← Autodidact Archive · Original Dissent · Ed Toner
Thread ID: 4248 | Posts: 13 | Started: 2002-12-30
2002-12-30 15:23 | User Profile
[url=http://www.vdare.com/sailer/wealth_of_nations.htm]http://www.vdare.com/sailer/wealth_of_nations.htm[/url]
Steve Sailer Archive Email a Friend...
Printer Friendly Version...
A Few Thoughts on IQ and the Wealth of Nations By Steve Sailer
I want to contribute some observations about the landmark book IQ and the Wealth of Nations by Richard Lynn of the U. of Ulster and Tatu Vanhanen of the U. of Helsinki. It was the subject of an extremely informative Feb. 27th VDARE.COM review by J. Philippe Rushton, which this is intended to complement.
The book's content is irresistible - at its heart is a table of the average IQ scores of 81 different countries, most drawn from studies published in peer-reviewed scientific journals. The national average IQs range from 107 for Hong Kong to 59 for Equatorial Guinea.
Lynn and Vanhanen benchmarked their IQ results so that Britain is 100. America scores 98 on this scale, and the world average is 90. IQ's are assumed to form a normal probability distribution ("bell curve") with the standard deviation set at 15. Here are a few examples:
Percentile of GDP Per Cap
National Avg. Person Purchasing
Nation Avg. IQ Relative to UK Power Parity
Eq. Guinea 59 0.3% $ 1,817
Nigeria 67 1% $ 795
Barbados 78 7% $ 12,001
Guatemala 79 8% $ 3,505
India 81 10% $ 2,077
Iraq 87 19% $ 3,197
Mexico 87 19% $ 7,704
Argentina 96 39% $ 12,013
US 98 45% $ 29,605
China 100 50% $ 3,105
UK 100 50% $ 20,336
Italy 102 55% $ 20,585
Japan 105 63% $ 23,257
Hong Kong 107 68% $ 20,763
Admit it, you want to know what the rest of the table says! Beyond satisfying sheer curiosity, though, the strong correlation between IQ and the wealth of nations is of world-historical importance. From now on, no public intellectual can seriously claim to be attempting to understand how the world works unless he takes IQ into account.
How much can we trust these IQ results?
As soon as I received the book, I turned to Appendix 1, where Lynn and Vanhanen describe all 168 national IQ studies they've found - an average of just over two per country.
Are the results internally consistent? In other words, when there are multiple studies for a single country, do they tend to give roughly the same answer?
I expected a sizable amount of internal divergence. I spent 18 years in the marketing research industry, so I know how expensive it is to come up with a nationally representative sample. Further, Lynn and Vanhanen use results from quite different IQ tests. They rely most on the non-verbal Raven's Progressive Matrices, which were designed to be used across cultures, even by illiterates. Yet, they also have a lot of results from the Wechsler exams, which are more culture dependent - the Wechsler include a vocabulary subtest, for example. And they report results from other IQ tests, including a few from the oddball Goodenough-Harris Draw-A-Man test. Also, sample sizes vary dramatically, from a few dozen in some obscure countries to 64,000 for one American study. Finally, some studies were of children, others of adults.
This doesn't sound promising. Nevertheless, the results show a high degree of internal consistency. Here are the first eight countries for which they have multiple scores:
Argentina: 93 and 98 Australia: 97, 98, and 99 Austria: 101, 103 Belgium: 99, 103, 98 Brazil: 88, 84, 90, and 85 Bulgaria: 94, 91 China: 100, 92.5, 103.4 Democratic Republic of Congo: 73, 72
That's not bad at all. In fact, leaving aside China, the results are remarkably consistent. There are, of course, a few countries for which different studies came up with quite divergent results, especially Poland, where the two scores Lynn and Vanhanen found were 92 and 106. Still, the correlation among results when there are two or more studies for a country is a striking 0.94.
You shouldn't take every score on faith. The reported IQ for Israel (only 94????!!!) has elicited much criticism. Lynn has replied that he wanted to publish the data as he found it, even if some of it looked implausible. His hope is to encourage further research to resolve seeming anomalies.
The IQ structures of the two giga-countries, China and India, demand more intense study, in part because the future history of the world will hinge in no small part on their endowments of human capital. The demography of India is especially complex due to its caste system, which resembles Jim Crow on steroids and acid. By discouraging intermarriage, caste has subdivided the Indian people into an incredible number of micro-races. In India, according to the dean of population genetics, L.L. Cavalli-Sforza, "The total number of endogamous communities today is around 43,000ââ¬Â¦" We know that some of those communities - such as the Zoroastrian Parsees of Bombay - are exceptionally intelligent.
