The Unz Review - Mobile
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>
 TeasersRussian Reaction Blog
/
Race/Ethnicity

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New Reply
🔊 Listen RSS

Results of PIRLS 2016 (4th Graders) have just come out (h/t Polish Perspective).

The official website is somewhat of a pain to navigate, and there doesn’t appear to be any single master report, but fortunately they left their root directory unblocked so you can just look at all the charts and Excel tables here:

http://timssandpirls.bc.edu/pirls2016/international-results/wp-content/uploads/structure/PIRLS/

pirls-2016-achievement

Unlike PISA, which sets 500 as the OECD mean (members at the time the test was started) – which is also conveniently almost the same as British average IQ (Greenwich mean) – TIMSS/PIRLS sets it as the blank international average. According to my back of the envelope calculation, the mean OECD value would be around 543. The S.D. is the usual 100 points.

Anyhow, Russia tops the chart, getting an IQ equivalent score of almost 106 according to the scale above, higher even than Singapore. Ireland, Finland, Poland around 103. United States 101. The Netherlands, Australia, Czechia, and Canada are around 100. Georgia 92. Azerbaijan at 89. Saudi Arabia (and Iran) at 83, with the other Gulf Arab states clustering around that level too. Morocco 72. Egypt 68. South Africa 66. Moscow gets an amazing score of 110, a difference of around 4.5 points between the capital and Russia as a whole (in PISA it’s closer to 7 points).

That said, I wouldn’t draw too many conclusions from this. First, TIMSS/PIRLS is more of a specifically academic test than an IQ test. Second, these are fourth graders, so even small differences in average age at testing should translate into bigger differences in academic performance (and in fact Russian kids are some of the oldest here, average age of 10.8 years; Poles are almost as old at 10.7 years; Finns were at 10.8; typical age was in the low 10.0′s; the bad performing Georgians were some of the very youngest at 9.7 years). Third, sample sizes are lower than for PISA.

Here are the historical scores of this round’s participants.

PIRLS-2016 (4thG) 2001 2006 2011 2016
Australia 527 544
Austria 538 529 541
Azerbaijan 462 470
Belgium (Flemish) 547 525
Belgium (French) 500 506 497
Bulgaria 550 547 532 552
Canada 548 543
Chinese Taipei 535 553 559
Czech Republic 537 545 543
Denmark 546 554 547
England 553 539 552 559
Finland 568 566
France 525 522 520 511
Georgia 471 488 488
Germany 539 548 541 537
Hong Kong SAR 528 564 571 569
Hungary 543 551 539 554
Iran, Islamic Rep. of 414 421 457 428
Ireland 552 567
Israel 541 530
Italy 541 551 541 548
Latvia 545 541 558
Lithuania 543 537 528 550
Malta 457 452
Morocco 310 358
Netherlands 554 547 546 545
New Zealand 529 532 531 523
Northern Ireland 558 565
Norway (4) 499 498 507 517
Oman 391 418
Portugal 541 528
Qatar 425 442
Russian Federation 528 565 568 581
Saudi Arabia 430 430
Singapore 528 558 567 576
Slovak Republic 518 531 535 535
Slovenia 502 522 530 542
South Africa 323 320
Spain 513 513 528
Sweden 561 549 542 555
Trinidad and Tobago 436 471 479
United Arab Emirates 439 450
United States 542 540 556 549
Benchmarkers
Ontario, Canada 548 555 552 544
Quebec, Canada 537 533 538 547
Eng/Afr/Zulu – RSA (5) 350 406
Andalusia, Spain 515 525
Abu Dhabi, UAE 424 414
Dubai, UAE 476 515

.

 
• Category: Race/Ethnicity • Tags: Education, IQ 
🔊 Listen RSS

My article on the history and present reality of Russian IQ has just been published at Sputnik i Pogrom, with its trademark beautiful graphics:

The pièce de résistance:

map-russia-iq

Without undue exaggeration, I believe this is the most comprehensive popular article on this topic in the Russian language.

I will write a summary of it for The Unz Review in due course.

 
• Category: Race/Ethnicity • Tags: Human Biodiversity, IQ, Russia 
🔊 Listen RSS

The Franco-German media organization Arte recently produced a documentary about the decline of global average IQ.

What courage in the Current Year! What resolve! Not only do they treat IQ as a legitimate concept, but are even willing to seriously contemplate whether it is declining, and what could be done about it.

Could the tide really be turning in the struggle against the cultural Left’s media monopoly in Yurop?

Don’t pop open the champagne just yet.

What actually happened is described in an article by Sputnik: Fällt IQ der Menschheit doch nicht wegen „Umwelthormonen“? – Was in Arte-Doku fehlte (via Google Translate):

Human intelligence is diminishing. This frightening message Arte published on 7 November as part of a documentary. The reason given by several researchers in the program is that they have chemicals that have a negative effect on the child’s brain development, especially in the womb. The message is clear: it’s bad for humanity. But the way out of misery is also clearly outlined: to strengthen environmental awareness, remove harmful substances from the environment and not let them get into them – and we are on the right path again.

What is not known: Arte had previously also conducted an interview with the anthropologist Edward Dutton, who has been researching for years in this area and teaches at the University in Oulu, Finland. But the explanation that he had provided for the documentation was replaced by more and more expert opinions, which focused solely on environmental influences. Finally, Dutton’s attitude had been excluded from the documentation as a “huge side note”. What was that explanation? And why did she have no place in the documentation?

woodley-effect-illustratedEdward Dutton’s explanation centered on the Woodley Effect – the basic idea that whereas genotypic IQ has declined since the 19th century in much of the industrialized world, due to dysgenic fertility patterns, it was – until recently – more than compensated for by environmental gains (see illustration right, also via Sputnik).

For Dutton, “Intelligence is 80 percent inheritable.” In practice, a strong natural selection used to favor intelligent people: those who were more intelligent became more prosperous within a society, and those who were more prosperous were more successful.

“Until the industrial revolution, the 50 richer percent of the population in every generation had 40 percent more surviving children than the poorer 50 percent. This means that intelligence has increased in every generation. That went from the Middle Ages to about 1800. By 1800, the intelligence was so high that it gave this massive breakthrough with the many inventions, the industrial revolution,” said Dutton.

With the onset of industrial revolution , however, the situation of the people and thus also the selection changed: “It came to things like vaccinations and lowered the child mortality on and on,” explains Dutton. In addition, contraceptives have been developed and the following applies: “People who are smarter tend to use more contraceptives because they think ahead and act less impulsively. You can plan better,” says Dutton.

