This is Japan’s immigration policy. It is exactly what I proposed.
Notice that Japan is not being overwhelmed by immigrants. There aren’t all that many Nobel Prize laureates who want to move. They have great jobs wherever they are. But if we get a couple more Einsteins, it won’t cause the problems that people are claiming.
Reading some comments, it seems that you expect 50 million PhD’s to show up here. The pool of potential immigrants who fit this is small and would have no ability (numerically) to change anything politically.
However, their scientific contributions would be far out of proportion. Consider when all the top European Jewish scientists (and Aryan scientists who supported the Jews) came here in the 1930s. The technological and military advance was very rapid and directly traced to them.
Smart people don’t take jobs. They create them. In fact, they often create whole industries with their inventions (computers, cars, trains).
They don’t take up spots in universities, they improve school reputations and that means that more schools become on par with what we now consider top schools.
CUNY’s colleges could barely count as academia until Jews began attending them en masse during the 1930s when they were largely excluded from Ivy Leagues. When these Jews enrolled in the City College and the Brooklyn College, these schools became better than Harvard and Yale (in terms of the students’ success in the job market, in winning top prizes like the Nobel, etc). This was despite the fact that these schools had not even 1% of the funding of their Ivy League competitors.
Then Jews at CC and BC were replaced with blacks (Ivy began accepting Jews, while blacks began getting affirmative action at CUNY), and the result was that these schools’ reputation collapsed.
Smart people are good for the economy, for education, for the country. We see that all over the world over the course of centuries.
When whites came to Africa, the Dark Continent’s economy, medicine, education improved. When whites left, it collapsed. This pattern of improvement when high IQ arrive and collapse when high IQ leave has been repeated over and over again throughout history.
Now, I wouldn’t support getting more than a marginal number of non-white high IQ people. But I really don’t see what would be so horrible about getting another Albert Einstein or two or 500 (495 of whom would likely be white).
And like I said, when we are losing the demographic race war, it wouldn’t be all that horrible to get some white reinforcement. American Latinos, even Puerto Ricans, Dominicans and Cubans, don’t complain about Mexicans. Blacks don’t complain about the arrival of Haitians and Africans. Only whites complain about European immigration, even in small numbers of high-contributing individuals.
The guidelines set forth here show the criteria of “contributions to Japan” for permission for permanent residence. These guidelines have never been released to the public in the past but have been recently released within the allowable range at the moment. The guidelines are subject to revision in course of collecting opinions from relevant parties and deliberating any necessary deregulations, clarification and additional information release.
Guidelines for Contribution to Japan
The person satisfies any of the below-mentioned requirements and has stayed in Japan for more than five years without causing any problems in his/her social life.
1. Common to all fields
* The person has been awarded a prize by an international organization, foreign government or any equivalent organization, with the prize being internationally evaluated as authoritative.
ex.) Nobel Prize, Fields Prize, The Pritzker Architecture Prize and Legion d’Honneur
* The person has been given any of the following awards by Japanese government:
National Honor Award, decoration, the Order of Culture, Medal of Honor (except the Medal with Dark Blue Ribbon and an award for the deceased given to a bereaved family) or the Japan Prize
* The person spent more than three years or so for pursuing public-service activities as a committee member, etc. appointed or commissioned by the Japanese central government or a local government.
* The person has made great contribution to the conservation or development of the society or local community in Japan through medical, educational and other vocational activities.
2. Diplomatic field
* The person has been working in Japan as a member of a diplomatic mission or consular office of a foreign government and has rendered distinguished service contributing to the improvement of friendship or cultural exchanges between Japan and his/her country.
* The person has a career as a secretary-general, deputy secretary-general or a higher-level title holder of any equivalent managerial position of an international organization of which Japan is a member nation.
3. Economic or industrial field
* The person has made contribution to the development of the Japanese economy or industry through his/her activities as an employee or management in a Japanese company whose stock is listed on the stock exchange or whose business scale is as large as those companies having listed stocks, and has been or had been engaged in the activities for more than three years in Japan.
