Are individualistic societies less equal?

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

THE HORROR.

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

https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/78557/1/gini_pathogens-1.pdf

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)

87

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)

84

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?

Cultural individualism and businesses

https://www.ecfed2018.unican.es/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/Empreendedorismo-20180530-Daisy.pdf
Individualism, Culture and Entrepreneurial Opportunities*

brb altering history

The present paper evaluates the effect of living in an individualistic society on
entrepreneurial opportunities, using cross-country data from the GEDI. Individualism
is one of the five cultural dimensions proposed by Hofstede (2001) and it is considered
by intercultural psychologists the main dimension of cultural variation. For individualism is a cultural trait that emphasizes freedom and rewards one’s own personal
achievements, it increases the propensity to open new businesses and realize own ideas,
despite the possibility of failure. So as to prevent reverse causality between individualism and entrepreneurial activity, we use the frequency of blood types and other
genetic data as instruments. The data show a positive and highly significant effect
of individualism on entrepreneurship, even after controlling for education, religion,
fertility, unemployment, the ease of doing business, networking, among others.

Economists try to pretend the race-culture connection isn’t important but….

I screencapped.

Look at ‘lil Venezuela down there, I wonder what will happen to them?

This is why Trump doing the trade war is a genius move. THIS.

In countries with more individualistic cultural characteristics, they have a predominance of individuals seeking potentially better opportunities to conduct an initial business, as well as characteristics with a greater perception of entrepreneurial opportunity. Similarly, Figure 5 suggests that countries with
more individualistic cultures often have greater opportunities to start a business. As for example, Canada, United States, Great Britain and Australia. The ten countries with the highest GEI index in 2017 were: the USA, Switzerland, Canada, Sweden, Denmark, Iceland, Australia, the United Kingdom, Ireland and the Netherlands.

I wonder what THEY have in common.

1950s GDP: not race (only) but cultural individualism.

Therefore, it measures the quality of entrepreneurship, as we are concerned with the quality of entrepreneurship: the entrepreneur driven by opportunities that generate commercial success. The definition of entrepreneurship that we will adopt is related to job creation and growth through innovation.

aka GDP, real ingroup gains

No, Asians can’t take over capitalism. That can literally never happen.

They’re collectivists, they get crony capitalism, they’ll fuck it up.

We just have to survive that.

I wonder what this figure indicates…

Yes.

You’ve got me.

Yes, this is definitely my opinion.

My educated opinion.

As you can see, I am very jelly.

Thus, the most appropriate model for the analysis of the effect of entrepreneurial activity on individualism is that of column (5).

Considering the above-identified situation of a possible endogeneity between the variables, instrumental fractional variables were included for the econometric analysis. This process requires variables that are related to individualism, but not to entrepreneurial activity.
This hypothesis is sufficient so that the causal relation can be established in the proper direction. Thus, for individualism we use the blood distance of Mahalanobis and the pathogenic genes according to Gorodnichenko and Roland (2017). In table 2, the individualism and each possibility of instrument: distM-UK and mean of pathogens, which are, respectively, Mahalanobis blood distance between the country in England and the mean of the presence of the nine genes pathogens considered relevant to Murray’s individualist collectivist analysis: leishmaniasis, trypanosomes, malaria, schistosomiasis, filaria, leprosy,dengue, typhus and tuberculosis.

My opinion, clearly.

I magically altered their blood, to lie.

I can do that.

The relationship is negative, because it suggests that the closer to the entrepreneurial country, the more individualistic the culture will be.

Table 3 includes some more control variables, particularly related to institutions and their long-run effect on development. Precisely due to their persistence, it is important to separate the effect of culture from institutions as good as possible, although this it is a difficult matter and still an ample field of research (Gorodnichenko and Roland 2017; Spolaore and Wacziarg 2013)

Muh opinion, clearly.

I’m just jealous of cultures that enslave their children to make my phone.

Table 4 repeats our preferred estimation, the fractional probit instrumental variable model,
for a number of subsamples. On the one hand, the sample is divided into countries that
experienced European colonization and those that did not. The former may have suffered
a mixture of cultures that is not captured by the genetic data. Therefore, if any, we expect
the effect of individualism to be stronger and more precise in the latter subsample.

To sum up, we find remarkably few differences in the magnitude of the individualism index
across the estimations in tables 3 and 4. In fact, the point estimate is not statistically
different from the baseline regressions in table 2 and in all of the seven estimation do
we obtain a positive and significant effect of individualism on the opportunity to start a
business.