So while poor families were surviving more and more children, the wealthy families produced fewer and fewer descendants. This tendency was reinforced by feminism: smarter women spent more and more time on education, thereby producing fewer or no children. And the religions also played their role, with their request: be fruitful and multiply. As a result, religious families would tend to put more children into the world. And for the researcher, it is clear that religiosity goes hand in hand with low intelligence.

Arte cut all of that hateful extremism out, in effect wasting a day of Dutton’s life. They left in just the comments on declining IQ, but attributed it all to muh environment.

At Arte, it was chemicals blamed for breaking down intelligence. But Dutton’s objection to this statement is: “If environmental chemicals really were the cause, then the decline in IQ would not have begun until the mid-nineties.” Because the chemicals accumulated in the environment since about 1907 and not just since the 90s. However, the data showed that the negative Flynn effect did not start until this time.

I would furthermore note that most pollution indicators peaked in the 1970s in the First World, and are now much lower than they were back then – whereas the decline in IQ only started becoming increasingly evident in the 2000s.

Initially, the Arte documentation should revolve around the genetic explanation approach. But in the end just this approach was omitted. “I do not know if they were afraid to present my explanation,” Dutton says. But he already had similar experiences with the experts of his scientific work: “There was always a review that said: Yes, that’s excellent, publish it. And another reviewer would say: That’s terrible, that’s basically nothing other than eugenics, and you should not publish this. “In one case, even the two reviewers would have been convinced of the work, but then the publisher had put on the brake,” because the readers would not like that “.

In the leftist universe, IQ is a social construct.

Except when you can use it to advance the Green agenda or save retarded felons from the death penalty.

Then it becomes very real.

However, since some fake news is faker than others, it is Sputnik that is getting barred from advertising on Twitter, being listed as a foreign agent in the US, and having its press accreditation revoked in Congress. Meanwhile, the beliefs espoused by Arte and the censorship practiced by its “journalists” remains universally handshakeworthy.

 
• Category: Race/Ethnicity • Tags: Fake News, IQ, Propaganda 
🔊 Listen RSS

PEW has just made three different projections of the Islamic percentage of Europe’s population in 2050.

map-europe-future-muslim-demographics

Map of Muslim share of each European country today and in 2015 (High scenario).

Here are the assumptions behind each of them:

  1. Low: All migration into Europe stops from 2016. Muslims still increase from 4.9% to 7.4% by 2050 due to higher fertility and younger average age.
  2. Medium: Refugee flows of 2014-2016 stop, but “regular” (non-asylum) immigration continues at current levels. Muslims increase to 11.2% of the population.
  3. High: Refugee flows of 2014-2016 continue at the same level, with the same composition (i.e. mostly Muslim) in addition to regular immigration. Muslims increase to 14.0% of the European population.

Here is a summary:

europe-future-demographics

Takes:

1. I think actual policy will be between #2 and #3, i.e. #2.5. (Recall when Merkel said multiculturalism was a failure? What a change half a decade makes).

2. There’s some evidence that Muslims are undercounted in Europe. For instance, French Muslims have remained unchanged at around 8%-10% of the population since the early 2000s.

french-muslims-undercounted

And there’s real quantitative evidence behind this, as Emil Kirkegaard points out:

There’s a lot to do, but one thing I’ve been thinking of is showing that Muslim populations are actually growing a lot faster than many claim. The reason they claim these low levels of growth is because they rely on official statistics and these data tend to convert 2nd and later generation people into the ‘native’ categories, thus effectively hiding them. However, Muslims are nice enough to use distinctive names, so one can count the number of persons with such names over time and this will show a more realistic growth rate. Preliminary results for Denmark indicate an official stats-based growth rate of 2.5%, whereas first names indicate 5.1%. That’s not a small difference. The growth rate of Danish natives is something like -16% per generation which comes out at about -0.5% per year. You don’t have to be a genius to see how 5.1% vs. -0.5% work out in a few decades.

3. This obviously doesn’t include non-Muslim immigration (see Sailer’s most important graph in the world).

4. Doesn’t take into account conversion. Anecdotally, many African immigrants to the UK are apparently into Islam; conversely, Muslims in Western Europe tend to become more secular and liberal (though paradoxically, Islamic radicalization also increases).

5. Invest in Eastern Poland.

 
• Category: Race/Ethnicity • Tags: Demographics, Eurabia, Europe, Islam 
🔊 Listen RSS

PAPER REVIEW


This study compared the pace of life in large cities from 31 countries around the world. Three indicators of pace of life were observed: average walking speed in downtown locations, the speed with which postal clerks completed a simple request (work speed), and the accuracy of public clocks.

Hilarious that the country with the most accurate clocks was… Switzerland.

pace-of-life-1999

Chalk up one more victory for stereotypes.

Unsurprisingly there’s an evident correlation with measures of future time orientation in general.

 
• Category: Race/Ethnicity • Tags: Sociology, Switzerland 
🔊 Listen RSS

Just came back from a workshop on “Intelligence and Culture as Factors of National Competitiveness” organized by the Institute of Psychology RAS.

ipras-iq-russia

The most interesting presentation was by Konstantin Sugonyev, which may be published in a forthcoming paper. It concerned the following test:

https://recrut.mil.ru/career/soldiering/test.htm

This is a test on the Russian Defense Ministry’s website, where potential contract soldiers are offered to take an IQ test (30 questions, testing verbal, numerical, logical), and a couple of personality tests, to assess their suitability for military service (unfortunately, it doesn’t seem to give you your score, only a pass or a fail).

Over the years 2012-2017, almost 250,000 Russians have done this test, possibly making this the largest source of regional psychometric data on Russia apart from the Unified State Exams (regional data about them is carefully secreted away).

The results:

Cohorts

While people born between 1973 and 1987 performed at a stable 19.5-20/30, the post-1988 period saw a steady improvement towards an average score of 21/30.

S.D. is around 6 points.

Whether this is due to a Flynn effect or ageing isn’t clear.

ipras-regions-russia

Regions

Only the top/bottom 5 regions were displayed, but they were exactly as expected. The difference between the best performers and worst performers was almost 1 S.D.

Best regions:

  1. Saint-Petersburg
  2. Yaroslavl
  3. Moscow
  4. Kirov oblast
  5. Chuvashia

Worst regions:

  1. Ingushetia
  2. Tyva
  3. Chechnya
  4. Dagestan
  5. Kabardino-Balkaria

So nice when new investigations continue building on stereotypes, especially n=250,000 investigations.

Note that I have long thought Yaroslavl might have a high IQ.

