevent Americans in Seoul from escaping, then America will negotiate with China to save members of their own political elite. China could demand complete withdrawal of US forces from the Korean Peninsula as a condition. Now, anti-ship/anti-aircraft missiles would make it not that hard to enforce blockades near one’s borders; the era of American military dominance by air is over. China is already in the process of deploying the state of the art S-400 it got from Russia to cover most of Taiwan and has already deployed its own, less advanced but still formidable, air defense system on the South China Sea islands, enough to render US fighter jets practically useless in the region.

How do you get an edge over a competitor? You can by improving yourself, making your product more competitive, that’s the good way. Like it or not, you can often do equally or more by directly sabotaging the competitor in a way you can get away with. The success of Microsoft, and many big businesses, had arguably much more to do with the latter. In the case of geopolitical influence, militarily evicting the enemy is necessary. It doesn’t have to turn violent, and ideally, it shouldn’t; all one needs is enough military power for the other side to give in on the negotiating table.

As an example of China’s exercising leverage, did you know that in the 50s, after the Korean War, the US would not let Chinese with STEM PhDs return? After a few years of negotiation, the Chinese government exchanged American POWs for the freedom of those Chinese with hard-to-obtain and strategically important STEM expertise to return to their home country, where they would make a decisive contribution to the success that China is today. China/Chinese, if they really want to get ahead, need to do similarly. Their struggle in America is a losing game. Yes, there are ways to succeed massively yourself, but more often than not the tradeoff is generating much more value/money/success for others, which could even count as an anti-success given the relative nature of success.

For Chinese, it’s okay if you piss off some elite Americans. You can always go back to China and find something reasonable there. China is not what it was twenty years ago. Plus, if you’re anti the American establishment, the Chinese government will likely support you. With Indians, it might be different, since India still is shit place. And Indians have for the most part already given up. Indians cannot even create their own Internet companies.

Speaking of which, I am trying out some Chinese internet products, and while there is still room for improvement, they seem to have created a reliable alternative. Weiyun (微云) for cloud storage, and integrated with WeChat. Foxmail.com for Email. Both products of Tencent. There is also that Opera Browser, which originated from Norway, was acquired by Chinese company Qihoo 360, and it is faster and uses less memory than Chrome. Comes with ad-block and VPN by default too. I’m definitely sticking to that.

I’ll conclude with another comment of wokeAZN:

Good. Let them be afraid. TBH I live and eat because I’m taking wealth that previously belonged to whites every day probably. Not that I dispossess whites or whoever else on purpose, I just work and buy land, stock and assets here legally. So? What do you want me to do? Apologize and return my land and assets? Lol lol

Asians, keep acquiring your land and wealth while you’re here. if you dispossess whites unintentionally don’t feel bad about it.

He’s 100% correct. If Asian-Americans want equal rights, they should try to take as much from this country while contributing as little as they can in return. That’s the logical response towards discrimination. Either use this country solely to advance yourself and your group to the extent that you can, or don’t come here in the first place. There are even some Asians who bash their own for not contributing enough to the community, which is ridiculous. Seriously, have some sense of entitlement. It’s not really your community anyway. Yes, those rich Chinese who buy real estate here basically contribute nothing. If fact, they make lives harder for the middle-class by driving up housing prices. Well too bad.

我对于种族关系的看法

最近在美国,正在进行的对常春藤大学歧视亚裔的种族配额制度的案子在2018年6月中旬透露了哈弗录取人员给亚裔申请生更低的所谓的“个性评分”,以此为拒绝他们之由。可预料,这引起了一场稍同情亚裔的媒体大波,而7月出头没过多久,川普政府撤销了奥巴马时期推行的大学录取种族平衡政策并颁布了新政策指南的重要举措。同时,亚裔又在纽约市强烈抵抗市长de Blasio提出的将撤销特殊高中考试录取的案,为了种族多元化而改至holistic的录取方式,难以接受在现有制度,那些特殊高中的名额大约百分之七十都占于亚裔学生。加上,芝加哥大学,一所SAT分数分布很高的接近顶尖大学,已经把SAT考试改为可选而非必要的申请件。看来随着亚裔体抗议常春藤的歧视加热而稍有进展的同时,美国的某些其它教育机构又开始给以新的袭击。看来美国社会就是对亚裔不要好啊。为此,我当然也有自己的想法。

对于一位为所谓亚裔孩子平等教育权的活动者所提出的,我是这么说的:

没错,但是我现在不断觉得华裔在美国所争取的社会地位的提升很可能大多会是枉然的,因为美国当权派不愿意太多华人进入美国上层。是,在美国的华人必要敢于为自己的利益抗争,但要现实,不要把太多时间和精力浪费于几乎不可能成功而对自己毫无长远价值的事情上。现在美国优秀的华人太多,已经难以容纳,要移民最好找找别的地方,或者留在中国为增强我们自己主导的体系而奋斗,把它转成有国际竞争力的一流体系。在美国,华人只是会帮着造福望永远把华人以世界二等人对待的美国当权派。

