Fraud in Psychological Research

Kevin MacDonald

A NYTimes article (“Fraud seen as a red flag for psychology research“) discusses the case of scientific fraud involving a Dutch social psychologist, Diederik Stapel. This is an amazingly egregious example of fraud by a psychologist well-known for his leftist views. Stapel got his Ph.D. in 1997 but managed to crank out 150 research papers and 24 book chapters in that short period. A recent paper of his, published in the very prestigious Science, Coping with Chaos: How Disordered Contexts Promote Stereotyping and Discrimination” included two lab studies and three field studies. This study had a wonderfully liberal conclusion—that racial discrimination would be increased in chaotic environments because people have a tendency to simplify their cognitive processing in such environments.

The NYTimes article notes,

In recent years, psychologists have reported a raft of findings on race biases, brain imaging and even extrasensory perception that have not stood up to scrutiny. Outright fraud may be rare, these experts say, but they contend that Dr. Stapel took advantage of a system that allows researchers to operate in near secrecy and massage data to find what they want to find, without much fear of being challenged.

“The big problem is that the culture is such that researchers spin their work in a way that tells a prettier story than what they really found,” said Jonathan Schooler, a psychologist at the University of California, Santa Barbara. “It’s almost like everyone is on steroids, and to compete you have to take steroids as well.”


The program, then, is to spin a pretty yarn that will fit into the liberal zeitgeist of social psychology. Apart from Stapel’s work, I am unaware of a “raft of findings on race biases …  that have not stood up to scrutiny,” but it’s certainly not surprising that that would be the case. Recently a psychologist pointed out to me that the research on stereotype threat purporting to explain the poor performance of African Americans by the effects of negative stereotypes routinely partialled out the contribution of IQ before presenting the results, thus exaggerating the importance of stereotype threat. This is more a sin of omission than outright fraud, but a sin of omission that is then used to advance the liberal worldview that poor Black achievement is due to White attitudes rather than Black realities.

As discussed here previously (Social Psychologists: Becoming Self-Conscious of Their Liberalism“; “More on Jonathan Haidt’s Tribal Moral Communities“) Jonathan Haidt (a social psychologist himself) has made a major contribution calling attention to social psychology as a  “tribal moral community” united in its liberal political commitments. He notes that articles that contravene the tribal liberalism are subjected to much higher standards in order to get published. Even when it’s not a matter of outright fraud, there are sins of omission where certain types of racial research are just not conducted. Recall that Harvard sociologist Robert Putnam did not publish his findings on the costs of multiculturalism for years because he thought it might sour people on our glorious multicultural future.

Here the NYTimes article adds that a recent study found that in an anonymous survey around 70% of psychologists admitted  ”cutting corners” in reporting their data and 1% acknowledged falsification; statistical errors favoring  the hypothesis occurred in around 15% of a random sample of papers in high-end psychology journals.

I suppose that the long term effects of outright fraud in social psychology are less important than the lowered standards that apply when articles reaffirm liberal ideas in the social sciences. (This was famously true of the Boasians in anthropology [a Jewish intellectual movement reviewed in The Culture of Critique) and doubtless continues today since Boas’s intellectual descendants are still in control. Boas was the quintessential skeptic and an ardent defender of methodologi-cal rigor when it came to theories of cultural evolution and genetic influences on behavior, yet, as Sheldon White noted, “the burden of proof rested lightly upon Boas’s own shoulders”; see here, p. 27.)

Reviewers are far less likely to catch corner cutting and statistical errors when they favor the leftist world view, while race realist papers are worked over with a fine tooth comb. In my own case as a consumer of social psychology research rather than a producer, I look for findings that make sense in the broad scheme of things, including the general framework of evolutionary psychology. For example, social identity theory is central to the theory of anti-Semitism (and Jewish ingroup psychology) developed in Separation and Its Discontents. These results have been replicated in dozens of social psychology laboratories over more than 40 years and fit well with an evolutionary perspective on the psychology of groups—that natural selection has resulted in mechanisms that would prepare people for between-group competition. (For example, even very young children show ingroup biases, such biases are universal among humans, and they are reflex-like and unconscious rather than the result of deliberation—good evidence for an evolutionary basis.)

A science of social psychology is possible, even in a leftist environment, but one needs to be a cautious consumer.

Nevertheless, there are some cases where outright fraud has had a long and influential life in the social sciences. Exhibit A is The Authoritarian Personality which was clearly the product of Jewish ethnic activism by the Frankfurt School and the American Jewish Committee in the service of Jewish ethnic interests. Here the “findings” were so clearly counter-intuitive, so strained, and so clearly manufactured to produce an outcome that was clearly set out long before they gathered the data, that fraud is the only reasonable explanation (my review is here, p. 168ff; the current TOO video is an extended commentary on The Authoritarian Personality put together by Byron Jost before his premature death; although unfinished, I think it’s his best work).

Psychoanalysis was not so much fraud as simply the rejection of science completely. The fact that psychoanalysis was prominently used in The Authoritarian Personality is part of the indictment of this work and the entire politically and ethnically charged agenda of the Frankfurt School. The fact that The Authoritarian Personality has never really lost its respectability within social psychology is itself yet another serious charge against the entire field.

  • Print
  • Digg
  • Facebook
  • Twitter

99 Comments to "Fraud in Psychological Research"

  1. thomas mallon's Gravatar thomas mallon
    November 9, 2011 - 9:23 am | Permalink

    KFox14: Elderly man kidnapped, raped near Socorro park: Four black men sought in what police call a hate crime

  2. Dutchboy's Gravatar Dutchboy
    November 8, 2011 - 11:51 am | Permalink

    Not only is outright fraud common in scientific research but misinterpretation of findings by statistical errors is epidemic:,_Its_Wrong

  3. thomas mallon's Gravatar thomas mallon
    November 8, 2011 - 11:24 am | Permalink

    Report: Sarkozy calls Netanyahu ‘liar’. Microphones accidently left on after G20 meeting pick up private conversation between US, French presidents. Sarkozy admits he ‘can’t stand’ Israeli premier. Obama: You’re fed up with him? I have to deal with him every day,7340,L-4145266,00.html

