This is probably the most controversial topic around, but I’ve successfully managed to redpill multiple friends on the idea of human biodiversity (HBD). In coming years, new genetic evidence will likely vindicate most tenets of HBD, so I think it is time to start preparing ourselves to have that conversation.
I freely acknowledge that I have an inherent advantage in talking about this: I am a brown man, and society doesn’t police my crimethink as aggressively as it polices that of Whites. Nevertheless, I think the ideas here have some applicability to everyone who wants to talk about HBD.
1. Picking Your Targets
“It’s about sizing up your mark, lad. The way they walk, what they’re wearing. It’s a dead give-away”
-Brynjolf, TES V, Skyrim
I recommend you focus on Right-leaning people, particularly those who have a degree of interest in dissident right views like nationalism or paleolibertarianism (I lean towards the latter). That’s the easiest target.
Surprisingly, I think the next best targets for HBD conversations are heterodox Left-leaning people. These people lived in close ideological proximity to, but ultimately rejected, the SJW memeplex. That makes them more open to new information, and I think if phrased correctly, a fraction would be open to ideas about human biodiversity.
The worst possible targets are orthodox leftists. The SJW memeplex about how White privilege dooms the world is a self-reinforcing narrative that closes them off to new information. More bad targets include establishment conservatives. While they reject the SJW memeplex, they are studiously opposed to any thought of race…which makes our job very difficult.
2. Choosing a Line of Attack
It’s best if you stay away from hot-button topics like the innate Black-White IQ gap. As soon as people hear this, the majority will do what they’ve been propagandized to do, and will shut down.
I recommend you pick a kind of esoteric topic to start. For example, you can bring up Steve Sailer’s discussion on how cousin marriage impacts Iraq, makes it a society organized completely differently than ours, and makes Western democracy a non-starter there. Most (sane) people agree that the Iraq invasion was a bad idea, and they may be interested in explanations for why it failed.
Of course, the topics you can bring up will differ from society to society. In America, I could talk about how founder effects and subsequent selection created Indian castes and subcastes as we know them, and likely affected mental phenotypes as well. In India, I would be murdered for bringing up the topic.
3. Providing Solutions
“You kids joke about Viagra, but it was a big deal. It made it ok to talk about erectile dysfunction, it brought it out of the shadows. And that helped a lot of people.”
-Professor of Urology at my medical school
Humans don’t like being blackpilled (so to speak). If you want people to accept your points, you need to provide solutions alongside them.
They don’t have to be perfect solutions. For example, antipsychotics aren’t great at treating schizophrenics. But they work to a degree, and once typical antipsychotics were invented in the late 1950s, that made the deinstitutionalization movement of the next few decades possible.
One solution I would have for America is a shift to educational tracking and vocational schools, similar to what Germany does (though thanks to Diversity Inc, Germany may be moving away from this). We should emphasize that regardless of the IQs of groups or individuals, people can be productive contributors to society, even if things won’t end up perfectly equal in the end.
It’s not perfect, but as explained above, the solution doesn’t have to be perfect.