总之而言,这些人我觉得在忽略一个更根本的问题,就是为什么华裔在美国得不到平等。为什么呢,美国还是白人统治的白人大多数国家就不用说了,就是在世界,作为种族,白人的社会地位还是远远更高的,由于白人在前好几百年所积累的,此难以摆脱。没错,东亚人很聪明,又勤奋,智商高一点,这一点在心理统计学界里是几乎绝对认可的,毫无异议的,但是问题是权利和资源掌握在白人手里,这一点白人的精英和统治者是不会轻易放弃的,反而东亚人好,还更有原因被歧视。白人不太在乎黑裔或墨西哥裔,他们不构成任何威胁,而且给予这些被压迫民族一点名额和资源不仅能缓解一些殖民奴役所造成的所有的白人內疚感,还便以表出一点虚伪的慈善,不用说,把资源从主要对手转移至弱者是非常典型常用的增强巩固自己地位的手段。

同一个人,非男性,还发布关于亚裔男性爱受到的歧视的信息,对此,我只能说:

可惜的是,说不定亚裔男性的性(这包括身材,面容,外表)吸引力就是差一些,或者他们由于属于更弱的种族被视为缺乏社会地位。没什么好办法,只能进步自己和做你所能做的进步你所属于的不可脱离的种族。抱怨只会让你显得更加屌丝(loser)。

我在美国长大,但显然与ABC很不一样,还是一直坚持了对自己文化的认同,因为大多ABC所做的真的挺愚蠢的。我一直认识到正宗中国人的势力比在美国被边缘化的ABC的势力要大得多,对种族关系和歧视还是比较现实主义的,可惜像我这样的人实在太少。现在的中国人过于想如何多融入美国白人所主导的社会和体系而非如何把自己主导的体系变得更有国际竞争力,无论如何,华裔在美国只能采取二流的附属的地位,中国人的主力应该放在中国。

中国人不要忘记日本的经历。他们从明治天皇的领导起现代化做得非常成功,不断像世界证明了东方人在现代科技和军事还是有竞争力的,但是最终还是得不到平等的对待,不得不对西方列强发动战争,在此过程中将其它东方人和亚洲人为奴隶和牺牲品,最终由于自己太小而过于扩张还是失败了,最终不得不永远放弃原有的军事大国梦想。虽然日本输了,但是还是打赢了好几场具有先进军事技术水平的战争,也得到了一定的认可,而战后,他们的飞速经济重建和崛起又让西方人刮目相看,把美国的好多科技产品打的落花流水。我还是非常佩服日本人为民族而不服输的精神,他们很多方面比中国人的确素质高,像日本的精英从来没有过永久留在外国乘凉的现象,大多都最终回去为他们的祖国贡献,同时,也很少出日奸,在这一点现在的中国人可以感到羞耻。相比之下,中国人的奴性和民族自卑感要严重得多,若没有毛泽东和抗美援朝的胜利只会远远更差,当然比印度人要强得多了。说起印度人,你看中国人62年把印度打的那么惨,魂飞魄散,现在还要在美国公司受印度人欺负,多么丢人啊。在这一点我的确对当代的中国人感到很失望。说的极端一点,中国人去买美国的那套扯淡,不如勾结俄罗斯人想法把美国打垮。你想想当年斯大林和毛带领的那样的团队是没人敢惹的,斯大林的间谍那么可怕连美国都要搞类似于文革的麦卡锡主义反共浪潮来镇压,把钱学森那样的顶级华人人才也吸引回国了,中国人现在已经失去了这种精神,这是很遗憾的。

现在的中国人经常盲目的崇洋媚外没有什么骨气,经常接近于教条的将与美国体系多近为衡量人的标准,非常的缺乏民族自尊心。台湾人和香港人对大陆人有优越感,因为他们经济更富裕,更西化,没有意识到他们自进入美国的怀抱下都是殖民经济,以附属地位和产品换取了他们的经济和生活水平,而在此过程中,增强了他们的阿Q心态,变得像印度人那样了。的确是,他们和印度人一样少数精英享受了美国的教育和体系,自己发展的很好,但是他们绝对不能算得上真正代表中国人,当然中国人也都为他们的精彩成果感到自豪。一个国家的人才大多在国外只能说明这个国家的国际政治影响力比较微弱。说到这一点,由于领导,毛泽东时代的中国很多方面国际政治影响力比现在远远更富裕的中国都要强,为这一点,现在中国人也应当感到羞耻。