It had the highest literacy rate of any non-capital Russian region in 1897:

Incidentally, I am not surprised to see Yaroslavl being the top non-Baltic/non-capital Russian region by literacy rate in 1897. It struck me as by far the cleanest and most civilized provincial Russian town on the Golden Ring when I visited it in 2002 (a time when Russia was still shaking off the hangover of the Soviet collapse). Curiously enough, it also hosted one of the most vigorous insurrections against the Bolshevik regime in central Russia. Although it was not one of the regions covered by PISA, I would not be surprised if Yaroslavl oblast was to get a 100-102 score on it should it be carried out there (and as would be implied by the correlation curve).

They also had the biggest percentage of Russian peasant families with passbooks (needed for savings accounts) in 1897 and 1913.

“Patriotism”

The major disadvantage of this test that it selects for some degree of Internet proficiency (so also a mild sort of IQ test). No easy way to correct for this.

The major advantage of it is that you can also get a good idea of the “patriotism” of different Russian regions by the percentage of their population who do these tests.

Most patriotic regions:

  1. Sevastopol
  2. Altay
  3. Buryatia
  4. Murmansk
  5. Amur
  6. Zabaykal
  7. Adygea
  8. Kaliningrad
  9. Tyva

Least patriotic regions:

  1. Chechnya
  2. Ingushetia
  3. Tyumen
  4. Sakha (Yakutia)
  5. Tatarstan
  6. Khanty-Mansiysk
  7. Yamalo-Nenets
  8. Dagestan
  9. Karachay-Cherkassia

Note that Sevastopol was first, even though Crimea only joined up with Russia in 2014, i.e. about 40% of the way through this “experiment.”

The patriotism of the Buryats and Tuvans is also noted. This is not all that surprising – recall that Buryats had the highest percentage rate of military deaths in WW2 alongside Russians.

In contrast, DICh – especially Chechnya and Ingushetia – are distinguished by their lack of patriotism.

Saint-Petersburg was more patriotic than Moscow, as well as being more intelligent.

Results were robust according to a variety of statistical checks.

Several other people, including myself, made presentations.

ipras-davydov

One, by Denis Davydov, was about a 19 region (n=4010) survey of 18-50 year old Russians with Raven’s tests carried out in 2005-2007. (For some reason, its detailed results remain unpublished – at the least, they don’t appear in Lynn’s or Becker’s database).

They found no correlation with income, though I suspect the problem there is low sample + no adjustment for oil income.

There was also a negative correlation with homicides, suicides, and alcohol consumption, which is of course unusual. My pet theory is that this is due to the Finno-Ugric admixture in northern Russia making them both more intelligent and more prone to alcohol abuse, with most homicides/suicides in Russia themselves being a function of alcohol abuse.

 
• Category: Race/Ethnicity • Tags: IQ, Moscow, Patriotism, Psychometrics, Russia, The AK 
🔊 Listen RSS

Reuters poll:

We set out to find out which of these cities are safe for women – and which need to do more to ensure women are not at risk of sexual violence and harassment and harmful cultural practices and have access to healthcare, finance and education.

In each of the 19 megacities, we contacted 20 experts focused on women’s issues including academics, non-government organisation workers, healthcare staff, policy-makers, and social commentators.

Here is what they found:

Safety from “cultural practices”

reuters-sexual-violence

Safety from sexual violence

reuters-cultural-ractices

In an earlier post I noted that Moscow is the last and only megacity in the world where Europeans remain a solid majority.

 
• Category: Race/Ethnicity • Tags: Moscow, Rape, Women 
🔊 Listen RSS

moscow-2049

Eurasian Federation, 2049.

Half a year ago I wrote about the absurd legal case against Dmitry Bobrov, a Russian nationalist who was sentenced for using extremist terminology such as “the great Russian people.”

No, I am not even exaggerating, here is the formal conclusion of the court’s “linguistics expert,” Galina Melnik (who is also a professor at Saint Petersburg State University and a published author in American scientific journals):

Linguistic terms are used that constitute evidence of propaganda of the exclusivity of the white race and ethnic Russians. For instance, there are epithets that positively characterize ethnic Russians – “The great Russian people,” “Russians are the most prospective white people,” “planetary significance,” as well as phrases, that negatively characterize other races – “Non-white peoples,” “races of a second order”; various exaggerations; writing words with capital letters so as to give a specific meaning to concepts – White people, Russians, Russian Popular Socialists, Russian Socialism [AK: The names of ethnicities are uncapitalized according to standard Russian grammar]; phrases such as that some peoples “have a phase of obscuration, degradation, and disorientation,” while others are experiencing a “steady growth in the national consciousness.”

I assure you that this sounds as deranged in Russian as it does in English. Apparently, the phrase “great Russian people” is propaganda of exclusivity, the phrase “white people” demeans non-whites, and violating the standard grammatical rules of capitalization in the Russian languages constitutes the most outrageous sort of extremism. American SJWs are nervously smoking in the corner.

The only possibly questionable phrase in the quoted paragraph is “races of a second order.” However, in the article that got Dmitry Bobrov into trouble, “Racial Doctrine of the National Social Initiative” (which is blocked in Russia), it is explicitly stated that the phrase refers to subraces, as opposed to implying a racial hierarchy.

The combination of evolutionary and historical processes led to the fact that now a large White race consists of several subraces, or races of the second order.

Evidently, Galina Melnik did not feel the need to give this vital piece of context in her summary.

This Orwellianism echoes the arguments of another contributing “linguistics expert,” Rezeda Salahutdinova (who has a degree in the joke subject of “Scientific Communism” from Kazan University):

In particular, she declared that the phrase “white race” just by itself fans the flames of hatred, because “they don’t talk like that in modern science” and that the expression “non-white people” is extremist, since it attacks the national dignity of other peoples.

It is heard to describe this theater of the absurd under the guise of a law court. When she was asked, “What specific racial, national, ethnic, social, or other groups were insulted?”, she replied: “All those groups, that are not identified with whites.”

Even though Dmitry Bobrov, representing himself, absolutely destroyed the arguments of the prosecutors’ pocket linguistic experts – court transcripts show even the judge becoming annoyed with their incompetence – he still ended up getting sentenced to 2 years in a penal colony.

In the event, Bobrov went missing on the day the verdict was set to be announced and is now considered to be on the run. Hopefully he is safe in a foreign country.

And to top it all off, citizens of Country 282 have to listen to lectures from Hillary Clinton about how Putler heads the global white supremacist movement and read Washington Post op-eds by affirmative action Kremlinologists on how Russia “disparages black people” and “centers the Russian slav.”

