Back in February, Nathan Cofnas wrote an influential piece A Guide for the Hereditarian Revolution, in which he wrote:
The prospect of a hereditarian revolution strikes some people as inconceivable and/or even more terrifying than wokism itself. Here I argue that, without hereditarianism, the fight against wokism is futile, and that a hereditarian revolution is both feasible and desirable. “Race realism” is the best term to describe the scientifically correct position. When the elites accept race realism, we can construct a better world.
Well, here we are. With the US elections finally over, the Republicans have taken control of the presidency, senate, very probably the house, and they already had the supreme court. While Trump does occasionally post about intelligence, genetics, crime etc., he’s not an intellectual. However, the vice president elect J. D. Vance reads books and blogs. In fact, he does more than just read books, he follows Crémieux and Wilfred Reilly on Twitter. Overall, there is a decent chance he knows the central facts of HBD (defined broadly as biological influences on human differences, whether these are sexes, sexual orientations, races, criminals and so on). To this we can add that Elon musk follows and engages with Crémieux, Wilfred Reilly, i/o, datahazard, Colin Wright, Hanania, as well as edge accounts iamyesyouareno and Defiant L’s. Given that Musk grew up in South Africa, he’s almost guaranteed to know about Black-White IQ gaps and crime rates. Given this, some of the Republican elites can probably be assumed to be at least HBD aware.
Does this change anything? Hanania thinks most politics is top-down, voters are going to believe and like whatever policies and beliefs the elites advocate, so the main thing that matters is having the right elites. Well, maybe for the first time in a while, some top US politicians are red pilled. This has happened before. Take this recording of a phone call between US Republican president Richard Nixon and his advisor Daniel Moynihan in 1971 (from Amren’s write-up):
The 25-minute conversation begins with a discussion about an article called “IQ” that Richard Herrnstein had just published in The Atlantic and that Moynihan had sent to Nixon. This was a comprehensive, 18-page explanation of the heritability of intelligence, its correlation with success in life and — most controversially — the suggestion that the black/white gap in average IQ is due, at least in part, to genetic differences.
Nixon: Nobody on the staff even knows I read the goddamn article.
Moynihan: Oh, good.
Nixon: . . . The Herrnstein stuff and all the rest: First, nobody must know we are thinking about it, and second, if we do find out it’s correct we must never tell anybody.
Moynihan: I’m afraid that’s just the case. Yep, yep.
Nixon: . . . I reluctantly concluded . . . that what Herrnstein says, and — what’s that earlier, by [Arthur] Jensen? — and so forth is probably very close to the truth.
Nixon clearly thinks Herrnstein and Jensen are right. He even describes how the facts could be made more palatable.
Nixon: Then you counter that by saying something the racists would never agree with, that within groups there are geniuses — there are geniuses within black groups, [but] there are more within Asian groups. And, incidentally, it was a rather neat trick to point out that the Asians are number one, and Caucasians are number two, and the . . .
Moynihan: The Eskimos [Moynihan is clearly suggesting the word “Eskimos” as a euphemism for Jews].
Nixon: . . . the Eskimos are above the whites, which is good. And also your little deal about the English and the Irish [Moynihan was of Irish ancestry]. Now, that is the best example of the fact that this is knowledge, but it is knowledge that is better not to know. [Nixon is referring to evidence that the Irish have a lower average IQ than the English.] At least, good God, it would cause another war. They’re having enough damn problems in Northern Ireland now. And, basically, there are Irish geniuses.
Has anything changed? Their policy of keeping it secret that they knew led to another 50+ years of race conflicts, affirmative action and a climate of lies. Maybe it is time to speak up. Musk has certainly been making moves in that direction in the last few years. Here’s how I envision improvements could be done:
- Follow the Hanania playbook and overturn, repeal, remove, and otherwise defeat pro-censorship regulations and laws regarding group differences. No more hiding crime data.
- In the same vein, overturn, remove all pro-affirmative action laws and regulations. This demon must be slain once and for all. Make it clear it is absolutely illegal for government-funded organizations to implement such racist policies.
- Remove all laws regulating the actions of private companies. If they want to hire people of X race, let them. The market will regulate itself. This removes 1000s of bureaucrats managing these laws.
- Implement open data laws that force government-funded organizations to release internal data for public consideration. This includes test scores and other applicant data for admissions for all education institutions that receive federal funding. Right now the only way these things get out is when there are major lawsuits.
- Make a government commission to analyze pay gaps as a function of human capital, including test scores. We already know the results, but the US government is sitting on lots of data that can be used to study this. Make all that data public. Publish a big government report, so this question is over once and for all. Show that meritocracy is king. This undermines the falsehoods about ‘systemic racism’.
- Whatever popular claims are made regarding this or that social program, earmark funding for large-scale study of such claims. Headstart is a good example. Congress already did a large study of this and showed that it doesn’t work. This program should be defunded. We need more of this determined research, less loose funding that academics misuse for their own purposes. The default should be that any large publicly funded social program is assumed not to work until proven effective. Use proper standards of science. Follow the lead in medicine with registered trials, open data, and multiple research teams.
- Something must be done about the egalitarian infestation in academia. Merely banning diversity statements etc. will not solve the problem. Most of this stuff must be defunded. Whatever private institutions fund with their own money is their own business, but the publicly funded institutions should not be funding fake science in the service of Marxism and its modern offspring.
- Punish publicly funded universities that undermine science by firing or otherwise harassing dissident professors. First Amendment is king. Make sure they understand that there is a very big economic hammer for those who violate this. This means cases like Amy Wax, Bryan Pesta, and Linda Gottfredson.
- Musk must make sure there are non-Woke AIs on the market. He already has his own Grok project, but it doesn’t fare much better than the competitors in measurements of political bias. The source of the bias seems to be the final tuning, which means it is also relatively easy to remove. David Rozado is the go-to expert on this topic.
- Run federal studies that examine political bias in the hiring and promotion at publicly funded research institutions. We know there is a large bias. Make all this data public. Sunlight is the best disinfectant for corruption. If necessary, implement rules that remove the ability to engage in blatant political discrimination. Award extra funding for institutions that are less biased, or cut funding for those with more bias. This is not straight affirmative action for non-leftists. Given their interests in science, they should be over-represented in academia, but not at the level of 95%+ of professors in most fields. Whoever was hired under these illegal anti-meritocratic procedures should be let go and the job position opened for a fair hiring procedure.
- There is a large political bias in the available funding for research into HBD topics. Make sure some money is earmarked for these purposes.
- Make sure datasets produced from federal funding are publicly available. Right now, they are being guarded by censors who secretly determine what kinds of research can be done (if they don’t like your research proposal, you won’t get access to the data). The great success of NLSYs, World Values Survey, 1000 Genomes etc. are in large part due to them being entirely public. Open science will show us the truth and defeat the house of cards they have built. Make science great again.