中国人也应该有一定的优越感。虽然自己没有搞出近代科学和工业,落后挨打了,但这不一定说明中国人本质上就是劣势的,可能在身材上某些方面劣势一些,但是这也是次要的。相反,中国那么落后糟糕但为何,类似于日本人,只不过起步晚的多,追赶却那么快呀?不是因为更高的智商和更加刻苦耐劳吗?而这一点,不也通过在美国的优秀刻苦但受歧视的华裔学生加以证实吗?而且中国人还做到了日本人未能的,就是与西方白人打平一仗而建立自己独立的体系和制度吗?中国人在外国还被白人欺负,没办法,这个问题必须靠自己以中国为主的势力来解决,对手还是瞧不起你,不会轻易认输的,只会更加给你施加压力。最终还要看中国人自己的能力了,不是那些为美国机构服务的中国人,而是为中国自己服务的中国人。任务是艰难的。我作为中国人敢直截了当这么说因为我知道无论如何,我不可脱开中国人的面貌,就像俄罗斯人无论和西方多么亲,依然无法脱开共匪的面貌,还是被彻底毁坏了,中国人即是共匪,又是黄种人,就更没有希望了。可惜太少人认识到这一点。反而,汉奸还是特别多,像我说的,中国的整体素质还比日本人要差,我想如果中国不敢为此严厉处置,在内加在外,中国人的希望是不大的,连港台的人心都拉不过来,谈何与白人平等啊。有些人如果品德实在太差而无救,也不要放弃劳改,绝育,甚至灭九族的手段,不用一切向美国学习,美国现在反人类的SJWneocon势力日益增强,无可遏制(消灭就更不用说了),将来它们都可能把美国整个国家搞坏,损失已经很大了,中国人不要一样傻就行了。

Harvard’s discrimination against Asian-Americans

It was revealed last week or so that Harvard systematically rates Asian-Americans lower on personality, on subjective traits such as “positive personality,” likability, courage, kindness and being “widely respected.” I’m not surprised at all by this. Though they could have at least been a bit smarter about this by keeping this shit off the record. Now the investigators could actually reveal something about their process to the public that would undermine the institution’s credibility.

Though I am an Asian-American, I will not try to pretend. It’s so far for Harvard’s institutional interests more or less rational to do what they’re doing. Asian-Americans have very little power and influence over the institution. Sure, there is no shortage of prominent Asian-Americans professors at Harvard, mostly in STEM, but they don’t actually have all that much influence over the institution, and are mostly being used by the institution to advance its own academic reputation. The same goes for being an Asian academic undergrad admit (who can, say, win a high place for Harvard at the Putnam Contest). There is also the implicit assumption that because Asians face race-related disadvantages in the career game, especially in the corporate world, due to unconscious bias, lack of ethnic affinity networks, etc, they should be penalized, as future career success, of a form not perceived as too threatening to the current elite, is crudely what admissions is optimizing for. So, life is not fair, get used to it, and do the little that you can to try to make things more fair (or more in your favor).

I’ve actually seen some not actually very talented Asian-Americans without hooks who did make it to HYP under very striverish behavior. They played the game of try hard resume optimization, of appearing less Asian. The thing is that most of those people end up not well at all after graduation. Don’t think that HYP guarantees a good job. There is no guarantee is today’s world. Those people did too little in terms of developing actually employable skills. What they got by playing the college admissions game was essentially a pyrrhic victory. Actually competent state school kids do much better than them in the workplace. So, don’t be stupid like that.

Even many actually smart Asian-American HYP grads don’t do all that great. A common outcome is a merely solid engineer at a respected technology company. Some go to a top grad school, but success much depends on the field. Academia has very few openings nowadays, though for engineering, due to industrial demand, it is much less competitive than math or science. A common route of course for the really technically exceptional is quant finance, though those positions tend to be taken by immigrants, who generally undergo a much more rigorous STEM education with less distraction compared to what Asian-Americans receive. The thing is that so many people are irrationally desperate to attend an elite school. Some middle class parents will burn a fortune to send their kid to some fancy prep school full of rich kids, where they easily end up at the bottom half of the school’s social hierarchy, let alone for an elite university. They lose sight of the fact that in many if not most cases, major determines what you do much more than school. There are many cases of these try hards wasting much time, money, and stress for nothing.

Like it or not, America is still very much a white country. Asian-Americans can and should try, but they shouldn’t realistically expect equality. If Chinese parents really want their son to become a lawyer or politician, they should probably stay in China. It’ll be hard there as well, but your odds of success will be probably at least an order of magnitude higher than in America. Here, I use only the male qualification of child in light of how “on average, Asian American women received higher personal ratings and extracurricular ratings than Asian American men.”[3] This is, of course, consistent with what goes on in the real world as well. And it is expected, considering how historically, sexism and racism have always gone together.