But we can't say with any confidence what is the long run IQ potential of Indians overall. Their current IQ score (81) is low, especially compared to China (100), the other country with hundreds of millions of poor peasants. Yet, keep in mind just how narrow life in rural India was for so long. In 1952, on the fifth anniversary of independence, the Indian government commissioned a survey to find out if the average Indian villager had heard yet that the British had gone. The study was quietly cancelled when early results showed that the average villager had never heard that the British had ever arrived!
It appears likely that some combination of malnutrition, disease, inbreeding, lack of education, lack of mental stimulation, lack of familiarity with abstract reasoning and so forth can keep people from reaching their genetic potential for IQ. Lynn himself did early studies demonstrating that malnutrition drives down IQ. The co-authors conclude their book by recommending that
"The rich countries' economic aid programs for the poor countries should be continued and some of these should be directed at attempting to increase the intelligence levels of the populations of the poorer countries by improvements in nutrition and the like."
A clear example of how a bad environment can hurt IQ can be seen in the IQ scores for sub-Saharan African countries. They average only around 70. In contrast, African-Americans average about 85. It appears unlikely that African-Americansââ¬â¢ white admixture can account for most of this 15-point gap because they are only around 17%-18% white on average, according to the latest genetic research. (Thus African-Americans white genes probably couldn't account for more than 3 points of the gap between African-Americans and African-Africans.) This suggests that the harshness of life in Africa might be cutting ten points or more off African IQ scores.
Similarly, West Africans are significantly shorter in height than their distant cousins in America, most likely due to malnutrition and infections. The two African-born NBA superstars, Hakeem Olajuwon and Dikembe Mutombo, are both from the wa-benzi [people of the (Mercedes ) Benz]upper class. Only the elite in Africa gets enough food and health care to grow up to be NBA centers.
This also implies that African-Americans might be able to achieve higher IQs too, although the environmental gap between white Americans and black Americans appears to be much smaller than between black Americans and black Africans. As I pointed out in VDARE in 2000, the most promising avenue for improving African-Americans' IQs is by promoting breastfeeding among blacks mothers, who nurse their babies at much lower rates than whites.
In fact, we know that IQ is not completely fixed over time because raw test scores have been rising for decades, about 2 to 3 points per decade. To counteract this, the IQ test-making firms periodically make it harder - in absolute terms - to achieve a score of 100. Lynn was possibly the first scientist to make this phenomenon widely known, although New Zealand political scientist James Flynn has gotten more credit for this recently. And, indeed, Lynn and Vanhanen scrupulously adjust the test results in their book to account for when each test was taken.
While the causes of the Lynn-Flynn Effect remain rather mysterious, it does resemble several other ongoing phenomena. For example, human beings are getting taller, living longer, and having fewer of their babies die during infancy.
One might expect IQ scores to converge as the richest nations experience diminishing marginal returns on improvements in nutrition, health, and education. By way of analogy, consider how, after 1950, average height has not grown as fast in already well-fed America as it has in rapidly developing East Asia.
It's unlikely the Japanese will ever be as tall on average as, say, Lithuanians or Croatians or African-Americans. But the gap has closed. This partial convergence in height is why you now see 6'-2" East Asian baseball pitchers like Hideo Nomo and Chan Ho Park starring in the American big leagues. Last year Wang Zhizhi, 7ââ¬â¢-1ââ¬Â became the first Asian ever to join the NBA.
Perhaps that kind of convergence will happen with IQ scores someday. But the evidence that it is happening now isn't terribly strong. The odd thing about the Lynn-Flynn Effect is that it doesn't seem to have had much impact on comparative rankings of IQ over time. The smart seem to keep on getting smarter.
For instance, one of the best-documented examples of a country with rising raw IQ scores is the Netherlands (current IQ: 102). But even as far back as the 17th Century, the general opinion of mankind was that the Dutch had a lot on the ball.
One potential explanation for why IQ gaps don't seem to be narrowing (for example, the white-black IQ gap in America has been about 15 points for 80 years or so) was offered by Flynn recently. He argued that smart people, because they find cognitive challenges pleasurable, seek out more mentally stimulating environments, which in turn exercise their brains more, making them even smarter. This suggests, for example, that the Dutch will tend to become, say, Internet addicts demanding constant fixes of new information and argument, and thus continue to grow in mental firepower.
While unproven, Flynnââ¬â¢s suggestion seems possible. In absolute terms, it's a virtuous circle. But it seems unlikely to lead to the closing of the relative gap.
