Role models for Chinese who grow up in America

Now that I am older with some time out of that shitty American education system, I can better appreciate how racist and emotionally destructive it is at its core for Chinese. Of course, I sort of knew all along that the “Asian” portrayals and stereotypes within the US school system and media bears little resemblance to the real one based in China. I mostly did what I could to ignore that and learn the real Chinese culture instead. For that, much thanks to Baidu and CCTV.

Continue reading “Role models for Chinese who grow up in America”

Advertisements

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!

Continue reading “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”

苏联的伟大,中共文明继承 (величие советского союза, китайская коммунистическая культура наследует) перевод китайской поэмы

对于知乎上的如何看待一美国华裔发帖称父母若为孩子着想就别轻易移民美国之问,我写了一下之回

他说的很对,我跟他背景同样,六岁去了美国,也是凭自己的政治觉悟和语言天赋,以中文互联网为主要工具,把中文达到了与中国人没啥差别的水平。我比ArmorUSA还小一些,看来失去了当真正先驱的机会了,可依然独立得到了同样的判断,看看我的博客gmachine1729.com就能看到了,已经写了一年多,而ArmorUSA昨天才得知。我将来也要回来,已经开始联系中国公司了,为此欢迎从此回答读者得到联系和援助。我是做计算机的,但是回国我并不一定非要做它,或许更愿意从事一些文化政治宣传方面的工作,利用我的特殊才华加背景向更正确的方向启发中国人,这么做可以比作一位软件开发员有远远更大的影响力。而且我相信星星之火可以燎原!

Continue reading “苏联的伟大,中共文明继承 (величие советского союза, китайская коммунистическая культура наследует) перевод китайской поэмы”

Gangnam Style

I have a smattering of thoughts I want to express here, and cannot think of a more suitable title. I guess the general theme is the cultural divide from the Cold War. I use Gangnam Style as the title since it is a representative, and also it’s occurred to me that it’s better for attracting attention/marketing. It is or at least was the most viewed video on YouTube after all.

Why am I suddenly reminded of Gangnam Style? Well, yesterday somebody spoke of that Crazy Rich Asians movie that just came out, that’s in a couple weeks time gotten $86.6 million box office already, almost thrice the $30 million budget. After searching online, I learned it’s based off a novel of the same name by a Singaporean-American of Chinese descent from, predictably, quite a prominent family in Singapore. I had already learned of it, as it has been everywhere online for a few weeks, though I didn’t pay much attention to it. I was quickly reminded of an anecdote involving Gangnam Style, which is also Asian. As for the name, Gangnam is this important, wealthy district in Seoul, or something like that. It is Korean for 江南 (jiangnan), which means south of the river, I believe.

What is the anecdote? My smart as fuck Russian friend in math raised in America who identifies strongly with the Soviet era has a younger brother nowhere near as smart as him who plays video games all day. On the car, he would keep singing Gangnam Style. My friend got so annoyed with that he said,

From now on, sing that again, and I’m going to sing back No Motherland Without You, Comrade Kim Jong-il.

I have listened to Gangnam Style by the way, and my reaction was like, “how the fuck did this trashy culture-less music video in Korean become number one on YouTube? What the fuck is going on with the taste of the current generation?” I guess it’s also impressive, that South Korea can produce a video music this viral, in their own language. Korean drama is also a big thing. Samsung and Hyundai too. Koreans (in the South) are both technically and culturally innovative.

Reminds me of my unusual ABC (actually born in America) friend who’s sympathetic to the North. He said some things about them which surprised me. Now, most Chinese in my parents’ generation I’ve encountered were from relatively humble backgrounds, often first in their family to attend college. He’s an exception though. He told me that his father’s family used to own a four story building in Tianjin that he’s visited. During the war, it became Japanese barracks. After the Japanese left, they got it back, but four years later, they ended up sharing it with a bunch of poor people. He told me his grandpa was about to go study in Britain, but the Japanese invasion disrupted that plan. His mother’s dad were also highly educated in STEM, and occupied a relatively high up position there. Ironically though, he really surprised me by saying a bunch of stuff in Chinese in the likes of what you hear from people during the Mao era or nostalgic for it, like how back then people didn’t need to buy a home, because the state provided one. I concluded that he, who has spent his entire life in America, must have learned all that from his parents.

As for North Korea, I told him about how some Korean was telling me about how there’s this map of lighting of world, in which South Korea is super bright while the North is almost completely dark, which exception of a glimmer from Pyongyang, which just goes to show the sheer economic disparity in level of development. His response was,

Or maybe because while the South Koreans are being worked to death, the North Koreans are sleeping.

Inside Facebook office, there’s an analogous display.

0828_3

In this one, China is also entirely in totalitarian darkness. 😉

On DPRK, that guy was also like,

In a situation of war, the South Korean soldiers are not going to fight to the death to preserve the interests of their capitalist masters.

I spoke of how American and South Korean media talks about how the North’s army is extremely weak and ill-equipped now. Like their pilots don’t even have enough fuel to do sufficient training. On that he was like,

That’s not how the American and South Korean armies staging military exercises think.

I was like “lol okay.”