A while ago, I wrote on here a rather cynical (or whatever you call it) piece in Chinese regarding elite US schools, which to my pleasant surprise a Chinese international of my acquaintance who attended Harvard commented on affirmatively. Its title has somewhat of a sensationalist provocative vibe to it, translated to English as “American elite universities as a political tool for brainwashing and uplifting (pseudo) elite of Chinese descent.” Of course, I have more or less the highest regard for the STEM being done at these top American institutions, though maybe it is a bit overrated. Much of the humanities and social science coming from those places I find quite questionable though, and that goes along with the cultural and political values fostered by these institutions. On that, I brought up how the former unsuccessful regime of China, the Republic of China, was led and run largely by Chinese graduates of Ivies of their time, who were but superficially Westernized and modernized Chinese. Despite their graduating from these elite schools, they lost the civil war and failed to modernize China, though perhaps that also had much to do with their being in the wrong time. Certainly though, many of the elite Chinese who played prominent roles in China’s modernization from the 50s on did advanced study in STEM in these top American schools. I’ll say that from my experience, it certainly does seem that these schools tend to select for Asians whose social and political viewpoints, often not very grounded on reality, tend to fit them into the aforementioned category, like Jeff Yang, with whom Steve Hsu had a debate. This is of course part of the pattern of American elites’ desire to bring elites of other countries into their circle, in a sufficiently subordinate position. On this, I’ll say how I’ve read comments on how over past half century or so, affirmative action by Harvard and other Ivies has won for American elites not only (a facade of) charity but also cultural and ethnic representatives to advance their interests in, say, African countries. For that, Harvard was useful as a binding force. Surely, Harvard has always played a quintessential role in persisting the rule and influence of the current American elite throughout the world, and like it or not, kissing the ruler’s ass is almost always the easiest way to rise up on the social ladder. In Chinese, to be America’s dog is spoken of as pejorative, but so what, there were and are too many small countries willing to do so, because it brings them, their elites in particular, much economic and political benefit.

Asians tend to be pretty obsessed with prestige. Chinese are very, and Koreans are especially so. In the 80s and 90s and 00s, a degree from a prestigious or good American school was much an upper mobility ticket in China. Now, this is much less so, because there are too many such Chinese now, and also maybe because people in China have increasingly realized that maybe these people aren’t actually all that good, in spite of their brand-name American school. A PhD from MIT from China once told me that now in China, companies are increasingly reluctant to hire “sea turtles;” you have to pay them more, when more often than not, you can find a local guy who can do the job as well or better for much less. This is a sign of devaluation of elite American institutions, and I believe this will continue, given the relatively low level of STEM education and preparation in America (which is impossible to hide to any actually smart, scientifically literate person) along with America’s overall decline.

The short-sighted and personally motivated decisions of the intellectually mediocre and politically delusional American elite over the past generation are, cumulatively, really taking its toll now, on the American economy and the credibility of its ruling class. Their elite institutions, nepotistic and corrupt in its admissions, are losing the public’s trust and alienating Asian-Americans especially, many of whom moved to a foreign country speaking little English with too much blind faith in the so-called American Dream that they sought for themselves and more so for their children. American elites may have thought that they themselves could neglect STEM, that there are plenty of talented foreigners, many of whom Asian, willing to do those jobs indefinitely, often grossly under-compensated and with their American-born, American-raised kids facing higher hurdles in education and at work. This might have been so decades ago, when in their home countries, there was still lack of economic opportunity for smart people. Nowadays, there is a booming and internationally competitive high technology sector in China, with India going that direction as well, in spite of brain drain into America. Collectively, the STEM expertise has over time not only grown itself but transformed into significant leverage for the group, so much that the elites running Harvard need to resort to rogue tactics to preserve themselves. I don’t exactly blame them. It’s just like how people who go the bullshit business and social climbing route do so largely to compensate for their inherent intellectual deficit; at least to me, that’s never a pleasant or honorable position to be in. But what else can you do, if not to accept defeat? I can already foresee such an entrenched group fighting desperately for its own survival. Harvard will do all that it can to get away with what it’s doing right now amidst much backlash. And it’s an extraordinary rich, powerful, well-connected institution, much able to manipulate the outcomes. Either they win, or they reform themselves accordingly, or they become slowly sidelined. We’ll see. I just hope they don’t resort to even nastier tactics. Though that tends to happen when power and survival is at serious risk.

References

[1] http://infoproc.blogspot.com/2018/06/harvard-office-of-institutional.html

[2] http://infoproc.blogspot.com/2018/06/harvard-office-of-institutional_21.html

[3] http://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-lee-harvard-legacy-student-advantage-20180622-story.html

[4] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gekcNqlHptM

On Russia and Russians

I was told yesterday by that uber pro-American anti-communist American Jew that American liberals actually hate Russia more than they hate China. I was surprised. He said that this is seldom realized, and that

if you compared xi to putin people would consider that offensive even
people have a double standard against white countries when it comes to human rights

So, the logic is because Russia is white, they should be held to higher standards for human rights and democracy, and the extent to which Russia is “freer” (than China, which blocks Google and Facebook and is still a one-party totalitarian state) is not enough to offset the differentiated standard.