  4. Wolfgang Star's Gravatar Wolfgang Star
    November 8, 2011 - 5:14 am | Permalink

    Maybe it is off topic here, but some of Mr. Jones conclusions make great sense to me on a personal and metapersonal level, namely his analysis of modernity. He looks at modernity as rationalization of our vices, especially our sexual vices. It started with „Martin Luther’s rebellion against the Catholic Church, and at the heart of that rebellion was Luther’s doctrine of the enslaved will.
    … The position of Luther is simple. `Whatever God has made´, he writes in De Servo Arbitrio, his classic attack on the idea of free will, `he moves, impels and urges forward (movet, agit, rapit) with the force of his omnipotence, which none can escape or alter; all must yield compliance and obedience according to the power conferred on them by God.´ … In an image from De Servo Arbitrio that has become famous, Luther writes,  `The human will stands like a saddle horse between the two. If God mounts into the saddle, man wills and goes forward as God wills …. But if the devil is the horseman, then man wills and acts as the devil wills. He has no power to run to one or the other of the two riders and offer himself to him, but the riders fight to obtain possession of the animal.´ … So the Lutheran position is quite simple. It degrades man to the level of a beast … it flies in the face of human experience, which is faced every day with choices not only of the mundane sort but between those involving good and evil that will have profound and lasting effects on our lives here and in the world to come. … The doctrine of the enslaved will that lies at the heart of the Lutheran ideology is at heart the admission of a man who struggled against evil and then failed, and then tried to rationalize the failure by claiming that there was no struggle. `I have often attempted to become good,´ Luther said in a sermon he gave in 1524, `however the more I struggle, the less I succeed. Behold then, what free will is. … Unresisted libido, broken vows, and hatred for the Church are all individual pieces that go into the making of the mosaic that was Luther’s doctrine of the enslaved will.“ so far from  “Degenerate Moderns – Modernity as rationalized Sexual Misbehavior”  by E. Michael Jones
    And now on way from „faith alone“ towards no faith at all, the vices have been turned into virtues by our open society. But the funny thing is, I experienced that for many on the right side of the political spectrum this kind of analysis seems to make them very uncomfortable. And why? Because they have also surrendered to their vices and in this way to Modernity. But vices are vices because this is the natural law, engraved in our hearts. Everyone who has declared his vices into virtues or has stopped to truggle with them is therefore troubled by a guilty conscience and cannot think clearly.

  5. 90404's Gravatar 90404
    November 7, 2011 - 11:21 pm | Permalink

    KMD…I appreciate yr emailing me..I had mentioned the bias in the Obituary page of the LA Times…
    My ? is…How do the Jews at KCRW get away with it?
    They have banished the students at SMC
    KCRW…College Radio Workshop

    also the Rusiian Mafia is doing its dirty work in Marina del Rey

  6. 90404's Gravatar 90404
    November 7, 2011 - 11:19 pm | Permalink

    @henry baxley:
    itys ‘throw’..sheesh

  7. Trenchant's Gravatar Trenchant
    November 7, 2011 - 10:07 pm | Permalink

    US AID uses Hollywood as its propaganda arm in this campaign.

  8. thomas mallon's Gravatar thomas mallon
    November 7, 2011 - 9:45 pm | Permalink

    @Pierre de Craon: Poor man, you’re not so much “wondering” as letting your heated imagination go wandering.

  9. Pierre de Craon's Gravatar Pierre de Craon
    November 7, 2011 - 9:25 pm | Permalink

    @thomas mallon: You must surely have seen that I didn’t seek your instruction on this matter, Mr. Mallon, nor do I require it. Judging by some of the things you have written since you washed up on these shores, I can’t help wondering whether you might not profit handsomely from being astonished rather more often than you evidently are.

    Postscriptively, I also can’t help wondering, given your lively admiration for Jones, why it was not you, rather than the always gentlemanly Wolfgang Star, who identified him for me.

  10. thomas mallon's Gravatar thomas mallon
    November 7, 2011 - 9:14 pm | Permalink

    @Curmudgeon: Check it out:

    The planet will take care of itself. We mustn’t confuse culling other continents with a vicious immigration policy spread across the West. The latter is our problem and fight, not black babies.

  11. thomas mallon's Gravatar thomas mallon
    November 7, 2011 - 7:25 pm | Permalink

    @Pierre de Craon: E. Michael Jones —
    “from sense to folly and back to sense again”? You’ve got to be kidding! Dr. Jones is one of the most consistent and brilliant men writing in the past three decades. One may differ on points but to question or mock his scholarship and is astonishing.

  12. November 7, 2011 - 5:58 pm | Permalink

    @thomas mallon: It is not for us to attack, or for that matter cull another country’s population. We should not, however, become the saviour of those countries which, collectively, cannot make the connection between the ability to feed the population and explosive population growth. As has been posted elsewhere, Somali women of child bearing age average 9 births. The carrying capacity of the land cannot sustain the current population, much less the current birth rate 10 years hence. It is not only the issue of the carrying capacity, Germany can barely sustain itself food wise, it is also the fact that countries like Somalia have no viable economy to be able to trade for food stuffs. High emigration rates from these countries do nothing to make them deal with reality.

    Here is a sane answer to the issues confronting us.

  13. Pierre de Craon's Gravatar Pierre de Craon
    November 7, 2011 - 4:23 pm | Permalink

    @Wolfgang Star: Thank you very much, WS, for kindly answering my question, at least with regard to its primary point of curiosity. I’ve been reading Jones’s stuff—which has swung unpredictably from sense to folly and back to sense again—on and off for twenty years or more, but I never got a look at his kisser till now.

    Perhaps KM or someone else could fill in the other blanks. Surely I’m not the only one who cares!

  14. thomas mallon's Gravatar thomas mallon
    November 7, 2011 - 2:40 pm | Permalink

    @Curmudgeon: “Our” first line of defense? “Our”? Cruelty? Hey, remember when your mother said honey works better than vinegar? No, let’s persuade and not attack directly —or indirectly. One can talk about the amount of foreign aid but it would be morally wrong to seek to cull populations in such a way. Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.

  15. November 7, 2011 - 1:28 pm | Permalink

    @thomas mallon: Our first line of defense, after stopping non-white immigration, should be cutting off foreign aid. Most of the countries have populations beyond the carrying capacity of their land. A century ago, no one would have known about famines or starvation, and likely no one would have cared. Aid agencies are big business, and guilt trip whites into feeding sad faced, wide-eyed non-white children.

  16. Wolfgang Star's Gravatar Wolfgang Star
    November 7, 2011 - 12:04 pm | Permalink

    To specify: Michael Jones is the other gentleman in first half and in the end of this unfinished movie.

  17. Wolfgang Star's Gravatar Wolfgang Star
    November 7, 2011 - 11:48 am | Permalink

    Maybe I overlooked it but I do not see in the comments section the question answered who the other Gentlemen is in this very good movie about the Frankfurt School. It is E. Michael Jones, a Catholic Scholar who wrote several books about the roots of modernity and edits the Culture Wars magazine. By the way the movie also answers the question why Freud was a fraud.

  18. thomas mallon's Gravatar thomas mallon
    November 7, 2011 - 10:49 am | Permalink

    I see the last post was not deleted. My apologies & thanks.

  19. thomas mallon's Gravatar thomas mallon
    November 7, 2011 - 9:13 am | Permalink

    Was my post deleted? You certainly have the right to reject any post, but if you would send my email a brief explanation I will at least understand why and I will appreciate that. The reference I made to 1,700 years was an arbitrary dating of Christian culture (so hated by powerful Jews) to the time of constantine.

  20. John hearns's Gravatar John hearns
    November 7, 2011 - 8:42 am | Permalink

    I’d like to see a an article , in the NYT , entititled ” Why blacks look like monkeys ” In the article the author might say something like
    ” It’s because blacks really do look like monkeys ”

    That would be fair reporting for a change .