A few days ago, I finally learned of Erich Honecker and his wife Margot Honecker, who were the General Secretary and Minister of Education of East Germany respectively. They both pretty much got screwed after reunification. Erich escaped a criminal trial out of poor health to reunite with his wife in South America, who had sought asylum in Chile through the Chilean Embassy in Moscow. Margot died in 2016 and defended the GDR till her death. I had known before of the predecessor of Honecker, Walter Ulbricht, but not that he also had training Moscow from the 20s on as part of the German Communist Party. Not a surprise though, after the war, the Soviets pretty much planted those types in positions of power in East Germany. The system they established certainly had some political influence, they trained communists from all over the world, setting up schools just for that. The Comintern was certainly quite an effective political organization. Many of the old Chinese revolutionaries had that background too. I also learned of Egon Krenz, a top East German politician who actually travelled to China in 89 to thank Deng Xiaoping on behalf of the regime for using force to suppress the student protests, who subsequently published some books sympathetic to the GDR.

I’ve read before that there is quite a bit of East German nostalgia, with the so-called Ossis still being culturally different, of course, I’m not qualified to judge. In any case, it’s probably safe to assume that the stuff we hear in English about East German and the Stasi should be taken with a grain of salt. Victor’s justice after all, those part of the Stasi (an equivalent of Department of Homeland Security really), along with just about everyone high up in the East German regime, were politically disgraced after reunification.

More generally, I can sense how the political outlooks and ways of doing things still vary widely, and the legacy much persists today. The political rhetoric employed is markedly different, needless to say. Also, how those former socialist countries do those military parades, which would be naturally viewed in American mindset as distasteful and totalitarian, the style of dictatorship. Many from former those states also think that, especially ones who emigrated to the “free world,” also eventually grow to think that. They’ll say stuff like “waste of money.” An uncool way to “show how good we are.” I once said С днем победы to a Russian friend raised in America and he was like,

It’s stupid to celebrate the deaths of so many people.

My response was

So you’re saying that it’s basically, “we beat the Nazis, we saved Europe, we saved the world, we’re the best!”

And he was like, “pretty much.”

In the American political narrative, that stuff is almost always portrayed as people taking part in that not because they want to but because they have no choice under a totalitarian regime. An easy way to be dismissive of course. Expectedly, I find this perspective rather problematic. I’ve heard enough times the likes of “I like China, just not the Chinese government,” and “Remember that the Chinese people and the Chinese government are not the same thing.” The reality is that a government of a country is made up of a subset of its people, with the percentage depending on degree of government affiliation, not to mention that a government is necessarily influenced by its people, so it’s entirely unrealistic to speak of a government and its people as entirely separate.

I’ve also seen some liberal Russians here poke fun at Iosif Kobzon. They’ll say,

Oh, everybody hates Kobzon.

and

He’s ridiculous. Super pro-government. And he’s not even Russian you know, he’s actually Jewish. He’s ridiculous.

When the government routinely organizes those concerts where they sing those songs about the Red Army and crowds clap along, those guys find it either ridiculous or revolting. The thing is that the system gradually normalized that kind of activity to the point where people in that environment don’t find it strange and even enjoy it.

I do wonder how much of one’s preference on this spectrum is heritable versus shaped through experience. Necessarily, experiences shape one’s tastes and views but it is genes which largely determine how people respond to experiences more or less imposed on them as well as which ones they actively see out.

Thoughts on American/Anglo exceptionalism in a Nazi-Soviet context

I came across an interesting piece on Unz Review on German soldiers of World War II. Basically, what it is saying is that the Nazi soldiers, contrary to many depictions in the Anglo media, were far more competent than American or British soldiers. Of course, it’s the winners who write history, so we don’t get to hear this very often, even if true. I would certainly believe this to be the case. Like it or not, the effectiveness of a group is determined not only by the skill of the individuals in it but also by the willingness of its people to optimize selflessly for the group interest. I would expect that the Nazi soldiers, owing to their training and culture, were not only more technically proficient, but also much more willing to genuinely fight, without concern for personal loss or gain. It is these types of organizations that tend to be the most capable and effective collectively, like it or not, and they are exceedingly rare. For example, in corporate America, in the private sector, people are mostly out to advance themselves, or to extract money from the system in a way that minimizes pain or effort; managers and executives care more about their own position than the overall health of the company. Those who go to the extreme, in terms of actual competence and substance, and especially in terms of action, tend to be those with fervent passion, often ideologically motivated, or those whose survival is at serious risk.

In Andrei Martyanov’s book, he goes on about how the major difference between Soviet and American attitude towards war is that a whole generation of Soviets experienced a brutal war themselves where it was a matter or life and death, whereas America has not had a war at home since the Civil War from 1861-1865. This is elaborated on in Chapter Four, THE AMERICAN ELITES’ INABILITY TO GRASP THE REALITIES OF WAR. Owing to the privilege of being shielded by water, especially in the case of America, the Anglo world has been able to treat war as a means for power projection outside one’s borders as opposed to as a necessity for survival. Thus, the Anglos are more inclined to win easy wars against vastly weaker opponents which do not require much sacrifice of human life. There is also that, in the words of Sergey Krieger on Unz Review,

The problem is that Anglo Saxons tend to use others to fight their wars but as currently nobody can and Anglos are not known for their war fighting prowess outside of Hollywood movies, they are having problem. As Andrei wrote in his book one can go only so far persuading others in his prowess by beating babies in sandbox. Time comes to show it against big man and here Anglos are lacking. USA had a lot of luck due to location to get into dominant position but every luck eventually runs out.

