Genes Account For Success, Though Not Happiness

From NewScientist:

When Belsky and his colleagues looked at the genetic profiles of the New Zealanders, they found that those with higher polygenic scores not only had a greater education, but went on to achieve more in other ways. By the age of 38, they had more prestigious occupations, higher incomes, more assets and were better at managing their finances. The individuals’ polygenic scores could predict success even when the team accounted for their level of education.

The relationship held regardless of whether the person had come from a rich or poor family, too – those with a higher polygenic score were more likely to achieve upward social mobility, and do better than their parents. “You wouldn’t have predicted social mobility based on genetics,” says Robert Plomin at King’s College London. “I think it’s a heartening sign.”

Belsky’s team also found that successful people with higher polygenic scores were more likeable and friendly, both as children and adults. “It’s a ‘nice guys finish first’ story that I didn’t expect to find,” says Belsky. But the polygenic scores had no link to life satisfaction or health.

Posted in Genetics, IQ | Comments Off on Genes Account For Success, Though Not Happiness

If Immigration Is Your Issue

Comments at Steve Sailer:

* If immigration truly is your go-to issue, then Trump obviously should be your choice in November. No one, repeat NO ONE except Trump brought up the issue last summer. Cruz certainly wouldn’t have if Trump wasn’t in the race.

Cruz has had nearly six yrs to make immigration his signature issue, talk about building a wall on the TX border, etc. and he has not done so. Which demonstrates how little he truly cares about the issue until Trump came along and made it his own.

No candidate in either party would’ve been devoting much attention at all to the issue at large until Trump made it his own. So if that’s your main issue you can thank Donald Trump for raising it in the primaries since no other candidate did to the extent that he did.

Also, Senator Jeff Sessions, US’s immigration patriot has endorsed Trump. That should tell you something. He’s worked closely with Cruz and other Senators on the issue. He knows which ones are fakes and which ones are genuine on the issue. Yet when push came to shove, he endorsed Trump and not Cruz. Very very telling.

* Trump just gave an amazing speech in which he emphasized an America First policy on trade, immigration, and foreign policy. He spoke of protecting American workers from immigration. I was very impressed.

Posted in America | Comments Off on If Immigration Is Your Issue

Who Is Kamala Harris?

Steve Sailer writes: Harris has been in the news since 1994 when she was the very special 29-year-old guest at the 60th birthday party of master politician Willie Brown, the longtime speaker of the state assembly, who, by the way, has been married since 1958. The ethically challenged Brown found lucrative state sinecures to appoint his mistress to.

When Californians voted for term limits in large part to get rid of Willie, he slid over to being mayor of San Francisco. Despite since being term-limited out of the mayor’s office, Brown, now 82, still pretty much runs San Francisco through his handpicked mayor Ed Lee. Evidently, term limits lead to amateur office holders, who give local deep state rascals like Brown even more power.

Brown is a political genius of sorts, but not the kind that states normally want to flaunt in Washington. Willie was always a down-home taste, fine for the gamey realities of San Francisco but not really for sharing with national company. (Granted, Brown was never as crazy crooked as some more recent San Francisco elected officials, such as Ed Jew, who tried to shake down the owners of a rival tapioca shop, and Leland Yee, the state senator and gun-control advocate who was recently jailed for gunrunning shoulder-launched missiles with the Moro Islamic Liberation Front, a.k.a. MILF.)

The Democrat Brown was famous for being able to stay speaker by finding Republicans here and there to vote for him. Not surprisingly, his former concubine has followed a 1990s path of running for prosecutor jobs to set herself up for higher office.

COMMENTS AT STEVE SAILER:

* Who is Kamala Harris? An attractive Mixed Race woman. I know she married a White guy.

If they had kids together, they would be passable as White.

After all Susan Rice has kids who can pass for White and Susan is darker than Kamala.

* The Harris example shows that there is a destabilizing asymmetry in the media universe. Female behavior is scrutinized significantly differently than male behavior. How much of that noticing and critique of males is due to the top dog getting hounded by all those oppressed individuals and classes? The corollary to that is that men deserve the hounding as one price for all that privilege.

Alternatively, how little of the female behavior is held up to objective review? Something like a Kamala Harris greasy pole dance might seem somewhat benign in the Clintonian scheme of things. As more women accede to higher positions, how will they fend off or rationalize away criticisms about some of the shadier methods used in that ascent?

* Aside from her looks and racial and academic credentials, and partisan considerations aside, is Kamala Harris any good?

How does she rate for sheer professional competence, leadership smarts and political chops? Does anyone in California know?

Do you have any strong impression, Steve?

These days it’s hard to find that kind of information about anyone running for office…the signal to noise ratio in the media is infinitesimal now.

* There’s so many ‘firsts’ (and ‘seconds’ too) in one person you can’t count them all.

1. First black senator from California
2. First female Asian-American senator
3. Second black female senator
4. First woman attorney general of California
5. First black attorney general of California
6. First asian attorney general of California

* Politics are about what you would expect from a diversity hire, 100% liberal.

Kamala Harris

Harris has been a vocal proponent for gun control her entire career. While serving as District Attorney in Alameda County Harris recruited other District Attorneys and filed an amicus brief in District of Columbia v. Heller, arguing that the Second Amendment does not protect an individual’s right to own firearms.[68] Harris also supported San Francisco’s proposition H, which would have prohibited most firearms within city limits.

Harris is opposed to the death penalty but has said that she would review each case individually.

Harris created a special Hate Crimes Unit as San Francisco District Attorney. She focused on hate crimes against LGBT children and teens in schools.

Harris supports same-sex marriage in California and opposed both Proposition 22 and Proposition 8.

Harris has been vocal in the immigration debate, supporting San Francisco’s immigration policy of not inquiring about immigration status in the process of a criminal investigation.

