It would be helpful if some guy would post a list of all the true things you’re not allowed to say. With localized versions: specific things you can’t say at company X, say McDonald’s or Google. I’ve seem people from other cultures slip up on this, and it hardly seems fair. Whoever wrote down the list would of course be immediately fired, but surely someone is willing to suffer for the greater good.
-
Recent Posts
Archives
- December 2023
- December 2022
- September 2022
- May 2022
- April 2022
- January 2022
- December 2021
- November 2021
- October 2021
- September 2021
- August 2021
- July 2021
- June 2021
- May 2021
- April 2021
- March 2021
- February 2021
- January 2021
- December 2020
- November 2020
- October 2020
- September 2020
- August 2020
- July 2020
- June 2020
- May 2020
- April 2020
- March 2020
- February 2020
- January 2020
- December 2019
- November 2019
- October 2019
- September 2019
- August 2019
- July 2019
- June 2019
- May 2019
- April 2019
- March 2019
- February 2019
- January 2019
- December 2018
- November 2018
- October 2018
- September 2018
- August 2018
- July 2018
- June 2018
- May 2018
- April 2018
- March 2018
- February 2018
- January 2018
- December 2017
- November 2017
- October 2017
- September 2017
- August 2017
- July 2017
- June 2017
- May 2017
- April 2017
- March 2017
- February 2017
- January 2017
- December 2016
- November 2016
- October 2016
- September 2016
- August 2016
- July 2016
- June 2016
- May 2016
- April 2016
- March 2016
- February 2016
- January 2016
- December 2015
- November 2015
- October 2015
- September 2015
- August 2015
- July 2015
- June 2015
- May 2015
- April 2015
- March 2015
- February 2015
- January 2015
- December 2014
- November 2014
- October 2014
- September 2014
- August 2014
- July 2014
- June 2014
- May 2014
- April 2014
- March 2014
- February 2014
- January 2014
- December 2013
- November 2013
- October 2013
- September 2013
- August 2013
- July 2013
- June 2013
- May 2013
- April 2013
- March 2013
- February 2013
- January 2013
- December 2012
- November 2012
- October 2012
- September 2012
- August 2012
- July 2012
- June 2012
- May 2012
- April 2012
- March 2012
- February 2012
- January 2012
- December 2011
- November 2011
- October 2011
- September 2011
- August 2011
Categories
- Aging
- Altitude adaptations
- Amerindians
- Archaic humans
- Ashkenazi Jews
- assortative mating
- Australian Aboriginals
- Book Reviews
- Bushmen
- Cold War
- Denisovans
- Dietary adaptations
- dysgenics
- Economics
- Education
- Eskimo
- European Prehistory
- Evolutionary Medicine
- Genetics
- Genghis -Khan effect
- GGS
- homo erectus
- Homosexuality
- Indo-European
- Linguistics
- Low-hanging Fruit
- Mangani
- Neanderthals
- Pygmies
- Skin color
- Speaking ill of the dead
- sub-Saharan Africans
- Uncategorized
- World War Two
Meta
West Hunter 
You’re not allowed to say “guy” when you mean “man.”
A chi-rho symbol for your avatar? I like it. But most commenters wouldn’t like it (if they knew what it meant).
Complete with alpha and omega, even!
Noticed that too. I’ve cross-stitched the complete thing on some birth announcements.
For my grandchildren, their parents wouldn’t permit such a thing, I didn’t even mention it. I found some photos of stylized palm leaves (very common in the ancient world). They look good too.
Indeed, everyone knows this comment threads are full of traditional Romans, still furious over usurper’s Constantine betrayal of ancestral Roman gods.
That’s what I was thinking too! They’re always commenting about ancient gods.
They might be more into the Teutonic gods, though.
That was the nice about polytheism, there was room for more.
“It would be helpful if some guy would post a list of all the true things you’re not allowed to say.”
I laughed out loud. You have a way with words.
I’m sure if you ran an word-cloud on your blog that would be a pretty good start.
The name/word for this is “mokita”.
Didn’t the Catholic Church have an Index of banned books?
Until 1966.
There’s a brilliant post about this here: http://tinyurl.com/olavnf5
Thanks! That link is both LOL funny and a good start on a list of the true things no one is allowed to say.
Yes, it’s a good read, but he claims that all people know the items are true, but not be discussed in polite company.
He doesn’t cover the more controversial issues where many people think the items are true. They become enraged if you mention these issues. Jobs can be lost, friendships break up and relatives might shun you.
You can’t have the list because the PC crowd denies that they’re true.
