Quote of the day—Rachel Alexander

Researchers found that by merely analyzing that type of brain activity, they could predict whether someone is Republican or Democrat 82.9% of the time.

John Hibbing, a University of Nebraska political scientist, researched twins and found that identical twins share more political beliefs than fraternal twins. Since identical twins share more genes, he concluded, “Forty, perhaps 50 percent of our political beliefs seem to have a basis in genetics.”

Rachel Alexander
September 26, 2022
Our Brains Are Wired Differently Than Democrats, So Don’t Get Too Mad at Them
[Interesting… They (for certain values of “they”) are broken and can’t be fixed. At least you could say that from a first glance at the data. A deeper dive would reveal more subtle conclusions.

She didn’t mention it in the article but a book I just started reading points out that different personal viewpoints have advantages and disadvantages depending upon the current situation.

For example, experimenting and risk taking to improve your life is probably a good thing when your situation is changing in a potentially life changing manner. If life is good then not changing things is probably the proper path.

I say that because there will be some people who will claim that some sets of people, including their children, are irredeemable and a threat to humanity. I don’t agree with that except for some extremely small sets (violent psychopaths for example).

The large sets wouldn’t be large if they were unfit from a evolutionary standpoint. We may not see their benefit to society. If fact we may be able to make a good case they are a detriment in our current situations. But there must have been some benefit at some time in the past. This means there may be a time in the future when they will be a benefit again and you are the detriment in that new situation.—Joe]


9 thoughts on “Quote of the day—Rachel Alexander

  1. I have fraternal twins. It’s been interesting to watch how the nature v nurture elements affect them.

    They have their own identifiable personalities since day one – and the way those personalities react to similar nurture experiences that then create a path of future reactions and further personality effects has been amazing to watch. It’s like the butterfly effect applied to human development.

  2. I could see people being more being predisposed to liking order or chaos. One see’s that in the way children keep their rooms.
    But those traits will always be limited by the social framework children were brainwashed in.
    One might be a very orderly communist. And another a very sloppy one. But both will be communists non the less.
    And we indeed see very many brilliant, orderly, insightfully wonderful people, that are just bat-shit insane communists. As well as the sloppy-ass stupid ones running wild in the streets.
    Same with risk, or aversion to it.
    For many years coming to America was a life threating process. It took a certain something inside to want to come here. Call it genetics. (I’m not researched enough to say.)
    But whatever it is, it won’t give up its guns. Where others almost always have.
    As to it leading to a more peaceful society? Not a chance in hell.
    We passed the live and let live stage when Adam bit the apple. And the only thing that stops us from killing each other for fun and profit is an agreed upon system. Like the constitution, and laws made in pursuance thereof.
    And as we can plainly see personality traits brainwashed outside that constitutional system are right back where we started.
    “The nature of man is wicked beyond believe.”
    I don’t see that changing anytime soon. Regardless of how we go about life and politics.
    By discovering genetics, it seems only gave us an excuse for killing one another.

  3. You really need to read about r/K theory, “The Evolutionary Psychology Behind Politics: How Conservatism and Liberalism Evolved Within Humans,” by Anonymous Conservative. Yes, different character traits are better at different times. Both are present in a population. When conditions for one are favorable they swell in percentage terms, when conditions change they become more rare and the other increases.

    The modern high-tech society requires some minimum percentage of K (the highly selective, highly involved rearing type, think wolf pack optomized for a resource-scarce environment) to survive let alone grow. Not sure what that percentage, but I’d guess between 5% and 25% is the min. To many ‘r’ types, tho, can put to large a burden on the systems. In an old ag or hunter-gather culture, the fall-back positions are simple. In modern systems, one failure can cause collapse. How long do things keep rolling if the gas pump shuts down… and doesn’t come back on?

  4. Will you guys please stop with the books already? I’ve got too much waiting to be read now and you’re just making it worse. Not to mention the damage to my credit card……

  5. Nope. I see no need to try to redeem communists. It’s never been successfully done, and we’ve been trying to talk them around for a century now.

    It really is them or us.

  6. We plugged up the filter to the gene pool many decades ago. Now we’re paying the price for that insanity. A truly intelligent society would accept the fact that some people are simply UNFIT TO LIVE and do what’s needful. OUR society elects them to office and puts them on pedestals.

    • The first BIG political mistake made here in the US was giving the vote to females. They are hardwired to want a ruler/system that is a “strongman” type, that will give them the things that make them feel safe to raise children.

      Even if they don’t intend to have children, that unconscious urge is still in action. Unless they are taught in school that that sort of political thinking is bad, they will absolutely follow it. Even then, some percentage will still push for the socialism/communism types. It is a no win setup due to this inbuilt bias on the female side. You can’t totally eliminate their effect, so they have to be restricted. When you have a 50% bias for soc/com, any voting is just over the details of your country’s downfall, not whether it will or won’t happen.

  7. “…..some people are simply UNFIT TO LIVE and do what’s needful. “

    I understand the sentiment and do not doubt its truthfulness; that said, the statement ignores alternatives.

    Unfitness can be corrected; not always, absolutely not without effort, sometimes phenomenally tremendous effort on the part of all parties involved, and sometimes the corrective effort is sufficiently strenuous as to be not conducive to the continued support of life.

    If that is the mechanism by which Unfitness is mortally excised, then so be it; it’s never been said that redemption came, or should come, easily. But to deny the opportunity, and the effort, is a weakness to be avoided.

    And, by such example can (much, maybe only some) future Unfitness be avoided.

    • War is messy. Genocide is clean. We’re on the receiving end of genocide, and the only solution is war.

      Some people appear to be more afraid of getting dirty than of being exterminated.

Comments are closed.