Blogiserverini omistajan eli Prodoksen omassa blogissa oli kommentoitu Puumalaisen aloituttamaa noitavainoa. Laitan tähän näkyville pari keskustelunpätkää sieltä, koska viime aikoina ei ole ollut muutakaan postattavaa.
Lisäksi laitan tähän muistakin blogeista poimittuja relevantteja pätkiä. Tätä kommenttikoostetta voidaan päivittää tarpeen mukaan ja yleisön kiinnostuksen mukaan.
päivitys 8.7.
lisätty keskustelua Prodoksen blogin kommenttiosastosta
Kritiikkiä ajatuspoliisin tutkinnan kohteena olevaa blogipostaustani Yhteiskunta koostuu ihmisistä kohtaan:
On the other hand the book’s data also indicates that Asians are smarter than Europeans, something we also see in US SAT scores, so the Asian portion of the essay appears to be on shakier ground.
Minä:
I have never denied the fact East Asians (Japanese, Koreans and Chinese) have a higher median IQ than white people. Southeast Asians (Thais, Malaysians, Indonesians etc.) have a lower median IQ than white people. But I fail to see how this is relevant. I did not say anything about the intelligence of Asians in my blog posts.
Now having said that I think that there are a number of alternative hypotheses for the criminal bit that have not been properly analysed. For example one alternative hypotheis that might explain the crime figures is poverty: poor people tend to commit more violent crimes than rich people and/or can’t afford the lawyer to get them off. Based on that, let me paint an alternative 2 point hypothesis that explains the same crime figures for immigrants without getting into whether their IQ (or culture) leads them to being criminals.
the poorest people in society commit most crimes
immigrants are usually amongst the poorest members of a society
QED
This is prenumeric thinking. You might as well say that if men commit more crimes than women and the percentage of men is higher among immigrants than among the native population (e.g. 50 % instead of 49 %) this gender gap would explain the difference in crime rates between immigrants and natives. If you actually analysed relevant crime statistics mathematically, you would quickly notice that the difference in crime rates between men and women or between the rich and the poor does not explain more than a very small part of the discrepancy in crime rates of immigrants vs. native-born citizens.
Prodoksen ja minun välistä keskustelua jutun taustoista :
Mikko Ellilä Says:
May 8th, 2007 at 12:43 am
But first, let me state or remind the reader that when Mikko originally wrote to me he said …
I am writing to you because I received a letter from the municipal police department saying they want to interrogate me because of the anti-Muslim, pro-Israeli, pro-European, pro-American posts in my blog.
When you read the translation of the charges and of Mikko’s article, you’ll see that this is not in fact the case.
However, Mikko has clarified the misunderstanding as follows …
… I could not know this [what the specific charges referred to exactly] before Friday evening (the interrogation is on Monday) because he [Mikko Puumalainen, Ombudsman for Minorities of Finland] REPEATEDLY refused to specify his allegations and to email me the relevant material that he had sent to the police.
I was able to obtain the material from him only after I notified him that I could sue him for failing to send me the relevant material because the POLICE had explicitly asked me to comment on his allegations in written form, which I obviously could not do as long as I had not even SEEN the allegations in the first place. Puumalainen undoubtedly committed a CRIME by acting like this.
You probably understand that it was reasonable for me to assume that I was going to be interrogated for “hate speech” against Islam because I have commented on Islamic terrorism and Islam in general in several dozen posts, but I have mentioned the black-white IQ gap only in this one post.
There was absolutely no way for me to know that the charges against me were based on this one post because the Thought Police repeatedly refused to show me the letter that he had sent to the police. Like I said, the Witchhunter (Puumalainen) committed a crime by acting like this. This is not my fault.
I have mentioned in my blog e.g. the fact that the Muslims have often threatened to kill Jews and homosexuals, and yet the Left, which claims to be against racism and tolerant of homosexuals, totally supports the Muslims.
Obviously the leftists think this is slander against the Muslims, because the leftist are dumb and deaf and blind and therefore totally unable to understand what the Muslims actually are like.
Anybody who reads my blog would automatically assume that if I were ever to be accused of hate speech, it would be for slander against Islam.
It was totally surprising to see that the “hate speech” allegations were based on a post in which I mentioned the obvious and well known fact that Africans commit more crimes than Europeans, and have a lower average IQ than Europeans.
Joku Walter Haxton-niminen henkilö esittää minua kohtaan kritiikkiä Prodoksen kommenttiosastossa ja minä vastaan tähän kritiikkiin:
Mikko Ellilä Says:
May 8th, 2007 at 12:54 am
# Walter Haxton Says:
May 7th, 2007 at 2:50 pm
He plainly broke the law of his country.
Not true at all.
I don’t think that such a law is necessary or desirable though.
Nobody does, except Muslims and their sycophants and other quislings who want make e.g. the Muhammad caricatures illegal.
He even managed to insult me.
How?
In the USA the KKK doesn’t determine anything.
Strawman. I never said it did.
He used the picture of Condalisa Rice to illustrate his point.