* The person has made contribution to the development of the Japanese economy or industry through his/her activities as a manager or equivalent title holder in a managerial position of a Japanese company whose stock is listed on the stock exchange or whose business scale is as large as those companies having listed stocks, and has been engaged in the activities for more than five years.
* The person has made contribution to the industrial development of our country, and has been awarded a prize as a result of being selected from among nationwide candidates.
ex.) Grand Prize or Special Prize of Good Design Award (sponsored by Japan Industrial design Promotion Organization)
* The person has made great contribution to Japan’s agricultural, forestry, fishery, industrial, commercial or other business development through his/her activities as an engineer or technical expert having advanced or high-level expertise.
4. Culture or art field
* The person has been awarded a prize which is widely evaluated as authoritative in the category of literature, fine art, motion pictures, music, theater art, entertainment or other cultural or artistic fields.
ex.) La Biennale di Venezia, Golden Lion, Prince Takamatsu Imperial Art Prize, Academy Awards, Awards at Cannes Film Festival, Awards at Venice Film Festival, and Awards at Berlin Film Festival
* The person has made contribution to the development of Japanese culture through his/her activities for more than 3 years in Japan in a position of leadership in the category of literature, fine art, motion pictures, music, theater art, entertainment or other cultural or artistic field.
5. Education field
* The person has made contribution to the improvement of the level of Japan’s higher education through his/her activities as a full-time teacher or equivalent-to-fulltime professor, assistant professor or lecturer working for a Japanese university or any equivalent academic institution as defined under the School Education Law of Japan, and has been or had been engaged in the activities for more than three years in Japan.
6. Research field
* The person has been recognized to have made distinguished achievements through his/her research activities and falls under any of the following:
1. The person’s paper on the results of his/her research has been published in a scientific/technical journal, and has been referred to by two or more other researchers in their papers.
2. Two or more of the person’s papers on the results of his/her research have been published in scientific journals as a result of selection through fair judgment.
3. Many of the person’s papers on the results of his/her research have been published in authoritative scientific journals.
4. The person has been highly evaluated by a scientific society generally known as an authoritative organization, and has the experience of giving a lecture, etc.
7. Sports field
* The person has won a high-level prize in a well-known international sports competition or other convention such as the Olympic Games, world championships, etc., or the person has made great contribution to such prize-winning achievement as a coach or instructor of such athletes and is pursuing instruction activities or promotion activities of that sport in Japan.
* The person has won a high-level prize in an international sports competition or other convention, or the person has made great contribution to such prize-winning achievements as a coach or instructor of such athletes, and has spent more than three years in Japan pursuing sports instruction activities or sports promoting activities.
* The person made great contribution to the promotion of sports in Japan.
8. Other fields
* The person has contributed to the development of Japanese society in the field of public welfare, and won a prize as a result of selection from among nationwide candidates.
ex.) One More Life Workers’ Volunteering Award, awards for persons who are recognized to have made contributions to the society
* The person made great contribution to Japanese society or welfare through his/her public-service activities.
http://www.immi-moj.go.jp/english/tetuduki/zairyuu/contribution.html
“But if we get a couple more Einsteins”
Einstein did his important work when he was a Swiss citizen. In America at the Institute for Advanced Study, he: 1. pooh-pooh’ed quantum mechanics. 2. His introduction of the cosmological term was the biggest blunder of his life, which such cosmological constant delayed the acceptance of the Big Bang theory. 3. Struggled for the rest of his life trying to develop a Grand Unified Theory with NO success. 4. Petitioned FDR for the development of the atom bomb, which specter of nuclear annihilation haunts us still.
My point? Bringing him to America resulted in NO net gain for us White American native-borns, but us American taxpayers supported his sorry ass.
Meanwhile, any inventions from outside countries that do crop up, we can pay royalties to use if we wish. Without the baggage of families and political activism.
