Friday, April 4, 2008

China and biological realities

Unless you have your head stuck in the sand, you would have heard about the various Chinese abuses in Tibet. I hesitate to condemn the Chinese. They have different values than us, as a civilization. They stood by when ethnic Chinese were slaughtered in Khmer Rouge. Mao didn't mind starving 50 million people for ideology, and China regards the Darfur genocide as mildly annoying, but not worth giving up the country's resources.

Anyway, the repression of Tibetans doesn't strike me as out of character, and it's hard to get really upset over what's going on there compared with the brutality occurring in Africa that we're not worried about.

What's fascinating is an editorial in the times where Kristof acknowledges that Han Chinese don't mind the Tibetan repression:

It would be convenient if we could simply denounce the crackdown in Tibet as the unpopular action of a dictatorial government. But it wasn’t. It was the popular action of a dictatorial government, and many ordinary Chinese think the government acted too wimpishly, showing far too much restraint toward “thugs” and “rioters.”

I wish he would reconsider his multiculturalism, but I'll settle for same old anti-China rhetoric while he remains an apologist for the arm chopping barbarians in African ethnic conflicts.

What is heartening, though, is that in a new article, Foreign Affairs magazine is willing to talk about ethnic nationalism here

political identities often take ethnic form, producing competing communal claims to political power. The creation of a peaceful regional order of nation-states has usually been the product of a violent process of ethnic separation. In areas where that separation has not yet occurred, politics is apt to remain ugly.

cough cough Iraq? Look, it all comes down to SELFISH GENE THEORY. People think on a tribal, or at least racial level, when it's a matter of them and their gene holders vs. the other.

Now, ethnic problems suck. But, what's infinitely worse is when you combine ethnic issues w/ racial disparities in IQ. That really leads to headaches, also known as Market dominant minority.

Back to China. If you read the rest of Kristof's editorial, he mentions this:

Americans sometimes think that the Tibetan resentments are just about political and religious freedom. They’re much more complicated than that. Tibetan anger is also fueled by the success of Han Chinese shop owners, who are often better educated and more entrepreneurial. So Tibetans seek solace in monasteries or bars, and the economic gap widens and provokes even more frustration — which the spotlight of the Olympics gives them a chance to express.

Very juicy piece of news. Listed here we see something of note: the average IQ in Nepal is 78-75, contrasted with the PRC, which has 100/105. Now, assuming that the Tibetans have different blood, and isolation and poverty are a factor, we can see their IQ going up to 85-90 genetically. Still a huge difference, the difference between African Americans and whites in the US.

If you look at the difference in skin tone between the Dalai Llama and Hu Jintao,

you can see that the two probably belong to two different ethnic groups, especially after comparing the picture of an average Tibetan vs. Chinese (okay, maybe I like Asian girls and was a little bias)

So, just think about the mental differences that the Tibetans have from being a relatively isolated population over the course of thousands of years. If you don't think that is enough time to evolve, check out this

“The or­i­gin of mod­ern hu­mans was a mi­nor event com­pared to more re­cent ev­o­lu­tion­ary chang­es,” wrote the au­thors of the re­search, in a pre­sent­a­tion slated for Fri­day in Phi­l­a­del­phia at the an­nu­al meet­ing of the Amer­i­can As­so­ci­a­tion of Phys­i­cal An­th­ro­po­l­o­g­ists.

Interesting stuff, huh?

Anyway, for another look at China we actually consider the Islamic world as well in a recent times article here. Usually I'd be the first to claim that Islam is responsible for all the problems. But I think biology also does, too. Look at this paragraph:

Like Tibetans in Tibet, Uighurs have historically been the predominant ethnic group in Xinjiang, which is officially known as the Xinjiang Uighur Autonomous Region. In both Tibet and Xinjiang, indigenous groups have chafed at the arrival of large numbers of Han Chinese, the country’s predominant ethnic group, who have migrated to western regions with strong government support.

Uighurs, like Tibetans, have complained that recent Han arrivals now dominate their local economies, even as the Han-run local governments insert themselves deeper into schools and religious practices to weed out cultural practices that officials fear might reinforce a separate ethnic or religious identity.

Oh man. At the same time, though, these are Muslims. They generally want to be able to live under Sharia law without interference. A large Han presence threatens that, just as in Malaysia where they are dependent on the Chinese minority to keep the economy running.