Ultimately, though, it is hard to avoid concluding that intellectual and income differences between nations stem to some extent from genetic differences. The results simply cluster too much by race. All the countries populated by Northeast Asians score between 100 and 107. The European-populated lands score between 90 and 102. Southeast Asian nations cluster in the low 90s. The Caucasian countries in North Africa and western Asia score mostly in the 80s. And so forth.
The correlation between national IQ and national income is very high. For the 81 countries, the r is .73 for GDP measured in purchasing power parity terms (which makes poor nations with lots of subsistence farmers look better off than they do in standard measures of just the cash economy). In the social sciences, correlations of 0.2 are said to be "low," 0.4 are "moderate," and 0.6 are "high." So 0.73 is most impressive.
This doesn't mean that a high IQ alone is the cause of a high income. Causation probably runs in both directions, in another virtuous circle. Rich countries tend to produce enough food to stave off malnutrition, for instance, which probably leads to higher IQs, which leads to even higher food production due to more sophisticated farming techniques.
Interestingly, per capita income correlates almost as strongly with a nation's level of economic freedom as it does with its level of intelligence. But that's in large part because economic freedom and IQ correlate with each other - at the high level of 0.63.
Freedom and brains probably contribute to each other. Although there are obvious exceptions, countries with smart workers (and smart leaders) tended to find that the capitalist system generated wealth. So there was less impetus to experiment with command economies than in places where free enterprise wasn't getting the job done.
But it could also be that freedom exercises the brain - West Germans averaged 103 while East Germans scored only 95. My pet theory is that having to make all the choices between products available in a successful capitalist economy stimulates mental development. (I believe this because, as I get older and stupider, I increasingly find shopping to be intellectually exhausting.) But evidence for this is not abundant.
Culture can play a role as well - at the extreme, contrast two countries with almost identical per capita GDPs: Barbados and Argentina (at least before Argentina's recent economic collapse). Don't cry for Argentina, because it is blessed with ample IQ (96). But it's dragged down by a notorious lack of economic and political self-discipline. In contrast, Barbados, despite an average IQ of 78, is one of the most pleasant countries in the 3rd World due to its commitment to maintaining a veddy, veddy English culture.
Still, these two countries are close to being the exceptions that prove the rule. The explanatory power of the "cultural realist" models like Thomas Sowellââ¬â¢s are necessarily more limited than those of "biocultural realist" like Richard Lynn. In general, cultures that emphasize, say, foresight are generally found in countries where people have enough IQ to be foresighted. Maybe people in northern countries tend to have higher IQs because people too unintelligent to effectively prepare for winter tended to get removed from the gene pool.
The IQ-income correlation is not perfect either. But even where it breaks down - most notably with China - IQ helps explain otherwise puzzling developments like the recent headline in the New York Times announcing "Globalization Proves Disappointing."
Globalization, or the fast-paced growth of trade and cross-border investment, has done far less to raise the incomes of the world's poorest people than the leaders had hoped, many officials here say. The vast majority of people living in Africa, Latin America, Central Asia and the Middle East are no better off today than they were in 1989..."
On the other hand, hundreds of billions in private investment have poured into China, which, despite its parasitical ruling caste, has enjoyed strong economic growth.
So what's the story behind this story? Apparently, capital flows to where wages are low but IQs are high - pre-eminently China, where the average IQ is two points higher than the U.S. already and likely to go higher as economic development continues.
In contrast, these other regions (with the exception of Argentina) average IQs of 90 or less, sometimes considerably less.
This is not to disparage free markets - there's no alternative. The point is simply that humans differ greatly in productive capacity, so not everyone benefits from economic competition to the same extent.
The implications for immigration policy are clear.
First, any conceivable level of immigration to America is insufficient to make any difference in the welfare of the billions of foreigners living in poverty.
Second, in a world where the average IQ is 90, America's nepotism-driven immigration system (legal and illegal) will continue to import primarily foreigners with two-digit IQs. These immigrants' skills are typically insufficient to compete with our native IQ elite, but are ample for driving down the wages of our fellow American citizens who were not blessed in the IQ lottery.
The morality of such a system I leave to the reader to decide.
[Steve Sailer is founder of the Human Biodiversity Institute. His website www.iSteve.com features site-exclusive commentaries.]
2002-12-30 21:00 | User Profile
** For instance, one of the best-documented examples of a country with rising raw IQ scores is the Netherlands (current IQ: 102)...