The argument for muh civic nationalism, muh brain drain immigration is a pack of lies.

They are not the same as us.

The present paper evaluated the hypothesis that individualism can influence the entrepreneurial activity, accounting for cross-country differences in education, religion, fertility, unemployment, ease of opening a company and networking. The data shows a strong and remarkably robust relationship between living in an individualistic culture and entrepreneurship.

Things libertarians pretend to give a shit about.

The West is WEIRD – nobody else.

Although one should be careful in interpreting our results as causal, our estimates of fractional probit instrumental variable approach suggests a plausible interpretation of this relationship. We explored other potentially important channels in determining entrepreneurial activity.
The effect may potentially be confounded by geography, climate conditions, or through European colonization, as well as through persistent institutions, such as the risk of expropriation. In addition, the influence of the culture dimension of individualism was tested separately for each group of countries belonging to the OECD or not. It was concluded that the effects remained positive and significant, confirming the validity of the results and of the instruments.
Finally, the perceptions of the opportunity to start a business are different from society
to society, so the origin of these differences and their influences is important. Thus, this
article thus complements the studies on entrepreneurship (Pinillos and Reyes (2011), Liñán
and Fernandez-Serrano (2014), Dheer (2017), Doepke and Zilibotti (2014), Laskovaia et al.
(2017) and Nikolaev et al. (2018).

Ya snooze, ya lose.

Peterson memes and the myth of the individual

The Left can’t meme, holy shit.

It’s like a goth phase for degenerates.

He’s the dumb person’s smart person.
And the best meme is obviously this:

Show me IQ by sexual partners or STD history, Peterson.

http://highexistence.com/16-jordan-peterson-memes-made-clean-room-laughter/

How to spot a cult, this line:
“There are those on the inside who “get it” and those on the outside who don’t.”

The modern navel-gazer picks over Disney instead of the Bible.
“In his Maps of Meaning course he spends over 4 hours deconstructing the movie Pinocchio,

so intellectual

digging a latrine for four hours would be more useful

these people are allergic to manual tasks

they’d watch paint dry than do something with their hands

why doesn’t he teach you how to read research papers?

so you don’t have to rely on anyone’s interpretation?

(he doesn’t think you’re smart enough – and he’s right)

drawing from the cartoon profound insights about religion, myth, society, Marxism, psychology, and religion.”

Marxism, yay! Theft is so deep.
If you want to torture me, set me up Clockwork Orange style in front of someone pontificating about Disney for hours like it’s the Holy Grail.
This is what the SJWs did first. If you twist things for kids, you can brainwash them. It’s the lowest effort manipulation.
Remember when the edgy people used to hate psychology professors?
The field isn’t different. They still hate you.

I’ve written about the distraction on menial work before, typical cult.
Clean up your room?
Clean up your country.

Jesus didn’t tidy a hut.
“You stop doing things that make you feel weak and aim for making your life better.”
FEEEEEEELS.

REAL SELF-IMPROVEMENT MAKES YOU FEEL LIKE SHIT.

It doesn’t stop.

The funny part of a cult is how the members have total cognitive dissonance, demonstrated in zero self-awareness.
They couldn’t have wasted months watching shit on the internet (I know I do!), no, it has to be life-changing.
If it were true, the signal value would be bad.
Logically, it must be partially false to pass the censors.
Spiritual bypassing again. Addicted to superficial “improvement”. No use repainting the wall when the building is about to collapse.
Look at the simple conflict of “stay out of the mainstream, you’re so special just the way you are” against “Climb the dominance hierarchy”.
What if the system is corrupt? Why support it?
Ah, academic professor, that’s why. Teenagers will hate their parents, never their favourite teachers. And you wonder why so many abandoned kids are socialists. They never replace the teachers with robots for this reason, the real reason. They teach state loyalty with emotional abuse (since teachers are instrumental supports designed to induce obedience in the helpless and always leave).
The people you see on TV (Channel 4 interview) or at the top of Youtube are finger puppets.
The internet is one big Punch and Judy show.
The alt right collapsed when the drama!!!!!1! people came in and started trying to be celebrities constantly cat-fighting one another for attention supply and doing nothing productive. Actively halting productive conversations with gossip.
It’s just as bad as the Kardashian brothel.
However, this was gold. You can allow 1% lolz. It can’t be 99% what you do.

