Are individualistic societies less equal?

Are Individualistic Societies Less Equal? Evidence from the Parasite Stress Theory of Values


[This is how you don’t do a study on cultural differences.]

It is widely believed that individualistic societies, which emphasize personal freedom, award social
status for accomplishment, and favor minimal government intervention, are more prone to higher
levels of income inequality compared to more collectivist societies, which value conformity, loyalty, and tradition and favor more interventionist policies.

widely believed?

And tradition doesn’t mean, what you think it means i.e. nepotism, grandpa never retires.

The results in this paper, however, challenge this conventional view.

Great, nurture people.

Drawing on a rich literature in biology and evolutionary psychology, we test the provocative Parasite Stress Theory of Values,

aka wrong

because low fitness =

which suggests a possible link between the historical prevalence of infectious diseases, the cultural dimension of individualism-collectivism and differences in income inequality across countries.

Specifically, in a two-stage least squares analysis, we use the historical prevalence of infectious diseases as an instrument for individualistic values, which, in the next stage, predict the level of income inequality, measured by the net GINI coefficient from the Standardized World Income Inequality Database (SWIID). Our findings suggest that societies with more individualistic values have significantly lower net income inequality.

Make your mind up.

White man bad or good.

The results are robust even after controlling for a number of confounding factors such as economic development, legal origins, religion, human capital, other cultural values, economic institutions, and geographical controls.

Legal origins…..

Oh, I brought screencap.

Shit, a diagram of people who wash their hands after.

Could this have something to do with infection? or…. IQ?

The Parasite Stress Theory of Values, which was first introduced by Thornhill and Fincher
(2014), proposes that regions with high levels of parasitic stress were more likely to naturally
select personality traits such as xenophobia, neophobia, ethnocentrism, and, more generally,
values that disregard the well-being of out-group members, including those at the lower
end of the economic ladder. Traits like xenophobia and neophobia, for instance, not only
reduce economic transactions between groups and across-regions, but reward conformity
and obedience toward traditional order and discourage novelty


Explain Brexit.

As a result, societies with high degree of pathogenic stress were more likely to develop cultural traits associated with collectivist values (Fincher et al., 2008) that view negatively ideas that can potentially threaten the established social norms.

Societies too thick to believe germ theory contaminate their water supply and get infected?

To this day?

See they wanna admit the collectivism but spin it.

From an evolutionary standpoint, these behavioral strategies were mechanisms to stop the spread of
infectious diseases

The required amount of immigrants is zero and mercantile transportation didn’t exist for millennia.

The Chinese seemed happy to swarm America as soon as it was legal.

Where did black death come from? Which continent?

Theoretically, then, the effect of individualistic values on income inequality is ambiguous.

More lies.

Since the individualism-collectivism component loads positively on values such as individual freedom, opportunity, achievement, advancement, recognition, and loads negatively on values such as harmony, cooperation, and relations with supervisors, Gorodnichenko and Roland (2012) note that, broadly defined, individualism emphasizes the values of personal freedom, affective autonomy, and achievement. In that sense, individualistic cultures award social status to personal achievements such as innovation, discoveries, or artistic achievements with high social status (Gorodnichenko and Roland, 2012).

How terrible. /s

A stylized empirical fact that emerged from a series of follow-up studies is that developed and industrialized nations are more likely to be associated with greater prevalence of individualism whereas less developed, traditional and agricultural societies are more likely to preserve collectivistic values (Hofstede et al., 1991).

“less developed” = low IQ

maybe the culture led to the economic prosperity and industry? big if true?

What is this a map of, children?

a) places people want to live

b) places white people live

c) cultures that aren’t shit-holes

d) cultures where capitalism is technically allowed

e) countries that won’t suffer comparatively in the next collapse

f) all of the above.

It’s F, for Fuck China, rates should’ve gone up decades ago.

You read the rest.

Autonomous (individualistic) cultures are ones where people are seen as autonomous and independent entities. In such cultures, people are encouraged to cultivate and express their own preferences, feelings, ideas, and abilities, and derive meaning from their own uniqueness. Embedded (collectivist) cultures, on the other hand, are ones where people find meaning by identifying with the group, participating in a shared way of life, and striving towards shared goals.