Oh well.

Now, finally, we turn to the China-India relationship in this where India is painfully aware of their inability to control the Chinese giant.

But as the two emerging Asian giants engage in their own version of the Great Game, it is impossible for New Delhi to escape the reality that the playing field is badly skewed in China’s favor, and hence the need for caution.

The planned Africa summit meeting, for instance, only highlights the vast gap between Indian and Chinese ambitions on the continent. Jairam Ramesh, the Indian minister of state for commerce, pointed out that a $640 million line of credit to Ethiopia was India’s largest single loan to an African country; by comparison, he noted that China had extended a $13 billion line of credit to oil-rich Angola.

“We can’t race with them at all,” he said. “There’s no point. They have left us behind.”

That imbalance has forced New Delhi to walk a fine line between competing with China and challenging it.

China mostly buys iron ore from India and sells a variety of consumer goods and auto parts

Now, think about everything India has going for it: a better sex balance, a free government, a large English speaking population, ability to feed itself, a young population. And then think about the fact that India has never come close to catching China and never will.

IQ reality, people. It aint going away anytime soon.


Jeaniechu said...

Actually, India has a worse sex balance than China. Far more males and aborted girls.

shalomi said...

According to the Jewish media:

Racially-oppressed Palestinians throwing rocks at US-bought Israeli tanks squatting on their land = terrorists.

Tibetans killing unarmed Chinese shopowners = freedom fighters


RichAsianKid (豊かなアジア子供 富裕的亞洲孩子 풍부한 아시아 아이) said...

Great article, great links. Thanks.

Here are a few more.

(1) First, Chinese immigrants flood the Russian Far East.

Quote: "Sergei Buchma, the deputy president of an association of Russian-Chinese entrepreneurs, runs a business center in Vladivostok where eight Chinese companies with an annual collective turnover of $10 million are based. 'Ten years ago they were all shuttle traders,'he said. 'Now they are big managers, some of them turn over millions of dollars a year. They already control half of the economy here. Within 30 or 40 years they will have economic control of this whole area.' "

It looks like the effects are the same.

- - -

(2) Or if you compare to Australia -- here's a law professor's observation (the whole article is worth reading)

Quote: "Apart from the objective genetic interests at stake, a multiracial society forces white Australians to bear other, more subjectively painful social, economic and political costs. At the high end of Australia's immigrant intake, a growing cognitive elite of East Asians threatens to become similar to "market-dominant minorities" such as the overseas Chinese in Southeast Asia, Jews in Russia or Indians in East Africa. [47] Faced with competition from a growing East Asian population, white Australians will find themselves outgunned: Western-style "old boy" preference networks are only weakly ethnic in character, and, thus, permeable, making them no match for the institutionally-directed, in-group solidarity or "ethnic nepotism" practiced by other groups. Endowed with an edge in IQ and a temperament conducive to rigorous regimes of coaching, rote learning and stricter parental discipline, young East Asians already dominate the competition for places in universities and professional schools. Within two to three decades, it is not unreasonable to expect that Australia will have a heavily Asian managerial-professional, ruling class that will not hesitate to promote the interests of co-ethnics at the expense of white Australians. [48]

At the low end of the market for Third World immigrants, tensions are already appearing between white Australians and the growing numbers of black, sub-Saharan Africans settled here by the transnational refugee industry. [49] One can safely predict that, no matter how large this particular Third World colony becomes, black Africans will never become a "market-dominant minority" in Australia. On the contrary, experience "practically everywhere in the world tells us that an expanding black population is a sure-fire recipe for increases in crime, violence and a wide range of other social problems." [50] Unfortunately, experience also demonstrates that any such suggestion will produce nothing short of a hysterical reaction among Australian journalists and academics. [51]"

- - -

(3) IQ distributions around the world are not identical


And we know that human capital is correlated with GDP (the subsaharan African countries bunch up at the lower left, while Eurasian countries are at the top right):

And if someone objects to IQ saying it's just unimportant, what about international achievement tests (PISA, TIMSS)? IQ and these tests correlate almost perfectly

(Full paper here )

And some countries are just plain retarded by whatever criteria -- look -- 3,4,5 standard deviations below the (Korean) mean!!