“Consider when all the top European Jewish scientists (and Aryan scientists who supported the Jews) came here in the 1930s”
And, for it, we got the atom bomb and a 40-year MAD nuclear standoff with USSR, and terrified little kids hiding under their desks during practice drills for in case the nuclear-warhead-tipped ICBMs are headed over. Gee, thanks a whole bunch, Jewish scientists and Aryan scientists who supported the Jews. Thanks a lot.
Do you realize the Oppenheimer, et. al, when they were about to trigger the first nuclear detonation, debated amongst themselves the possiblity that they might set the whole Earth’s atmosphere afire? But that they decided the risks were acceptable? The arrogant bastards.
“The pool of potential immigrants who fit this is small and would have no ability (numerically) to change anything politically.”
Yeah, and Kennedy told the 1965 immigration act would NOT result in a million immigrants a year, from 3rd world nations. So much for “assurances.”
And high IQ-ers, while they may be numerically small, with the big bucks those high IQs enable earning, they can easily gain an OUTSIZED political advantage by using those high incomes to buy off politicians to have the immigration laws/ other laws CHANGED to benefit themselves.
“They don’t take up spots in universities”
They DON’T?? They are not physically present on campus? What do they do? Attend by correspondence course???
Of course they take up spots in universities. University admissions are a zero-sum game. For every immigrant who gets a dorm room, is one native-born American white who does NOT.
In a country of 200 million Whites, there are PLENTY of smart White kids. Our attention should be focussed on nurturing THEM.
.
“The person satisfies any of the below-mentioned requirements and has stayed in Japan for more than five years without causing any problems in his/her social life.”
What does “causing any problems in his / her social life” mean? Had an argument with somebody sometime over a trivial matter?
This “so long as” clause is so broad and so vague, it allows Japan to deny permanent residency to anyone it so wishes, for any reason whatsoever, or no reason at all.
Hey! This is the perfect “out” for them. I like it!
If we had the above clause in our immigration policy, I might consider softening my absolutely-no-immigrants-whatsoever stance.
S,
You know you are wrong and desperate when you begin sloganeering, fighting straw-men and ignoring arguments.
Re: Education.
It had been well established that the quality of schools depends strictly on the quality of students. DC spends the most money per child, Utah the least. Yet, we know where the schools are better.
“”They don’t take up spots in universities”
They DON’T?? They are not physically present on campus?
This is a straw-man argument that ignored what I wrote. Next time I will block your comment for dishonest propaganda.
The point is that if we have enough students for 5 top universities, then we will have 5 top universities. If we have enough students for 15 top universities, then we will have 15 top universities.
I specifically cited City and Brooklyn colleges, which were very marginal schools. They charged no tuition at all at the time and received hardly any funding. Their teachers were not professors, but rather lecturers without PhD’s.
There were no labs, no sports teams, no scholarships.
Yet until the late 1960s, City and Brooklyn produced more Nobel Prize winners, top doctors and lawyers, inventors, millionaires, etc than Yale and Harvard.
This is because it doesn’t matter what the school quality is.
This works in reverse too. I wrote here of several black schools that received hundreds of millions of dollars in funding, yet still produced terrible results.
If you take Harvard and replace 140 IQ students with 90 IQ students, the result will be that Harvard will no longer be a top school. This is exactly what happened in top South African universities post-1994.
So yes, these students do take up space. But the amount of space in top schools depends on the number of top students. The two go hand-in-hand.
The more smart students exist, the more schools will be able to produce top results, just as Brooklyn and City colleges once did.
=========================================
“Yeah, and Kennedy told the 1965 immigration act would NOT result in a million immigrants a year, from 3rd world nations. So much for “assurances.”"
Another strawman argument. This is not about assurances, but basic math. Even in civilized countries no more than 5-10% of the population has graduate degrees. In non-white countries, that number is well under 1%. Of those people, the vast majority have great jobs and wouldn’t risk them to go half-way around the world to a place where they don’t even speak the local language.