“In order to be able to think, you have to risk being offensive.”
Liars can use common sense, Satan can quote Scripture, Peterson can sound lucid for once.
He’s using the Rules for Radicals technique there, I think. Hoist them by their own petard, hold them to their own standard. SJWs offend everyone so are they also banned? We now have political classes … we notice because they’re in flux. Christians, white people and capitalists (right-wingers) used to be on the bottom of the heap and rise. The left, atheist crowd object to the change in status but can only make noise, having no logical grounding to prevent their slide down.
The end of that video is what I just described, she slides silently down, virtue signalling corrupted.

He didn’t say the best thing: the right to liberty involves risk. If someone disgusts you, you have the right to avoid them. Freedom of association keeps the peace. Emotional appeals have no logical or legal basis. Everyone has emotions. The truth will be the truth no matter what you or I feel about it, bring up Creationists and evolution. Denial has no right to be respected when an individual tries to force society to ignore evidence in biology. It’s ideological fascism.

You cannot outlaw risk, it’s a fact of reality and there is no such thing as a right to be coddled by others. Infantilization is wrong. Entitlement is toxic. Outrage begins within and it is abusive to ask others to regulate your own emotions when you choose to seek out ideas that anger you. It’s an anger management problem.

This is why they don’t let me on TV.

The Virgin/Chad thing was a cringe attempt of middle-class, spoiled American degenerates to pretend they have a conscience e.g. “saves Western civilization”, it actually says that. Next to “centrist” (cuck) and “Disney”. Just “Disney”. The left can’t meme, even when they’re pretending to be right e.g. “speaks the truth” is one “Chad” description. Find the average business major Chad at a festival and see how much shit they talk. They still listen to rap, FFS.
It’s embarassing.
The male equivalent of an SJW. Both are addicted to vice, an irrational sense of superiority from being degenerate, combined with intense emotions and without those intense emotions like a strong tap they collapse from withdrawal. Both are drama addicts.
These people are useless narcissists: http://highexistence.com/dark-side-of-following-your-dreams/

Both are movement poison, waiting for a powerful bandwagon to jump on.

A cuck will collapse (no conscience, nothing behind the verbal) and abandon your team as soon as you call them racist. Racist just means white person.

You can’t stop being white? It’s the white person’s “nigger”. Pets used to be called that with love, it had a variety of meanings. They’re so sheltered they don’t get that a word becomes its use and “racist” was a Marxist invention anyway; words can describe all sorts of things that don’t exist, you bloody unicorn. You don’t have to respect a thing because they made up a word for it, it’s linguistic intelligent design.

(If ID were true, genetic mutations wouldn’t exist, nor would genetic disease).

Denial doesn’t work. Reality exists!

The scientific use of it is a false flag to deplete attention away from the science per se.
The science is still there. DNA is on our side on this one. The word is in the long slow process of dying out among the ignorant who don’t believe in the science.

“Define who you are” – Peterson

oh but nationalism is bad?

Are you not your culture, Mr Myth Man?

Are you African culture too, with your globalism? Who’s your fave Orisha, Peterson? Or does he only study White culture? I’d like a comparison of Yemoja to Luna. Probability = 0.

(As you can guess, I could write a religion book better than Peterson and trust me, that isn’t saying much.. He doesn’t even mention The White Goddess book, haven’t seen it. It explains women in wheat fields as ancestral memory, imho. His view is narrow Greco-Roman Martian sensibility. Within the same pantheon and ignorance, at least appreciate Jupiter and Saturn!)

His lectures plot the same course of intellectual development for female students as male, that is a Gender Studies major’s wet dream.

And are you not beholden to your biology? Then you begin with huge limits e.g. IQ and true self-definition is a farce involving the long-dead American Nightmare.

“Strengthen the individual.” Fucking psychologists.
(They make more money treating 5,000 people for the same problem than telling them all at once and solving it forever. Remember that.)

I think, I drink, I judge.

If you’re new, welcome.

And if the given rationale for that particular mantra is to spare society the responsibility for individuals, that is the express purpose of authority (and taxation) and individualism is the enemy of nationalism. The basis of his brand of individualism cannot be nationalism (improving strength and potency of national symbols and culture). If it’s for the Greater Good of nation then why be opposed to nationalism, why not just skip to that bit?

LOGICALLY.

Save the nation, save all the individuals comprising it.

Any rebuttal? Anyone? If we’re shooting for pure utilitarianism… don’t be easy pickings.

The envious mob can chop up Hypatia. One great individual has no strength in a weak society that doesn’t deserve them.

It’s a myth of mere genius e.g. Galileo, that they cannot be murdered. A fairytale.

