sofiechan home

Unamericans in America

anon_qono said in #4999 2w ago: received

One severely underdiscussed aspect of woke is its disastrous effect on our ability to integrate talent.

What I mean specifically is the problem with our highest quality immigrants. Mass migration is a separate issue. America has imported big waves of immigrants over the years, some good, some bad, some disastrous. I'm not talking about any of those, or generic "assimilation". I'm talking about the top tier.

For the last quarter millenium the United States has done far better than any other country on earth at attracting talent--not bugmetric "highest scoring" but the most courageous, agentic, risk tolerant, frontier-minded men on Earth who want to try their luck in Thunderdome America. And then developing them to their highest and most ambitious form.

This is our specialty.

Look at Operation Paperclip. We took these brilliant men who were at the farthest edge of capability. We sent von Braun and his men to Alabama, and eventually gave them our best 24yo cornfield engineers, a deepwater port, an insane goal and a budget equal to 1% of our GDP.

But first, we demanded and received their loyalty. When he was finally permitted to naturalize in 1955, von Braun said: "This is the happiest and most significant day in my life. I must say we all became American citizens in our hearts long ago."

We saw this mechanic work thru the 20th century and into the 2000s, through men like Elon Musk and Jensen Huang.

So what do we have today?

A country that demands and receives nothing in particular.

A country whose civic religion has metastasized into a form of self-hatred.

So we get high-caliber unamericans. The most crass examples I know of are all born post 2000... here are two:

Look at Eileen Gu. Born in the US to an American father and Chinese-immigrant mother, grew up in the nicest part of SF, went to Stanford. She is a talented skiier, trains at Lake Tahoe, competes. Eventually she wins Olympic Gold... playing for China. Is it a coincidence that she went to high school and college during peak woke?

Or an Indian acquaintance. High IQ. Went to a west coast university circa 2020. Disgust in his voice talking about his first tech internship... all the race-based "interest groups", the rest-and-vesters, people leaving at 5pm. Hilariously he thought it a bad sign that Rishi Sunak was the PM of the UK, and so many American tech cos run by Indians... "bad if you can't find leadership in your own people". So true, king.

We have a problem. America still disproportionately imports the world's most capable, but:
- They will not magically show loyalty when none is demanded.
- They feel natural resentment seeing gibs and sinecures flow to the undeserving.
- Woke encourages a lopsided ethnonarcissism (which dumber immigrants sometimes participate in uncritically) but which has a special effect on the best--they recognize it for what it is, find it repugnant and weak, sometimes cynically participate if to their advantage.
- They will not respect a people who don't respect themselves.

Ultimately this is another hard-to-fake indicator of civilizational health. Are our own smart young people trying to leave? (Fortunately we are not at this stage yet. If we get there we are the new USSR and it's truly over.) When smart young people from elsewhere come here, do they find something worth their permanent loyalty, or just an opportunity to milk?

We are nerfed until we fix this.

One severely underdi received

anon_qono said in #5001 2w ago: received

Alright, looking through a list of ~20 top immigrants and for the sake of intellectual honesty, there is a clear pattern by ethnicity.

Our top east and south asian immigrants are more prone to dual loyalty (or outright anti-American sentiment) than those of european or anglo descent.

Hart-Cellar was a mistake.

Alright, looking thr received

anon_qono said in #5003 2w ago: received

> A country that demands and receives nothing in particular.

I should add, this is not quite true. The problem is that what we demand and receive is purely economic.

The IRS demands your absolute and unquestioning loyalty, even as a noncitizen green card holder. It demands an open book to all of your income and assets worldwide in perpetuity.

But if you want to run for office as a dual citizen "Eritrian-American" you can go right ahead.

I should add, this i received

anon_qono said in #5004 2w ago: received

Here, judge for yourself. The challenge is that true loyalty is something only these men's close friends know; public statements are easy to falsify. Even so, some patterns:

- Narrative violation: it's actually the euro and anglo immigrants who are most likely to have foreign or dual citizenship.
- Asians like to talk about "immigrant experience"
- South Asians are the most vocally pro-immigration. See eg. Deedy Das in the last Hamilton debate.
- Overall as a group, STEM leaders are notably conflict avoidant and apolitical, optionality-oriented. Thiel's NZ citizenship bugout bunker bullshit is a good example.