Anyhow.

This Kafkaevschina finally motivated me to run a guide on avoiding Russia’s hate speech laws at my Russian language blog: Руководство по Избежанию 282

Here is a summary in English.

1. Strictly avoid any Nazi symbology.

That includes “ironic Nazism” of the sort that the Alt Right likes to play around with.

But all rules have exceptions.

If you are sufficiently close to the Kremlin you may well write articles along the lines of “Hitler did nothing wrong” (at least up until 1939). You can also organize conferences for foreign Neo-Nazis freaks, such as the International Russian Conservative Forum in 2015; some Galactic Brain in the Kremlin even came up with the idea of inviting German Neo-Nazi Udo Voigt, with his entirely non-ironic demands to return Kaliningrad to Germany.

2. Don’t insult Caucasians.

All countries have differential racial hierarchies for the permissibility of insulting different racial and ethnic groups.

handshakeworthy-russophobia

Handshakeworthy anti-Russian racism from /r/politics.

For instance, ex-Director of National Intelligence James Clapper thought nothing of saying that Russians are “almost genetically driven to co-opt, penetrate, gain favor, whatever, which is a typical Russian technique” in a meeting with NBC journalists – one wonders how long somebody who said anything remotely similar about Jews would last in his job (actually we don’t have to wonder at all). Clearly, Jews, Blacks, the gay race, and the fat race are at the top, while white rednecks and Russians are at the bottom.

In Russia, there is a similar Great Chain of Racial Privilege.

One Russian nationalist, Konstantin Krylov, got convicted under Article 282 for his considered and entirely mild-mannered position on the issue of federal transfers to the Caucasus: “It it time to do away with this strange economic system.” In contrast, Holocaust denial only became illegal in 2014, and authors such as Israel Shamir with a reputation for anti-Semitism haven’t encountered significant problems (unlike his French language publisher, who was faced with a ban of the book he had translated and the prospect of three months in jail). On the other hand, you can’t relax too much: The Stalinist singer Alexander Kharchikov had one of his songs, consisting entirely of folk sayings about Jews, banned for extremism in 2012.

In fairness, Russia does also jail the most cartoonishly extreme Russophobes, such as Boris Stomakhin, who called for terrorist actions against Russian civilians to fight against “Chechen genocide.” In the West and amongst Russian liberals, Stomakhin is considered a prisoner of consciousness, because in their world, supporting terrorism against Russians is far more handshakeworthy than waxing lyrical about “the great Russian people.”

3. Don’t be an oppositionist.

This is so obvious that it hardly needs an explication – but that doesn’t make it into a rock-solid defense either.

For instance, just a few weeks ago, the police searched the offices of the Institute of Russian Civilization, a bookshop that focuses on republishing historical works – not Mein Kampf or Last Will of the Russian Fascist, but entirely mainstream texts in the Russian conservative and theological tradition, many of whom Putin has himself cited in his speeches (e.g. Berdyaev, Danilevsky, Ilyin, Karamzin, Pobedonostsev, Soloviev, Trubetzkoy, Khomyakov).

Apart from blocking the oppositionist Sputnik i Pogrom, Russian censorship authority also blocks the website of the Russian Imperial Movement, even though it is Orthodox-monarchic and entirely non-racialist in character, and even went to the trouble of advancing Russia’s geopolitical goals by sending a batallion to the Donbass in 2014.

4. You can’t be pro-Ukrainian.

You can if you’re a liberal – in that case, that’s actually expected of you – but you can’t if you’re a nationalist, especially with respect to the Crimea, for which there is a “separatism” clause on the lawbooks.

5. Don’t appear on law enforcement’s radar.

Possibly what really did Bobrov in is that he has a previous (and justified) conviction from back in the 2000s, when he headed the Schulz-88 Neo-Nazi gang that beat up immigrants. The current conviction is unjust, not only because this time round he literally did nothing wrong, but because the state is essentially sending violent Neo-Nazis a message: Regardless of whether your active is legal or illegal, violence or non-violent, we are still going to lock you up the same.

But let’s assume you’re not already “marked” by dint of previous legal troubles.

Here’s something you should bear in mind: The various Russian silovik agencies are not staffed by especially bright or conscientious people – in the case of Roskomnadzor or “Center E” (police anti-extremism division), their priorities are to fulfill their monthly quotas for finding “extremists” and get their bonuses for doing so. As such, they spend much of their time in the rich and easily accessible hunting grounds of VKontakte, which remains Russia’s most popular social network. As such, it would do well for “politicals” to limit their VKontakte posting to cat memes, while maintaining the bulk of their “meaningful” presence on Facebook and Twitter.

very-extremist-material

NSFR (Not Safe For Russia): What got Andrey Voronin in trouble just a few days ago.

Incidentally, this applies likewise for Westerners. Since nationalism is an almost purely “export” product so far as the Putlerreich is concerned, The Daily Stormer has been able to maintain an uninterrupted presence on VKontakte – even as Russians on the platform get in legal trouble for reposting historical illustrations that happen to feature a swastika.

6. Pay your mite to ZOG.

Liberals have an admirable tendency to stick up for each other, thanks to their higher IQs and levels of trust.

Nationalists are the opposite.

Whereas a liberal in Bobrov’s position would have gotten no end of attention from (predominantly liberal) human rights organizations, hardly any nationalist website anybody apart from Sputnik i Pogrom even bothered to highlight his case.

This problem is a very hard one and frankly the dearth of human capital is the single most crippling problem for conservatives and nationalists well nigh everywhere.

It is ironic that if anybody is going to seriously represent and advocate for you if you get in trouble, it will likely be a liberal with an idealistic commitment to free speech.

Therefore, the least that you can do is to pay at least symbolic fealty to ZOG – for instance, by affirming your commitment to free speech and human rights – so that when you do get sent off to the Gulag, the liberal sphere – which has at least ten times as much media influence as the nationalists – can’t just dismiss you by saying that this sort of world is what you were fighting for anyway.

7. Don’t listen to all this advice.

Doing so will just make you a mindless Kremlin propagandist. They’re a dime dozen anyway, and you probably won’t get rich even if you stand out, since all the most lucrative positions have long been carved up anyway.

Besides, as the host of our ROGPR podcast Kirill Nesterov acerbically noted, at the rate the wheels are coming off the Kremlin’s prosecution machine, it won’t be long before people start going to jail for justifying the return of the Crimea – and we’re not even entirely sure that this will happen after Putin loses power.