Fix the nation, correct the incentives or the tall poppies die and everyone else with them. Throughout history, they pluck off the “individuals” first. Divide and conquer.

What takes out your polymaths and geniuses will easily devastate the common herd.

You can have the tidiest room up to operating room standards and there are still invaders raping your little sister. Are you really a man?

They seek out myth because their life is a lie.

They seek out old culture in a grandiose pastiche because they are disconnected socially from the present and recent past (kin) and want the emotional boost of belonging like a drug without the duties to the in-group. His lectures go over well with kids because they’re dodging responsibility. It’s escapism.

They say they want “meaning”, they crave belonging.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saudade
You miss your unique place that is your birthright.

I know this because I’ve been there, the same position as you fifteen years ago.
Don’t waste fifteen years reading myths thinking they hold a key to Atlantis.

To put it in terms a Peterson cultist would understand, meditate on this:

You’re still alienated, surrounded by Disney VHS tapes.

It doesn’t have to be this way.

Video: Sin is a disease

Sexual hygiene will make a comeback, whether you like it or not.

Like, you learn to wash your hands or keep dying of cholera.

The Sexual “Revolution” will be seen as a mass murderer in times to come.

Stereotypes are true. Those people are shunned (including a perception of inferiority to one another!) due to social contagion.

What is allowed (not punished) becomes implicitly good.

The gold standard logical test applies: if everyone did this, would society collapse?

Because yes, no individual should either. It involves other people so it isn’t actually an individual choice. It requires corruption, always evil. Since society pays (on disease load alone) then it isn’t actually a personal claim, it’s a withdrawal from the public good.

Yes, tragedy of the commons applies to moral goods in society.
You want other people to stop being dicks on the road but act like one yourself.

Society keeps rewarding sin because chaos makes money.

It keeps the economy consuming and GDP high enough to tread water.
e.g.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-44802123

It can’t last, it won’t last, understand why.

Random but they always look weird, like middle-aged but plastic smooth?

It’s like a circus freakshow, I swear.

Where Spencer is wrong

Youtube comments, what do ya know? Tell me your secrets.

My friends read these (and rarely, write in themselves) so you don’t have to!
The little bitches could do the editing for me, though.

He should really study up on Trivers’ Parental Investment theory, that one would count as individualistic-oriented, I think. It also ties into r/K. Spencer is saying up with K-strategy, basically, which is individualistic in comparison to the rest of the world. Look at birth rates!

Try to find national case studies or go by national heroes.

Good find, there is no such thing as an individual in evolutionary or biological terms. There is only the breeding unit (plus surviving spawn) – man and woman, here defined in our culture as the nuclear unit.

Biologically, single humans do not exist because humans are not an asexual species.
Collectivist races tend to have extended family (Asians, genetic-Asian “Native” Americans) or a total breakdown of family but an extended community (The Hood).

For other theories Spencer could stand to use, anything about the amygdala, oxytocin and Terror Management Theory.

I’ve linked this before but it’s a good start.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2894685/

http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0022002186017002006

It’s ripe for discussion.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19864286

There’s no such thing as ‘harmless hedonism’, as libertarians imply.
The state must absorb the cost of their social damage e.g. STDs, abortions, drug resistance.
Is it really a freedom if someone else is paying for its consequences?

I find it ironic the winning ‘strategy’ of the Non-Aggression Principle (a wimp’s Golden Rule) is to either behave or plot murder. The solution to violence is violence. Instead of threat of violence, we have a guarantee. The evil of society will spontaneously and logically agree to stop pursuing a selfish strategy, in their mind.

Birth rates and Western culture

I don’t think I linked to these.

Malthus and the Making of the Modern World

http://www.alanmacfarlane.com/TEXTS/Malthus_final.pdf

On the characteristic individualism of Western cultures.

https://www.britac.ac.uk/pubs/proc/files/82p171.pdf

“Weber suggested that one of the central causes of the emergence of capitalism and its associated features was the disappearance of extended family structures. … ‘freeing’ the market and the individual.

The individual didn’t exist beforehand.

It’s a common question so here you go, either you can read it or stop circling the same three questions like clueless vultures.

1.How did we get here? – Libertarians who thought they could share without loss.

2.What’s going on with our demography? – r/K but read Malthus first aka Who is alive and why?

3.Why are we different? – Individualism opposes collectivism (non-Europeans) and those differences are irreconcilable, because they are genetic.

pp.122

Nationalism must come before any capitalistic position or you lose all your resources to the outgroup. You must be fair on your own citizens or no good will come of it.