Where do you want to live?

In short, do you want to suppress, oppress and smother the smart, gifted people?

Average IQ by Race, Ethnicity, and Career . . . And Why It Matters

You can say Japan and China are smarter until you look at their pension plans.

I’ve posted about them.

Israel’s IQ is 95 on a good day.

Southeast Asians (Thailand, Cambodia, Laos, Vietnam, Malaysia, Indonesia, the Philippines, and Borneo)


about right, almost a whole deviation down

YOU have to live with this.

South Asians (Bangladesh, India, Pakistan, Iraq, Iran, the Gulf states, the Near East, and Turkey)


Yes, let us fear them.

Eastern and Southeastern Europe is 95

Hispanics in America 89

I’m scared, are you?

Welfare, the important metric.

Why count Asia as two? Why all the lies? Why?

You count all Europeans?

Comic: The Routine

Every. Fucking. Time.


Alternate title: Damsel in distress, pathological altruism edition.

This toxic colonialism is bullshit. Deport the cuckians first.

IQ has nothing to do with gullibility. Predators have their own intelligence.

It isn’t charity with somebody else’s money. Damselling is pride.

(And by all definitions I know, treason!)

If it’s about love, why do they want money? – hookers come in many forms

Behold, the savage prostitute. A dog turd spray-painted gold still smells like shit.

“I don’t care if she’s a stripper, we’re in love!” Geopolitical edition.

World, you aren’t a damsel, you aren’t even a dame. Whitey is not your husband, we owe you nothing.

Okay, I’ll be happy to give them a one-time lump sum if they 1. leave us alone and STFU on it forever and 2. are forbidden from using White developments, all of them. Globalism is expensive.

Technological multiculturalism is killing us. Literally.

Video: The Tesla of Eco-villages

In an interview at Singularity University’s Global Summit in San Francisco, James Ehrlich shared insights on how combining lessons from nature with new technology is pushing sustainable housing into new frontiers.

Ehrlich is the founder of ReGen Villages, a company that spun out of Stanford University and is building the “Tesla of ecovillages.” Ehrlich is also Singularity University faculty and won the Global Grand Challenge award in the shelter category at last year’s Global Summit.

These sustainable neighborhoods integrate renewable practices in food, water, energy, and waste management to create self-reliant communities in which all essential needs for a healthy life are met within the footprint of that community.

“The idea is to take energy positive homes and add infrastructure that is actually regenerative. What that means is that the output of one system becomes the input of another,” said Ehrlich. “We think this is the best solution for the next two to three billion people coming to the planet in the next 30 years.”

Watch the full interview and learn how biomimicry and other lessons from nature are helping build more resilient and sustainable neighborhoods.

But those billions are too low IQ to maintain it themselves

and kill the dumb people willing to try.

Why can’t the tech be delivered to the places starving and they do the damn job themselves?

Why should we build and slave for the outgroup?

We can’t even house ourselves. Generation Rent here.

If we’re responsible for them, they must be dependents.

Why should we help child rapists?

Why can’t they grow their own food?

High IQ tech is wasted on the low IQ.

Sounds almost Biblical?

Have at it.

You can’t save people who won’t stop reproducing long enough to save themselves.

The funniest part?

This American has created nothing new. It’s a high-tech potager.

Yep, feudalism. Keyword is “Energy positive” – it’s taxable, I’ll bet. You work to live, work makes you free, corporatism pretending to be environmentalism.

Serfs are back, they never left.
The surplus of energy belongs to the workers. Workers do not have owners, that’s a slave. Slaves were ‘paid’ with a place to live and food- AKA exactly this plan.
The capital produced belongs to the laborer, this is the foundation of human rights.

Libertarians, now is your time to shine.

Second row.

We did it first, Yanks.

 Small farmsteads were tended by, and would have supported, isolated communities of family or extended family size, producing enough to live on and a little extra to exchange for commodities that the farmers were unable to provide for themselves.