Specific to my locality and place of work (but probably true in a of places)
You are not allowed to mention that First Nations people have a tendency towards failing out of school, alcoholism, other addictions, violence and criminality (unless in the same breath you blame the problems entirely on racism and residential schools.)
You may not say that there is a correlation between Islam and terrorism. Don’t you dare notice that!
Don’t even think of noticing that, on average, women might not be as strong in math as men. (I am a female math teacher but would not dare point this out –could lose my job)
Better not to notice that things such as alcoholism and intelligence involve genetics. If you mention this you are basically Hitler.
Most readers don’t know what “First Nations” means.
It’s two lies in two words.. neither first, nor nations.
Not first, but why not nations?
In Canada I think the best term is tribes, not nations. There was no organization into “nations” as there was in, say, the Inca empire. Instead, they remained tribes – roughly, a group of people related by family (clans) in a well-defined area, self-sufficient, with optionally a political organization under chieftains.
Nothing like a nation, which is a more abstract concept — from Wiki “a cultural-political community that has become conscious of its autonomy, unity, and particular interests”.
In Canada the “First Nations” claim a ‘nation-to-nation” relationship with the Federal Government, but do not act like any other kind of nation.
Consider as an example, drinking water. Almost every community in Canada has self-financed sources of safe drinking water. The financing is down by taxing the property in that community, in combination with one-time grants from the provinces. Provincial regulations are enforced by provincial regulators, who ensure compliance.
Compare that to “First Nations”, which rely 100% on Federal funding to build treatment plants – they do not self-finance or self-tax for this. And, once built, these “nations” do not have the social or regulatory structures to maintain those plants — allowing them to fall into disrepair. When this happens, they then demand more funding. And the liberal media immediately start denouncing the Federal government for its lack of care..
“I’ve seem people from other cultures slip up on this”
This reminds me of the time an Islamic organization in Canada put links to stuff about David Duke and his view on Jews. This caused problems for them, needless to say. But no one cared if they put links to George Galloway and his views on Jews.
How are newcomers to Canada supposed to figure out which white anti semites are politically correct?
How are newcomers to Canada supposed to figure out which white anti semites are politically correct?
It’s easy, because Duke and Galloway aren’t “anti-semitic” in the same way. Duke came to his anti-semitism by being pro-white and racist, Galloway to his anti-Zionism by being pro-Palestinian and anti-racist. In any case, the accusation of “anti-semitism” was the foundation-stone of the PC Lubyanka. All the other blasphemies are modeled after it. This blog is racist, sexist and homophobic, for example. To progressives, no more need be said, because the whole point is to avoid a debate. Similarly for those who call David Duke an anti-semite. The accusation evades the question of whether his views are true or not.
An important metarule applies to non-Christian religions including Islam: if Islam teaches something that you are not allowed to say, you are not allowed to say that Islam teaches it.
But the Index would need constant updating, or it would become hazardous. Who knew a few years ago that using the word “trannie” for a transsexual would make you worse than literally Hitler?
It’s quaint to see someone so out of the loop that “trannie” is the example they use. “Trangendered person” vs. “Transgender person.” “trans” vs “trans*.” If you call a literal, acknowledged transvestite a “transvestite,” you will be put on a watchlist for even having the word in your vocabulary.
Imagine a minefield laid in quicksand.
The index would also need to have each forbidden concept/word to be dated so we can see how much of a ratchet effect they are applying over the years. Something tells me that this is a permanent revolution and that the list will be ever changing and ever growing.
Surely no-one should make any of these comments until we know their precise location?
From a control perspective, it’s great these rules aren’t clear or lineated; it gives more power to punish innocent people considered a nuisance. Just accuse them of something, retroactively considered a hate crime, and you get them out of the way. Maintain status quo and rule like a king.
Also, having the list secret has great intimidating power. Since people don’t know exactly what’s on the list, they avoid saying anything that might be on the list, self-censoring. This expands the de facto forbidden space – a positive feedback process which ends when all speech that is not compulsory is prohibited.
You can construct the list from first principles. Saying anything true and positive about WHAMs (white heterosexual able-bodied men) and traditionalist Christianity is BAD. Saying anything true and negative about non-WHAMs and non-trad-Xtians is BAD. Denying the absolute Psychic Unity of Mankind is BAD, as is questioning the sacred task of Striving for Equality. But when progressives talk about Equality, they mean it in the Orwellian sense: “All humans are equal, but some humans are more equal than others.”
More simply still, ask: “Do Those-Who-Must-Not-Be-Named accept this truth?” If they don’t, it’s on the list. See S.J. Gould, J. Diamond, The Culture of Critique, etc.