  21. John hearns's Gravatar John hearns
    November 7, 2011 - 8:32 am | Permalink

    White people discriminate against blacks because blacks tend to look and act like monkeys to white people . * place monkey grunts here *
    It’s just that simple .

  22. November 7, 2011 - 7:52 am | Permalink

    An academic study that suggests chaos results in racism would lend itself being used to promote a heavier governmental hand (through laws and licensing) in our daily lives. Now who would be in favor of that? Once the NYT realize their mistake I’m sure there will be another article singing Stapel’s praises.

  23. thomas mallon's Gravatar thomas mallon
    November 7, 2011 - 3:56 am | Permalink

    @Curmudgeon: Pardon any typos below as I must rush. The mind reels. Silly me, as I said, it’s all a mess. But even more complex, per the UN definition, genocide can—I see very late— be construed as meaning many things. I had of course wrongly been thinking of traditional examples of extermination of peoples (via wars, or ethnic hatred as in Rwanda in the 80’s, etc) when the UN definition is so much broader I see now.

    But this can work for us as well as against us: the arguable elimination of the traditional European peoples—let’s say traced back the last 1,700 years— in an upper-story attempt to biologically assimilate us to other racial colors and features, may be construed as a form of genocide by the UN’s broad definition since it would likely mean in time the elimination of our traditions and features. It is plausible and ominous. So…the international lawyers who see this must step forward…and as for us ‘ordinary people’ let’s have babies above all, teach our children the urgency of this, shun all involuntary eugenics, and fight facts with facts in an effort to persuade traditional Euro-Americans and other peoples of good will there is urgency here—as this website and other works are admirably attempting to do. There is a counter-offensive going on, we can be glad to observe. No one wants to be directed / commanded / hoodwinked by International finance or any other other plutocrats.

    The counter-offensive need not and should not be vicious. All peoples should love and nurture their own races and can be persuaded of that much at least. Asiatics, Israel, Africans, Euro-Americans, etc. We all only ask for what is rightly our traditions and God-given features.

  24. November 7, 2011 - 12:23 am | Permalink

    @thomas mallon: Re: United Nations Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide.

    There is a movement in the UK, protesting the mass immigration to that country, using this provision. As many can trace their origins back more than 6000 years, they argue that intentional mass immigration is genocide.
    Not as easily done in North America, despite evidence of Europeans predating the Asian invaders who massacred or enslaved them.

    My point is that those who control the political process want a dumbed down population distracted/dazzled by mass non-white immigration to keep attention away from what they are really doing – killing all of us.

  25. Trenchant's Gravatar Trenchant
    November 7, 2011 - 12:12 am | Permalink

    @Baltasar Nordstrom: AGW, assuming it’s “combated” via a cap-and-trade scheme will also be bonanza for Wall St, lead originator of customized derivative products. A boon for lawyers, too, and regulators.

  26. Baltasar Nordstrom's Gravatar Baltasar Nordstrom
    November 6, 2011 - 11:32 pm | Permalink

    Stapel basically lied in order to “prove” his point. This is all part of the leftist mentality, which deems it okay to lie for a greater cause. They use it all the time, currently, among other things, to support their anthropogenic global warming theory, which is actually intended to transfer wealth out of the West to developing nations, which are little bound by environmental concerns. This leftist mentality, in turn, seems to be rooted in Jewish morality, which deems it acceptable to lie and do other things against morality if it is good for the Jewish people. As people are implying, what Stapel did is part of a long history of immoralists using a derivative of Jewish “morality” to further their causes. It is a pernicious mindset that hopefully more and more people are becoming aware of.

  27. Trenchant's Gravatar Trenchant
    November 6, 2011 - 10:40 pm | Permalink

    I totally agree. Decentralization, a weakening of the State, allows for a strengthening of social institutions like Church, and also mutual help associations, presently crowded out by State welfare.

  28. Sanjay's Gravatar Sanjay
    November 6, 2011 - 10:24 pm | Permalink

    Professor MacDonald

    I firmly believe that libertarianism will be good for Whites in the short term because it is the antithesis of strong centralized government.

    Virulent and unyielding libertarianism bordering on anarchism will help loosen the Jewish grip on the levers of power, namely – Fin. System (Federal Reserve, IMF, World Bank, BIS), Big Media, and Security-State: FBI, DHS, CIA, TSA, etc.

    iron cuts iron. So ideology shall cut ideology. Libertarianism will cut open the belly of Jewish totalitarian power.

    However, once the existing order is demolished, Whites will have to quickly grab power and assert themselves, by advocating large traditional families, explicit white interests, White Media, White financial system, extreme mormon/traditional catholic morality, and White Security State.

    Libertarianism should be seen as a weapon to disintegrate the existing order upon which a new White Conservatism shall be built.

    But I agree, Whites have a long way to go.

    Look at ron paul gatherings. I am one of the less than 10% non-whites. more than 90% are Whites. So libertarianism is implicitly White, especially conservative-libertarianism with strong emphasis on Church as a parallel/competing power center other than Jewish secular Federal Government.

    I have also heard you saying that “limited government is not going to save White People” and there is some truth to that.

    However, I also believe that social welfare through Church should be heavily promoted by Whites to make sure there is a strong double benefit of church-welfare as well as the conducive environment it will provide to large traditional white families.

    I fear that jews are close to converting US and Europe into 3rd World, and China and India into 1st World to destroy White Western civilization.

    Psychology, Sociology, and all these Humanities Professors will keep on undermining Whites, until their funding is cut-off and entire departments are deleted from government control.

    Limited government is necessary as a transitory solution to cut public funding for Jewish activism.

  29. thomas mallon's Gravatar thomas mallon
    November 6, 2011 - 9:04 pm | Permalink

    PS the problem is that some minorities in this nation already arguably accuse whites of inflicting ongoing “mental harm to members of the group; deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life, calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part”

    The whole thing then is a mess, and so subject to abusive interpretation, but there it is.

  30. thomas mallon's Gravatar thomas mallon
    November 6, 2011 - 9:00 pm | Permalink

    @thomas mallon:

    Correction and I guess I stand corrected: If the 1948 United Nations Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (CPPCG). Article 2 stands as **the” definition, of genocide I stand corrected since I see it may bear an interpretation less than the physical mass murder of a people.: From wikipedia:

    “Article 2 of this convention defines genocide as “any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such: killing members of the group; causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group; deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life, calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part; imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group; [and] forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.”

    I stand corrected.

  31. thomas mallon's Gravatar thomas mallon
    November 6, 2011 - 7:54 pm | Permalink

    @Curmudgeon & FR: Soft “genocide” is no genocide at all. That is only playing with words. The default position for races is to be with their own; and, whatever the temporary serious setbacks, it will prevail as it does in times of crisis and even in jails. Our task is to educate, persuade, and reverse trends in economics and morals. This can be done. To suggest otherwise would be worse than pessimism, it would be a delusional depressive state and the fatalism / determinism that accompanies that depressive state even when it masks itself as realism. Beware self-fulfilling prophecy.