Many of these small farmsteads, such as at Farley Mount in Hampshire, delimited with a circular bank and ditch enclosure, were surrounded by linear ditch systems that formed small rectangular fields, radiating out from the farm itself.

Video: The Economic Hitmen

Party politics is laughably small-minded.

Remember when I fingered the NGOs as corrupt? Well all that infrastructure they’re building…. it’s basically colonialism.
The ‘cucks’ are working for the NGOs, not their own government, let alone the people paying for it. They are above government but operate like companies… but tax exempt as charities.
If they couldn’t exploit these people or places, they wouldn’t want to do anything there.

The Smart Fraction theory of IQ and the wealth of nations

I was hoping that we could continue our discussion of human biodiversity. I brought some fascinating data from the Summer 2001 Mankind Quarterly. In the article, National IQ and Economic Development: A study of Eighty-One Developing Nations, Richard Lynn and Tatu Vanhanen expose a relationship between national wealth and IQ. I brought a table of their data, but you can see the relationship best in a graph (Figure 1).

It has sexy graphs.

Dat mass.

Notice how GDP is positively correlated to average IQ. The correlation coefficient is 0.733, IQ explaining 54 percent of the GDP variance. Values this large are rare in social science. ….

Prodigy.  That’s because the relationship between per capita GDP and mean IQ is not linear. The fit is the best that can be obtained with a line.

Estraneo.  Is nonlinearity important?

Prodigy.  Correlation indicates the degree of linear association between variables. Because, the relationship is nonlinear, the value 0.73 actually underestimates the strength of the relationship. …

Thus, for a technologically sophisticated society, SFT asserts that a nation’s per capita GDP is determined by the population fraction with IQ greater than or equal to some threshold IQ. Consistent with the data of Lynn and Vanhanen, that threshold IQ is 108, a bit less than the minimum required for what used to be a bachelor’s degree. Figure 3 illustrates the fit of (3) to the data of Lynn and Vanhanen.

Saturation is probable, dwindling marginal utility of sorts.

World IQs have been increasing at the rate of 3 IQ points per decade (the Flynn effect). If that trend continues [DS: and is valid], countries now in the mean-IQ neighborhood of 100, will near smart fraction saturation in about a century.

Directionality is considered.

Estraneo.  There has been something gnawing at me for a while now. Just because national wealth and IQ correlate across different countries, we cannot infer which causes what. Smart Fraction Theory would fit the data just as well if national wealth led to high IQ rather than the other way round.

Prodigy.  You are correct, Estraneo. We need to look elsewhere for evidence that fixes the direction of causation. Independent studies of monozygotic twins reared apart provide some help. At least four major studies have been conducted with remarkably consistent results. They find about 70% of the variance in IQ is associated with genetic variation. Bouchard et al, Science, Oct 12, 1990, present an excellent review of these studies. Closer to the present context, we can look to the clever experiment of Charles Murray (Income Inequality and IQ, AEI Press, 1998). Murray studied biological sibling pairs selected such that the siblings in each pair differed significantly in IQ, but were reared in the same home by the same parents. Controlling thus for environmental factors, Murray found earnings stratified conspicuously by IQ.

There is much more, Estraneo, but two nails are sufficient to fix the direction of a one-way sign. The arrow of cause points mostly from IQ to income, and not the other way round.

Western culture IS the best

Or to put it another way;

Europe ist besser

Early 1800s.
Culture A was creating Science and steampower.
Culture B was still dying of leprosy and exorcising demons.
Culture C was still doing raindances and eating one another.
Historical facts: ruining liberal wetdreams since forever.

Resources are running out because there are too many people

Not a single mention of

The Malthusian trap is about to snap shut and take the undeveloped world with it.

We will not listen and begin measures. We will continue to feed r-types far outbreeding us with evermore hungry mouths to consume Western productivity. When the East rises, they will die regardless. You think China will care anymore for an African peasant than one of its own?

Strangely, the UN expects the world population to have drastically decreased by 2300, without explaining how.