Martyanov, Krieger, and similar Russians tend to believe that the military tradition and spirit in the Anglo world is lacking owing to their never having engaged a serious enemy in order to protect their homeland. External threats in the likes of Iraq and North Korea are mostly manufactured by the US media to lobby support for more wars of invasion and destruction overseas for profit and imperial domination; common sense should tell just about anyone that nobody seriously threatens the US or British homeland.

American exceptionalism, as far as I see it, is quite a delusional beast. It’s very much premised on a dogmatic conviction that God has granted her the right to do as she pleases throughout the world, and that it’s her duty to God to fully exercise it in the name of “freedom and democracy” for the rest of the world. I have often wondered myself how much it is that American elites really are delusional with regard to the inherent superiority of their political system for others versus that they are shamelessly promoting this with the conscious intent of screwing over their competitors. I used to think the latter, but now I do wonder if the American/Anglo psyche really is malformed enough for them to really believe they are doing good for the world. In any case, regardless of what exactly goes on inside their heads, they are destructive and damaging to the extreme. Yet, at the same time, contrary to what their actions internationally signify, there has emerged now at home this superficial and absurd (and disingenuous?) culture of inclusion and diversity along race and gender lines. The politically mainstream in America now, for the most part, denies race as a biological construct. The way I see it, it’s not a matter of being right wing or left wing, it’s a matter of realism vs denial. Like it or not, DNA is real, people are biologically wired to be nepotistic and ethnocentrist, and we should accept it, live with it, and manage it accordingly instead of pretending otherwise. I’m very much under the principle that those who engage in unscrupulous self-interest under the pretense of charity are far more malicious than those who openly acknowledge that they want more for themselves.

I’ll further illustrate the difference with a few quotes which would be met with horror and rebuke in today’s American political climate even though at core mostly innocuous.

One from the Nazi genius mathematician Oswald Teichmüller, who led boycotts against Jewish professors as an undergraduate at Göttingen.

I am not concerned with making difficulties for you as a Jew, but only with protecting – above all – German students of the second semester from being taught differential and integral calculus by a teacher of a race quite foreign to them. I, like everyone else, do not doubt your ability to instruct suitable students of whatever origin in the purely abstract aspects of mathematics. But I know that many academic courses, especially the differential and integral calculus, have at the same time educative value, inducting the pupil not only to a conceptual world but also to a different frame of mind. But since the latter depends very substantially on the racial composition of the individual, it follows that a German student should not be allowed to be trained by a Jewish teacher.

He is saying that these mathematical concepts, literally and technically speaking, are the same everywhere. Yes, and that’s the beauty of STEM, its universality. Even so, STEM also has its cultural interpretations and political ramifications, and due to both differences in cultural exposure, as well as an instinctive slant to one’s ethnic group as a part of our natural biological wiring, this “different frame of mind” does indeed “depend very substantially on the racial composition of the individual.” Ask yourself why people tend to look to those of the same race and sex as role models, even in science.

There is also a quote of Hitler on so-called “honorary Aryans” which struck somewhat of a chord with me. How much better for Chinese-Americans if America could educate and encourage more in the same fashion, as opposed to the toxic multiculturalism we’re getting right now.

Pride in one’s own race – and that does not imply contempt for other races – is also a normal and healthy sentiment. I have never regarded the Chinese or the Japanese as being inferior to ourselves. They belong to ancient civilizations, and I admit freely that their past history is superior to our own. They have the right to be proud of their past, just as we have the right to be proud of the civilization to which we belong. Indeed, I believe the more steadfast the Chinese and the Japanese remain in their pride of race, the easier I shall find it to get on with them.

Chinese raised in America have a lot of self-hate and identity issues. They could learn a bit from Hitler seriously, at least what he’s saying here. You can grow up Americanized but your DNA will never change. To reject your roots is but futile and pathetic. And seriously, forget all the popular (and often inaccurate) American propaganda and taboo about Hitler; just view him and what he did objectively based on the hard facts. And yes, the facts unambiguously say that American and Britain played a marginal role in defeating Hitler and the Nazis relative to what the Soviet Union did, and they were in fact ideologically much closer to Hitler and Nazi Germany than to Stalin and the Soviet Union. There were plenty of prominent pro-Nazi Americans and British, like media mogul William Randolph Hearst, until Hitler turned against Britain. Again, it’s another instance of the Anglo media and elite in blatant denial when reality is inconvenient for them.