    FR , there is no compulsory sterilization of whites going on so we are free to procreate. Be a prolife activist and shun this websites eugenicist writers.

  32. sylvie's Gravatar sylvie
    November 6, 2011 - 6:55 pm | Permalink

    @Jason Speaks:
    “Please make more videos. I would like to see more from everyone in the video. We live in such a visual age, these things can reach more people. ”

    Oh, my god! Can’t you guys read anymore?
    Think about people without ADSL flatrate. Tried 3 times to download this 250MB monster, always stalled. A normal text would have taken less than 1 MB.

    What’s the added value of seeing faces and masses entering subway stations?

  33. Jason Speaks's Gravatar Jason Speaks
    November 6, 2011 - 6:29 pm | Permalink

    @Jim: Talking about “diversity”, Jim says, if it were a universally desirable thing, then biologists wouldn’t poison streams and lakes to get rid of invasive species.

    Great point. The term “diversity” is used ad nauseum as a universal and unqualified good, in all contexts. We need to point out, that like any other quality, there are times when it is not desirable. Hygiene can be a good thing. So can purity.

  34. November 6, 2011 - 5:24 pm | Permalink

    @ Jim
    @ Thomas Mallon

    The city, in which I live, had been known for decades as being multi-cultural. The context was that the Greeks, Poles, Ukrainians, Germans, Russians, and other European groups has distinctive cultural differences from those from the British Isles. Although, if one observed closely, there were threads that connected all of them.
    That changed about 40 years ago, and wave after wave of Asians, Africans, and non-white Carribeans and Central Americans have come. Political correctness says they are a valuable part of our “cultural mosaic”. I see them as colonizers. They refer to themselves as the Somali community, or the Filipino community etc. All in the community support the Somali car salesman or the Filipino real estate salesman, and so on, as the case may be. White children are encouraged to befriend them and learn about their culture. Meanwhile, white children learn nothing about their own culture. White teenagers are encouraged to “date” non-whites. The natural extension of this encouragement is reproduction. The child is neither of its parents race. The child’s offspring are also mixed race. At some point in the distant future, providing the child’s lineage has consistently reproduced with one race or the other, one could say that they other race was bred out. However, given mixed race couples/children are the goal of those who control the political process, that possibility is diminished.

    As Franklin Ryckaert has correctly put it, this is soft genocide.

  35. Jim's Gravatar Jim
    November 6, 2011 - 1:59 pm | Permalink

    Curmudgeon said: “The term “discrimination” is now used only as a method of herding whites into guilt. While growing up in the 50s, people who were very particular in their likes and dislikes were said to have discriminating taste. No one saw it as negative.

    Loading words with emotional value or qualities that they never had before is the primary tactic of the intolerant left. “Diversity” describes a measurable property, and has no more positive value than “viscosity” or “density”. If it were a universally desirable thing, then biologists wouldn’t poison streams and lakes to get rid of invasive species.

    I agree with Thomas Mallon about the overuse/misuse of the word “genocide”. There may actually come a time when they start rounding up people of European descent (unlikely, but possible.) That word should be reserved for those situations.

  36. Franklin Ryckaert's Gravatar Franklin Ryckaert
    November 6, 2011 - 1:58 pm | Permalink

    @thomas mallon:
    In my opinion the term “genocide” in this respect is adequate and no metaphore or hyperbole.Let me explain.If you want to commit genocide on a certain population you can do that in two ways : 1) direct,2) indirect.Direct genocide can be done again in two ways: 1) hard,2) soft.The hard direct way is by simply killing the population (by whatever means).The soft direct way is by letting the population live but by preventing their procreation, which again can be done in two ways: 1) sterilization,2) separation of the sexes (this is BTW what Alex Linder proposes for the Jews).

    Indirect genocide can be done in two ways: 1) mass immigration of racial aliens with a high birth rate into the territory of a population with a low or even below replacement birth rate.2) promotion of miscegenation.
    It will be clear that what is called “multiculturalism” and what is happening nowadays in all white countries is in reality a combination of both forms of indirect genocide (mass immigration and miscegenation).The process may take several generations but will eventually lead to the racial extinction of the target population.
    So yes,”muticulturalism=genocide” is a true statement.

  37. Hedgerow's Gravatar Hedgerow
    November 6, 2011 - 12:59 pm | Permalink

    Normally, in the debate between rationalism versus empiricism, while both can be useful, I lean toward empiricism. However, empiricism does seem to me to have the problem of being able to cherry pick data to “prove” whatever one wants.

  38. thomas mallon's Gravatar thomas mallon
    November 6, 2011 - 12:36 pm | Permalink

    @Curmudgeon writes, “In short, those who promote multiculturalism, promote genocide”.

    You need to redefine—or transmute—the term “genocide” if you too are to avoid the charge of reckless hyperbole.

    Some use it as a metaphor, meaning the gradual assimilation of biological “whiteness” into the biology of other racial colors. That is a workable transmutation from the literal into the metaphorical or biological—whether deliberately or by “accident”. But if you **mean** genocide by “genocide” then hyperbole shadows you.

  39. Stogumber's Gravatar Stogumber
    November 6, 2011 - 12:21 pm | Permalink

    As for the “authoritarian personality” – I sometime found a certain similarity: the way the “authoritarian personality” was constructed resembles the way Adorno et alii describe the construction of the “Jew” stereotype by antisemites.
    I never have had time to go into detail. Of course, if the analogy can be proven, one could use it in two different ways: as an argument against the “Authoritarian Personality” or as an argument in favor of the “Jew”-stereotype.

  40. November 6, 2011 - 11:59 am | Permalink

    The term “discrimination” is now used only as a method of herding whites into guilt. While growing up in the 50s, people who were very particular in their likes and dislikes were said to have discriminating taste. No one saw it as negative. At worst, it was annoying for some of the sales clerks and the odd person waiting to be served.
    I discriminate every day when I choose the clothes I will wear. I like Delicious apples as opposed to Granny Smith apples. I have chosen my friends by discrimination of their personal traits. Discrimination is part of life. The reality of life, is that most people, if left on their own without external forces, prefer the company of people that exhibit traits that they themselves can relate to. Race is an easily identifiable trait. While I have many acquaintances who are of other races, none are my friends. Most of these people are nice people in their own right, but have racial traits that I find irritating, or in some cases downright objectionable. These traits are beyond the loyalty to their own race.

    There are laws prohibiting “discrimination”, but what is never identified is that those laws are applied in the context of what is unreasonable or overt irrational opposition to someone based on race, colour, etc.. The goal of those who promote multiculturalism, and by extension race mixing, is to make people believe those differences don’t exist, and to vilify those who recognize them.
    In short, those who promote multiculturalism, promote genocide.

  41. Hedgerow's Gravatar Hedgerow
    November 6, 2011 - 11:41 am | Permalink


    “All of a sudden, an increase in the labor supply does not put downward pressure on wages.”

