Smart people...Stupid people

hahahaha. I've thought the same too.

Also I've noticed that a lot of smart people just lack a *drive* for consistent reasoning. Without such a drive, they are more likely to arrive at conclusions due to other stronger drives.

All too true. Query: why are so many smart Jews so politically naive? Just read a book called "The Fatal Embrace," about how the Jews throughout modern history have allied themselves with various political factions in society (now kings, now aristocrats, now the liberal bourgeousie) in ways that are good for them in the short-run, but often ruinous in the long? Today it is free trade and massive third-world immigration, in behalf of some very short-sighted political calculations.

Many of the top-ranking Nazis were pretty high IQ types. Many devout religious believers too. And commies.

Being very clever gives you the ability to justify with sophistry the most absurd ideas.

about how the Jews throughout modern history have allied themselves with various political factions in society (now kings, now aristocrats, now the liberal bourgeousie) in ways that are good for them in the short-run, but often ruinous in the long?

1) aligning with kings and aristocrats for a long time was the ONLY strategy. there wasn't a "long run" strategy, unless you count converting to xtianity.

2) who says that the time windows for smart people will be "long run" in an absolute sense if they are in a relative sense?

3) most jews are still stupid even with somewhat higher IQs.

There has never been a good argument against free trade. Any argument against trade between nations applies to trade between individuals.

Luke Lea thinks changing the ethnic balance is due to "short-sighted political calculations"

Quite the opposite the elipse of the current majority is a done deal. Now the danger period is past and there will never be any more reason to worry about an Nazi-Aryan party as Mr Raab of Brandeis pointed out.

It would be ignoring the dictates of realism to pass up the chance for increasing ones relative power in an uncertain world. Who knows what political movement in the current majority might have arisen and taken power by 2050, "The hetrogenious nature of our population" that has been brought about shows long term thinking behind it in my opinion.

I suppose it could be called neurotic rather than agreeable to assume a a threat a generation hence however many peoples have disappeared while this one goes on, they must be doing something right.

With the destruction of a heterogeneous America, the next step will be a slow regression back to a millet system.

This will upset the followers of the Haskala, but will hearten traditional Jews.

How can one have "diversity" after all, without a variety of self-contained, self-policing societies?

And how can one maintain such societies without also devolving the power to police their boundaries, i.e. a millet system?

Of course, when the population changes in America as far as it has in Lebanon, we can expect some conflict over a period of years. Regardless, demographics will ultimately decide the question (as Mr. Arafat noted).

Brazil seems to jog along as a centralized state, it is not what it should be with it's resources, one of the richest countries in the world I admit, but the centralized state seems healthy enough there.

Arafat ought to have realized that his gloating over demographics would lead Israel to begin toying with an even more decisive idea: population transfer. The influx from Russia may have saved Arafat's people from yet another disaster.