One potential explanation for why IQ gaps don't seem to be narrowing (for example, the white-black IQ gap in America has been about 15 points for 80 years or so) was offered by Flynn recently. He argued that smart people, because they find cognitive challenges pleasurable, seek out more mentally stimulating environments, which in turn exercise their brains more, making them even smarter. This suggests, for example, that the Dutch will tend to become, say, Internet addicts demanding constant fixes of new information and argument, and thus continue to grow in mental firepower...
But it could also be that freedom exercises the brain - West Germans averaged 103 while East Germans scored only 95. My pet theory is that having to make all the choices between products available in a successful capitalist economy stimulates mental development. **
I tried very hard to read some evidence of sarcasm or playfulness in the above points, but finding none, I am forced to conclude that this guy is fully deserving of the denigration bestowed on him by the Linders of this world. Surely the pertinent information is already known by Vdare readers, so whom is the windbag trying to reach?
Yes, Rhinelanders and Bavarians have higher IQââ¬â¢s than Prussians and the abundance of selection in trinkets furnished by a democracy is a plausible explanation. Further, the Dutch can forever augment their brilliance by seeking more information fixes such as may be found on the Internet. :lol:
I sincerely hope that no one here dreams that extra web surfing will boost their ââ¬Åmental firepowerââ¬Â in any meaningful raw or ââ¬Ågââ¬Â type intelligence, other than to furnish more ammunition for verbal and written duels, and turn one into a better read individual (if sufficiently discriminating).
Yes - truly - there is correlation between IQ and wealth on both the individual and the national level. But this has been known for some time and reminding those who already know and may be indifferent is a waste of time. An even bigger waste is attempting to derive some meaning from differences in scores amounting to half of standard deviation or less.
The only thing that an IQ test reveals with absolute certainty is how well one does in comparison with other test-takers. The so-called cultural neutral tests (so-called because they dump the verbal component) are a slightly better assessment tool but certainly not accurate enough to allow for explanation of negligible score differences obtained via tests used in different countries. 1) Obviously there are language differences and logic or verbal reasoning subsets must reflect cultural norms. 2) A combination of logic, visual-spatial and gestalt type exercises can still be trained for. For example, I have no doubt that infant throwing around coloured lego blocks is afforded a superior prep tool (good for a point or two) than if he juggled sticks and rocks.
When it comes to differences in excess of half a SD we can at last say that we may have something. The persistent one SD difference between whites and blacks (the North American variant only with its white admixture) is meaningful but, then again, no test scores are needed to point out the obvious.
Regarding the ostensible Asian superiority, I find it interesting that the Peopleââ¬â¢s Republic of China yields least consistent results (the hidden - not consistently so - leprosy factor I alluded to elsewhere). As for our Japanese/Korean betters, I reflect that long ago I was considered by my peers to be a mathematical genius. Sadly, my peers were seventh graders and my genius was duo entirely to real education I had received elsewhere and one that stressed discipline and drill and accomplished more in less class time.
We have a choice. We can teach meaningful subjects or we can chatter about Sally and her two mommies. We canââ¬â¢t do both. This article is another confirmation of our choice.
**Second, in a world where the average IQ is 90, America's nepotism-driven immigration system (legal and illegal) will continue to import primarily foreigners with two-digit IQs. These immigrants' skills are typically insufficient to compete with our native IQ elite, but are ample for driving down the wages of our fellow American citizens who were not blessed in the IQ lottery.
The morality of such a system I leave to the reader to decide. **
Our fellow citizens have long ago lost all powers pertaining to discernment based on morality. Decisions based on logic are also out of fashion. All that remains is to see whether the administration of pain will stir the masses.
2002-12-30 22:17 | User Profile
Sisyfos, the SD mentioned (15 points) is the SD for whites. For E. Asians and jews, it's less than 9 points. I won't belabor the point, as it has been discussed in other threads ... but the SD is important to take into consideration. For example, the average for E. Asians is usally shown to be around 105 - 107. This means there is a high number of that group clustered around the (their) mean. Same for jews. Whites have the 15 point SD, and have a greater curve of distribution, something no one likes to talk about, because it leads people to realize why white males tend to dominate at the top ends of so many fields, outnumbering their "smarter than whites on average" jewish and Asian counterparts. This is mentioned in A Question of Intelligence by Daniel Seligman, and a bit in Robert Jensen's books. I suspect the SD difference has much to do with the success of populations as well, as the narrow SD's for mestizos, coupled with low averages etc. accounts for the miserable conditions of their countries, while high average IQ's, even though the SD is narrow, accounts for the success of say, the Japanese.
