“It should be of particular concern to us that the beliefs of Muslims pose a special problem for nuclear deterrence. There is little possibility of our having a cold war with an Islamist regime armed with long-range nuclear weapons. A cold war requires that the parties be mutually deterred by the threat of death. Notions of martyrdom and jihad run roughshod over the logic that allowed the United States and the Soviet Union to pass half a century perched, more or less stably, on the brink of Armageddon. What will we do if an Islamist regime, which grows dewy-eyed at the mere mention of paradise, ever acquires long-range nuclear weaponry? If history is any guide, we will not be sure about where the offending warheads are or what their state of readiness is, and so we will be unable to rely on targeted, conventional weapons to destroy them. In such a situation, the only thing likely to ensure our survival may be a nuclear first strike of our own. Needless to say, this would be an unthinkable crime—as it would kill tens of millions of innocent civilians in a single day—but it may be the only course of action available to us, given what Islamists believe. ”

Basically, “I don’t want to, but we’d have to” which is the same thing as saying “we should”, in any case. But I’m trying to get away from this, so on to the Fiz thread!

His book, The Bell Curve, had a small chapter on IQ testing and race, and what he said was some groups had different test results than others. I have no opinion on the matter, and neither did Harris.

Characterizing the race and IQ section in the Bell Curve as a “small chapter” is a very disingenuous act of intellectual dishonesty. Murray made eugenicist policy prescriptions in the Bell Curve based on the data he presented in that chapter to argue, in his words, (so you won’t say I am mischaracterizing him):

“The technically precise description of America’s fertility policy is that it subsidizes births among poor women, who are also disproportionately at the low end of the intelligence distribution. We urge generally that these policies, represented by the extensive network of cash and services for low-income women who have babies, be ended.”

Now, tell me why Murray needed to include a section on race and IQ in book he is using to argue for certain types of population control? Forget the fact that Murray’s work was trashed for not being peer reviewed or for its many empirical errors. Do you or Harris, the great defender of scientific objectivity, really expect any fair minded person to think this chapter was inconsequential to his prescription?

I’d have respected Murray more if he just came out and said that there are too many Blacks and Hispanics being born in this country. It would be just as racist and far more intellectually honest. But the fact that Harris felt the need to defend Murray, a man who is a prominent think tank intellectual with hundreds of published pieces, as some persecuted figure for promoting this racist junk science is enough to tell me where the former’s actual priorities lie. And that is with protecting enablers of power under the pseudo-intellectual guise of scientific rationality.

The overall offense failed to play faster as he wanted and it didn’t really improve, but there were some good signs. No hidden gems were buried on the bench. They were incredibly thin behind the big two.

Didn’t Hire Mark Jackson
2018