WHY ARE YOU ASSUMING IT WOULD BE A “GUY” WHO COMPILES THIS LIST OF FORBIDDEN THOUGHTS?????!!!!!????
Here is a guy from another culture who got it wrong.
The Aussies let these people into their country! Do they know nothing of US , UK, and European history?
Are Aussies allowed to know more that the average bear/google employee?
I see some encouraging signs when I look at the way part of the Australian elite dealt with illegal entries in their nation. But a the same time, having enjoyed the huge advantage of being a much more homogeneous white nation a lot more than others, could be that big chucks of the population, are even more naive that in other parts of the west.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4531942/Residents-terrified-four-Melbourne-home-invasions.html
As they say – good decisions come from experience, experience comes from poor decisions.
What has he got against dogs?
Personal taste.
😉
In the classrooms of my secondary school the custom was that the teacher put the dimmest pupils at the front, the brightest at the back. So one sweeping glance taught you rather a lot. And that was in a stream where the minimum IQ for entry was 118. That raises the possibility of another incorrect list: photos that you’d better not show in public.
It is a wonder they still publish “most wanted” lists with photos.
http://www.rcmp-grc.gc.ca/en/wanted
It’s worth differentiating between what is forbidden by the law and what is forbidden by “polite society”.
That Asian immigrant in Australia couldn’t keep up a sign that said “no 14-18 year-old blacks allowed”. But neither could he put up a sign that said “no whites allowed”, at least in the U.S., even if the press and others would show more sympathy for the latter.
It is obvious and true that men present a much greater threat of harassment and physical attack against women than other women do, by perhaps two orders of magnitude. You’re even allowed and encouraged to say this in polite society, so long as you don’t go too deep into the biological basis of sex differences. Yet the Uber-for-women startup fell through when it was determined you weren’t allowed to say “No men allowed”.
Apparently some woman in Lebanon runs a female-only taxi service. Given how Muslim men behave (I know they aren’t all bad), it makes a lot of sense. Why take a chance?
This was several years ago, long before Uber.
these are common in iran as well
If everyone knows the shibboleth it’s no longer a shibboleth. The ever-shifting and uncertain nature of what you can’t say is a feature, not a bug.
Using ‘shibboleth’ correctly on the internet? Radical!
I’m sure he at least had the good grace to pronounce it in the wrong accent….
I’ve heard some people call it a sibboleth.
Maybe you can get the ADL to compile a list of “hate facts” for you.
Preferably with severity ratings: categorize things into eye-rolling, fainting couch, and lynch mob. If only there were some sort of half-trillion dollar enterprise out there dedicated to organizing the world’s information; I bet they could pull it off.
the media lied about what the guy actually said which shows there are two layers: the things that the media think the public will accept as reasonable heresy i.e. saying “all women are biologically inferior at tech” and the things they won’t i.e. “fewer women want to go into tech.”
this illustrates that the media are 1) the enforcers of PC heresy and 2) shameless liars
and given that the media is owned by a handful of billionaires and corporations this means they must want PC heresy enforced – so why would billionaires and corporations want to impose PC ideology?
they want an unlimited labor supply to keep their workers “flexible” (aka desperate).
Media is a plural word. The singular is medium. Therefore, you should not say “the media is”, but rather “the media are”. Your English lesson for the day.
ty – my education mostly involved avoiding getting stabbed by gangs that the media are said didn’t exist
Coincidentally, Julia Galef, a minor Facebook public intellectual (or science popularizer?) (or maybe she’s just pretty) is currently collecting a List of Unpopular Ideas. A lot of them are silly and inconsequential, IMO. As far as I can tell, she doesn’t have the #1 most unpopular idea of them all. But she’s taking suggestions.
Asking for such a list identifies you as one of those “pro-rationality extremists” Greg. Immediately report yourself to your nearest re-education camp citizen!
The Japanese have a specific term for this. Tatemae (teh things you now privately to be true) and Honne (the things you are allowed to admit of publicly). Woe betide he (or shklee) who mistakes one for the other.
In previous eras it was easy–we put all the crap that wasnt true in a thing called “religion” and left it there. Its got tougher now.
The sad thing about discussion of offensive truths today is that so few Westerners are bi- or trilingual. The last time that offensiveness was weaponized in the name of civilization, the Victorian Age, educated people could simply switch to Latin to drop inconvenient truths, with few repercussions.
Should be “offendedness.”
Si Caesar viverat, ad remum te dareris
In Germany and Austria, questioning any single detail about WW2 that you’ve heard in school is forbidden by law. They’re afraid of people attacking the new original sin.