I don’t know who Condalisa Rice is, but I used the picture of Condoleezza Rice to illustrate my point that black Americans are more civilised than the Africans who actually live in Africa. Do you think this statement is false? Do you really think black Americans such as Condoleezza Rice are as primitive as e.g. the Nuba tribe of Sudan or the Masai tribe of Tanzania?
I think that he owes her an apology.
I think you do. You’re saying she is like the Nuba or the Masai simply because of the colour of her skin. I said the exact opposite, and since you were against my statement, you apparently really believe Condi is not more civilised than the primitives in Africa.
Also he probably owes a lot of other people apologies.
Such as?
But other than apologies or jail time I would like to send him to a training course in human relations.
Why?
He just doesn’t seem to get the fact that people are not groups but are in fact individuals.
I have written explicitly and extensively about that in my earlier blog posts.
He is definitely a collectivist.
On what basis?
I don’t like people to be locked up for what they say but this one is either very young or very racist.
I’m 30. I don’t know what you mean by very young because I don’t know how old you are. Maybe a 90-year-old might consider a 30-year-old to be very young.
What makes you think I am ‘very racist’?
Is Finland a socialist country.
Yes, just like Australia and America.
What education do they give their kids.
The best in the world, according to the famous PISA study. Google it.
My best advise for him would be “When you get out of jail find a new country to live in. Learning about strangers would improve your education.”
Yours, Walter Haxton
I am certain I know much more about different cultures than you do.
Taas joku haukkuu minua rasistiksi ja vaatii blogini deletointia:
Mikko Ellilä Says:
May 9th, 2007 at 12:03 am
Prodos and I are not at all pleased that one of our bloggers has written racist material on his ThinkerToThinker blog. If it were not for the legal action against Mikko Ellilä, I would be urging Prodos to disassociate ThinkerToThinker from Ellilä.
Define “racist” material.
The mere mention of the results of scientific research, such as professor Tatu Vanhanen’s research showing that Africans have a lower median IQ than Europeans, is not racism.
The ThinkerToThinker bloggers have never been required to agree with Prodos on every issue. There was only one catch: advocating anti-capitalist ideologies was not allowed. Show me a post where I advocate some anti-capitalist ideology. If you fail to do so, you have no reason to tell Prodos to remove my blog from ThinkerToThinker. For your information, I am an objectivist, and I don’t think there is anything in my blog posts that is inconsistent with objectivism. This does not mean that I agree with e.g. Ayn Rand on every issue. For example she liked to smoke, but I don’t smoke. It would be irrational to expect all ThinkerToThinker bloggers to agree on every issue. There were no strings attached to the ThinkerToThinker blog service, except that the bloggers must not advocate anti-capitalist ideologies. Mentioning the results of scientific IQ research has nothing to do with advocating anti-capitalist ideologies.
If Prodos wants to remove my blog, I naturally expect him to notify me well in advance so that I can republish my blog posts on some other server and tell my readers where my new blog is so that my readers will find my blog again.
If Prodos suddenly deletes my blog without warning and without allowing me to first tell my readers where to find a copy of my blog archive, everybody will think Prodos has yielded to the demands of Big Brother Puumalainen.
Tämän jälkeen Walter Haxton palaa astialle.
Walter Haxton Says:
I have to disagree with a major premise of Mikko’s. He thinks that intelligence is the determining factor in the wealth of a population.
Strawman. I don’t have that premise.
I think that a country where people are free to act anyway they see fit as long as it is not at the expense of their neighbors will always be richer that a society where everybody has to ask permission to do things.
Of course.
Joku Jim esittää järkevän kommentin ja minä kommentoin takaisin:
Jim Says:
Ellila makes an interesting observation contrasting his abundant posts criticizing Islam with the singularity of the offending post yet the one instance gets the attention. I suspect that this is an astute tactic by Muslims that he has offended to silence him by exploiting a separate weakness without a public debate about the merits of his criticism of Islam.
I think so too. They think it’s easier to attack someone for “racism” that to attack someone for criticising Islam. That’s why they start with the “racist” part. There are a lot of people in Finland with much more “racist” opinions than myself, but the Muslims aren’t interested in them.
I have e.g. published the famous Muhammad cartoons in my blog, and the Muslims and their sycophants are obviously pissed because of this. They are trying to attack me because of my “racist” statements (i.e. quotes from crime statistics published by the Ministry of Justice, and results of scientific research such as professor Vanhanen’s IQ and the Wealth of Nations; see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IQ_and_the_Wealth_of_Nations) because they think this is easier than attacking me e.g. because of my opinion that Islam is a fascist ideology.
Joku Sydney Kendall-niminen henkilö heittää “ihminen ei ole nisäkäs, rotuja ei ole olemassa”-tyylisiä pavlovilaisesti ehdollistettuja hysteerisiä rasistisyytöksiä:
Sydney Kendall Says:
It is this “biology is destiny” idea, when applied to human beings in regard to morality, that I consider to be racist.