Racism/ethnic nepotism is biologically rooted. Everyone has an element of that subconscious within his frame of mind. To be cognizant of this requires in some sense a higher consciousness, which different people develop to varying degrees. Without it, you’re like an animal acting on primal instincts without conscious awareness of it. This is commonly seen in the American ruling class, grossly lacking in metacognitive and cognitive empathetic capacity. Blinded by their own exceptionalism as well as unquestioning belief in the universal superiority of their political system, they seem unable to rationally predict how others are likely to react when their interests are threatened or infringed upon. I suppose this has been on one hand a strong motivator for colonization, conquest, and cultural hegemony, but on the other hand, when this lack of understanding of the other party leads to deeply miscalculated decisions of consequence, the losses are often enormous. Whatever is going on in the minds of the American/Anglo elite could only be fundamentally rooted in some form of intrinsic ethnic exceptionalism that manifests externally as aggressively and unremittingly expansionist, both militarily and culturally. I vaguely remember how somebody on Unz Review wrote that colonization and conquest is deeply embedded in Anglo DNA, and I would almost wholeheartedly agree. Nobody has gone anywhere near as far as the Anglos have on that one. The Anglo ability is undoubtedly quite high, but not quite commensurate with their unrealistic ambitions on the global stage, and in fact, often lower than what competitors develop over time, and when this happens, the elites present nothing but a sore loser attitude. The Anglo elites are contemptuous at heart of just about everyone; they express little desire to acknowledge and preserve jewels of civilization from outside and mostly seek cultural imperialism. In terms of displacement of populations (here we have United States, Canada, Australia), nobody has gone anywhere near as far as the Anglos. Of course, the populations they displaced in those cases were very weak and defenseless, of negligible value. However, even towards formidable adversaries, Russia and China in particular, the Anglos exhibit much hostility and yearn to destroy through cultural and political means, with utter contempt for and often outright denial of credit of legitimate achievement of the other party. Unfortunately for them, they are increasingly shooting themselves in the foot on this one. There are of course Anglo intellectuals who oppose this, but they seem to lack the sway to put actual change into effect. And it doesn’t seem like anybody else really wants to destroy the Anglos; they mostly want to be left alone. However, it might just be that the US elites have gone far enough, especially towards Russia through Ukraine, that Russians now have changed their mind and decided that the current US ruling class must be permanently taken down for their own, and the world’s, sanity. With China, the US already tried to take over North Korea (China’s Ukraine) and failed miserably, with a shocking military defeat that they try to forget and evade to this day. There are some actually sane Anglos, like Bob Sykes, who are afraid that the US neocons will attempt this again and get utterly smashed, this time with serious negative consequences, now that China is so much stronger.

As for rogue exceptionalism, the only group/culture that can really be compared to the Anglos, as far as action and media is concerned, is the Jews. Israel’s policy has been more or less one of rule at all costs, keep enemies weak at all costs, so long as you can get away with it. Use as much of America’s resources and international power as you can to achieve this. Lie whenever and however if it’s for the Jewish interest. Because Jews are the chosen people, period. Again, there are Jews like Ron Unz and Stephen Lendman who vehemently oppose this, but they are too marginal to do anything about it. And American elites support Israeli and Jewish interests, not only because there are too many Jews in positions of power in America but because Israel is seen as most expedient for Anglo domination of the Middle East.

People like me began with more of a let it be attitude, until it went too far and ticked us off too much, damaging our careers to some degree, that we decided that we cannot tolerate it anymore. I’ve gotten to the point where I want to openly say that loyalty to the America for a non-white or Russian is misguided; you’ll always be a second class citizen in this country, and just about any relatively high position you are awarded will be contingent on service to a rotten American elite. Sadly, given what’s happened, it will be difficult for me to alter this opinion. It’s perfectly okay for Chinese to utterly detach from America. China was never colonized and Anglicized the way India was. The former American puppet regime of China has now but a marginal existence in exile in Taiwan. Modern China was built with virtually infinitely more Soviet/Russian influence than American influence, an off-message fact that US media will avoid at all costs. America and the Anglos in general have had their chance of winning the hearts of both Russians and Chinese, but too bad for them, they’ve basically blown it away. Now it’s gotten to the point where not only do they not give a damn about what happens in America, so long as it doesn’t negatively affect them, they will even actively do what they can to make America fail.

Sergey Krieger noted that Anglos tend to use others to fight their wars. There are not enough Anglos in the world after all, so enough loyal, dependable lackeys from other groups need to be trained and enlisted. India is the best example of such. Even though India gained independence formally, the psychological dependence and subordination to the Anglo world never really evaporated. The difficulty with such a strategy is that those you feed to do your dirty work can eventually turn against you too, if you piss them off too much. American ruling class better watch out.

Finally, I shall say that there are plenty of Americans who do not fit this exceptionalist stereotype, though certainly, as a whole, Americans tend to be very susceptible to it. There is much variance across the population in just about every country or group, though certainly means can differ by a lot. I also want to keep in mind that there are plenty of Americans and Anglos tremendously talented and hardworking who I deeply respect, many of whom earnestly want to make America better; it just happens that those types are increasingly less likely to reap the big rewards. Either the American elites change and win a better reputation for themselves over time, or they go further to preserve their own power and wealth and burn the country further to the ground in the process. It’s no longer like before when America had too much power for anyone else to really do anything about it. Unfortunately, I’m not optimistic, especially with the production of more snake oil in the likes of Elizabeth Holmes lately from the bowels of Washington. As with everything, this all adds up over time. Past a tipping point, people really will believe that American disintegration would be necessary if human society and civilization is to advance its next major step.

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。

祝党的生日快乐!