In the end, tests don't measure everything, obviously, and we have to look at real world results. And real world results show that whites and East Asians can develop and maintain civilizations. The rest of the world doesn't seem to have the same capacity.
I would add that the chosenites are doing their level best to destroy the last remaining vestiges of education in the US (as most at OD know anyway), to drive the white IQ to the levels of the turd worlders pouring in across the borders. IQ potential is genetic, but the level reached by each individual is influenced by their environment, etc. The environment is becoming more and more hostile to whites in the US. Visit us here in LA and take a look.
2002-12-31 03:45 | User Profile
Roy Batty,
I know of the SD race differences you speak of and your cited sources are probably as reliable as any. My rambling was intended to make fun of Sailorââ¬â¢s sappy theorizing on the significance of Netherlandsââ¬â¢s national IQ of 102 and the discrepancy between the dismembered German states.
I gather from your postings that you are a programmer so I will employ a suitable analogy to expand my position on intelligence. You will see that we agree on much.
Picture the newborn as a freshly minted PC tower primed for a first-time user who happens to be one and the same. His intellectual potential is genetically determined and unalterable with respect to its chief components. Namely, the type of microprocessor, such a 386 or a P4 (degree of myelin around neurons, or presence of certain gene on a long arm of chromosome 6, etc.); the amount and type of DRAM, such as Edo or Rambus (number of concepts or digits a person can comfortably juggle/hold in their short term memory); and a hard drive, such as 20GB or 80GB (the total sum of a personââ¬â¢s knowledge that is readily accessible). The hardwareââ¬â¢s optimal performance is a constant although some feel that our hard disk is unlimited in its capacity to hold information and that the question is really one of retrieval. Whatever the case may be the newborn arrives with a clean hard drive save the operating system and some pre-installed rudimentary programs.
The kidââ¬â¢s hardware is entirely at the mercy of his parents/educators and whatever additional software they choose to ram in, and unfortunately, by the time junior becomes a certified user of his OS and begins to discriminate, he may find much of his hard drive stuffed with irrelevant drivels and porn-like filth without a defrag and delete option at this disposal.
And away he goes. Every experience good or bad, if meaningful to self, has the potential to enrich his hard disk and render the contents of each lesson available for Random Access Memory retrieval and perusal by the processor. Then, voila, intelligent (maybe) behaviour is observed and perhaps recorded by an IQ test.
The elusive ââ¬Ågââ¬Â is really an attempt to quantify the performance of personââ¬â¢s CPU and RAM while nullifying hard disk poke differences, while conventional IQ tests measure the performance of the entire hardware. Talks of Asians and their meagre five-point advantage are a waste of time. I reason that viable societies do not neglect their childrenââ¬â¢s hard disks, never mind actively engage in their corruption.
The subject of large Aryan standard deviation when compared with other races is a fascinating one, but troubling. Elation over the number of ââ¬Ågeniusesââ¬Â in our ranks must be offset by an identical number of idiots -- the people who along with invaders and hostile aliens constitute the tools with which the international parasites and elite white traders facilitate our destruction. Fortunately, this is a transient circumstance and easily cured via revolutionary means.
More distressing, is my suspicion that the same genes that give rise to the SD statistic are a contributing factor to our inability to act in a racially cohesive manner even when threatened by overtly hostile groups. If so, we have an interesting dilemma in trying to devise a society that reconciles our need for privacy and independence of thought and person while being immune against internal subversion and alien invasion. Oh dear, wherever will find a precedent for just such a society. :D
In strictly biological terms ââ¬Åsuccessââ¬Â is a function of survival, a criteria by which I would be weary to assign such a label to a race that has gone from comprising one third of all homo sapiens on the globe to just under ten percent in a century. Material wealth is fine but not at the expense of social stability and vitality. The cockroach is a decent candidate to be around in a million years for he has history of being successful for an even longer period. Any objective prognosis of the white man must be less cheerful.
BTW, I have seen the cultural wasteland that is LA on several occasions and not just the "scenic" areas. You have my sympathies. Still, it is nothing that a few strategically placed low-yield neutron bombs could not remedy. Please send the leftovers my way after youââ¬â¢ve finished. :angry:
2002-12-31 16:24 | User Profile
There are two distinct Jewish types, the Ashkenazai, and the Sephardic.
Several sources claim the elevated IQ of Ashkenazi Jews is 117, and the average IQ of Sephardic and Oriental Jews remains at the 98 level.
2002-12-31 16:47 | User Profile
**More distressing, is my suspicion that the same genes that give rise to the SD statistic are a contributing factor to our inability to act in a racially cohesive manner even when threatened by overtly hostile groups. **
An insightful observation. White elites tend to be separated by a greater distance from the dregs of the white community and seem prone to engage in race-forming behavior, as discussed by Arthur Keith and others.