    I assume you may have found my sentence above cryptic. What I meant to say is that normally, and when not trying to advance an agenda, an economist would take it as axiomatic that an increase in the labor supply would put downward pressure on wages, as per the law of supply and demand. However, that creates a problem for those who want to argue to the public that immigration harms nobody and is, in fact, beneficial. So they ignore the law of supply and demand.

  42. thomas mallon's Gravatar thomas mallon
    November 6, 2011 - 11:34 am | Permalink

    I’m getting tired of the IQ comparisons. I know a man who has barely read a book all the way through in his life, and if you talked to him he might strike some as “slow”— but if a tornado hit your village he could rebuild your house and barns—figuring out many complex problems along the way—as only an expert could. One could say the same of many comparisons which appear to present on one side a deficit in book learning. There are many different and complex indexes to intelligence.

    Somewhere I read that the original IQ test was born of eugenical ideas. I wouldn’t be suprized. We need to face our opponents on the basis of facts other than tenuous insults.

  43. Jordan's Gravatar Jordan
    November 6, 2011 - 11:10 am | Permalink

    Thank you Professor MacDonald. Your comments are helpful.

    Again, the point they want to make is that discrimination is not the result of a reasonable and rational response to the actual traits of people.

    But it sounds like it is a consequence of both traits of people AND the environment. So if one wishes to reduce the level of discrimination by people, it is reasonable to focus on the environment, because the environment may be easier to modify than people’s traits. Do you disagree?

    I wasn’t sure what you meant by the last sentence in the following excerpt:

    people stereotype more under conditions of cognitive load (e.g., Pendry, L. (1998). When the mind is otherwise engaged: Resource depletion and social stereotyping.

    Are resource depeletion and social stereotyping examples of cognitive load, of the mind being otherwise engaged?

  44. qwerty's Gravatar qwerty
    November 6, 2011 - 11:07 am | Permalink

    “…it has been repeatedly found that people stereotype more under conditions of cognitive load.”

    That’s right. Now you, as a professional in the field, are allowed to define, through research, the environment that brings about cognitive load. This guy says “disorder”. Who can disagree? Then one can define disorder.

    “Again, the point they want to make is that discrimination is not the result of a reasonable and rational response to the actual traits of people.”

    And again, who cares about the point they want to make? Make YOUR point from their data. Pose questions to them and their like-minded colleagues (e.g. “Is it your implication then that multiracial societies, which our brains interpret as disorderly due to our evolutionary past of homogenous ingroups, are more likely to increase cognitive load and thus stereotyping?” or “Does this study mean, for instance, that the stereotyped and negative media portrayals of impoverished rural whites could be lessened if these people were somehow given better housing?” etc…).

  45. icr's Gravatar icr
    November 6, 2011 - 10:34 am | Permalink

    Very long video (3:40:13) on race begins with discussion of hoaxing by Gould and Boas:

  46. tom fallon's Gravatar tom fallon
    November 6, 2011 - 10:06 am | Permalink

    The Occidental Observer Site has always been one of my favorites but has just been putting out knock out material as of late. Dr. McDonald just rises to the occasion each and every time and is such a class act. Thank you for the film clip which clarifies a situation which is constantly being confused by masters of chaos which have been housing academia for a while now.
    Perhaps a look at the brave Jews that had been marginalized by The Psychoanalytic movement such as Otto Rank and Ernst Becker. Becker’s treatment of Kirkegaard as a post-Freudian before Freud is especially revealing and perhaps provides a bridge to a reemergence the absconded American soul.
    Your work is very much appreciated Dr. McDonald.

  47. qwerty's Gravatar qwerty
    November 6, 2011 - 9:44 am | Permalink

    “And again, this sort of research is in fact used in the campaign to show that discrimination is irrational–that people who discriminate are doing so not based on real racial differences, but because of a need for order, because disorder results in increased cognitive load, therefore resulting in simplified thinking, etc. ”

    AAAAAARRRRGH. Read what you wrote. If it’s being said that “people discriminate because of a need for order” and that “discrimination is irrational” that means it’s being said that a need for order itself is irrational, which means that every cultural grouping from the beginning of the world has, in an attempt to bring order, been irrational.

    “Disorder” and “racial differences” in a society bring about the same psychological response is what this mock study is saying, even if it didn’t mean to. That is what you can take from this, and it doesn’t matter that the ersatz researcher might try to apply it to a liberal agenda, his fake experiment proved something for our side. I’m sorry you can’t see this.

  48. Henry's Gravatar Henry
    November 6, 2011 - 5:52 am | Permalink

    Am I the only one that is shocked that the New York Times put this article out or should I start reading it now?

  49. Jason Speaks's Gravatar Jason Speaks
    November 6, 2011 - 5:32 am | Permalink

    The video is great by the way. MacDonald and the other gentlemen are very informative and strike exactly the right tone. Please make more videos. I would like to see more from everyone in the video. We live in such a visual age, these things can reach more people.

  50. Franklin Ryckaert's Gravatar Franklin Ryckaert
    November 6, 2011 - 3:29 am | Permalink

    When you google “Diederik Stapel” you get a picture of the man in which he looks unmistakingly Jewish.When you google “ (Consolidated Jewish Surname Index) and type his name,you see that “Stapel” is indeed a Jewish name.Need I say more?

  51. Jordan's Gravatar Jordan
    November 6, 2011 - 1:15 am | Permalink

    There is an interesting quote from Stapel on this fisaco on his Wikipedia page:

    I did not withstand the pressure to score, to publish, the pressure to get better in time. I wanted too much, too fast. In a system where there are few checks and balances, where people work alone, I took the wrong turn. I want to emphasize that the mistakes that I made were not made were not born out of selfish ends.

    I think the last sentence is meant to read that he doesn’t believe the mistakes he made were motivated by “selfish ends.” This may be a very revealing comment and in line with Professor MacDonald’s view of the motivations behind the culture of critique. Someone should ask Stapel whose ends he was intending to serve.

  52. Trenchant's Gravatar Trenchant
    November 6, 2011 - 1:00 am | Permalink

    Stanislav Andreski’s Social Sciences as Sorcery should be a first-year required reading for social science students. That it’s long out of print is a sad commentary on the times.

  53. Walter Lewkowski's Gravatar Walter Lewkowski
    November 6, 2011 - 12:39 am | Permalink

    Orderly living may be a White people thing.

    Discriminating by race is natural to man. Any research project that throws in a superfluous “disordered” variable is just muddying up the waters. What is happening is not disorder but signs of Black people.

    As has been widely observed Black people are not disturbed by living in the midst of so-called disordered contexts consisting of such things as litter or a broken-up sidewalk and an abandoned bicycle.

    When a White person sees such things as litter or a broken-up sidewalk and an abandoned bicycle he does not see disorder but sees signs that Blacks are about and this triggers the life saving racial discriminating mechanism.

    We can all recount stories where people had their life saving racial discriminating mechanism short circuited and it cost them their lives. The Wichita Massacre and the Knoxville Horror come immediately to mind.