97年了,我无话多言,直连到此文。此终结为:

上世纪20年代的青年思索救亡图存,30年代的学生投笔从戎,60年代的学子以身许国献身戈壁,当代年轻人面向社会追寻人生意义……一代代青年人的从心而行,何尝不是一种精神传承?让信仰之火熊熊不息,让红色基因融入血脉,让红色精神激发力量,我们就能更坚定、更执着、更无畏地前行,为国家为人民创造一个更好的明天。

哈哈,说是这么说,只不过据我所观察现在的人大多已经失去往时这种宝贵精神了,人也远远不如老革命那一辈了。总是感觉现在的人比起以前过于保守,缺乏胆量。作为一位在美国长大的被动无声的minority(少数民族)的一员,在一种腐朽无味的文化环境中,何以得到精神力量?当然,有个人的学习和事业,但我想说的不是这个。所想说的是文化认同。在这一点,不是多沉浸于ABC的伪文化中,而是多认识我们的革命前辈,从之得以启发。可惜与我同感的人实在太少。

今年初,我有幸得知并读中共创始人李大钊的《狱中自述》,感受到了他为党壮烈牺牲所留下的信念。共产党当时在受蒋介石发动的白色恐怖下的残酷冲击,此余力最终逃避生存而从建真是奇迹,从而中华民族得以新的诞生。此文之外,还看了讲这位民族英雄的一部纪录片,里面有不少他写的诗,开头还有他二十年代在莫斯科向当时多位共产主义战士演讲的镜头。

提到莫斯科,我还想说我业余自学俄文,直到今天基本能读会说一点,也很大处于更深入理解党的历史背景的愿望,当然,苏联的那一套也有不少非常值得学习的。

从建党建国的历程可以看到组织和动力的重要性。不用说,当时的人的确与现在非常不一样的,现在的社会太放纵,诱惑太多,过于注重金钱,人愈来愈自私,缺乏社会责任感和理想。我觉得市场经济是有一定用处的,但是同时,他鼓励很多对社会不良的表现,过于注重短期谋利,导致有长远意义的工作难以实施。在我前文所提,金钱的诱惑干扰实在太大,使得现在中国愿意静下心长期投入核心科技研制的精英越来越少,前辈知识分子坚持信念以身许国的精神已大大消失。

当然,你可以说我太理想主义了,可是我觉得接近于马克思想象的那种共产主义社会还是有可能的,尤其在现在机械化信息化高产能社会,此与以前的未工业化社会相比截然不同。以前稀缺是因为生产技术不够发达,而现在的稀缺大多是人为的,出于少数大资本家掌握太多物质资源,为了他们自己的利益囤积居奇,中国的房地产泡沫就是个好的例子。美国的大学学费过高也是又一个例子。在美国,公立教育是很烂的,学校提供的极少,完全需要家人自己投入。同样,美国没有医疗保证,好多人都没有医疗保险,有不少人得病而破产。总之而言,中国由于他的红色基因和毛主席时代的遗产比美国好得多,在价值观上。在美国资本家完全不会在乎你,也不在乎社会的健康,就为了你的钱,鼓励或垄断迫使大量销售,而且媒体由于被私人掌握好多都是故意误导人的。可惜中国人,尤其是领导人,不够自信缺乏志气,经常还要向美国这些学习,若不是毛泽东时代所留下的遗产,可能中国也会面临俄罗斯同样的遭遇。

在冷战时期社会主义苏联和中国的存在慢慢给世界形成了新的社会规范。两国在有经济条件的情况下都提供免费教育和医疗,加上有分配房子,按马克思的“各尽所能,各取所需”的原则。同时,社会主义国家所提供的育儿也提升了妇女的地位。相反,美国现在天天闹虚伪的,反常识的女权主义,而不解决此最根本的问题。强大的对手这样做导致美国资本家把在美国内地的剥削和系统种族歧视减轻了一些,好避免美国人民造反推翻他们的风险和赢得世界非白种人对美国的支持以对付社会主义阵营。当然,我们都知道中苏之间不久决裂了,毛时代晚期起,中国却开始偏向美国,所谓的逻辑是打着红旗反红旗威胁比公开资本主义更大,当然也是为自己利益的一种妥协。改革开放后,美国所施加的软压力和诱惑实在太大,导致了89年运动不当处理所引发的六四事件,此突然更大弱化了早已决裂的社会主义阵营。在这一点,我的确发觉到六四所制造的国际政治影响对苏联及东方集团的崩溃有了相当大的催化作用。我想,若社会主义在此复辟,何况共产主义实现,胡耀邦赵紫阳这俩王八蛋,如赫鲁晓夫一样,肯定会被划为历史的罪人。

当然,不少人用苏联的最终失败和中国的转型来证实社会主义制度的劣势。当时,从科学严谨角度而言,这一点都算不上什么证实,只不过是一种容易忽悠人的政治宣传而已。在冷战时期,因为美国特别怕红色中国,才给了日本和四小龙大量的经济援助和政治支持,在彻底封锁红色中国的同时,欲之崩溃。这样当然更加貌似资本主义民主制度优越于社会主义民主集中制,可说服大多数人。当然,也有少数一般智商比较高的人,如我的美国数学奥赛金牌朋友(纯粹美国人)也说好多是因为苏联二战后还是很落后于美国,中国与美国的主要盟国英法日加起来就更不用说了。我也想,可能当时如果苏联没有变修,采取适当的改革,并且维持与中国的结盟合作,结果会是反过来的,那就是社会主义赢得冷战,在美国进行更多向着社会主义的和平演变。当然,冷战不光是意识形态的冲突,也是大国之间的冲突,要是苏联和中国要赢,肯定也要像美国传播一种服从似的社会主义,此也是中苏分裂的根源,那就是中国到了一定的程度不想继续做服从的社会主义二哥。