This has nothing to do with assurances, it’s just basic math. There simple aren’t enough PhDs and doctors from the University of Berlin or even Warsaw who are dying to come here to make overwhelm us politically/electorally. Not only are PhD’s and doctors few and far between, but they are the least likely to want to move.
Notice how few PhD’s and doctors move within the European Union. Where are all the Polish doctors? They are still in Poland.
=========================================
“And, for it, we got the atom bomb and a 40-year MAD nuclear standoff with USSR”
Would you have preferred it if the USSR had nukes and we didn’t? Would that be better?
Without nukes, US does not become a superpower and those great 1950s do not happen due to the inability of the US to dominate the world economically and militarily.
Imagine if Hitler wasn’t an idiot and allowed Germany to its place as a global empire, which was inevitable unless he jumped in the war because it was so dominant scientifically.
So now you have Russia and Germany with nukes, with top scientists. And the US is off the the side on another continent. Guess what! There’s no way in hell, not the slightest chance that the American GDP would’ve been higher in the 1950s than the rest of the world combined.
The reason I said that the 1950s can’t be brought back is precisely because we can’t be in position to dominate the world economically like we used to. But that gave us a good head-start, allowing many of our industries to develop.
Plus, it’s not just nukes, it’s also computers and all sorts of other stuff. All that would’ve been developed in Europe. And this country would’ve been no more important than Brazil.
=========================================
Re: Einstein.
It wasn’t Einstein in particular that I was citing. There’s a lot of crap about him on Stormfront, most of it false. (Notice that their sources are usually like-minded blogs, not anything mainstream.)
But the point is that having smart people is good. Some may contribute more than others, but they all do contribute. Sure, some of their theories are false. But without failed theories and experiments, you won’t get accurate ones. People often learn more from mistakes than from guessing the right answer.
If the computer industry were developed in Germany or in Russia, chances are, I’d be typing this in broken German or broken Russian, and you’d be struggling to read this. Because guess what?! Germans and Russians have to figure out enough English to read/write on the internet. Their language cites are very peripheral and most non-English speakers still regularly visit English-language sites.
=========================================
I am flabbergasted that you would contend that smart people aren’t good for the economy.
Isn’t that the whole explanation for black failure in Africa and in the ghetto?
“If we had the above clause in our immigration policy, I might consider softening my absolutely-no-immigrants-whatsoever stance.”
Apologize for the serial post/ ranting.
I wish to add to the above statement: In addition, the children born of such permanent resident do NOT get American citizenship.
“It wasn’t Einstein in particular that I was citing. There’s a lot of crap about him on Stormfront, most of it false. (Notice that their sources are usually like-minded blogs, not anything mainstream.)”
I didn’t get my information from Stormfront. I read years and years ago a biography of Einstein and drew these conclusions myself, way back then. Fascinating that you write a blog, Making Sense on Race, but are wanting sources for arguments from the mainstream? The mainstream promulgates propaganda, is untrustworthy, as you yourself must surely realize, being the author of this blog.
I realize you used Einstein as an example of the achievements of high IQ immigrants.
MY point is, in countering your Einstein example, merely being in possession of a high IQ, it does not necessarily mean that said immigrant will be of benefit to American citizenry already here.
“I am flabbergasted that you would contend that smart people aren’t good for the economy.
Isn’t that the whole explanation for black failure in Africa and in the ghetto?”
Ah, come on, I’m not contending that smart people are never good for the economy. BUT, BUT, enough examples exist
of smart people who, through corruption, do harm to American society that to just say “smart people are always good” is false, too, and NOT worth the gamble.
Example: mafioso dons, of Italian immigrant heritage, who survive in an exceedingly dangerous environment, are NOT dumb, or they’d be dead.
We’ve got enough smart sociopaths to deal with here, who are American citizens, already. Ex.: the Wall Street traders leveraging MBSs and pawning them off onto unsuspecting pension funds, for a fast buck. We don’t need more trouble, so we can’t afford to take a chance on any immigrants.
