And why do you presume your sources are better.
Your source is a fringe twitter account, followed by alt-right accounts, cherry picking bits and pieces from journals. It doesn’t even properly link to the primary sources so I can’t even examine the the weakness/ context.
Worry more about my Jacobs’s sources contradicting your sources.
You and I have a very opposite reflection of the Sam Harris vs Ezra Klein fiasco.
I’d like to hear what you think about Klein’s point that environmental factors explain may >100% of the black-white iq gap, and yet this is alien in the race realism discourse. https://forum.effectivealtruism.org/posts/ALzE9JixLLEexTKSq/cea-statement-on-nick-bostrom-s-email?commentId=YN85c93DD3EiNLFfo
counterproductive for the goal of fighting racism to stake your case on scientific claims that could turn out to be false.
There is so much evidence at this point against race realism/ HBD. There is no possibility of it “could be false” without evoking some grand conspiracy. Can we never call it pseudoscience? My goal is to fight for scientific truth, not some anti-racist agenda. Check out Ben Jacob’s great resources.
I say it is pseudoscience on the grounds that there is a scientific consensus that genetic explanations for racial iq-gaps are deemed pseudoscientific.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_racism
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_and_intelligence
To anyone who sincerely wonders if there’s anything to the “race-iq realism” theory, I ask you to consider this great point point made Ezra Klein to Sam Harris when Harris embraced The Bell Curve: very rarely will you see any serious consideration of the possibility that environmental factors explain >100% of the black-white iq gap. In other words, on a purely genetic basis that black people may be more intelligent than white people is alien to the discourse.
And of course there’s all sorts of other issues that cloud this discussion about the arbitrariness of race, the poor correlation between “race” and genetics, black americans having substantial european ancestry owing to slavery etc etc.
The science is clear, it’s pseudoscience folks.
Thank you Bob Jacobs for your resources.
Rich and powerful people have hijacked this movement.
Given that debating race and IQ would make EA very unwelcoming for black people
Or white people.
Influential EA philosophers having used racial slurs and saying they’re unsure about IQ and race is hurtful to black EAs, hurtful to black people outside EA and bad for future diversity in EA.
It’s also pseudoscience.
Good points.
Small-scale targeted labour disputes tend to not have that much broad support. The 2021 John Deere strike for example did not have that broad societal support. There may have been some support from the wider labour movement, but also opposition from the local court system, and business groups/ chamber of commers etc.
But it is hard to think of this happening at a larger scale, without broad support. I can’t think of any examples.
There are examples I can think where economic disruption has helped for minority rights, although some of these would for sure have had some level of popular societal support.
- In Bolivia, rural indigenous groups caused roadblocks bringing the economy to a standstill, and successfully were able to resume delayed elections.
- Recent Chile constitutional changes include gender parity and indigenous issues, was the product of very disruptive protetsts
- Longshoremen refusing to move cargo from South African ships during Apartheid.
- The ILWU many activities, including desegregating work gangs. Also oppposed Japanese American internment and were involved in the civil rights movement but I don’t know if there particular efforts were effective.
- The Tailoress strikes which led to pay equality for women
Those are the sorts of examples on my mind.
Sources:
https://inthesetimes.com/article/dockworkers-ilwu-racism-workers-apartheid-black-freedom-movement-bay-area
https://www.actu.org.au/about-the-actu/history-of-australian-unions
Many successful protests have had some element of striking/boycott/business or economic disruption.
Is it possible to examine whether this specifically improves the effectiveness of protests? This would be my working hypothesis.
The diagonal entries are defined in another way. See the link:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transition_rate_matrix#:~:text=In%20probability%20theory%2C%20a%20transition,Markov%20chain%20transitions%20between%20states.
Apologies, I could have made this clearer. It is only those diagonal entries which are allowed to be negative. In fact they must be negative (or zero).
Technically, the diagonal entries are transitions from state i to i (ie. they are not really transitions but rather a measurement of “retention”). You can think of the positive or negative sign as indicating if it is a measure of transitioning away from the state, or retention in the state.