2002-12-31 23:33 | User Profile
**White elites tend to be separated by a greater distance from the dregs of the white community and seem prone to engage in race-forming behavior, as discussed by Arthur Keith and others. **
That is part of what I was getting at. The wide SD means that differences are more apparent and individuals of average or above rank may be more inclined to neglect their left side of the bell curve brethrens (not just dregs) and take up with those they deem equal sans regard for ethnicity. In particular, I have in mind persons who rank plus one to two SD (IQs of 115 ââ¬â 130 for our white population), and who supply a large portion of the more dangerous misfits because of their education and social standing. An ideologically driven female with a graduate degree, particularly if raised in a single parent household, is an example, albeit of the popular and cheap variety as the problem is not one of sex. Rather it is case of continuous reinforcement in oneââ¬â¢s superiority (both real and imagined) by the presence of lower scoring individuals. In college the said persons find their cliques and accept risible ideologies they do no perceive as such because they are furnished by professors/colleagues they at last deem equal. Originality and genuine independence of thought is not the stuff of contemporary academia and the temptation such end products have for meddling is overwhelming. Although we cannot be certain that social engineering drafted by persons whose training is grounded in real world experiences would by itself advance our society, it is a forgone conclusion that there would be less of it -- which is always and improvement.
The other part I had mind but alluded to poorly is even more speculative. Whatever else the SD may be tapping, the genes responsible for the wide-ranging scores could contribute to the traits of independence and originality inherent in our race. In other words, lack of social cohesion and originality (creativity if you like) are two halves of the same coin. I stated elsewhere that creativity is not quantifiable and I believe this still. This is merely taking aside the only mental statistic whose profile shows consistent (reliable) difference when compared with other races and musing on what other behaviour is a logical consequence of the same genes.
Generally, the following is true or at least applicable to Aryans (note meaning of the very word) out of proportion with other races: We enjoy privacy and immediate family versus extended cohabitation is the norm. We go hiking and partake in outdoor sports. Individual performance and achievement is emphasized over group results (though this is exaggerated in modern Judeo-capitalist society).
As an example, sometime ago while on a business trip in the interior I met a 19 year-old racial kinsman in the parking lot of a junk food vendor in a hick town straddling the main highway. He was sitting on a bench in the parking lot and playing with a laptop that had a cord hooked up to a receiver type gizmo placed on the roof of his beat-up car. Apart from details concerning his intriguing set up our conversation revealed that he had no real reason for being 400 miles away from home other than that he liked to drive and take in the scenery. He was not between jobs and the distance thus covered was only a fraction of this particular trip. It turned out that he frequently takes such trips over night or on weekends. I was unable to discern any other peculiarities be they social or personal. Apparently, his usage of spare time was the only deviation. No, I have not met the next Tesla, but I have met an original.
Creativity is merely originality fulfilling a purpose. Originality is merely deviation from group norms. The less cohesive the groupââ¬Â¦
Apparently, there is a price to be paid for every desirable attribute. I wonder if ours was too high. :(
2002-12-31 23:54 | User Profile
You're a man after my own heart, Sisyfos. Yeah, I'm aware that the range of distribution allows for a fair share of idiots - but this is where other areas than the ambiguous ideas of intelligence(s) come into play. For the most part, the whites at the lower end of the IQ spectrum are not as violent or impulsive as their compatriots in the black and brown crews. This means that of course other factors are at work. Factors that not too many want to look into, because it leans in the direction of certain "overlays" not being as highly developed, if you know what I mean. Even in JR and SR high school, I can remember being struck by how impulsive and animalistic most of the mestizos and blacks were, while most of the E. Asians and whites were far more thoughtful, shall we say, in their approach to things. Friends of mine that are cops say this is something that no one really talks about, meaning the PREDICTABILITY of what the darker criminals will do in certain situations. They said this goes for crowds of them as well. (Brings us back to "... what brown can do for you," when thinking of crime)
Not doing much programming these days, as the graphics work has me very busy indeed - but while working in programming and software development, I was able to observe how different groups handled things, etc. Much of the imported computer braceros are better off handling systems administration, setup, etc., something more concrete. Guys like rban think I'm anti-Asian, not at all. I just understand that many of them are here under artificial circumstances, at the expense of whites. Different people have their strengths and weaknesses, and creativity does not seem to be an area of intelligence (I tend to believe in some of the theories of multiple intelligences, separating some cognitive abilities from the lump term of "talents") that many Easterners excel in. I think some whites could stand to learn a thing or two from the emphasis that some Asians and the jews put on studying, by the way. BTW - the claim of Ashkenazi IQ now being at 117 is an exaggeration. If you read the books mentioned, and a few others, you'll see that yes indeed, the jews have been fudging their numbers, cooking the books as they do in everything else. Just 10 years ago or so, they were listed at 110, then they've been pushing it upward bit by bit, claiming higher and higher visuospatial scores - the part of the tests that jews score worst on. Jews have always averaged under 100 in the visuospatial, but the last few years, they've somehow managed to push their average up in this part of the tests, but with no real world improvement in areas that rely on this area or traits. Hmmm. The verbal scores are listed higher also, but not as much higher as this sudden improvement in visuospatial.