虽然大国之争,民族之争处于人的本性,不可避免,只可良化,我还是相信社会规范是可以并且值得进步的,一点因为此在历史过程中大致是进步的,二点因为世界现在还有很多极其糟糕不仁的制度和社会规范,甚至可以说苏联垮台之后,美国统治阶级无压力,为所欲为,使之退步。比方说,我想有可能,甚至,如果我乐观,很可能,一百年后,现在美国这样的没有免费教育和医疗的社会是难以想象的,至少在发达国家。也可以想象一百年后,通过发达的基因检测及胚胎筛选的实施,社会不会允许智商低于80的人和有昂贵遗传疾病的人出生。无论如何,我相信中国共产党97年前的诞生会经得起历史的检验。这是什么意思?比如,中华人民共和国的不断成功和世界地位的上升已经给中国的体制增强了威望,当然,现在世界舆论还大由美国为首的西方国家掌握,它们还可以说这是因为中国改革开放起转向了资本主义制度,只不过不民主,而若民主只会更好。这中说法我觉得很扯淡,没有根据,认为中国人要敢于在强大的压力下坚持真理,自信主动地带领人类的社会进步,科学的决定并且尝试制度,包括更社会主义的制度,少在意美国如何看待。要想超越别人,带领新的潮流,走向更先进的社会,必须敢于挑战当前的权威,在学习它的同时解开他的缺点漏洞,发展自己的独特之处,大胆而科学的探索尝试新的方法,让时间所检的更佳结果和优越不得不得到世界的认可。

其实,鉴于此文在纪念党的生日,我觉得中共所领导的做的好多都是惊人的,具有无比勇气的。统一了百年军阀混战的中国是一。建国没捞着喘什么气又跟世界老大直接打了一仗,而且还赢了,至少平了。此代价是世界老大采取几乎所有措施让你崩溃,但是二十年后,中国从几乎零的基础下研制出了两弹一星,世界老大也不得不认输了。之后,跟世界老大建交了,他非要让你改变你的制度,到处污蔑你好对你施加压力,但中共依然坚持抵抗着,直到今天发展到世界老大真的怕你代替他咯。所以从任何客观的角度这都是很神的党,奇迹性的政治组织,美国当权派及其走狗对它的诬蔑只能客观表示一种自己深厚的畏惧和对自己失败的回避,是一种拒绝面对客观事实的表现,用另一句话说,是一种sore loser的表现。当然,中国在共产党的领导下还要好多做的不足的地方,如此前文所述,还有很漫长的路要走。我个人觉得中共改革开放那帮领导相对比较差,比较没有骨气,此可以以六四和中国的人才流失证实,当然我也认识到中国要融入美国为首的国际体系就是要失去一定的独立自主为代价。(注:读者别把我搞错,我绝对不是一个极左,四人帮当然也有很多糟糕的地方,基本上是一些弱智流氓,但至少他们是立场坚定,不会去走卖国的自由主义。)

作为终结,我想引用一下我很尊重的一位英国学者所分析的,那就是:

Not that I am any sort of unreconstructed Maoist: I also approve of Deng Xiaoping, including his willingness to be harsh when necessary. Both Mao and Deng played a big part in producing today’s China, but in a future article I will argue that it was Deng who came closest to wrecking it. Contrary to what most analysts will tell you, Mao always had a fall-back position that he could return to if one of his radical experiments went wrong.

翻译成中文是:

不是我是任何教条的毛派:我也认可邓小平,尤其是他在需要的时候肯采取严厉措施。毛和邓都对建立今天的中国起了决定性的作用,但是在未来的文章,我会论证为何是邓最接近毁之。与大多评论家会说的相反,毛总是,以备他的某个大试验出问题的可能,有了适当的退却安排。

其实随着我对相关背景的不断了解,我也得出了类似的结论(当然,我这么说无法证明这不是看到上文所产生的后见之明偏误。盼望这位可被视为奇异的学者尽快发表对他此“异常”观点的论证!

On the Trump-Kim meeting in Singapore

I had the great pleasure of catching up in person with a friend doing math PhD in something algebraic geometry-ish at a top school. We had dinner at an Indian restaurant. He asked me what I thought of the upcoming meeting between Trump and Kim in Singapore. It’s something that I hadn’t been paying attention to really, though I was aware of it, and I didn’t really have any opinion.