I don’t get it, why are Western liberals so intent on hating Russia, why why why? Because Russia is such a threat to their world domination? (The USSR is gone and there’s basically zero hope of Russia recovering to that level, but that’s apparently not enough.) I had also heard that in the UK it’s the Russians, not the Muslims, who are most resented, for being tall, blonde, and alpha and taking the tech jobs. It’s another one of those they’re hated for being too good. Russians being good attracts more resentment than admiration, they must have failed politically somewhere.

From my experience working, observing, reading, and interacting, it does seem like Russians are technically extremely powerful. Of course, the ones here in America are a select group. At a place where I worked, there was this big Russian guy who was quite an ubermensch programmer doing much of the technical heavy-lifting. He was also a higher up in the company, though not terribly high up, and it took him some time in officially low ranking positions (where I’m sure he contributed a ton) to get there. There is good reason to believe the pattern of Russians being ranked (much) lower in American tech companies relative to their ability and contribution, given how political promotion and performance reviews are, and the extent to which salary is determined by one’s “circumstances.” There seem to be very few Russians high up in corporate America, despite their ability. On this, I can’t help but think: could it be that the American elite only wants them to do the hard technical work (where they contribute much more than they get) and find them too threatening to allow into positions of power? It seems though that as a group, they’re more or less accepting of this treatment, content with a very intellectually stimulating job. My Russian friends tells me that very few go back due to lack of opportunity, notwithstanding that Russia has Yandex (which was, curiously, founded before Google) and vKontakte, and its own military ecosystem.

I know that there is the widely stereotype that Russians are smart and really creative, while Chinese are smart but lack spark. There is some truth to that as far as I can tell. On TopCoder and CodeForces and at the ACM ICPC, all of which I’ve participated in, with mixed success, the Chinese still cannot beat the Russians, even when they seem to try really hard. Petr was superhuman, and ACRush, while also an ubermensch, was still a notch below Petr. Though ACRush, with his Chinese connections, has started his own self-driving car company, while Petr is still working for Google. CodeForces, created by Russians, is now much better maintained and consequently more popular across the world to competitive programmers.

I’ve observed that Russians are not as obsessed about prestigious schools here in the US as Chinese are. Plenty of really smart ones only attend state schools, to save money, and also maybe because the elite schools discriminate against them too, because their being Russian and worse connected in American society would be a disadvantage for them in the career world.

From what I’ve seen, Russians are very well-rounded too, actually smart and capable in all respects. Even in athletics, they’re feared and targeted (with reference to the Olympic ban). This might mean that they’re not very good at putting on a stupid smile and going along with all the stupid bullshit that goes on in this society. If they’re this good, maybe they instead of being taken advantage of by American capitalists who only want to extract as much as they can out of them for as little as they can get away with should build their own technology and institutions in Russia, where they actually end up having ownership. They did that in the USSR days (but bad luck and stupid political decisions blew it all away), maybe they should continue to do so.

To conclude, I’ll say that I’ve heard that “Russians/Eastern Europeans get macho and that leads to individualism/isolation in the workplace.” Maybe because they’re pissed that they (the ones in America are some of the best and brightest) have to answer to idiots who they have a hard time pretending to respect.

On credentialism and selection systems

I’ve mentioned before that an Asian-American friend of mine, who is quite smart, disapproves of the whole campaign against Asian quotas spearheaded, or at least advocated, by Steve Hsu and others.

His words are the following:

  1. I don’t believe in legitimizing the credentialist culture of modern academia
  2. I don’t generically feel much kinship with Asian-Americans (who are the most affected by purported discrimination in admissions), even if I might feel more kinship with them on average than I would with any other large ethnic group in America (which is itself not necessarily true)
  3. I don’t find it implausible that there are legitimate reasons to discriminate against Asian-Americans in the admissions process, if by ‘discriminate’ we mean ‘weigh their formal accomplishments less than one would for a member of a different race’
  4. At the end of the line, I believe that persistent whining about this is a reflection of emotional immaturity on the part of Steve et al., in that they seem to have a ‘chip on their shoulder’ which they are incapable of overcoming, and if they were actually taking a principled approach, they would come together and try to create a superior alternative to the radically broken university system, which will likely not be saved by any infusion of Asian students

Here’s what I think.

On 1), I don’t like the credentialism culture of modern academia either. Much of it is a superficial and soulless arms race. Not that grades, test scores, publications, citations, impact factor aren’t strong signals but they are prone to manipulation and artificial inflation, and that there are qualities of work not well-captured by those metrics. People are more or less compelled to single-mindedly play this game, often at the expense of actually substantial scholarship, if they are to survive in academia nowadays.

On 2), I hate to say that this country has become more toxically consumed by identity politics over the years, not to mention that people are judged at least subconsciously by who one is associated with. So collective bargaining is crucial for a group’s position on the status hierarchy.