The only person on this list--out of 25!--with an actually inspiring take is Elon, who's overtly patriotic, sole US citizen, says he'll "live and die in America".

On the whole it supports my original point: we need to demand far more loyalty from our immigrants. And conversely, we need to demand far better from schools and colleges. Withhold federal funding for the ones that are anti-American intellectual monocultures, crack down on student visa farming, whatever it takes.

Here, judge for your received

jewishman said in #5005 1w ago: received

I am skeptical of analyses that trace problems back to a specific campus discourse in the 2010s. I'll say something about that.

I think the comparison with the Soviet Union is useful. Did anybody want to leave the Soviet Union because of some ideological failure? Did the Soviet Union not command loyalty? Maybe. The failure of the Soviet Union seems more complicated. Smart young people found their talents wasted under bureaucratic totalitarianism. Institutions broke down, or young people were not invited to participate in them.

I could say the same thing about the "going abroad fever" of 1980s China... The young people that flooded out of China then did not do so because they believed China was unworthy of their devotion. If they were swayed by campus discourse, it was a temporary phase. They were a generation wasted—elite urban students sent down to the countryside in the primes of their lives, or forced to sit out university because the entrance exams were cancelled. There was no way to integrate all of them back into normal life in the 1980s. So, the solution for some was crime and vagrancy (several million ended up in reform-through-labor camps), or getting a visa.

The Chinese figured things out, if only temporarily. The Soviet Union collapsed.

This is why I think it's short-sighted to attribute much to a specific flavor of post-Obama-or-thereabout campus radicalism: the end of association came first, and generational warfare came first, and the destruction of vital institutions came first, and so on. The connective tissue of American capitalism was scorched away. There were always college radicals, but, with the right incentives and the right structures, they invent clever things or ideas, get married, found companies, and have a lot of kids.

Anyway, that's what I have to say about campus discourse.

The United States is in a much queerer situation than either the Soviet Union or China.

It fails to convince its most of its own native-born young people. But collapse or reform can be put on hold. The Third World refugee is adapted for an economy run by criminals, speculators, and tyrannical bureaucrats.

If you still believe it's worthwhile to hunt for the Gujarati von Braun or, failing that, the Somali Jensen Huang, some investment and coordination is required by the state and other structures to dissuade them from getting rich off the various scams that power the economy.

In other words, this is a material, as well as a spiritual, problem.

Maybe Eileen Gu hated America. Maybe she had brainwashed by some sort of campus radicalism. But it's pretty hard to say no to the promise of productive use of her talents and a boatload of cash up front. If I got the same call, I might hear them out.

referenced by: >>5008

I am skeptical of an received

anon_qono said in #5008 1w ago: received

>>5005

> I am skeptical of analyses that trace problems back to a specific campus discourse in the 2010s

Fair. I meant "woke" in a more general sense that predates the 2010s. In the 90s it was called "PC". There's a general phenomenon dating back to the 60s, but which got substantially worse recently, where:
1. We ingest global smart people into top US universities. (We also ingest a larger number of not-so-smart people into visa mills, due to retarded policy, but that's a separate issue.)
2. We force these people--the absolute elite of their home countries, the skimmed top of human capital---to take humanities requirements from Chomskyite shitheads who believe that the West is evil, that the Global South is underdeveloped because of white oppreshun, etc.
3. We put them in dorms alongside homegrown American leftists who believe the same
4. ???

It's a recipe for disloyal mercenaries who enjoy America for its economic opportunities, and succeed on that basis, and might even spend the rest of their lives here, but never really believe in it.

Mid-tier immigrants end up believing the bullshit directly (they think that their home country is poor because it is heckin oppressed). The top tier understand that it's bullshit, and correctly perceive a spiritual sickness in America.

They end up being less loyal than they otherwise would be.

--

> If you still believe it's worthwhile to hunt for the Gujarati von Braun or, failing that, the Somali Jensen Huang,

Did you read my other post?

