To believe that automation is going reduce the demand for low skill labor and, at the same time, be in favor of low skill immigration to the U.S. is a logical contradiction. Its a cognitive dissidence. However, the reason why leftists believe in such cognitive dissidence is that they are emoting. Thier political world-view is driven by pure emotion. There is no rational thinking on their part.
I think the big difference is that, when DNA research is able to objectively and without doubt state the intelligence and capacities of an individual, people will be classified and assigned jobs per their capacities.
Right now we can all accept the 'feel good message' of "you can do whatever you want" and I could even say that in a way we live in a society that really doesn't block you from thriving and reaching wherever you can. But once this science is matured and treated as known facts, then castes might be explicit. Even, I'm thinking that culturally, the western world is going down, and who's rising? China, Asian culture, and I think this is more prone to castes, so if China becomes the hegemonic nation, our "I can be whatever I want" goes bye bye.
As and addendum, the concerns over gender imbalance in STEM is really part of the vicious anti-male bigotry that has infected our schools and univerisities. Drugging school boys into insensibility with Ritalin, verbally attacking men, especially white men, in college classes and discriminating against them in every conceivable way. Why any man, again especially white but really any, would want to go to college under the present abusive regimes is a mystery. A man can earn a reasonable living as a pipefitter/plumber, electrician, carpenter or construction worker, and he will not have any accumulated debt and will not have run a gauntlet of abuse to get to his job.
The bright side for the gender nazis is that if they become abusive enough the gender imbalance problem will disappear along with the male students. And the remaining men will be gamma pussies. Even better.
Intelligence does exist, it can be measured, it does make a difference. US President Johnson's 1965 "Great Society" imposed what has come to be some $50 trillion in summed Social Marxism failures. The refractorily lowest classes are overall genetically inconsequential. No amount of money, no imposed opportunity and empowerment at the cost of others' robust abilities, heals the problem other than to amplify it through subsidized reproduction.
Cherish the Gifted. Allow normalcy less a standard deviation to prosper of its own palsied hands, demanded beliefs, and sacred cultures.
I think lots of people are banking on what I call the "Fukuyama thesis" re: China, which I understand to be a general skepticism about China's ability to seriously challenge the US for the following reasons:
1.) Basic cultural (or perhaps innate?) differences which predispose the Chinese towards low risk behaviour and conformity. The basic claim is that catch-up technological progress is different from progress on the bleeding edge and that the Chinese are better at the former than the latter. From what I understand, there may be some truth to this, although it's exaggerated and also complicated by the fact that many of the major breakthroughs in the US are the result of work done by immigrants from China, SK, etc.
2.) A lack of responsive institutions and the absence of checks-and-balances on government exercise of power. Fukuyama and his comrades thinks this cuts both ways I think; when China has good leaders, the upside is amazing because gov't projects are expeditiously completed, but then you also have to deal with the Maos. Someone like Zhang Weiwei would probably counter by noting that China has built informal norms through the Communist Party that emphasize promotion based on merit; I think this is compelling, although I'm still not completely sold.
3.) Long-term demographic problems. Unless I'm mistaken, China has a massive long-term problem with dysgenics. Also, if China's trajectory is anything like SK or Japan, young people are going to have real problems with under-employment, diminished social mobility, etc. The social mobility thing is probably a big thing in China in the long-run; I read some interview by a Sinologist that like => 90%people who have seen the largest gains in China are those whose lineage can be traced back to Qing aristocrats. (This is premised on the assumption that the socially immobile have the social capital and the desire to mobilize though; from what I understand, rural areas tend be the most conservative and exhibit the staunchest support for the party.)
While we need to strife for the ideal, we need to recognize that we live in a reality where people favor those from their own race. This is true for people from all races. In fact, white people in this country treated Asians better than we were treated by, say Indonesians. Being an Asian and not smart enough to go to any named schools, I nevertheless recognize that schools like Harvard must navigate this minefield in a Democracy like ours.
Being a parent in a high Asian concentrated neighborhood, I can attest to the degree of cut throat competition Asian parents subject their kids to in hope of getting to a better school. I think it is more fruitful if we focus our efforts to educate the parents about the futility of such efforts and the damages that they do to their kids instead of fighting for a higher number of entrants in a particular school that could result in a backlash from the general population. After all, Harvard exists at the whims of society at large.