 
• Category: Race/Ethnicity • Tags: Freedom of Speech, Hate Speech, Law, Russia 
🔊 Listen RSS

map-dysgenic-decline-estimates

What the commenter Cicerone wrote in response to the study about dysgenic decline in Germany.

The findings come rather surprizing to me and I am always sceptical of using these low N studies to make out trends.

Using fertility by education data from the Wittgenstein database, my estimate for the intrinsic IQ loss over the next generation is 1.0. That of course doesn’t take migration into account and only incorporates differences in fertility rates by education classes. Contrary to the past, these fertility rates don’t differ that much anymore. University educated women in Germany have a TFR of 1.3, vs. 1.45 for medium educated women and 1.6 for the least educated.

Fertility driven IQ losses per generation for other countries:

Belgium and Finland: 0 (the best scoring countries in the world, no dysgenic fertility here, rest of Scandinavia not far behind)

Canada: -0.4
Indonesia: -0.6 (best scoring developing country)
Japan: -0.8
UK: -1.0
Germany: -1.0
Italy: -1.2
China: -1.3
France: -1.3 (France has a very fertile underclass compared to the UK or Germany)
South Korea: -1.4
Singapore: -1.4 (the only country openly following eugenic fertility policies, with dismal results it seems)
Australia: -1.6
USA: -1.7
Russia: -1.8
Poland: -2.2
Romania: -2.9 (worst scoring European country, everyone knows why)
India: -3.2
Mexico: -3.3
Nigeria: -3.4
Iran: -3.6
Turkey: -3.6
Brazil: -3.9 (worst scoring major country, educated women in Brazil have extremely few children (1.2 on average))
Afghanistan: -5.1 (worst scoring country on earth)

 
• Category: Race/Ethnicity • Tags: Dysgenic, Psychometrics 
🔊 Listen RSS

I posted about German regional academic performance back in 2016.

The evidence seemed to indicate that German IQ was fairly uniform across Germany, once you took the immigrants out.

However, soon afterwards I got the following curious email from one Carolin:

I stumbled upon a few studies (one done by the German military, when there was still a mandatory draft), that put the regional differences at much higher values than a few IQ points. Basically, there were many regions, where the AVERAGE recruit was in the best/worst 10%, which would dwarf even the black-white-gap.

You can read the report here (I can’t read German so you’ll have to tell me the details): http://www.nachdenkseiten.de/upload/pdf/130218_weissintelligenzverteilung_laender_deutschland.pdf

Map of conscript test performance according to a 1998 study:

germany-conscript-iq-1998

What I take to be some test administered in schools:

germany-regional-education-performance

They also reference another school test carried out by Bertelsmann and published in the Deutsche Lernatlas around 2011:

 

germany-regional-iq-2011

.

 
• Category: Race/Ethnicity • Tags: Germany, IQ, Psychometrics 
🔊 Listen RSS
 

While I was writing an article about Russian IQ for Sputnik and Pogrom the past few days, I noticed this amazing statistic from the 2010 Census.

Percentage of the population with a postgrad degree:

1. Ingushetia: 1.59%
2. Moscow: 1.12%

90. Chechnya: 0.32%

Ingushetia is Chechnya’s quieter, lower T, slyer brother. They are part of the same Ichkerian nation. But instead of going head on against a nation that outnumbered them a hundredfold in the 1990s, they manipulated the situation to extract very generous monetary concessions from the federal center while their kinfolk withered under Russian bombs.

Today, they are the region with Russia’s highest rate of unemployment, the lowest Internet penetration, the lowest patents per capita. They are 85% subsidized by other Russian regions, more so than any other region. Back during the Soviet period, there were only 90 scientists for every 100,000 Ingush, versus 573 for the Russians.

Even so, this region somehow manages to have the the highest rate of people with postgrad degrees in Russia.

Say what you will about ol’ Ramzan, but at least he keeps his peeps in check. Based Chechen men need no diploma mill degrees.

 
• Category: Race/Ethnicity • Tags: Academia, Chechnya, Corruption, Russia 
🔊 Listen RSS
 

The magazine Profile.ru in 2015 compiled a list of Russia’s most subsidized regions.

It went exactly as you’d expect.

# Russian Region %dep. Majority Group
1 Ingushetia 85.0% Caucasian
2 Chechnya 81.4% Caucasian
3 Crimea 80.0% Russian
4 Tyva 77.1% Other Minority
5 Sevastopol 75.0% Russian
6 Altay 73.5% Russian
7 Dagestan 70.0% Caucasian
8 Karachaevo-Cherkessia 68.5% Caucasian
9 Kamchatka 64.7% Russian
10 Jewish Autonomous oblast 60.3% Russian
11 North Ossetia 56.3% Caucasian
12 Kabardino-Balkaria 56.2% Caucasian
13 Kalmykia 54.0% Other Minority
14 Amur 52.9% Russian
15 Buryatia 51.8% Russian

Of the top 15 regions, where federal subsidies make up more than 50% of the local budget, six were ethnic minority republics of the Caucasus. The top two were Ingushetia and Chechnya, which also have Russia’s highest unemployment rates by far.

Only seven of the most subsidized regions were majority Russian. However, Crimea and Sevastopol have a high level of subsidies for the very understandable reason that they are under Ukrainian blockade and international sanctions, and currently undergoing economic integration with Russia; while the Altay Republic and Buryatia both have sizable non-Russian minorities. Kamchatka krai, the Jewish Autonomous oblast, and Amur oblast are the only strong majority Russian regions that source a majority of their incomes from federal subsidies.

So statistically, Russian nationalists are not wrong when they say that Russians are “feeding the Caucasus.”

 
• Category: Race/Ethnicity • Tags: Caucasus, Finance, Russia 
🔊 Listen RSS
 

Surviving political repressions in Communist regimes is one of those rare problems that don’t seem to be at all g loaded.

When someone like spandrell talks of “IQ shredders” he refers to the role of modern cities as fertility vortices for society’s best and brightest. But in the 20th century those shredders could be all too literal. One can’t help but shudder reading through the lists of scientists and intellectuals judicially murdered under Stalin in the 1930-40s. (The Old Bolsheviks at least usually had the minimal decency to allow them to emigrate).

This “aristocide” was replicated on higher IQ groups further down the social ladder, including the liquidation (to varying extents) of the kulaks, the priesthood, and the national intelligentsias of the countries that fell under Red dominion.

To what extent did this unravel the gains of centuries spent under the Malthusian grindstone? What was the cost in terms of national IQ?

The only people who ask such questions tend to be, almost by definition, anti-Communists (self-explanatory) and far right (by dint of their indulgence of the hereditary theory of IQ).