Corrupt/ evil/ criminal minded is dangerous. But for sheer levels of total destruction, a high-IQ’er who lacks scruples wins the prize.
As far as the ghetto, no, low IQ is not the WHOLE explanation. Plays a large part, to be sure, but also, black men have on average higher testosterone levels, with resulting increased tendency toward criminality. Add ineducable + violent = social decay.
It takes smarts AND morals to make a livable society. And a livable society is not just due to the supersmart guys. You must have an average IQ high enough for there to be enough plumbers, electricians, other skilled tradesmen to maintain the infrastructure.
“Would you have preferred it if the USSR had nukes and we didn’t? Would that be better?”
No proof that would have happened. USSR got its nukes by spying on us: Rosenbergs.
HAD they managed to develop nukes, which will always be only mere speculation, we could have spied on THEM, ourselves, and gotten them lickety-split.
“Imagine if Hitler wasn’t an idiot and allowed Germany to its place as a global empire, which was inevitable unless he jumped in the war because it was so dominant scientifically.”
I’ve done a whole lot of imagining. Having grown up during the Cold War, hiding under my desk in practice for Doomsday, a theoretical hitler empire may or may not have been worse for me. Don’t know.
But I argue this: The atom bomb guys came out of Germany, and being Jewish, the idea that Hitler could have gotten them to develop an atom bomb for him is laughable.
“Without nukes, US does not become a superpower and those great 1950s do not happen due to the inability of the US to dominate the world economically and militarily.”
No. US had great years in the 1950s because WE had lots and lots and lots of cheap OIL, while Europe and Japan had been devastated.
But firebombing, as Dresdan was, demonstrates that NUKES were not necessary to destroy Japan.
“And this country would’ve been no more important than Brazil.”
That’s speculation.
But unlikely, as we had a smart population, even without the immigration. White Americans like Bell and Edison were plenty inventive, and, and, and, they lived in a society where the average IQ was high enough to have enough technicians to enable them to invent. Without the surrounding infrastructure created by your smart-enough countrymen, a would=be inventor would merely be another starving peasant.
But anyway, due to immigration, we are HEADED the way of Brazil. So how does America’s superpower status in the 1950s benefit MY grandchildren?
“The point is that if we have enough students for 5 top universities, then we will have 5 top universities. If we have enough students for 15 top universities, then we will have 15 top universities.”
Universities take American taxpayer dollars to build, and time to build. Therefore, if 100 immigrant kids get into a top American university this year, then this year, 100 White American smart kids WON’T get into that university. Meanwhile, I have been taxed to have built that university and maintain that university.
The smart kids in other countries can agitate their home countries to build THEM universities and go when it’s built. And then smart American White kids can try to get admission if they wish!
That way, my American neighbor’s smart kid who graduates this year can get started on his education.
“Yet until the late 1960s, City and Brooklyn produced more Nobel Prize winners, top doctors and lawyers, inventors, millionaires, etc than Yale and Harvard.” Right. City was originally closed to Jewish admission. When that changed, since it was the only free university open to poor Jewish New Yorkers, that’s where the American Jewish kids went, until the laws were changed at Harvard, etc.
So that makes your point, which I agree with. It’s the quality of the students that makes the university. Therefore there is no reason that we need to bring them to U.S. They can agitate their gov’t to tax their own countrymen to build them universities.
And we can pay royalties on their inventions when they’re educated, instead of supporting them in taxpayer funded think tanks, university professorships, etc.
And our own homegrown smart kids have a slot in a university that is a quality university because of our smart kids’ presence.
1. Germany and Russia had nuke programs in the 30’s. Germany stopped it, at least in part because the scientists left. Russia was beaten to the punch by the US because we got the top European scientists. Russian scientists who developed their bomb wrote a major paper on nuclear power in 1938. Rosenbers no doubt deserved death since no greater crime than theirs is possible, but the Russian bomb project was already advanced enough that the help was of limited value. While the UK bomb is identical to Fat Man, the Soviet was very distinct. The Soviets would’ve most definitely gotten it and marched through to the Atlantic ocean.