Yeah, whites do seem to have a problem, at the moment, in acting as a racially cohesive unit. I think some of it is due to decades of brainwashing that has taken advantage of white's inborn trusting nature. That trust was geared toward whites trusting other whites, and unfortunately, on a conscious level, too many whites apply to other groups, especially Jews. We are now seeing the results of this malevolent misuse of white trust and empathy for others. Whites in previous eras were not exposed to the mass brainwashing that has been growing in intensity the last 80 years or so. The stories my own father told me of the Detroit riots in the 40's were an eye opener, I almost had a hard time believing his statements about whites not having a second thought about banding together and putting the blacks back in line (he was a high schooler at the time). Then I saw the pictures (I'll try and dig up the URL). The blacks may have gotten the ball rolling, but the whites went out themselves to put a stop to it. Picture whites these days banding together and chasing a horde of blacks down the street in front of the Hudson bldg. I think whites will be united when the real collapse hits, but it's going to take lots of whites getting killed, at first, to really wake up the bulk of the sheeple. The white farmers in Zimbabwe and S. Africa really have put up some tremendous battles, losing only because they finally ran out of ammo against vastly superior numbers of yard apes. Those numbers just won't be on the side of the blacks and browns in this country, no matter how bad things look now, so yeah, I'll send you some leftovers.
I think whites are more than 10% of the world's population for the moment, but numbers aren't everything, as jews are a much smaller group than that. Yes, their group cohesiveness makes up for lack of numbers, but whites, once TRULY feeling threatened, will straighten out their situation. (BTW - I've never believed the numbers that jews throw around when discussing their population, as I'd bet their numbers are higher than they will admit. Remember, jews used to hide that they were jews during census taking, etc. I doubt this practice has abated - and they are helped by claiming publicly they are a religion, while we know otherwise) Without white money, foreign aid, etc., the rest of the world's population drops rapidly, more precisely, the third world population. Disease, famine, war, tribal disputes, animals, all will take part in trimming the artificially high levels of moronic third worlders we now see. And it will happen, because this country, and a great deal of Europe, won't be in condition to help out, even if they wanted to. Cleaning up after the collapse will be a massive, tough undertaking. In the end, I doubt whites will be so easily misled, at least not for a long time, in "donating" money and such to the turd world. Much of the charity was another element of malevolent forces taking advantage of white empathy for others.
Yeah, like you and MacDonald, I wonder where we'll find a precedent for a society that will protect us, and let us continue the march toward greatness that was derailed by the nation wreckers. I don't think that we are that far off from seeing the entire artificial situation we are now living in topple. I don't mean in 50 years, **I think 20 years at the very outside. ** It could go poorly, but I think that it will end up being the best thing that could happen in terms of white survival. Much pessimism I see at OD and around the country derives not so much from an awareness of what is going on, as much as it is from a real, tangible, palpable depression placed on the shoulder's of whites through malevolent use of the media, manipulation of information. Sure, we read about whites as victims, but the only way to read about whites turning the tables is to read snippets found in pubs like SOLDIER OF FORTUNE, or the mags put out by the NRA. And these stories seem to number in the hundreds every month, but how many people like to read these mags - how many people have been brainwashed to think these pubs are dangerous, right wing extremist, white supremacist rags? ** Those running the media make damn sure that very little positive in terms of whites fighting against the mud comprised hordes of criminals gets out there for mass consumption. ** I try to always keep that in mind, because all the doom and gloom, all whites giving up right off the bat against blacks and browns is NOT what I've seen in real life growing up in La La land amongst the savages.
2003-01-01 00:27 | User Profile
**The white farmers in Zimbabwe and S. Africa really have put up some tremendous battles, losing only because they finally ran out of ammo against vastly superior numbers **
Don't count out the Boere. 3 million, automatic weapons, and meaner that mountain lion piss.