Therefore, unsurprisingly, their answers tend to be extremely pessimistic.

Fortunately, James Flynn has Done The Math on Cambodia, the country where Communist bloodlust far surpassed that of any other by about an order of magnitude.

Rulers can cause mass exterminations that have dysgenic effects no matter what their intent. Between 1973 and 1976, Pol Pot killed millions of Cambodians (Kampucheans). His criteria were purely political but discriminated to some degree against those with superior genes for IQ. He tried to eliminate urban dwellers (mildly superior because people abandon impoverished rural areas when they find they can be viable elsewhere) and anyone with “elite” qualifications (superior because access to education is to some degree competitive favoring those with greater talent). Those who wore spectacles were used as a criterion: they needed spectacles for a literate occupation and they had the money to afford them. He also destroyed all bicycles.

How much did Pol Pot do to lower the mean IQ of the Cambodian people? Sunic (2009) puts Croatians at a mean IQ of 90. He asks whether the communist massacre of hundreds of thousands of the Croat middle classes in 1945 was the answer. He accuses communists in general of “aristocide” in the sense that much killing, whatever the rationale, was motivated by hatred for those more successful and intelligent than oneself. He generalizes (p. 3/5) that communist aristicides have crippled the whole of Eastern Europe: “A large number of intelligent people were simply wiped out and could not pass their genes on to their offspring.” None of these nations suffered massacres anything like the scale of Cambodia. It is hardly surprising that there has been public speculation about how much Cambodia’s average IQ was reduced (Learning Diary, 2009).

This question can be settled by a few calculations. Pol Pot killed somewhere between 1.7 and 2.5 million people. I will put this at 2.1 million or 26% of Cambodia’s 8 million people (Kiernan, 2002). If he had done it using IQ tests, eliminating the top 26% would have lowered the IQ of the remaining parents by 6.4 IQ points and a good portion of this deficit would have been handed down to their children. However, as we have seen, he in fact used occupation as his criterion.

We do not know the correlation between the occupational status of the parent and the IQ of their (no longer to be born) children, but in a semirural society it would be below that of the United States. At that time in the United States, it was 0.300 (Flynn, 2000b). If you eliminated the top 26% of the US population by occupation, the mean IQ of their children would drop by only 1.92 points. Moreover, Pol Pot did not really use a pure criterion of occupational status. For example, a lot of his henchmen doing the killing were intellectuals (Pol Pot attended the Sorbonne, although he did flunk all of his courses). When he tried to eliminate everyone who lived in the capital city of Phnom Penh, this included many in humble occupations. The genetic capital of the Cambodian people was lowered by not much more than an IQ point. The people were hardly stripped of intellectual talent. …

Pol Pot provides not only an estimate of the quality of Cambodia’s genes but also something more. He sets a probable limit on the dysgenic consequences of even the most horrific events of world history. …

Sunic (2009, p. 2/5) speculates about negative selection of genes for other behavioral traits: “Did communism … give birth to a unique
subspecies of people predisposed to communism?” For example, did it produce people who felt comfortable only with little personal freedom? I may be excused for not addressing that question.

One can rejoinder that the impact must have been heavier on individuals who were more effective at converting their intelligence to scientific/artistic eminence (“The nail that sticks out gets hammered down” is perhaps nowhere truer than under totalitarian Communist regimes).

And it seems likely that this was further amplified by the “family responsibility” and guilt-by-association principles that many Communist regimes operated under, meaning that the consequences of repressions would reverberate most strongly against the clusters of interest groups and blood relations that surrounded its prime targets; that is, against those people who most helped society cultivate eminence, and who had the highest chances of becoming eminent themselves.

Nonetheless, even those caveats aside, since even the Khmer Rouge couldn’t have cardinally dented Cambodia’s national IQ, it certainly couldn’t have done anything substantial to Russia, where the scale of Stalinist aristocide didn’t exceed 1% of the Soviet population. (The Soviet famines, with far higher numbers of victims, would if anything have been marginally eugenic; one wonders if some bold Communist will ever try to tout this argument?).

In the Communist world as elsewhere, the main eugenic/dysgenic driver must have been fertility patterns.

 
• Category: Race/Ethnicity • Tags: Cambodia, Communism, Dysgenic, IQ, Soviet Union 
🔊 Listen RSS
 

So the other day ACLU Tweeted its intention to secure the existence of civil liberties and a future for free speech.

aclu-future-for-free-speech

Ironic joking and SJW meltdowns over photos of White children with American miniature flags aside, the politically correct peeps at ACLU (who apologized for their social justice faux pas immediately afterwards) were actually far more to the point than they could have possibly imagined.

Opinion polls have shown that in the US, it is the representatives of the demographic group on ACLU’s photo that tend to have the greatest respect for freedom of speech.

We can check this by throwing up a few graphs from the GSS.

gss-racist-speech

Only amongst Whites and Jews does a clear majority support allowing free speech for racists.

But maybe this is just White privilege at work here.

Maybe the 50% of Blacks who also support free speech for racists are victims of false consciousness foisted on them by structural White supremacy.

Unfortunately for Leftists, non-Whites don’t really much care for their pet causes either.

gss-antireligious-speech

Whites support freedom of speech for anti-religionists more than anyone else.

Okay, maybe this is just the neckbeard Dawkins fan club venting their Islamophobia?

gss-homo-speech

Oh no, this isn’t looking at all good now.

gss-commie-speech

Communist speech is the only category in which a non-White minority (Blacks) has a marginally higher respect for free speech than Whites.

And one supposes Nixon might have had a point about Jewish spies. :)

gss-radical-islamist-speech

When I was in Washington D.C. in 2013 there was some crazed Islamist ranting in front of the White House.

muslim-preacher-white-house

Though Whites are not exactly thrilled with this behavior, they seem to more or less tolerate it.

But just like the possibility of small government, this will probably cease to be the case in the increasingly vibrant and diverse America of the future.

And wheresoever goes the US so goes the world.

That is because the US remains a genuinely exceptional country when it comes to free speech.

The very fact that it is Internet lynch mobs and tech corporations – the collective Society 282 – that enforces social tabooes reminds one that this task is accomplished through laws and prisons in virtually every other country on the planet.

map-pew-free-speech-poll

Once the First Amendment is annulled in the US, or riddled with multifarious exceptions to the point where it is but an empty formality, the Enlightenment ideal of absolute free speech vanishes everywhere else in the world.

 
• Category: Race/Ethnicity • Tags: Free Speech, United States 
🔊 Listen RSS
 

musinov-moscow

Credit: Ivan Musinov.