2. “But I argue this: The atom bomb guys came out of Germany, and being Jewish, the idea that Hitler could have gotten them to develop an atom bomb for him is laughable”
If Hitler didn’t write Mein Kampf, pass the Nuremberg Laws, etc, they probably would’ve. It’s good for their careers and they did regard themselves as Germans during WWI.
3. “Universities take American taxpayer dollars to build, and time to build.”
In theory, yes. In reality, we have plenty of universities. The trouble is that most of them count for nothing. This is not due to a shortage of funds, but due to a shortage of good students. Take any random school, which is on the brink of bankruptcy, and send a few hundred top students there. The result will be not only financial survival, but a massively improved reputation.
This is actually not something that would be effected by bringing in highly educated people from oversees. If you are already a PhD from Oxford, you probably won’t be taking English 101 with 18-year-olds in an American university.
4. “we can pay royalties on their inventions”
I hear this all the time, but it’s false. Why doesn’t Nigeria pay royalties? Because it doesn’t have any money. Why? They have plenty of natural resources. Because natural resources are no longer enough to support a modern economy, unless you are a tiny country swimming on oil (Kuwait).
What you need is to develop something of your own. Then you can pay for it. A payment is nothing more than an exchange. The more you develop within your own country, the more you can buy from oversees.
If our inventions and other goods/services increase, we’ll be able to buy more. If they decrease, we’ll buy less. You don’t just get money out of thin air. That’s Robert Mugabe economics, and you know how well that is working out.
By saying, “let them build it and we’ll buy it”, you are presuming that we can just print money regardless of how much we produce. But we can’t.
If something gets built oversees, we can only buy it if we develop something else here. By letting more and more things get built oversees, we can afford to buy less and less.
So in essence, letting something get built oversees means not only that we won’t be able to buy that particular gadget, but we won’t have the money to buy something else as well (something which would’ve bought by using some of that first gadget as payment for the second thing).
This doesn’t work directly because we don’t just have 2 things in our economy. We have millions of goods and services. So the result is that we do get both of these things, we just get a little less of them and a little less of everything else (basically, instead of paying a lot out of one wallet, we are paying a little out of several million).
But little-by-little, it all adds up. The more things get developed oversees, the less we can afford. When it’s one thing, we don’t see it. Two we don’t. A dozen we don’t. Eventually, however, a critical mass gets built up and there are severe effects on our economy.
5. “But anyway, due to immigration, we are HEADED the way of Brazil. So how does America’s superpower status in the 1950s benefit MY grandchildren?”
Excuse me, but what did I say (repeatedly) about not being allowed to use strawman arguments on my blog?
I never said that the 1950s superpower status led to the 2050s Brazil status. Nor did you establish a direct link between the two. You just want me to presume that the two are somehow connected.
They aren’t.
Immigration reform was passed in the 1960s. It was NOTHING like what I’ve proposed. My proposal is similar to Japan’s. Is Japan getting overwhelmed by immigrants? No! So there we go!
The idea that we’ll be overwhelmed by 100 million PhDs who got their degrees in white countries is just bad math. There aren’t that many people who went to grad school in all the white countries, and the vast majority of them have great jobs.
If a few thousand professors move here, it will have little-to-no effect on politics, but it will have an overwhelmingly positive effect on medicine, science, economy.
Even over the next generation we’ll bring a million white PhD’s and doctors to come here, it will have no effect on politics if they aren’t allowed to bring their adult relatives.
Will they agitate the government to bring more of their ethnics? No, they won’t. How do I know? Because they will be a little over 0.2% of the population and such a tiny population, no matter how wealthy, would be ignored by politicians, especially if their wishes will collide with that of the rest of the 99.8%.
Notice how people who are opposed to this don’t give any numbers. This is because it’s easy to engage in scary rhetoric using obscure words. It’s much more difficult to scare people with 0.2% of the population.
“”They don’t take up spots in universities”
They DON’T?? They are not physically present on campus?