2003-01-01 00:41 | User Profile
**I don't think that we are that far off from seeing the entire artificial situation we are now living in topple. I don't mean in 50 years, I think 20 years at the very outside. **
Yep. Twenty years or less.
BTW - I've never believed the numbers that jews throw around when discussing their population, as I'd bet their numbers are higher than they will admit. Remember, jews used to hide that they were jews during census taking, etc. I doubt this practice has abated - and they are helped by claiming publicly they are a religion, while we know otherwise
I agree completely. Latin America is crawling with Jews who don't generally acknowledge their Jewishness, for instance.
2003-01-01 01:11 | User Profile
Originally posted by Oliver Cromwell@Jan 1 2003, 00:27 ** > **The white farmers in Zimbabwe and S. Africa really have put up some tremendous battles, losing only because they finally ran out of ammo against vastly superior numbers **
Don't count out the Boere. 3 million, automatic weapons, and meaner that mountain lion piss. **
If the Boers tip things in the right direction, I wonder what type of Zionist/NWO b.s. the news media will be pushing to try and get the US / UN involved to "fix things". Hopefully, this country will be too deep in fixing its own internal battles, and down the line we'll see the blacks and browns return to their grass and/or mud huts.
2003-01-01 04:00 | User Profile
The exchange above on IQ relates so well to Ygg's article on The Bell Curve that I thought I'd post an excerpt. The link is at bottom. Some very good thoughts from the posters here as well.
Culture Wars #1: Talking in Code
by Yggdrasil
For the first 266 pages, the authors confine their discussion of the effects of low IQ to whites only, and limit the statistics on social pathology to whites (a very important clue about the real message of this book). They place particular emphasis on the advent of high levels of white illegitimacy, implying that white neighborhoods will soon become as dangerous and crime ridden as black neighborhoods.
The authors do not want readers with short attention spans to miss the graphic descriptions of white, working class neighborhoods full of illegitimacy and sullen angry skin-heads.
The next clue is a graphic on page 46, which clearly shows that while American Universities have been doing a much better job at rounding up intelligent people and getting them college degrees, only slightly more than half those with IQs above 115 get college degrees, and a clear majority of those above 130 do not attend college, remaining scattered in the those decaying neighborhoods.
Now why do you suppose the authors would print such an important graphic that tends to undermine their thesis? The graphic shows that while there may be fewer intelligent people back in those decaying neighborhoods, nevertheless, a clear majority of those with IQs at the truly gifted and genius levels remain back there with the decay!
People with IQs above 130 process information differently from the rest of society. They care a lot less about status. They are self-taught. They will act upon ideas, regardless of what others think. They have far less patience with propaganda than people with IQs below 130. People with IQs between 110 and 120 are far more conscious of status, manners and place. They tend to be a powerful force for social stability.
Now I will ask you; could this graphic have something to do with the real message of this book?
Might this vision of decaying white neighborhoods with too few 115 IQ people for stability but with more than half of our geniuses be disquieting to anyone out there?
Is the real message that there are more than enough very smart people left in those decaying white neighborhoods to cause lots of trouble?
Is the "code" becoming clearer?
So who, exactly is this "elite" that the authors are warning of impending danger? The book never says, although there are hints.
The book carefully notes that Asians have IQs that are 5 points, on average, ahead of whites. Jews have IQs that are 12 points above whites.
The authors spend 500 pages demonstrating that those people in our society with the highest IQs get all the best jobs, make all the money, and end up with all the power.
So let us go ahead and break the code! Here is the authors' real message:
How is it going to look to the European-American majority when most of the good jobs, most of the wealth and most of the power are held by Jews, Asians and other high IQ imports?
Worse yet, how is this concentration of wealth and power in minority hands going to look when these minorities impose racial quotas, attack majority religions and culture, and do everything in their power to weaken the majority, and to accelerate the pace of social decay?
** Read it all:**
[url=http://www.ddc.net/ygg/ms/ms-01.htm]http://www.ddc.net/ygg/ms/ms-01.htm[/url]
2003-01-01 12:42 | User Profile
Just remember that Jews only owe their allegiance to the state of Israel and the expansion of a zionist state. Jews will undermine all host countries that they now are residing in and do everything possible to make the state of Israel the most powerful on earth. The goal and dream of every Jew is world domination through thier ability to intimidate or liquidate any and all adversaries.
The sooner the state of Israel is nuked out of existence, the better chance for mankinds survival and the escape of perpetual enslavement by Jews.