On 3), there is that due to Asian-Americans’ and Asians in general having traditionally been the underdog, as well as their lack of media presence, which is intimately tied to the alienness of their names in the Western linguistic context, some people are inclined to view Asians are grinds who aren’t actually as capable as they might appear on paper. Especially with the whole tiger mother phenomenon that Amy Chua popularized with her infamous book. Of course, China’s rise over the recent years has altered this perception somewhat, especially the one that Asians are smart but not creative, though surely, it does seem that controlling for grades and test scores, or IQ, Asians do seem less creative, though that may be due to environmental factors, such as de facto or implicit quotas imposed by diversity mandates and economic circumstances.

On 4), I mostly disagree. Asian-Americans don’t really have the power to create a sufficiently credible alternative in a world that runs so heavily on associating with prestigious, usually long-established, institutions like Harvard and Goldman-Sachs. In their ancestral countries, China and India, Asians can improve the university and research system and the economic and technological competitiveness of the country as a whole, so as to make their universities more credible as well. In America, all Asian-Americans can really do is make more noise around the issue to exert more pressure on the elite universities, and also donate more and enhance their media and political presence as their socioeconomic position improves, especially at the elite end, improves, so that the elite universities perceive themselves as having more to lose from discriminating against Asian-Americans based on race.

This is all I have to say as pertains exclusively to Asian-Americans. I shall now give my thoughts on credentialism and selection in general.

The job of admissions and hiring committees and HR is astronomically harder than in the pre-internet age. So many people apply for positions they are grossly under-qualified for, now that it’s so easy to shoot off a resume or application online. There are, of course, application fees for college and grad schools, but they are not enough to deter. This means in the selection process can be afford now significantly less time per candidate, and one can argue that as a consequence, the process becomes more bureaucratic and easier to game. Often, people will in the pre-screening stage eliminate all applicants who do not meet certain formal criteria, such as minimum GPA/test scores or a certain degree from a certain set of sufficiently credible universities. In the case of academia, to my limited second-hand knowledge, committees will look at publications lists with a focus on citation count and impact factor of the journals on which the papers were published and also verify the candidate against senior, tenured faculty in the same or at least similar area of research. In the case of industry jobs, what matters more is the interview, where for technical roles, technical questions will be asked to further test the technical aptitude and knowledge, as well as, the softer aspects of communication and personal chemistry. For non-technicals, I can only say it’s even more about credentials (school, companies, job titles, dates of employment) and how you present yourself. I can only conclude that way more energy is expended now in aggregate on application and selection than before, which is quite costly really. In the career world, people are mostly out for themselves and don’t really care about wasting other people’s time, so long as they can get away with it with impunity more or less.

I’ll say that there is a tradeoff between optimizing for one’s formal credentials and optimizing for one’s actual ability and knowledge. One loses out so much more now if one neglects the former too much due to more competition per position. Surely, there has been gross inflation of credentials. This is in its crudest form epitomized by college’s having become the new high school, thereby rendering prestige of institution a stronger signal. Furthermore, the largely consequent grade inflation and watering down of coursework has added more noise to school transcripts. Contest training, for math in particular, has become so much more popularized, that to not have credentials in those raises questions in some circles, and moreover, there is so much more of an obstacle course of summer programs and scholarships and grants and internships and jobs which one must pass through to some degree if one wants a reasonable chance of success at a specified level. In this sense, there is more pressure to conform to an existing, often complexity-ridden system. It may well be that people nowadays are not all that much better in terms of knowledge and proficiency than before, correcting for the positive effects of technology on learning, but they actually put in much more time and effort.

Now, if one expends much energy on actual substance, there is concern as to what would be lost if those translate not into formal credentials. Arguably more common is the other way round, where one turns into a soulless credential-chasing machine. I’ve been amazed at how many people manage to achieve much higher grades, test scores, and awards than what their knowledge and ability from interaction with them would reasonably indicate. Those people tend to be very boring and risk-averse, and they are often the types our current system selects for, like it or not.

I used to feel like to prove that one is actually smart, at least in STEM, one ought to do sufficiently well in one of those major math, physics, or computing olympiads or contests. I would say that for raw technical ability, that is probably still the strongest signal. Grades are somewhat noisy, because it’s not hard to copy or snipe homework solutions, and for tests, there is a large cramming and figuring out what’s gonna be on the test component. Perhaps they are more consequentially so as there are also some genuinely capable or even brilliant students who for related personality reasons have a hard time getting themselves to care too much about grades. I’ve personally seen some high GPA people, even in college, who signal in what they say or write complete idiocy that would make you wonder if they were pretending stupid, especially if said person were female. Some people learn much more deeply and also much more broadly, outside of what the system teaches them, to a high level of retention, much of which is not captured through any formal credential. From my personal experience, tests of a wide range of knowledge, sufficiently substantial but not too esoteric, are stronger signals since they cannot be crammed for, but they are, for the difficulty of organization, seldom administered.