This is a straw-man argument that ignored what I wrote. Next time I will block your comment for dishonest propaganda.
Okay. I’ll address the rest of your statement. “they improve school reputations and that means that more schools become on par with what we now consider top schools.”
First, it’s the fact of the smartness of the kids, not immigrant-ness (to coin a term) that makes the school’s reputation. Where smart kids go, other smart kids desire to go and professors go where they can get to enjoy teaching smart kids.
Are you suggesting that we don’t have enough smart kids in America to fill the universities? Are you saying we have excess capacity? Then we should have fewer universities.
With fewer universities, they’ll each be more selective of the White American kids, therefore higher quality, and the IQ -100s can go where they should — junior college / trade school. Lower taxes on the rest of us.
As your example with CUNY shows, when the smart kids leave, the reputation drops, so that shows us a reputation is temporary and maintained only so long as smart kids attend.
Therefore, when all those smart kids we imported to “make a school’s reputation” have graduated, either the school has managed to attract smart American kids or the immigration cycle continues or the reputation ceases.
If the immigration cycle continues, eventually, yes, you would end up with enough of an ethnicity for the ethnic interests to start manifesting themselves.
If the reputation fails, then what purpose was served by importing the smart kids? Who now are American citizens, probably, and can vote, and can give birth to American citizens, and can use their high incomes to buy political favor.
If we’ve managed to attract smart kids after the immigrants to maintain the reputation, then we’d have been better served to recruit those kids by scholarships, luring good professors by offering high pay / labs / research grants, etc.
You say that Ph.Ds are NOT interested in emigrating and then agitating for more immigration of their coethnics. I say, why take a chance? We can pay royalties for inventions and not chance possible corruption.
Plenty of Hindu H1_B visas ARE importing their brides from India and then ethnocentrically hiring Indians in American computer companies.
American Whites want to be paid well, and if paid well, are competitive on the world stage.
If they are a White Ph.D., then they undoubtedly live in a White country, which is why they’re not interested in immigrating. So why do you want to make way for just those very few of them, in view of the fact that in writing the laws, it will be exceedingly difficult to keep out the smart but ethnocentric Chinese / Indians? After all, smart people are more capable of exploiting loopholes if they wish to do so.
Hindus won’t be able to come here because we won’t recognize their degrees. If a Hindu managed to get a degree in Britain, he’ll probably stay there.
IQ is genetic. Even if it isn’t, then the parents will create the right environment. A person with high IQ parents is likely to have at least above average IQ.
“First, it’s the fact of the smartness of the kids, not immigrant-ness (to coin a term) that makes the school’s reputation. “
I never said that crossing the Rio Grande makes you more intelligent. I said that if we bring in immigrants, we are better off bringing in smart people.
You say that Ph.Ds are NOT interested in emigrating and then agitating for more immigration of their coethnics. I say, why take a chance? We can pay royalties for inventions and not chance possible corruption.
Plenty of Hindu H1_B visas ARE importing their brides from India
H1B requires a Bachelor’s, not a Doctorate. And it accepts degrees from India. I specifically said I wouldn’t.
As your example with CUNY shows, when the smart kids leave, the reputation drops, so that shows us a reputation is temporary and maintained only so long as smart kids attend.
Smart parents have smart kids. Everyone agrees on it, even if they disagree on whether it’s nature or nurture. So long-term, unless we have political shifts causing a university to accept low IQ kids (such as what happened at CUNY), the schools will be fine.
If the reputation fails, then what purpose was served by importing the smart kids? Who now are American citizens, probably, and can vote, and can give birth to American citizens, and can use their high incomes to buy political favor.
Isn’t this true of descendants of German, Italian, Irish immigrants? I’d say most of them became Americans and would look after this country’s interests above all others.
“Hindus won’t be able to come here because we won’t recognize their degrees. If a Hindu managed to get a degree in Britain, he’ll probably stay there.”