There is this strange dichotomy with respect to Russia.

The Western elites like Hillary Clinton and many Russophile right-wingers believe that it is a paragon of fascist/conservative and white supremacist/traditionalist values, respectively. (The main difference being that the former think that this is Bad, while the latter think it’s Good).

On the other side, the more fervently anti-Putin Russian nationalists and /pol/ shitposters are in agreement that the Kremlin are just pursuing a Russian version of multiculturalism and open borders.

The Myth of Mosque-O

The central exhibit in this has become the Cathedral Mosque, and photos of the 100,000-200,000 strong crowds congregating around it on Islamic holidays.

Even Steve Sailer has written about it. Our Ukrainian friend AP never tires of reminding us about it in the comments.

pol-moscow-mosque

Here is a slightly more relevant statistic: There are a grand total of four mosques in Moscow, and this is one of them.

Moreover, it was originally built in 1904, then controversially demolished, and rebuilt in a project largely financed by a private Dagestani tycoon, Suleiman Kerimov.

The other Moscow mosques include the historical Old Mosque (constructed in 1823), the Moscow Memorial Mosque (more of a war monument than a place of worship), and one that is part of a complex of religious buildings that also includes a Buddhist stuppa. The latter two were both constructed in the 1990s.

This is in comparison to Moscow’s 1110 churches, a number which is increasing by about 5% yearly.

Two of them are Catholic churches. What is the ratio between the Muslim and Catholic population in Moscow? 20:1? 100:1?

To add an international perspective, the “UK Mosque Searcher” lists 427 mosques in London (many of which are funded by Saudis).

It should therefore be immediately obvious as to why the streets around the Cathedral Mosque are jam-packed with worshippers. Unlike in London, or Paris, or Berlin… they pretty much have nowhere else to go!

It is also probably – hopefully – as good a proof as any that Russia’s elites are not focused on a population replacement agenda, as is evidently the case in Western Europe. If mosques aren’t being constructed, then presumably, there aren’t any intentions to keep many Muslims around in the long-term.

What I am saying is that there is rhetoric and there are facts and statistics, and the former is no substitute for the latter if you want to be taken seriously outside your own narrow ideological circles.

The Myth of Moskvabad

Here is another, in many ways stunning, statistic: Moscow is the last and only megacity in the world where Europeans remain a solid majority.

According to the 2010 Census, 92% of Muscovites are Russians, rising to 94% amongst infants. For all intents and purposes these figures go up to more than 95% if you only count Slavs and other non-Central Asian and non-Caucasian minorities. Now yes, to be sure, if you go outside, then 85%-90% of the faces you encounter will have a Slavic appearance. In 2014, the Federal Migration Service estimated there were 1.4 million foreign workers in the city, of whom 400,000 were there illegally. Bearing in mind that the city’s official 12 million strong population is overwhelmingly Russian,

Rounding that up to two million – while bearing in mind that a significant percentage of those are Ukrainians and Moldovans – and adding them to the city’s official population of 12 million, which is overwhelmingly Russian, and you get a figure of about 14 million people. That is, about 85% European.

In comparison, London is 60% white according to the latest UK census. The French (in)famously don’t collect such data, but Paris is probably similar. Non-Hispanic whites constitute 45% of New Yorkers and 29% of Los Angelinos.

Most importantly with respect to the post-1960s European experience, fertility amongst these Gastarbeiters appears to be very low. There’s a simple explanation why this must be the case: There are 8x as many Uzbek and Tajik male citizens in Russia as women in the 17-25 year age group, and 4-5x as many in the 25-45 year age group. Men cannot bear children, as it generally acknowledged outside the SJWsphere.

gastarbeiters-age-sex-stats

There’s another scrap of circumstantial but pretty strong evidence to support this. In Europe, we are constantly inundated with news of how Mohammed has become the most popular’s baby boys’ names in the latest European city of church spires and historical taverns. Yet according to Moscow official statistics, it was the 80th most popular name in the city in January 2015, with only ten Mohammeds being born (actually some “ethnic” names were more popular: There were 26 Amirs in 51st position, and 16 Umars in 66th position). The most popular “ethnic” girl’s name was in 36th position, with 34 Aminas being born.

This is not to say things are ideal, and I don’t think I ever have. London, Paris, and Berlin did not become the way they are now over a few years, but over several decades. Not even the Social Democrats of Germany ever planned for Gastarbeiters to stay permanently. There is no guarantee that the same will not happen in Russia.

Yet even so, it’s important to keep things in perspective.

na-korable-polden

The Last White Megacity

Here’s a stunning implication: Moscow is now the last and only megacity in the world where Europeans remain a solid majority.

In contrast, Japan has three 99% Japanese conurbations, out of 127 million people. China has more than a dozen. Korea has one.

This is a very sad state of affairs for the European world in general, but it might well be a relative boon for Russia itself. Economists have long identified increasing returns to city size for economic wealth and technological productivity, and psychometricians have long noticed that big cities tend to attract the cognitive elites, which further turbocharges economic dynamism. Russia is the only country within “Greater Europe” to retain a megacity with a solidly predominant white population and its associated benefits of a high average IQ.

To be sure, there are plenty of megacities in the world. Most are now in the lower IQ Third World, and thus inconsequential from a “smart fractions”-central perspective, but a good twenty or so are in high-IQ East Asia, a civilization that has thus far managed to escape the “baizuo” disease of mass immigration and cultural decomposition.

However, considering East Asians’ relative lack of curiosity, it is not completely beyond the realm of the possible that Moscow might become a genuinely one of a kind cultural and scientific hub as the 21st century goes on.

 
• Category: Race/Ethnicity • Tags: Demographics, Eurabia, Moscow, Russia 
🔊 Listen RSS
 

Non-West European nationalists don’t tend to like Charles Murray’s Human Accomplishment (HA) database.

For instance, as relates to Russia: Why is Marconi propped over Popov? Where is Lodygin? Where is Bulgakov!?

Let’s answer that very last question.

It would certainly be very useful to see Murray’s assessments of the most eminent Russians correlates with Russian assessments. If the correlations are low, then perhaps the critics are correct about his alleged Western Eurocentrism. If, however, the correlations are high, though, then he should probably be taken seriously. Especially if these correlations are attained in more “subjective” fields such as literature, which are separated by a language barrier (e.g. Pushkin is far harder to translate well into English than Dostoevsky) and 70 years of fraught international relations.

Fortunately, I came across a list of the most influential Russian writers as tallied by the Russian Book Chamber (RBC), the national bibliographic agency.

