[another_sock]

various aspects of IQ, demeanor, education, work ethic, surroundings, and a whole host of other variables, some external some internal. Of course the majority of people on HN and in the public will revert to weeping and gnashing of teeth rather than acknowledge this obvious fact, because the majority of people on HN and in the public implicitly tie human worth to economic output and intelligence (which is the actually bigoted and racist thing to do)

[brsg]

I'm not going to "cancel" you, but it's a little telling that your example of a moderate view immediately went there.

[another_sock]

I don't care about you trying to cancel me lol that's why this is a sock account, but it's even more telling that you think basic descriptive (not prescriptive) observations about reality are not moderate.

[brsg]

Yeah, but why not stuff like immigration, stances on environmental regulation, income tax rates on high earners, gun rights...

You've gotta agree that those fall under the moderate umbrella a bit more right? I've lived/worked in some very conservative environments and I don't think anyone would've walked along with the race IQ path.

[another_sock]

My comment was in relation to the topic of the parent comment, which is why I mentioned it at all. Income tax rates and environmental regulation very rarely get brought up in conjunction with why there are gaps in racial outcome that aren't the result of racism. I think we can both agree that the things I mentioned are more more on point with arguments pertaining to racial outcomes, even if you completely disagree with those arguments.

[brsg]

That's fair! I think I may have confused you with the OP that responded as such to the moderate point.

For what it's worth, I think you may be surprised how much you can discuss on this topic without crossing "the line" for most people. I think that if partisanship wasn't as divisive as it currently is than you'd be able to discover a lot more common ground with people.

.... though definitely not online.

[another_sock]

I definitely agree with you on that. Most people are far more likely to have a productive discussion when at least one party goes out of their way to be nuanced and careful in how they word things as well as the discussion not taking place in a performative environment (online or in front of other people.) It is definitely a lesson I have learned over time and through my own biases and misbehavior causing myself unneeded problems that were/are quiet foolish in hindsight.

With that said, all of these topics are not worth getting too into, since even 100% agreement on HBD or esoteric human rights philosophy topics doesn't really accomplish much. I have arrived at a sort of internal understanding that it doesn't matter if most people would disagree with me on this stuff. Also, if I find the common perspective to be ridiculous or stupid that doesn't really matter or entitle me to pressing the issue when it doesn't matter. What genuinely matters is finding common humanity/shared goals that are mutually beneficial and not getting bent out of shape over stuff that doesn't really matter, which in this case is trivia pertaining to generalized (which is practically useless individually) racial outcomes. Hopefully I've explained myself clearly and shown that I don't have any ill will intended towards you or anybody who has different opinions or may even hate or take offense at how I see the world. Have a nice Sunday :)