Comments on: Against Patriotism

By: James

James — Mon, 16 Jul 2007 03:41:58 +0000

Babbling. It’s a scientific question how much the genes or Britain lose out to immigrant Danes vs. immigrant Bantus; refute it scientifically.

By: James

James — Mon, 16 Jul 2007 03:41:00 +0000

Babbling. It’s a scientific question how much the genes or Britain lose out to immigrant Danes vs. immigrant Bantus; refute it scientifically.

By: djw

djw — Mon, 16 Jul 2007 02:38:46 +0000

Of course, I meant that to be directed at James, not Will.

By the way, Amazon is selling Kateb’s book for 7 dollars right now for some reason. A very good bargain, and really readable, accessable, engaging political theory.

By: djw

djw — Mon, 16 Jul 2007 02:38:00 +0000

Of course, I meant that to be directed at James, not Will.

By the way, Amazon is selling Kateb’s book for 7 dollars right now for some reason. A very good bargain, and really readable, accessable, engaging political theory.

By: djw

djw — Mon, 16 Jul 2007 02:35:21 +0000

Will, one of Kateb’s central points is that family and nation are disanalogous sorts of groups in qualitative (in addition to quantitative) ways, and this sort of racialist babbling is precisely the sort of imaginary nonsense that’s required to gnerate the fake moral principle of patriotism. Sailor-esque silliness exemplifies Kateb’s objection, rather than refuting his point.

By: djw

djw — Mon, 16 Jul 2007 02:35:00 +0000

By: James

James — Sun, 15 Jul 2007 09:56:46 +0000

Just because that’s what it implies doesn’t mean it isn’t true.

By: James

James — Sun, 15 Jul 2007 09:56:00 +0000

Just because that’s what it implies doesn’t mean it isn’t true.

By: Will Wilkinson

Will Wilkinson — Sat, 14 Jul 2007 15:47:42 +0000

That truly may be the stupidest thing I’ve ever read. It implies, among other thing, that I could be indifferent between my sister and a sufficiently large number of chimpanzees. Just stop it.

By: Will Wilkinson

Will Wilkinson — Sat, 14 Jul 2007 15:47:00 +0000

That truly may be the stupidest thing I’ve ever read. It implies, among other thing, that I could be indifferent between my sister and a sufficiently large number of chimpanzees. Just stop it.

By: James

James — Sat, 14 Jul 2007 00:30:34 +0000

Here’s one way in which it “scales up” from the egregiously racist Kevin MacDonald:

“If 10,000 Danes emigrate to England and ultimately substitute for 10,000 English natives, the average Englishman loses the genetic equivalent of 167 children (or siblings) in the ultimate total population, because of the close genetic relationship between Denmark and England. This is not a great loss.

“However, if 10,000 Bantu emigrate to England and substitute for 10,000 English natives, the average Englishman loses the genetic equivalent of 10,854 children (or siblings).”

And don’t you realize, the fact that it scales up at all is a deadly blow to your position’s premise that there’s nothing higher than the individual, that favoring some people over other people is morally repugnant. It’s antithetical to idea that the only thing that should matter to a person is liberty for all.

By: James

James — Sat, 14 Jul 2007 00:30:00 +0000

Here’s one way in which it “scales up” from the egregiously racist Kevin MacDonald:

“However, if 10,000 Bantu emigrate to England and substitute for 10,000 English natives, the average Englishman loses the genetic equivalent of 10,854 children (or siblings).”

By: Will Wilkinson

Will Wilkinson — Thu, 12 Jul 2007 15:20:29 +0000

James, Obviously the Japanese have a very rich imaginary history. They are also some of the most egregiously racist people in the world, due to the story they tell themselves about themselves. Yes, genetic relatedness is real, and so are the dynamics of kin selection. But this scales up not very far at all. The Sailer article you link to attempting to extend the sentiments of family to something called a “race” is a typical use of imagination to forge fake solidarity.

By: Will Wilkinson

Will Wilkinson — Thu, 12 Jul 2007 15:20:00 +0000

By: James

James — Tue, 10 Jul 2007 22:57:03 +0000

What you write may to some extent be true of America but do you really think that, for example, Japan has an imaginary history and solidarity? Can you commit to saying that in print?

Families are real. Parents don’t sacrifice for their children for imaginary unnecessary reasons. If you accept this then consider what happens when groups of families intermarry and produce many new generations of people with each other for long periods of time …