In the real world and in academia though, what matters is the ability to deliver actual projects and conduct meaningful research, and those, while correlated with ability to learn, are not quite the same. Those are also way more context-dependent, which means more noise, both due to more variance and more ambiguity of judgment.

I will say that at times or even often, society is met with the problem of people finagling themselves into a position to judge what they are not really qualified to, per their ability and expertise, which means some resume-padding bozos rising up and actual competents being passed over. This problem I believe has been accentuated by the ever more credentialist culture that has emerged over the recent years. What’s kind of sad is how the more conformism and risk-aversion rises, the more these traits are pressured and selected for.

I’ve come to notice that there tends to be some difference between maverick genius and the conformist first-rate professional. If one looks at history, real genius, the ones who create paradigm shifts, tends to have more very lopsided profiles, though surely, it might go too far to say that *most* of the real geniuses were out of it in a Stallman or Galois like fashion, especially as it’s the deranged ones which garner more attention. But one can say with high level of confidence that there were many real geniuses who had a hard time fitting in even into the elite mainstream of his profession, who have even been marginalized. I’ve been told that the real genius mathematicians like Perelman, Langlands, and Shimura more or less cut contact with the mathematical community apparently out of disgust. There is also evidence that plenty would-be real geniuses did not actually make it, with their enormous potential having been thwarted by the system at some point and hardly realized. In an ideal world that optimizes for collective value, if somebody else can do the job much better than you and actually really wants to, you should let him do the job and get out of his way. Of course, reality is far from that. I have personally felt that way with regard to my mathematical ability, often feeling that I wasn’t good enough when I failed to derive something on my own, yet I see so many people worse than I am even so eager to play the whole credentialist game without recognizing how deficient they really are. This suggests that I am very partial towards a certain side of the spectrum. I even feel that in some sense, nothing is more embarrassing then formally being much higher than what one’s ability actually merits, since it demonstrates not only incompetence but poor character. However, I am, regrettably, or not, feeling that circumstances are pressuring me ever more towards the opposite direction.

On manipulating perceptions

My thoughts on the importance of perception management, in addition to actually being good, by way of a chat log.

dude I think the jewish domination of liberal media is just IQ
if white americans are 100 SD 15, ashkenazim are 115 SD 15
Then if you look at 130+
In the US you have a 30:1 ratio but among 130+ you would expect like
2:1
dude like 1/3 of the 130+ whites in the US are jews
jewish verbal is probably even > 115 since spatial is lower
also they are coastal and liberal
 
lol you idiot it has much to do with personality socioeconomics culture too
 
which leads to more representation
yeah i’m saying that
coastal and liberal
already on the 2:1
updating more
 
Lol also if Jewish verbal is so high why are Asians beating them at PSAT/SAT
 
stats?
 
English/culture
 
Read Myth of American Meritocracy by Unz
 
link me the stats
 
I read it
 
He has stats there
 
have you read Janet Mertz takedown
 
Yes I’ve skimmed through that
 
Unz overestimates harvard % jewish
and underestimates other things
 
Sure he probably does a little
 
math olympiad % jewish
wait like half the white people at mop are jewish
like half
Since it can be hard to tell by surname
dude I think chinese americans have a massive
verbal IQ
way higher than of mainland china
maybe even higher than ashkenazim
But they haven’t been here long enough
like Jews in the 50s
also a lot of them are not interested
in verbal professions
 
how trainable is verbal SAT?
 
I agree the trainability of the SAT is overstated by people but cramming vocab is totally a thing, no
I dont trust unz statistics at all lol
 
Lol because Chinese-Americans know that verbal careers like law are rigged against them
So many strong ones are hesitant to enter
There’s a cultural affinity aspect to that as well
 
chinese prefer medicine or law
I think a lot of it also is that a society with a functional legal system is alien to most chinese people 😛
once I asked zuming whether china had a legal system
his response: No
 
Haha he’s both right and wrong
 
but yeah law is jewish
but I mean jews are not pulling the strings or anything
like
they are smart verbally
And they tend to be coastal and liberal
The tribe is not jews, it’s coastal liberals
130+ secular coastal liberals are like half jewish
but they dont think of themselves as jewish but as secular coastal liberals
like NYT columnists are half jewish
because 130+ secular costal liberals in the US are half jewish
 
Lol lol
 
if you add the adjective new york
secular new york coastal liberals
it’s a majority easily
 
NYT columnists
 
like manhattan is 20% jewish
 
NYT is full of garbage
 
?
its pretty reliable
Sometimes they call Rouhani a “moderate” and I wince – he’s certainly better than ahmadenijad, but he’s no moderate … “pragmatist” is the right word
 
You really need to broaden your horizons lol
 
hmm?
 