It's much bigger than IQ. Down's syndrome is being eliminated in Europe and suppressed in the US by prenatal screening and abortion. Since every trait has some genetic component, pretty soon we will be able to check for homosexuality, transgender susceptibility, Alzheimer syndrome, Tay-Barre and even feminism and progressivism. Imagine the great social improvements by eliminating those traits. It would far exceed the benefits of selecting for high IQ.
By the way, people are already aborting fetuses because they are male or female.
The public thinks Trump will piss off the powers that be more than anything ever, and it looks like they're right. Sure, the immigration issue, not advocating WW III, and pledging to really put America's interests first were highly attractive, but the biggest attraction of Trump is that he is the F.U. candidate, and this was the F.U. election. He actually isn't worse so far, he's doing masterfully, and 90% in the right direction, with the rest being plausibly tactical moves. Continuous repetition of insults eventually starts to sink in no matter how contrary to truth. Trump has a much clearer picture of what is going on and what needs to be done about it than his critics, who are useful idiots for America's enemies and parasites, or are active enemies themselves. He also has far greater ability to execute his plans than his opponents.
His opponents in media and academia don't even realize that they were / are the powers that be, let alone that their salad days are over. They're going to get absolutely creamed by all the people they vilified, blacklisted, bankrupted, student-loan enslaved, discriminated against and sneered at. They don't have any inkling of the lasting strength of righteous wrath against them, that it isn't at all out of the question that they will be not only dispossessed as they have acquiesced in the dispossession of the American people, but executed: advocates of mass immigration, affirmative action, and of the many measures that suppressed the absolute and relative fertility of Whites (so causing exponential population decline , a.k.a. genocide) are all prosecutable today if you squint at the law a bit, and they won't have the judges on their sides much longer.
Actually Trump is just about their last chance to avoid the rope, once there starts to be violence from the right, once a large fraction of them think that there is no longer order to be preserved, that order has to be reimposed, you will see violence on a scale and with a level of coordination that the left cannot begin to match. If Trump is assassinated or removed from power, that will be the starting gun for a no-kidding, all-out genocidal civil war in which most of the current academic and media elites will likely die early on. Last chance. Trump is their only real friend in all the world. Spinners in the hands of an angry mob holding them forth over the fiery pit, will they repent?
For decades, progressives have strongly pushed identitarian politics for everyone except Whites, and that politics has been strongly anti-White. It was only a matter of time before Whites became self-aware as a race, and someone like Spencer was coughed up. The trend towards an openly racial/ethnic politics (replacing ideological politics) will only accelerate as the percentage of Whites in the US declines. Someday, our politics will consist of Keith Ellison and Richard Spencer shouting at each other. Welcome to Weimar.
What debate? What conversation? That's what progs call it when they lecture a deplorable on why he is so very deplorable. They are going to have to accept reality: equality is false, "equality" means abdicating the moral responsibility to judge what is better and what is worse, it means preferring the worse to the better, which is bad under every possible system of ethics. Treating unequal people equally is unjust. [edit cut...] Replacing the former nation with others will predictably lead to the US becoming as non-functional as Brazil, India, or South Africa. No amount of pretending equality is going to change the genetic facts.
[edit cut ...]. Non-whites were ~10% of the US in 1965, now ~40%. More than half the children under 10 are now non-white. That displacement will only accelerate as Whites are driven from power by the treason of their politicians, their academics, their clergy. Then Whites will be treated as they are in Zimbabwe or South Africa and civilization will sputter out.There is nothing to debate, our essential interests are irresolvably opposed.
The atrocities inherent in natural humans?
You egalitarians are sick. Inequality is good!
If gene therapy ever advances to a precise science that is universally available, the result of this utopia, in which all people are (pretty close to) exactly the same (make no mistake, they would be), will be a world in which most people will lose the will to live. Men will not only have no way of distinguishing themselves from others, they will have separated themselves from their creations (their children, who are not really even their children anymore). Life at this point is not just pointless in the sense that it is going to end, or that our world is going to end, it is completely pointless. I suppose we'll be genetically programmed to enjoy our own fruitlessness.