    You can spot the bad and almost always fraudulent science project as soon as the research scientist makes the unwarranted assumption that a life saving racial discriminating mechanism does not exist.

  54. Jordan's Gravatar Jordan
    November 5, 2011 - 11:19 pm | Permalink


    Economists who favor immigration will toss aside standard economics — supply and demand — when it serves their purpose. All of a sudden, an increase in the labor supply does not put downward pressure on wages.

    Could you please elaborate?

  55. henry baxley's Gravatar henry baxley
    November 5, 2011 - 11:09 pm | Permalink

    K mac;
    He uses his findings the way he wants, I will use them the way I want.
    Of course racial and other kinds of instinctual preference are biologically based and serve as a defense of your kind (survival instinct) but the good Dr. steped in it when he said or implied that these defenses increase in a disordered environment. Thus…I…conclude we should solve the problem by removing it. His conclusion is to be consumed by it.
    Separation is a cure for racial friction, just as divorce is a cure for marital friction.

  56. Pierre de Craon's Gravatar Pierre de Craon
    November 5, 2011 - 11:01 pm | Permalink

    Professor MacDonald: Jost’s video is quite as good as you said it was. Thanks for posting it.

    I have two questions: (1) Am I right in thinking that the 58 minutes of the video is all that there is, as your comments above suggest? (2) Who are the other gents speaking to the camera—i.e., those who aren’t you?

  57. henry baxley's Gravatar henry baxley
    November 5, 2011 - 10:49 pm | Permalink

    @Jason Speaks:

    Well if you don’t believe disordered environments tend to increase prejudicial stereotypes that is certainly rour right and I respect that. However, I do. And my Natural instinct to distrust say, Blacks for example, goes way up when driving through a ghetto. Anything else he may have said or implied doesn’t matter to me with regard to the truth of this statement.
    Also I am not a Christian but I recognize great wisdom in some of the things Jesus (allegedly) said. Ditto Muhamed, Budda and Hitler…Thats what I am talking about.

  58. Jim's Gravatar Jim
    November 5, 2011 - 10:48 pm | Permalink

    @Jason Speaks: The most telling line from the Wiki article:

    “Historian Peter Charles Hoffer, himself an advocate of gun control, lent support to Cramer’s charge when, in a 2004 examination of the Bellesiles case, he noted that influential members of the historical profession had indeed ‘taken strong public stands on violence in our society and its relation to gun control.’ For instance, the academics solicited for blurbs by Bellesiles’s publisher Alfred A. Knopf ‘were ecstatic in part because the book knocked the gun lobby.’ “

  59. Hedgerow's Gravatar Hedgerow
    November 5, 2011 - 10:42 pm | Permalink

    Economists who favor immigration will toss aside standard economics — supply and demand — when it serves their purpose. All of a sudden, an increase in the labor supply does not put downward pressure on wages.

  60. Sigh's Gravatar Sigh
    November 5, 2011 - 10:32 pm | Permalink

    It’s interesting that a PC liberal news site would even go near this.

    I’m a realist (atheist right now) white socialist who has a general preference for white people and a general dislike for black Africans… I also happen to prefer beautiful intelligent people and I support eugenics – *OMG* scream the sheeple- there I said it- the truth!

  61. Jason Speaks's Gravatar Jason Speaks
    November 5, 2011 - 10:25 pm | Permalink

    @Jim: Thanks, that is an excellent example of perfidy on the Left. There are so many of them that they tend to go down the memory hole. We need a website that lists all the intellectual frauds that have been perpetrated.

  62. Jordan's Gravatar Jordan
    November 5, 2011 - 10:21 pm | Permalink

    Just because it was fraudulent, doesn’t mean the conclusions are untrue.

  63. Jordan's Gravatar Jordan
    November 5, 2011 - 10:20 pm | Permalink

    I agree with qwerty. This study’s conclusion that “chaos” and “disordered contexts” promote discrimination can be interpreted as an indictment of the open borders, mass immigration, multicult, agenda. It highlights the costs to society of “diversity” and incessant change and “creative destruction” and endless wars and invasions and an absence of borders and rules. It is an indirect endorsement of conservatism and assimilation, whether the author intended it that way or not.

  64. Jim's Gravatar Jim
    November 5, 2011 - 10:13 pm | Permalink

    And historians are likely worse than psychologists.

    The Stapel incident reminds me of the fraudulent research conducted by liberal Emory professor Michael Bellesiles a dozen years ago. He tried to make the case that gun ownership among early American frontiersmen was greatly overstated; a myth created by the media and the firearms industry. It was a prominent article in Newsweek, and one of fellow liberal Garry Wills’ opening arguments in his book “Necessary Evil.” In fact, it was all over the news at that time.

    It was pure fabrication, however, dreamed up to support Bellesiles stand on gun control. He lost his professorship and all of his credibilty as an academic, but for some reason his misconduct was never quite the big news that his research results were. If there were retractions by Newsweek or Wills, I didn’t see them.

    Research resulting in conclusions that reinforce liberal political agenda just don’t have as high a bar to clear. Nothing more than common sense should’ve been enough to alert even non-academics to the Bellesiles fraud, however. I mean, what was it exactly that made all of those bison disappear?

  65. Jason Speaks's Gravatar Jason Speaks
    November 5, 2011 - 9:58 pm | Permalink

    @henry baxley: What are you talking about? It doesn’t matter if the paper is fraudulent? The paper asserts people engage in more “discrimination” because of messy environments (trash and garbage around). This of course, was an attempt to diminish the concerns that White people have about other ethnic groups – this has been the gist of all Stapel’s work.

  66. Jason Speaks's Gravatar Jason Speaks
    November 5, 2011 - 9:50 pm | Permalink

    @qwerty: No, I meant what I said – it makes no sense, period. This study is typical of the fraud we see coming from the Left. The paper itself is a fraud and it is publicly known as such – so bad that the Left-dominated academy had to admit it. If you are remotely honest, why would you encourage people here to quote a sham study?

    If you honestly want work that demonstrates the problems associated with ethnic diversity, start with the works of Robert Putnam – not an exposed charlatan like Dr. Stapel.

  67. henry baxley's Gravatar henry baxley
    November 5, 2011 - 9:46 pm | Permalink

    @Jason Speaks:

    It doesn’t matter that the study was flawed or even fruadulent He, perhaps accidently, stated a general truth among all the lies. Should we through the baby out with the bathwater?

  68. qwerty's Gravatar qwerty
    November 5, 2011 - 9:38 pm | Permalink

    @Jason Speaks:

    “Your comment doesn’t make any sense.”

    You meant to say, “Your comment doesn’t make any sense to me.”

  69. qwerty's Gravatar qwerty
    November 5, 2011 - 9:36 pm | Permalink

    @henry baxley:


  70. Jordan's Gravatar Jordan
    November 5, 2011 - 9:36 pm | Permalink

    I agree with qwerty. This paper’s conclusions highlight the costs to society of “diversity” and mass immigration. The implication is that more conservative society’s are healthier. That might not be the implication the author intended, but that is the implication he has given us.