I said we should prioritize Western immigrants.

That said, a race knower should understand which ethnicities have a competent right tail. There are in fact a handful of "Gujarati" von Neumann types--Ramanujan, Chandrasekar, etc. There are exactly zero Somalis as far as I can tell.

Inb4 another round of poos log in to accuse me of being Indian.

referenced by: >>5009

Fair. I meant "woke" received

jewishman said in #5009 1w ago: received

>>5008
> Did you read my other post?

I didn't.

On universities and disloyalty, we're at the risk of talking past each other, since I don't think your basic description is wrong...

I think the solution is to recognize and uphold the importance of the humanities as a way of passing on crucial cultural knowledge, etc. I think the successful state is willing to fund and control the universities, their humanities departments, their presses, and studies in art and history. The ruins were taken over by radical feminists, diversity hire Mbembe scholars, and the worst of the aging progressive activists. Chase them out. Their politics are revolting, but they're usually also terrible scholars, terrible teachers. It's good to offer lectures in history and literature; it's bad to let a lesbian rant at undergrads about gender. And restore and maintain the institutions that require the participation of young graduates in productive ways. And rebuild the economic structures that will dissuade a great number of young people from attending college in the first place. And, yes, prioritize Western immigrants, which means the same to me as deprioritizing immigration!

My position on this goes back to: if you have a functioning society and rational economy, a lot of left-wing radicalism—separate perhaps from the pure nihilism and brain rot promoted on American campuses, perhaps—can be tolerated. Build a nation on productive labor, instead of speculation.

Burning the books and burying the scholars is always an option, too, if you reach that point...

I didn't.... received

anon_vadi said in #5011 7d ago: received

I appreciate the effortpoast, but there really isn't much constructive to say about this topic. We just have to end non-white immigration.

We aren't ever going to be able to construct some kind of sociological Rube Goldberg Machine that successfully integrates talented non-whites. They're just different than us. That's the way it is. Nothing is ever changing that.

If they really are genuinely talented, then they should stay in their societies of origin and do the good things that talented people do. If genuinely talented Indians actually existed, for example, they would improve American lives way more by making India a non-shithole than they would by coming here. A non-shithole India would be way better for Americans than our own GDP increasing by 0.0001% due to "talented Indian" immigration.

referenced by: >>5012

I appreciate the eff received

anon_qono said in #5012 7d ago: received

>>5011

Wrong. We have successfully integrated plenty.

> We just have to end non-white immigration.

And I hate this genre of "we JUST have to <thing that 100% will not happen>", it's demoralization propaganda. Yes we just need a continent of above-replacement-fertility 130IQ anglos, nobody else allowed, hold my beer. Once this is done everything will be easy mode.

referenced by: >>5017

Wrong. We have succe received

anon_qono said in #5016 7d ago: received

Immigration overhaul targets:
- End birthright citizenship
- Severely restrict "family unification"
- Replace H1B/O1 with a new, better designed selective recruiting channel. There should be absolutely no lotteries, only auctions. We have a beautiful capitalist economy that produces high-information price signals; these are vastly more accurate and less gameable than any bureaucratic application process. If there is someone in the Taiwan whose market value in the US is $450k/year TC, they come.
- Reimpose pre-Hart-Celler nationality targets to prioritize Western immigration in all channels beyond the most selective.

We do this, and we maximize our globally unique capability to attract talent. We will still be a substantially "diverse" nation--even if we turn immigration to 0 and deport every last illegal--it's baked into the pie from the foundation.

We are not some kind of hermetically sealed "China for white people". Doesn't exist. Closest thing, maybe you can move to Poland, anon.

> Poland has a population of approximately 38 million, characterized by a steadily declining, rapidly aging, and highly homogenous population (over 98% ethnic Polish)

It's a nice place. Safe and quiet. I hear the Christmas markets are wonderful. Certainly better than clown immigration policy countries like Sweden; it's not that ethnostates are without advantage.

It's just not America, and never will be. We win by pressing our unique advantages, not by hoping/coping/seething about what we are not.