See politically, the Anglo world is setting the standards right now
 
yes, I very much enjoy not living in a society with sesame credit
 
sesame credit?
 
yes
 
I don’t even know what that is
 
china could become an orwellian state
 
Oh that
 
isn’t that great
 
Orwellian state what does that even mean
 
 
It’s just this phrase for evil regime coined by the Anglo media based on the works of an Anglo writer, that’s all.
I’ve read 1984 and Animal Farm
They’re pretty good
Very hyperbolic of course, as is much media
I actually exchanged briefly with Unz
 
ok
 
Maybe I should ask him about what he thinks of Jews being subsumed into the white category in these racial classifications
What do you think of these IQ tests as actual measures of real, biological intelligence
They are very noisy for sure
Especially verbal, because exposure to language varies widely
 
on an individual level
noisy
on a group level good
they are measuring something important
Whether it’s 100% genetic I dont know
I doubt it
 
Lol when most Chinese kids’ parents don’t know English all that well
Heck I’m even unfamiliar with some of the more colloquial English language
People viewed me as funny for it in school
 
sure
what do you think about steven pinker
he’s one of my favorite people
 
No opinion of him
Also those tests are noisy predictors of actual ability on real things as well from my observation
The discrimination against Asians in admissions right now is likely partially premised on the perception that their test scores inflate their actual ability due to prep.
There is still the perception that Asians do well in school but don’t go on to do great things
Again it’s only a perception
Being good and being perceived as good are far from perfectly correlated.
 
I think there is discrimnation against asians
for being recent
for being perceived as grade grubbers
 
Yeah they’re also not rich or well-connected.
 
this perception is not wholly unjustified ofc
yeah also that
i am strongly opposed to ivy asian quotas
 
There is resistance towards Asians becoming successful in America
It’s a white country after all
 
eh
 
Anyhow, I think in a matter of time, the best young people in China will come here for grad school less and less.
America will become a place for China to send its second-rates.
I’ve written that China needs to get better at marketing
 
china gives 0 shits about academics
it’s way too right wing to care about academics
 
too right wing?
And I’ve read on Zhihu that in recent years, the Chinese who studied math in France have turned out better than the ones who came to US for grad school.
 
that’s about france vs US
not china vs US
 
Lol math I think the best young people will still study abroad for a while.
There’s also engineering
Plenty of that China does well now.
I think in actual STEM ability/competence, China/Chinese still have much room for improvement, but now, they’re not bad, and the potential is there, with trends in favor of them.
It’s the whole game of manipulating perceptions that will take longer
Due to cultural difference and inertia
In that regard, it’s already been massively successful in just the last five years if you think about it
The media portrayal in the West has already drastically changed.
For instance, dismissiveness of Chinese tech companies is metamorphizing into fear.
I’m not gonna argue whether or not it’s gone to the other extreme
People can have different opinions on that
In any case, I don’t think China has transitioned to foundational innovator, that’ll take a while, but the increasing level of sophistication combined with the scale is certainly very formidable.
China still relies on US companies for its semiconductors/chips. She has not created a viable ecosystem for its homegrown ones yet. But that could well happen in a decade.
Then US will have even less bargaining chip.
Now, China can easily get away with what it’s doing to Taiwan largely because it is so much stronger economically, technologically, and militarily.
 
jack ma is a smart guy
but I mean
 
Nobody wants to piss off the powerful, because there’s much to lose.
 
china’s system doesnt make too much room for jack ma and yitang zhang
The lack of political freedom is a big obstacle here
 
Lol Jack Ma isn’t smart IQ wise
Struggled to get into a college
He has other qualities
 
The lack of political freedom is a big problem for innovation
 
Hahaha
Elaborate on that one 
 
Name a totalitarian society that was innovative
Germany under the Kaiser wasn’t really totalitarian
 
Uh, USSR?
 
all their jewish scientists moved to america and israel
ussr had good academics, certainly
Because they prevented them from leaving
They didn’t have much in the way of tech
 
Uh, Sputnik?
 
low tech
very low tech
your cell phone is better
there won’t be a chinese steve jobs
 
Sure computer technology they were behind, because semi-conductors and integrated circuits were invented in America
Lol Steve Jobs is mostly marketing 
 
shockley
eugenics
chinese bill gates
 
And what you say about Sputnik is ridiculous
First satellite in orbit
That was back in 1957 silly
You don’t think Ren Zhengfei is as impressive as Steve Jobs?
Huawei
So much of the global telecommunications infrastructure
Now their phones, which US is banning.
 
So
Lol what if China once it has the resources starts a huge propaganda/PR war
You bitch about totalitarianism
China has a ton of young people with nothing to do.
Have them troll the YouTube comments, drown out all the anti-communist Chinese.
Numbers do matter
The Chinese government could also incentivize more people in the West to start blogs supportive of Chinese ideology.
Try to buy out US media outlets
You don’t think China once it is advantaged in resources can start playing the game of manufacturing consent as well