  71. henry baxley's Gravatar henry baxley
    November 5, 2011 - 9:08 pm | Permalink


    I get it…And I tend to agree. since prejudicial stereotyping is inevitable in any society, mixing diverse peoples (multi culti) would definately tend to exacerbate it…on both sides

  72. henry baxley's Gravatar henry baxley
    November 5, 2011 - 9:02 pm | Permalink


    Don’t fret over it. It was a joke.

  73. Jason Speaks's Gravatar Jason Speaks
    November 5, 2011 - 8:39 pm | Permalink

    @Rex May: Very nice blog by the way, a lot of interesting material.

  74. Jason Speaks's Gravatar Jason Speaks
    November 5, 2011 - 8:29 pm | Permalink

    @qwerty: Your comment doesn’t make any sense. A bad study that used fabricated data, that is now publicly known to be a fraud, can be used to “help us”, by aligning with it? That makes zero sense.

    However, this paper is paradigmatic of the Cultural Marxist and Multicultural approach to research. I suspect you are deflecting here, on behalf of the Left. It is all too obvious that this is the kind of “reasoning” that is used by the Left, the “antifas” movement, and sadly by many in the Social Sciences and Humanities.

    What separates this “study” from most of the trash done on the Left? This guy got caught.

  75. Mike's Gravatar Mike
    November 5, 2011 - 8:27 pm | Permalink

    A lesson in jewish science:start with a conclusion, then work back, using semantic sophistry to prove your point, and voila! you are an expert in your field of study.

  76. qwerty's Gravatar qwerty
    November 5, 2011 - 7:55 pm | Permalink

    @Jason Speaks:

    I was replying to MacDonald’s comments, if you read the back and forth.

    That said, everything can be taken and used for us. Do you see the first line of the abstract?

    “Being the victim of discrimination can have serious negative health- and quality-of-life–related consequences.”

    Yes, he’s right. All you have to do is apply the thesis to the proper targets. Every third dude who comes to this site complains about some form of discrimination, and now they hear from Dr. Stapel that it can cause serious health problems. They should thank him for stating this.

    There are thousands of dead and dying small towns across America that look like hell. The inhabitants of these places, too can thank Dr. Stapel for pointing out how they’re discriminated against. Every poor white from Appalachia living in a shoddy trailer park can feel a bit of comfort knowing that one elite is on their side.

    Get it?

  77. Bo's Gravatar Bo
    November 5, 2011 - 7:17 pm | Permalink

    Someday soon we need to take a good look at the term “multicultural.” It appears to arise as part of an historical progression — pluralism to multiculturalism to multi-racialism, and finally to multi-nationalism.

    We should recognize that as a nation society has moved to the multi-racial stage of this progression and just stop using “multiculture” which may have been, in some senses, a coded word really meaning “precursor to multi-racialism.”

    “Multi-racial” also opens up a lot of new intellectual territory for unpacking, exploring, and exposing….well beyond the baggage attached to the term “multiculturalism,” an inherently disordered category of discourse in any case.

    “Multi-racialism” in any case points directly to the fact that members of each demographic group have the responsibility for their group, while “multiculturalism” suggests we all have a responsibility for everyone else. It hints at a different and novel approach to moral issues.

  78. Jason Speaks's Gravatar Jason Speaks
    November 5, 2011 - 7:09 pm | Permalink

    @qwerty: Querty, you aren’t reading the paper correctly. Look at the abstract for the actual paper:

    Being the victim of discrimination can have serious negative health- and quality-of-life–related consequences. Yet, could being discriminated against depend on such seemingly trivial matters as garbage on the streets? In this study, we show, in two field experiments, that disordered contexts (such as litter or a broken-up sidewalk and an abandoned bicycle) indeed promote stereotyping and discrimination in real-world situations and, in three lab experiments, that it is a heightened need for structure that mediates these effects (number of subjects: between 40 and 70 per experiment). These findings considerably advance our knowledge of the impact of the physical environment on stereotyping and discrimination and have clear policy implications: Diagnose environmental disorder early and intervene immediately.

    They mention such things as too much garbage, busted up sidewalks and abandoned bicycles. The implication is that if we just have more urban renewal programs, viola, discrimination will diminish. The implication is that making judgements about other groups is purely some form of pathology, in this case brought on by too much rubbish in the streets.

    The only rubbish that matters here is this dishonest paper.

  79. Jordan's Gravatar Jordan
    November 5, 2011 - 7:07 pm | Permalink

    Dr. MacDonald:

    Bias and fraud may be in fact be significant in social science research, yet I fail to see how Stapel’s “Disordered Contexts” study helps to promote liberal social policies. When I read your descrtipion of its conclusion –

    This study had a wonderfully liberal conclusion—that racial discrimination would be increased in chaotic environments because people have a tendency to simply [sic] their cognitive processing in such environments.

    – my first thought was that the results are favorable to a conservative polices that favor stability, continuity, and national borders. The liberal policies of multiculteralism, creative destruction, invasios of the world, and chaos, would seem to be promoting racism.

    Do you disagree?

  80. dc's Gravatar dc
    November 5, 2011 - 7:03 pm | Permalink

    @henry baxley:

    Err, what’s the connexion with Freud being a charlatan?

  81. Pierre de Craon's Gravatar Pierre de Craon
    November 5, 2011 - 6:47 pm | Permalink

    @Flossie: Read “simplify” for “simply” and everything falls into place, Flossie.

  82. November 5, 2011 - 6:30 pm | Permalink

    I’ve been waiting for your reaction before I blogged about this myself. I now have, and it is linked to your post with other comments here:

  83. qwerty's Gravatar qwerty
    November 5, 2011 - 4:39 pm | Permalink

    “I completely disagree that discrimination is all about simplifying cognition.”

    Sigh. That’s not what I said, nor is it what he said. It’s right here in his article title: “Coping with Chaos: How Disordered Contexts Promote Stereotyping and Discrimination”. Not to mention in your prose: “…that racial discrimination would be increased in chaotic environments…”

    You’re leaving out the variability of the environmental factor. Staple’s saying that discrimination and stereotype INCREASE in chaotic settings, DISORDERED CONTEXTS, which means the multicultural melange in the urban areas that Putnam talked about. It doesn’t matter if this guy’s a liberal tool, his findings are on your side. If he references a multiracial urban center as “disordered”, then one would have to ask what the default “ordered” context is.

    Your urban taxi driver, when faced with many African-Americans as his only fare choices, will sooner choose a couple with a baby, or a woman, or a nicely dressed business man over a thug or three male teens. That’s what he’s looking for, that level of discrimination. He’s gone down cladistically. When the context is “disordered” though, that is, “diverse”, he has to do a different type of initial stereotyping, and that means, for almost every human alive, racial comparison.

    “In practice the social psychology professor uses such findings to preach to his students that real traits are irrelevant to discrimination, and that’s just liberal ideology.”