Probably, but maybe not. Britain is nice, but just as some White British desire to come to America, some Hindus will, too. (Maybe fleeing the Muslim population growth in Britain?) And if any DO manage to get in, the ethnocentric agitating will start up if they ever DO manage to get the numbers.
And they WILL attempt to get the numbers, through fraud, through political dollars, bribes, etc. The few Hindus that managed to get in first are likely to get and bring over Hindu brides. Smuggle them in, if necessary. Then the Hindu babies born on American soil are in direct competition with Native Born White American babies for university slots / desirable jobs.
The problem will grow, as the few Hindu who first beat the system will desire greatly, and be strongly motivated to, find loopholes/ pay bribes, whatever it takes, to get their family members out of the hellhole of India. Then those will strive to bring their parents/ brother etc. etc.
Humans are tribal, and chain migration, once it gets started, won’t stop until the natives put a stop to it.
“Probably, but maybe not. Britain is nice, but just as some White British desire to come to America, some Hindus will, too. (Maybe fleeing the Muslim population growth in Britain?)”
I don’t think people want to immigrate twice. This is particularly true if you don’t speak the language. If you are an Arab who moved to France, odds are you wouldn’t want to move to the US just as you learned enough French to get a degree there. Can you imagine, after all that effort, dropping everything again to move… again.
” And if any DO manage to get in, the ethnocentric agitating will start up if they ever DO manage to get the numbers.”
Ok, so 3,000 Hindus get in over the next 10 years and you think they will have the power to do that?!
Let’s keep this in perspective here. How many Hindus are there in Europe who have doctorates? Even if all of them, each and every one of them, somehow decides to come here (will never happen), their numbers will still be in the 4 or low 5 digits. The only election they would be able to swing would be in a rural village… and that’s if they all move to that one village.
The reality is that it will be no more than a few hundred non-white immigrants per year. If it’s a couple thousand, that will be a bad year. They will swing no election.
RE the atom bomb: there were considerable efforts in the 1930s to “unlock the secret of the atom” as they used to put it so quaintly. Sooner or later someone would have done so. I am just glad the USA did it first.
RE: do students make the school or the school make the student? There have been considerable pushes by liberal universities to bring in more blacks and hispanics, despite their lower average SATs (and IQs). This is often done in contravention of state laws prohibiting race based admissions, aka affirmative action. The result is inevitably that the blacks and hispanics can not make the grade, literally and figuratively, and drop out.
The real tragedy is in the higher IQ students who are denied a place in the university because of these affirmative action placements. But then again, if they end up in a second line university, they will do all the better relative to everyone else. The real problem is that an Ivy League degree often means more when getting a job than a State U degree, even if the latter is, in reality, a better school.
From my own experience on campus (student, sometime instructor, occasional activist) I’d say the universities as a whole are getting more mediocre. Much of this can be lain at the doorstep of political correctness stifling independent thought, plus the need to push through “x” number of minority students to graduation, plus the proliferation of minority and feminazi studies programs which produce nothing of worth.
Of course, there are still solid engineering and IT and science departments, but these tend to attract large numbers of Asian and East European students.
In a country of 200 million Whites, there are PLENTY of smart White kids. Our attention should be focussed on nurturing THEM.
But modern American society does not consider intelligence to be very critical as a whole. We can look at the dumbing down of America as a conscious process (as I noted elsewhere on this website). Google John Taylor Gatto’s essay, “The Six Lesson Schoolteacher”.
Now, we might argue that this is due to the growth of lower IQ minorities. Or it is the conscious result of elites deliberately keeping the people dumbed down so they will not be a threat to the system. Or we could blame the people themselves for choosing to devalue education. It is significant that groups which value education, such as Jews, end up with higher rates of university admissions, assuming the system is not rigged against them via affirmative action.
It is a real treason of the ruling groups in this country that they have deliberately shot down the ambitions of White students by discriminating against them in the university admissions process via affirmative action and its clones. This not only discriminates against Whites, but in the long run, undermines the country as a whole by keeping down high-IQ students.