As of today, the meeting is over. I saw an article about it from Washington Post. Apparently, Trump agreed to halt US-South Korea military exercises, exactly what the Chinese government proposed ahead of the summit, likely in the personal meeting between Xi and Kim well before that, wants to eventually pull out US troops from South Korea, and professes more of less the attitude that though China is violating sanctions on DPRK that it agreed to, there’s nothing that can really be done. It’s impressive that DPRK has manage to resist for so long. America with its might has done so much to try to bring it down with economic sanctions and exclusion from much of the international community, thereby rendering its reputation as a pariah state. The people running DPRK, like them or not, are survivors. They, as a puny little country, managed to develop nukes despite economic sanctions and the crisis resulting from the decline and ultimate collapse of their former puppet master or patron (or whatever you choose to call it), the USSR. Their having nukes (and also being next to China, which America dares not to mess with too much) allowed the Kim dynasty to not end up like Saddam or Gaddafi. They must have felt that with the USSR gone and China’s viewing them as an obstacle towards its international integration that they really needed the nukes to preserves themselves. Though people also say that their long range artillery, with Seoul, where like half of South Korea’s population and economy is, within reach, they have enough to deter a military attack against them. What did they really get from nukes? Some more bargaining chip, because they figure they can always get more by pretending to denuclearize. I can’t blame them really. Anyone will go to the extremes when it’s a matter of survival. If you try to starve a dog to death (but can’t, strictly speaking), he’ll just become a ferocious wild one in order to survive, and that’s exactly what DPRK has done.

This must be quite a blow to the neocons and American supremacists who are so keen on American world domination. Hate to tell them that by now, they’ve probably missed their chance. The way things are going right now, in a decade, South Korea could even become a PRC ally; they will once it’s in the interests of those in positions of power there to do so. What can America provide them? A guarantee that those people currently on top can stay on top. They do that foremost by providing defense against a possible DPRK invasion. I’m skeptical still that US will actually move forward with pulling troops out of South Korea; the ROK elite probably won’t like that, unless those with conciliatory attitudes towards their northern counterparts take over, which could happen. I know little about what the popular opinion is there. I do have Korean friends who tell me that there, if you actually sing a DPRK song in public, you will definitely be arrested, because there really is something to fear. There is quite a history of that there. It is well-established that during the Korean War, after the DPRK first invaded, Syngman Rhee ordered massacres of those perceived as disloyal to his regime. Even in the 80s, when the ROK was already doing much better than the DPRK, there was the Gwangju Uprising, which is like a South Korean Tiananmen Square. Of course, to justify its suppression, it was easy for the government to label the protesters as agent of the enemy regime. Contrary to impressions given by the American media, the South Korean position has been somewhat precarious too, and America has been willing to really invest there. There are even nuclear weapons deployed in South Korea, not just American soldiers stationed there. It’s an ally that is seen as vulnerable and too valuable to lose. Over the years, people have always been asking how long the DPRK can hold on. Now could it be that it is the ROK that will struggle to hold on, at least if remaining a staunch American ally is an absolute must? In some being ROK has being an American lapdog almost as a definitive characteristic, more so than on the other side, with the DPRK’s having had two larger powers bid for its loyalty during the Cold War, and with its more being on its own afterwards. The ROK leadership is seen as more spineless (or less able to hold on their own) than the DPRK leadership, having had America’s military presence directly at home with themselves in the subordinate position ever since the Korean War, whereas the Chinese People Volunteer Army, that basically saved the DPRK regime, left not long after the armistice was signed, though it still maintains a defense treaty that guarantees military protection. Much of that is because China, being so poor and backwards at that time, had scarce resources and enough to deal with at home, while America was, and still is, a very rich country plentiful in resources. Of course, there is also that the American elite seems so much delusional with regard to their own exceptionalism and fanatic about their domination of the world. Unfortunately for them, their efforts have been really backfiring in recent years, with the rest of world’s having caught up and increasingly reluctant to take their orders, which they are now much more capable of resisting. The British Empire possessed the same attitude, and one, from this, gets the feeling that this intent for world domination is much more in the Anglo-Saxon genes. Saxon has association with German, and yes, the Germans produced a Hitler, but it’s reasonable to say he was mostly a reactive force, with Germany’s having been shamed in the Versailles Treaty. The Brits were the pioneers of industrialization, and also the pioneers of colonialism and imperialism (if one discounts the earlier Spanish). The British Empire and its derivative America are arguably also the most fervent about spreading their religious and ideological faith. God, freedom, and democracy. They are also arguably the most delusional there.

The reality with the British Empire and with America is that they were pioneers in many ways, giving them the first mover advantage, but eventually had difficulties competing with the latecomers, who were in many ways more competent. Though economically and technologically, the Anglos may have fallen behind their competitors in certain aspects, the cultural presence established by their earlier victories last much longer. Like it or not, they have been relatively successful at getting the rest of the world to accept and embrace their so called cultural values, through a combination of merit, trickery, and intimidation. They are also arguably the most narcissistic, domineering, and historically scurrilous. They led in terms of their science and technology, with that the merit side. In terms of the lengths to which one deceives and coerces, they led much more. People observes how obscenely rich and powerful individuals, in their business, are cutthroat to the extremes. They will screw over another when it is in their interest to do, meaning of course that they can get away with it. They will engage hypocritically in philanthropy and whatnot to buy their reputations and establish a facade of charity. Analogously, the Anglo world has done this massively with its cultural imperialism of which blatant historical falsification and political deception in the media are the essential ingredient. Some other countries wanted to and tried, to some degree or another, to stop them, but lack the aggressive disposition and material power to do so. Economically and militarily, the Anglo world is of course guilty of displacement of the natives in America and Australia, and even to this day, the UK holds on to the Falkland Islands. Culturally they have been successful; this, along with America’s worldwide network of military bases, which America is increasingly lacking in its ability to economically sustain, are held as socially acceptable, the social norm. This might change though, but it will take a while.