In interviews with Matt Lauer on The Today Show and local KGO-TV, Harris argued for treating “habitual and chronic truancy” among children in elementary school as a crime committed by the parents of truant children.

* I noticed that, too, about Kamala Harris and Willie Brown, and thought I was misreading it. I hesitated to comment because I’m not in California. But–good Lord!–if a Kamala Harris clone were to run for major public office in Ohio, how would anyone not think she’d bootstrapped her political career by sleeping up.

Posted in Blacks, California | Comments Off on Who Is Kamala Harris?

Monkey in Kenya Survives After Setting Off Nationwide Blackout

NYT: A nationwide blackout in Kenya was caused by one monkey jumping on a transformer at a power station…

Posted in Africa | Comments Off on Monkey in Kenya Survives After Setting Off Nationwide Blackout

Exploring Jewish Identity in Stanley Kubrick’s Eyes Wide Shut

By Bryn V. Young-Roberts:

Although Geoffrey Cocks explored the theme of Holocaust running through the entire oeuvre of Kubrick in The Wolf at the Door (2004), and devoted a section to Eyes Wide Shut, he only touched upon the theme of Jewish identity, rather than examine it specifically.[1] This article explores Kubrick’s swansong in order to discover what it can reveal about Jewish identity in late 20th century America.

Stanley Kubrick was born in New York in 1928, the descendant of Jewish Austro-Hungarian grandparents. After a successful career as a photographer in his youth, he turned to film directing in the 1950s, the work of Jewish-German director Max Ophuls being one of his primary influences. After a distasteful experience shooting Spartacus (1960) with actor and producer Kirk Douglas, he turned his back on Hollywood and fled to England, where he lived for the rest of his life. Still funded by Hollywood studios, he continued to work in the United Kingdom, transforming locations in London into settings for vast ancient deserts and outer space (2001: A Space Odyssey, 1968), Vietnam (Full Metal Jacket, 1987), and finally, in what was to be his last film, New York City, completed only four days before his death (Eyes Wide Shut).

Eyes Wide Shut is based on the novella Traumnovelle (1926) by Jewish-Austrian writer Arthur Schnitzler. The plot follows Dr. Bill Harford (Tom Cruise) as he seeks sexual gratification in New York as a response to his wife’s (Alice Harford, played by Nicole Kidman) fantasies of infidelity. The adventure takes him to an encounter with the daughter of a patient who admits her love for him, friendly prostitutes, a meeting with an old medical school friend, a heavily fortified costume shop featuring sex with an underage girl, and a masked orgy with quasi-religious themes that lead to threats against him and his family. However, at no point in the journey does he ever manage to consummate sex with anyone other than his wife. And there are no overt references to him, or any other character, being Jewish.

This does not hamper any investigation into Jewish identity, however. Just because characters are not highlighted as Jewish in a narrative, it does not mean they cannot be perceived as such, as there is also no reason to believe that characters must automatically be considered gentiles unless otherwise stated. However there is a particular argument for reading characters as Jewish in the work of Stanley Kubrick. Most of Kubrick’s films were adaptations of novels, and he deliberately expunged almost all overt references to Jewry in the transition from page to screen, even if Jewish aspects were major themes of the books. Jon Stratton argues in Coming Out Jewish: Constructing Ambivalent Identities that many texts offer ‘an ambivalence of representation’ to readers, so that our reading of Bill in Eyes Wide Shut, just like many other films that do not overtly mention the word ‘Jew’ gives us ‘the possibility of reading him as a Jew – looks, behaviour, name – but no certainty’ (2000: 5).

Traumnovelle is a classic example of Kubrick’s Jew-editing, as the novel, by a Jewish writer, clearly states that some of its characters are Jewish. But the omission of references to Jewish character backgrounds does not mean they are gentiles, and so readers of the novella watching the film adaptation would have no reason to assume that the characters are not Jewish. It is likely that Kubrick preferred not to overtly state that his characters were Jewish for financial reasons, perhaps believing that the word ‘Jewish’ would dissuaded gentiles from seeing his movies.

According to Ruth D. Johnston, citing the work of Jon Stratton in her article ‘Joke-Work’ (2006), post-World War II Jews in America were assimilated ‘on two levels – both ideologically and culturally. In other words, they were accepted not only as American (i.e., subscribing to the Enlightenment ideology of liberalism, individualism, and freedom) but also as White (i.e., embracing Anglo-American culture)’. By the 1970s and 1980s, however, she explains that ‘desire for assimilation waned’ and that modern American Jews found themselves ‘in a peculiar post-assimilationist situation’ that no longer subscribed to the key values of Anglo-America, and were left unsure of how to produce and present difference…

Bill’s profession of doctor suggests he is of this later Eastern European Diaspora, as these Jews ‘became professionals rather than business people’, with careers such as ‘physicians, attorneys, academicians, scientists, and engineers’ that allowed them financial security, but as a result were ‘less philanthropic (and often less wealthy) than the successful self-employed’, which further indicates Ziegler’s position as the descendent of nineteenth century immigrants, and highlights a Jewish immigrant class divide between the two men (Whitfield 1996: 185). The acceptance of a wage has therefore brought benefits of financial security, allowing a middle-class status to this later generation who took to higher education, but it has also limited them from entering the realms of elitist power by curtailing their philanthropic ventures.

NEW YORK POST: “THE late Stanley Kubrick once remarked that ‘Hitler was right about almost everything,” and insisted that any trace of Jewishness be expunged from the ‘Eyes Wide Shut” script that author Frederic Raphael was writing for him.”

Posted in Hollywood, Jews | Comments Off on Exploring Jewish Identity in Stanley Kubrick’s Eyes Wide Shut