By saying that “biology is destiny” I simply meant that man is a biological species, homo sapiens, not some “ghost in the sky” (see Rand), and therefore there are certain biological facts that need to be recognised, such as the fact that there are biological differences between men and women or between whites and blacks.
Talking about the IQ difference between whites and blacks does not imply hatred of blacks, just like saying men are, on the average, stronger than women does not imply hatred of women.
päivitys 8.7. alla
Mikko Ellila Says:
July 5th, 2007 at 4:46 am
“For example …
Negroes only abide by the laws of white society when concretely forced to do so, with stern discipline. Come laxity, and the African biological characteristics of the negroes once again manifest themselves in their behaviour.
I interpret this as advocacy in the area of law enforcement and civil order based on a racialist position.”
That’s a misinterpretation. My point was merely the observation that black people are genetically different from white people and will abide by Western (i.e. European, American or Australian) laws only when white people maintain law and order by using their legislative power in the parliament and by organising the police force and courts of law in a way that is consistent with Western ideals of justice.
This is not the same thing as advocating a racialist justice system. In fact I am advocating absolutely nothing here. I am merely making an observation.
“Importing negroes into Europe lowers the average level of intelligence of the European population because negroes have a lower median IQ than whites.
I interpret this as advocacy in the area of immigration based on a racialist position.”
Misinterpretation again. I am advocating nothing, I am merely making an observation.
“In the United States and in Canada, negroes behave bearably only when in clear minority. The surrounding white society - on the one hand with its coercive apparatus consisting of the police, the prisons, armed self-defence of the populace, and vigilantes in the KKK vein, and on the other via socio-cultural pressure - forces negroes to adapt to Western culture.
I interpret this as advocacy in the area of law enforcement and civil order based on a racialist position.”
Misinterpretation again. I am advocating nothing, I am merely making an observation.
“Also, I interpret your use of the phrase “vigilantes in the KKK vein” as meaning you hold a favourable view of the Ku Klux Klan and of its purposes and methods.”
Absolutely not. Obviously, I do not approve of lynchings and other crimes. I only mentioned the fact that the tradition of vigilantism in the USA has kept the crime rate lower than it otherwise would have been. This is a fact mentioned in many studies and university textbooks of sociology and economics etc. Mentioning this fact has nothing to do with advocating vigilantism.
If I say that the death penalty for homosexual intercourse in Saudi Arabia has kept the level of homosexual activity extremely low, the mere mention of this fact is absolutely not the same thing as advocating the death penalty for homosexual intercourse. Get it?
“If all the nonwhites living in Europe today were to move back to their respective countries of origin, crime rates in Europe would fall by tens of percentage points.
I interpret this as advocacy in the area of immigration based on a racialist position.”
Wrong again. Try to distinguish between statements of fact (e.g. black people have a lower median IQ than white people) and statements of political opinion (e.g. “all black people in the world should move back to Africa”).
Tim Warner Says:
July 6th, 2007 at 1:37 am
To state that “If you observe the front of the cinema, I note there may be a combustion that is cause for concern” is different from shouting “fire”.
But the chaos and likely results amount to the same, allowing for part of the audience not being able to decipher the comment!
It is disingenuous to claim that raising an issue and using very specific evidence does not amount to a position. It is the cleft stick of all true journalists.
They have limited space, they do make editorial decision on what counts as pertinent information.
The real test is whether the outside observer comes away with information and a sense of debate or a very specific idea of where they think they have been led.
As a commentator/blogger Mikko is not a journalist and opinion is the essence of the operation. But what he is doing is what I pointed to at the top.
He has an opinion. It is manifest from the topic, the evidence chosen and the rhetoric.
That he doesn’t pound the desk with his shoe a la Khrushchev doesn’t mean he isn’t making a statement.
Strider Says:
July 6th, 2007 at 5:47 pm
Whilst Mikko keeps insisting that he is ‘merely making an observation’ about various issues here, it appears to me that these ‘observations’ are not objective ones such as ‘the sky is blue’, but rather, ‘coloured’ by a considerable amount of his own opinions.
Where there is a problem is that his ‘observations’ and opinions are not exactly backed up by reliable evidence or facts, but rather, by his own prejudices.
This is a free country, and ideally, should be a free world, and I feel that Mikko should be entitled to his opinions and to his prejudices (and should be free to express these in any media which wishes to transmit them, without free of prosecution), but I don’t see that these opinions and prejudices are ones which are readily defensible, or which fit in with the stated individualist and pro-capitalist/freedom agenda of this particular medium (ie the thinker to thinker blog service).
I particularly find his comments, as translated, about coercive apparatus of white society (including KKK vigliantes) as keeping black Americans under control, to be breath-takingly ignorant and intolerant, such as to make my jaw drop in astonishment. I suspect that someone, wishing to argue an opposite case in a similarly dogmatic style, might wish to cite the movie “Deliverance” as ‘evidence’ to support a similarly ignorant argument about the criminality and sodomistic tendencies of white hillbillies.