    You could take his findings and use it for your side, rather than always just react. Agree with the guy – as you should, because he’s right – and see what happens.

  84. November 5, 2011 - 4:09 pm | Permalink

    Fwiw, there is an interesting discussion of the social taboos on studying and quantifying intelligence on Alternet today:

    I figured TOO readers might be interested in the discussion

  85. Flossie's Gravatar Flossie
    November 5, 2011 - 3:55 pm | Permalink

    “. . . because people have a tendency to simply their cognitive processing in such environments.” Isn’t there a word missing?

  86. John hearns's Gravatar John hearns
    November 5, 2011 - 3:29 pm | Permalink

    @John hearns:

    correction ” of mine “

  87. Rehmat's Gravatar Rehmat
    November 5, 2011 - 3:29 pm | Permalink

    I suppose Dr. Yonah Elian did not read such psychology research otherwise he would not have committed suicide like Bib’s shrink did last year.

    Dr. Yonah Elian 88, committed suicide in his Ramat Aviv apartment (Tel Aviv) in June 2011. Elian had worked for Israeli Mossad for two decades. He took part in many Mossad operations as an anesthesiologist to sedate victims who were to be kidnapped or otherwise incapacitated. Mossad is also notorious for using sexy Jewish women, otherwise known as ‘honeypots’, to seduce its victioms. Elian had teamed-up with Mossad ‘honeypot’, Cheryl Ben Tov nee Cheryl Hanin aka “Cindy” who lured Israeli nuclear technician Mordechai Vanunu while buying cigarettes from a kiosk in Leicester Square in 1986. Last year, Israel Rabbi Ari Shvat claimed that Mossad’s use of Jewish women as ‘honeypot’ is kosher, saying: “Our Sages of Blessed Memory elevate such acts of dedication to the top of the Halacha’s mitzvahs pyramid”. However, he recommended that these missions (honeypot) may naturally be tasked to women who are already promiscuous as no practing Jew will marry such women….

  88. John hearns's Gravatar John hearns
    November 5, 2011 - 3:28 pm | Permalink

    A relative if mine is a fairly big time psychologist . Not surprisingly he is quite ” liberal ” We get to discussing politics and I explain my opinion about jewish power and their agenda and how it has played out in history . He simply replies by saying that that is ” your truth ”
    I told him that it is very scary that he feels that truth is subjective and that , ironically , I feel he has been psyched out .

  89. Richard's Gravatar Richard
    November 5, 2011 - 3:28 pm | Permalink

    @St@r Scre@m:

    I agree completely, Star Scream.

  90. Masculinity's Gravatar Masculinity
    November 5, 2011 - 3:05 pm | Permalink

    The Dutch dude looks a bit Jewish honestly.

  91. qwerty's Gravatar qwerty
    November 5, 2011 - 2:40 pm | Permalink

    “Because it suggests that people who discriminate have a need to simplify their cognition…”

    They do. That’s what it’s all about.

    “… implying that discrimination isn’t based on real traits of the targets of discrimination but only on the psychological needs of the discriminators.”

    Why are the “real targets of discrimination” and “the psychological needs of the discriminators” considered a contrast?

    “The messy environment only enhances the general process of discrimination as based on cognitive simplification.”

    But that’s true, Professor. The study shows once again the destructive nature of the urban environment, and doubly damns it when it’s a multiracial environment.

    “…racial discrimination would be increased in chaotic environments because people have a tendency to simply their cognitive processing in such environments.”

    If I live in a small town, my cognition allows me the chance to judge random people met on the street more thoroughly (e.g hairstyle, fashion, gait) due to the lower volume of people passing by and the generally slower pace. With a greater amount of people, all of them rushing past, many of whom don’t look like me, I have to go based on color first.

    Give anyone a box of red buttons, some with one hole, some two, some four, and time them as they divide the buttons into their corresponding piles. Now mix in black, green, and white buttons and the first thing the subject has to do is grab for only the red buttons.

    Stabel should be laughed at for showing that “most people think the sky is blue” or something like that, but his conclusions are correct. It’s hardly a novel revelation, but neither is it “liberal”.

    I think your reactionary stance might be due to the negative value applied by a subset of people, particularly whites, to the term “discrimination.” When you neutralize this valence his conclusions would match that of most racial realists.

  92. henry baxley's Gravatar henry baxley
    November 5, 2011 - 2:30 pm | Permalink

    @St@r Scre@m:

    Come now professor, are you suggesting that Freud was a fraud ??
    The fact is Bias and prejudice (discrimination) both positive and negative, is not only instinctual and therefore Natural.
    it’s the very thing that make us HUMAN.
    Without bias, love hate etc. we would be ROBOTS.
    The so-called open minded liberal is a prime example. They HATE anyone who has a world view that is diametrically opposed to theirs…I said H A T E!
    So by definition, they are PRE-judiced against us as a group, without having read Mein Kampf, Race and Reason, etc….If that’s not knee-jerk pre-judging based on false information I don’t know what is.
    How many Hollywood/washington liberals were raised in the inner city, or spent time in jail, Or picked cotton etc. Well I have. Therefore I have more information from which to judge than thay…FIRSTHAND!
    Their liberal paternalistic attitudes toward the “poor, unfortunate, oppressed blacks” is in itself prejudice in reverse (Artificial Polarization) Do you think for one second all these white “celebrities” would be fighting to adopt black kids if it didn’t further their career and bring “glory” to their reputation among their miserable peers????
    Speaking of celebrities, ever notice that most of them are young and attractive??…….HOW COME???
    Could it be that their Zombie fan base would…DISCRIMINATE… against an old ugly person and not buy their s***????????…Could THAT be it???, ah
    WHAT ABOUT EQUALITY!!!….??…?? Should not their be affirmative action for ugly old people?? is hollywood not a “good young persons club” by and large??
    What about a “level playing field” for ugly, short, fat, hair-lipped old people? I could go on and on, but won’t

  93. St@r Scre@m's Gravatar St@r Scre@m
    November 5, 2011 - 1:10 pm | Permalink

    Thanks Professor Mac, for being the one academic to stand up and speak truth to power. Thanks for being the one guy to put his name on the line instead of serving as just another PAID LIAR!! I often wondered how liberal arts professors could sleep at night. And now it comes out that perhaps, the profession as a whole, has been more worried about protecting their dogma by cooking the books than any concern for proper research and real findings. SHOCKING Perhaps academia will be saved after all from the despotic reign of liberal storm troopers presently controlling the humanities. White youth should be marching on academia with its raw genocidal propaganda wrapped in universalism and protected by the western criticism via post-modernism. If they only understood who was teaching them and why.

    In large states public education will always be mediocre, for the same reason that in large kitchens the cooking is usually bad.
    Friedrich Nietzsche

  94. qwerty's Gravatar qwerty
    November 5, 2011 - 12:02 pm | Permalink

    “This study had a wonderfully liberal conclusion—that racial discrimination would be increased in chaotic environments because people have a tendency to simply their cognitive processing in such environments.”

    How is that a liberal conclusion?

Comments are closed.