America’s main competitors are China and Russia. Of the two, China is much more threatening. These are countries which have resisted the Anglo political and cultural system to this day, especially China, which is much harder to conquer, out of a combination of its size, competence, and alienness of culture, as a civilization that developed more or less independently from the rest of the world over millennia. The elites of the USSR basically sold out their country to America, whereas the Chinese communist elites managed to resist that. America and Britain had other competitors too, most of all Japan, but Japan was mostly tamed after WWII, and even with its economic and technological rise afterward, it could not escape the confines of the war legacy that it refuses to face. Germany is similar, but its attitude towards its war crimes is the antithesis of Japan’s. This is largely because the countries and peoples which suffered most from Nazism were the ones to destroy it. On the other hand, Japan was defeated by America and the Soviet Union, not by China, who was too weak at the time, though China did play a major role in sinking more of their resources, particularly human resources, which were the main bottleneck, quantitatively, for Japan, as a small nation that had tried very hard and only half-succeeded at playing the game of world imperialism that it entered in too late.

As much as I respect the accomplishments of the Anglo world, I much dislike the what I would call the domineering hypocritical sore loser mentality that this culture tends to channel and accept into their elites. When they are winning, they are arrogant and nasty. When they lose, they tend to do so in a very pathetic way. They are utterly lacking in self-critique and try to force blame on their adversaries. They have plenty of really talented, good people, but they are not very good at letting those people have a say on the important decisions. Since the title of this article is about the Trump-Kim summit, I’ll certainly say that America was quite a sore loser during the Korean War, which I won’t explain, because it is too obvious. This is objective reality; I’m not saying this because I am Chinese. Those anti-communist Chinese in Taiwan and Hong Kong who deny this are ridiculous, and the Anglo world world is just so keen on using such people as tools for sabotage against the real Chinese, except they keep on failing so miserably at it, making a fool of themselves. They are increasingly losing credibility.

Those in HBD will point out differences in temperament between East Asians and whites, which explain differences in social outcomes in individuals and the collective societies of which the individuals are constituents. There is the perception that East Asians are far less aggressive, which is a negative for maverick creativity, enough to offset the IQ advantage enjoyed by East Asians. There are of course some who claim that East Asians have lower variance in IQ explains the putative dearth of East Asian geniuses, though there is hardly any real evidence for this. This is exemplified by how the Chinese historically have been a relatively inward looking people. They made plenty of practical inventions, most notable of them papermaking and gunpowder that were transmitted to the West via the Silk Road, but were grossly lacking in fundamental theoretical contributions to science. Even now, China in foreign policy is relatively passive. There were plenty of crazy Chinese communist radicals, but that was a reactive mechanism of a society under crisis. I don’t see this changing much soon, though as China becomes more powerful and advanced, she will become more confident and care less about what the rest of the world, especially America, thinks. She may even go all out to change international norms to its liking, maybe in another generation. I myself am somewhat of a meek person by nature, but I can also be quite aggressive in certain ways. Like, I don’t uphold any fake ideal of freedom and human rights that Anglo culture so unabashedly and delusionally (perhaps with ulterior motives) promotes; discipline and “totalitarianism” (also call in a lack of American-style PC) certainly are very useful and necessary when defined appropriately in the right context. I am aggressive enough to not buy into much of the BS America sells, culturally and ideologically. If certain groups do a lot of damage, objectively, then it’s definitely a very good idea for them to be rendered irrelevant, by force if necessary. If certain objectively flawed ideas are promoted for the interests for some scumbags, then people absolutely SHOULD organize to resist them instead of standing idly. To me, a malicious person feigning charity is much worse than a very self-interested person who is open about what he wants.

I actually feel like China and Chinese in general could be, and probably should be, much more aggressive at getting their voice out and calling out the BS aspects of America. They shouldn’t be so accepting of it. They need a little more arrogance. And the more economically and technologically powerful and advanced China becomes, the more justification there would be for doing that. Before, China was so far behind that it could not claim much credibility, but that has changed vastly, especially over the past five years, with the trend being much on China’s side. If people don’t feel comfortable doing that, maybe they should work out more to increase their testosterone and confidence. Maybe they can find the genes for that and select for it to remedy the natural ethnic defect. Is this justified? Of course. Even many actually smart white Americans believe this would be better for the world. Quoting someone else, and not to be taken too literally,

A world run by Chinese or Japanese is one where they’d be rich and on top but mostly leave others alone, except to get money from them.

A world run by whites is one where half want to conquer and half want to help.

A world run by Jews is one where they’d systematically extinguish any hope of ending it.

Corresponding with me, Ron Unz concurred, without ever seeing this statement to my knowledge. His words are the following:

Naturally, the Verbal skew among Jews is a significant factor. But personally, I think a much bigger, relatively ignored factor would be what might be called the “Fervency/Fanaticism/Aggressiveness Quotient,” and it wouldn’t surprise me if the Jewish mean were something like 115 or even 120. Meanwhile, the East Asian mean might be down around 85 or 90, which has major social impacts.