Well, the problem is that people want to think well of themselves and their ancestors: they want a usable history. If you’re talking the history of the Second World War, Germans and Austrians aren’t going to get that without lying. Lots and lots and lots of lying. There’s a market for it: at the end of WWII, a big fraction of Germans just couldn’t understand why everyone was so pissed at them… Although some did. There was a guy on public transit in Berlin, wounded and obviously fresh from the front, a couple of weeks before the end, saying wildly to everyone: “You have to stop them. You have to stop them! Because if they even do half of what we’ve done in Russia…”
Lots of people have a shortage of usable history. If you insist on a history full of shining heroes and nothing else, everybody’s out of luck.
Simple solution: invent new ancestors and new history , for example, let’s say Tolkien’s stories are true and we are descendants of elves … nope, bad idea. Elves in Tolkien’s ancient history were as-brick-stupid psycho killers.
We are hobbits, yes, hobbits we are.
I see nothing wrong with just lying about history. The point of history is what, to learn? Lol. No one learns. Or rather, few do and those that do are willing to dig deep to make their own opinions as to what matters.
For the masses? Just give them easily digestible heroes and causes that encourage virtuous behavior that encourages civilisation.
The prob with what passes for “history” now is not that it’s mostly bs, but rather that the type of bs it is is self destructive to the West.
The Japanese know better.
The problem
The essay “What you can’t say” by Paul Graham is worth pondering.
http://www.paulgraham.com/say.html
Ah, thank you. I remember reading this before.
Someone on the autism spectrum could use this. Him: X. College: X is badthink. Him: But X is true. College: even if true still shouldn’t say because disrespectful. Him: I’m bad at modeling what other people consider disrespectful so could you please list all the true things I can’t say.
But you want to stop the college from defining something as untrue if at least one Phd thinks it is false, so you should ask for a list of things you can’t say that have at least some scientific support.
I think this guy is on to something:
http://quillette.com/2017/07/18/neurodiversity-case-free-speech/
People with mental problems of any kind are out of luck in our society. They may be left to roam around homeless because putting them against their will in a hospital would be a human rights violation.
And you can’t completely dismiss that argument. Under Communism, in the USSR, calling people crazy and using this as a reason to lock them up really happened.
There is no way they can break the speech codes. If they’re not “high functioning” they will be treated condescendingly. People will tactfully try to help them avoid the problem. For their own good.
If they’re high functioning and defy the speech codes they may be fired or shunned.
How do we know that if the fired Google employee was on the spectrum or not?
You have ask yourself why he wrote it. I’m retired now but would not have dreamed of writing something like that at work. Hadn’t he heard of other cases of people being fired?
Didn’t he notice the atmosphere surrounding such topics?
The Google guy is now giving interviews, promoting himself and exploiting his five minutes of worldwide fame as adroitly as possible. Not your typical Asperger/autistic/schizoid/schizophrenic person.
Agreed. But the argument above (starting with James Miller’s comment) was more general, it wasn’t about him in particular.
I mentioned him at the end, before he had started giving interviews, etc.
He was still stupid to write that memo, IMO. Plain vanilla stupid.
If he thought he will stay anonymous (if it was his plan A), he was mistaken. But his plan B (hire good lawyers, sue Google, promote himself as “alt-right” celebrity) is going well.
Five minutes of worldwide fame, if you know what to do with them, are well worth $160k Google job.
I was under the impression that colleges and the other PC types deny the statements are true. That is certainly what they say. I have any number of op-eds in places like New York Times saying the statements are completely false.
I have yet to read an NYT article there saying the statements are true but forbidden.
I’m using NYT as an example but the same holds for all news sites.
Do you have an example?
I don’t care about anyone other than myself.
I do not care what you care about 😉
Here is a list of youtube videos they are censoring right now, it looks like most of them are on topics of HBD, which figures:
http://www.censoredlist.com/
I once had the idea for a short story called “The Compendium,” which would feature a small, isolated society somehow coming into possession of a book containing all possible human knowledge. I don’t know how. Aliens, or something. Anyway, the trick is it’s too big for anyone to read in a lifetime, and skill and intelligence is required to search through it, interpret it, and apply it to practical life. It couldn’t be used for every purpose all the time, and only a limited amount of people could have access at the same time. So a class of people become privileged in its use, and everyone else has to defer to their knowledge of it. These privileged persons would necessarily agree even if they had a page open to argue about, and of course they would develop different bases of knowledge depending upon which parts of the book they specialize in. Some of these people decide to use their privilege for purposes of deception, both of the Noble Lie and regular lie variety.
Point is, such a list as you recommend compiling would be about as big and complex as the Compendium.
“would be about as big and complex”
No.