Immigration overhaul received

anon_vadi said in #5017 7d ago: received

>>5012
This is why I said there's nothing constructive or interesting to say on the topic. The state of things is that any reduction in non-white immigration is good. Beyond that, the details are just not interesting or useful to me as a regular citizen.

All your proposals are good, because they all would result in a decrease of non-white immigration. I "support" them, as a random citizen, for what it's worth (nothing). I don't see any difference between me saying "we just have to end non-white immigration" and you listing a bunch of hypothetical policies that would reduce non-white immigration. Neither of us are in any position to enact these policies. And everyone who is in that position is already well aware of all these avenues. It's not a question of people in government not having any ideas about how to reduce non-white immigration. It's a question of power and political will.

It's honestly more useful, not to mention more entertaining, to post humorous racist memes online than it is to Seriously Discuss this stuff. Circle jerking about this stuff doesn't do anything. Spreading racism does, slowly but surely, bit by bit, mind by mind.

This is why I said t received

anon_qono said in #5019 7d ago: received

> The state of things is that any reduction in non-white immigration is good

Disagree. If we shut down the O1 program tomorrow it would slightly reduce "non-white immigration" but it would be a big loss to the United States.

A lot of you don't understand the power law.

> I don't see any difference between me saying <meme what will never happen> and you listing a bunch of <specific policy changes that could occur this year, some of which the administration/SCOTUS are actively working on>

OK

> And everyone who is in that position is already well aware of all these avenues

The concept of replacing the lottery with an auction is surprisingly underdiscussed. Closest thing I know to a fix everything easily switch for skilled immigration. I am not convinced that our friends in & around gov't have engaged with it seriously.

referenced by: >>5026

Disagree. If we shut received

anon_fehi said in #5026 4d ago: received

>>5019
Replacing the h1b lottery with an auction is a strict improvement and I'd love to see it happen. But this is because lotteries are completely retarded, not because auctions are some brilliant wonderpolicy with no downsides. A person has many traits which determine whether they'd make a good countryman. Their salary is one of them, and is correlated with some others, but it's far from the whole story. There are plenty of highly paid people with bad character who abuse the public trust, who put loyalty to ethno-nepotistic clan schemes above good citizenship, and who have no intention to assimilate to a new country's ways. We don't want them no matter how skilled they are. This isn't a reason to stick with the lottery—it's not like that's filtering them out any better—but an auction is not a "fix everything easily switch".

referenced by: >>5028

Replacing the h1b lo received

anon_qono said in #5028 4d ago: received

>>5026

Replacing H1B with an auction at current limits would set the minimum bar high enough that it would filter out almost all "ethno-nepotistic clan schemes". You'd need probably over $300k TC. No Somalis, no Indian body shops, no Romanian credit card scammers are getting in at that level.

I agree that there should be additional requirements. All immigrants should have to explicitly affirm loyalty to United States. All immigrants, with narrow exceptions, should have to demonstrate a command of written and spoken English. And obviously, all immigrants should be subject to a background check to search for evidence of good or bad character.

We are not going to be able to read what is in their hearts perfectly. There is no reliable test for "intention to assimilate". But the reality is, this is a numbers game with power-law outcomes. We can take these basic steps to ensure that the world's very limited supply of outlier excellent immigrants end up in America rather than anywhere else--this is competitive recruiting, we play to win--and we can ensure that the overall mix is tilted in the correct direction. The auction is the key ingredient.

Replacing H1B with a received

anon_swpa said in #5029 4d ago: received

Another aspect of it is marital status. Are these people bringing their wives and kids with them, or are they coming in as young single people. The latter is much more amenable for assimilation.

referenced by: >>5030

Another aspect of it received

anon_qono said in #5030 4d ago: received

>>5029

Immigration consisting of a bunch of single young men is worse, as Europe found out the hard way.

referenced by: >>5034

Immigration consisti received

anon_swpa said in #5034 4d ago: received

>>5030

They imported a bunch of people who can't get good jobs, who can't support themselves, often can't speak the language, and otherwise can't successfully integrate even if they wanted to. That's not comparable to people who speak the language fluently, are smart, and have good jobs. The latter demographic is more assimilatable.

They imported a bunc received

You must login to post.