This allows us to compare Murray’s list to one compiled by a major institutional authority.

A few years ago, the RBC tallied the relative shares of publications accruing to literary authors from 1917-2012. Here is the correlation with the HA:

murray-rbc-eminence-russian-writers

And yet despite all these problems, there is a remarkable r=0.79 agreement between the two lists. Including on Bulgakov’s absence from both!

Yes, there are many things that I myself find strange about both lists. The absence of Kuprin and Esenin from HA is somewhat unexpected. The absence of figures such as Nabokov, Sholokhov, Babel, Ehrenberg, and Zamyatin from the RBC list is even weirder, as is, for that matter, Nabokov’s very low rating on HA. (The absence of Derzhavin and Lomonosov from the RBC list would be strange, but RBC does state that it only only covers 19th-early 20th century writers). And the absence of Bulgakov from both lists is genuinely absurd.

Even so, the numbers are what they are, and so far as I’m concerned, it confirms the legitimacy of Murray’s assessments with respect to Russian accomplishment.

***

HA & RBC Lists Compared

Author RBC HA
A.S. Pushkin 10.29% 30.05
L.N. Tolstoy 7.93% 40.53
M. Gorky 7.05% 18.82
A.P. Chekhov 5.48% 24.01
A.N. Tolstoy 4.15% 7.30
N.V. Gogol 4.08% 26.03
I.S. Turgenev 4.00% 24.30
M.Y. Lermontov 3.58% 12.48
F.M. Dostoevsky 3.10% 40.20
N.A. Nekrasov 2.34% 5.84
I.A. Bunin 2.29% 5.01
V.V. Mayakovsky 2.23% 16.29
V.G. Korolenko 1.64% 3.15
A.A. Blok 1.57% 11.31
N.S. Leskov 1.49% 7.30
A.N. Ostrovsky 1.42% 5.34
V.Y. Bryusov 1.40% 4.93
B.L. Pasternak 1.39% 11.76
K.D. Balmont 1.18% 2.48
F.I. Tyutchev 1.15% 3.38
A.A. Fet 1.11% 2.71
I.A. Goncharov 1.11% 7.95
A.A. Akhmatova 1.07% 4.73
A. Bely (Bugayev) 1.00% 7.70
L.N. Andreev 0.86% 5.42
F.K. Sologub 0.86% 3.15
V.M. Garshin 0.83% 2.01
A.K. Tolstoy 0.83% 2.38
A.S. Griboedov 0.80% 4.82
E.A. Baratynskyi 0.66% 1.93
O.E. Mandelstam 0.65% 2.29
A.I. Herzen 0.65% 5.46
N.G. Chernyshevsky 0.58% 4.43
M.E. Saltykov-Shchedrin 0.44% 6.12
D.S. Merezhkovsky 0.43% 6.15
A.V. Koltsov 0.41% 2.49
A.F. Pisemsky 0.13% 2.28

Appear Only in HA

Author HA
Karamzin, Nikolai 6.52
Ehrenberg, Ilya 5.00
Babel, Isaak 4.33
Derzhavin, Gavril 4.25
Lomonosov, Mikhail 4.19
Zoshchenko, Mikhail 4.11
Lenz, Jakob 4.07
Sholokhov, Mikhail 4.04
Krylov, Ivan 3.94
Fedin, Konstantine 3.77
Zamyatin, Yevgeny 3.51
Fonvizin, Denis 3.09
Aksakov, Sergey 2.91
Nabokov, Vladimir 2.68
Radishchev, Alexander 2.42
Katayev, Valentin 2.31
Olesha, Yuri 1.52

Appear Only in RBC

Author RBC
A.I. Kuprin 2.42%
D.N. Mamin-Sibiryak 2.01%
S.A. Esenin 1.24%
V.A. Zhukovsky 1.00%
I.F. Annensky 0.88%
N.S. Gumilev 0.88%
P.P. Ershov 0.87%
M.I. Tsvetaeva 0.81%
V.F. Odoevsky 0.79%
I.S. Shmelev 0.71%
Z.N. Gippius 0.66%
V.I. Ivanov 0.64%
D.I. Harms 0.62%
M.A. Kuzmin 0.60%
M.A. Voloshin 0.52%
A.A. Pogorelsky 0.47%
N.G. Garin-Mikhailovsky 0.44%
V.F. Khodasevich 0.38%
A.M. Remizov 0.35%
G.I. Uspensky 0.35%
D.V. Grigorovich 0.35%
P.A. Vyazemsky 0.28%
K.N. Batiushkov 0.28%
A.I. Vvedensky 0.28%
G.V. Ivanov 0.27%
I. Severyanin 0.27%
O.N. Klyuyev 0.24%
B.K. Zaitsev 0.20%
V. Khlebnikov 0.20%
A.V. Druzhinin 0.17%
A.B. Mariengof 0.14%
R. Ivnev 0.13%
N.G. Pomyalovsky 0.12%

.

 
• Category: Race/Ethnicity • Tags: Human Achievement, Literature, Russia 
🔊 Listen RSS
 

Another Uraza Bayram.

Countless photos showing zillions of Muslims filling up Moskvabad’s streets. More gleeful shitposts from /pol/ to svidomy forums about imminent Russabia.

moscow-uraza-bayram-2017

But you don’t have to be a particularly big fan of open borders with Central Asia to be able to look at statistics.

In a series of recent posts, Russian blogger Ivan Vladimirov tallied the percentage of newborn ethnic Russians relative to the percentage of Russians as a whole per region.

This is a solid approach, because while counting immigrants is hard – estimates of illegal migrants in Russia vary all over the place – doing so for newborns is far easier. Ultimately the vast majority of births happen in hospitals, and it is difficult to imagine a vast Uzbek/Tajik underground baby boom taking place, not least because of the banal fact that the vast majority of Gastarbeiters are males.

Anyhow, bearing in mind that newborns today reflect society in 30-50 years’ time, the figures are actually quite encouraging (from an assimilationist perspective).

acer120-map-russia-minorities-change

The percentage of ethnic Russians is increasing across almost the entirety of core Russia.

Here is another set of maps from blogger n_avdeev.

The first one shows the percentage of ethnic Russians by region:

avdeev-map-russia-minorities

The second shows the percentage of ethnic Russians younger than 5 years by region (note that green numbers represent an increase, and red numbers a decrease, relative to the total percentage of ethnic Russians):

avdeev-map-russia-young-minorities

You can actually see the majority Russian areas getting even more Russian. This even includes Moscow and Saint-Petersburg, despite them being Gastarbeiter magnets.

The Chuvash, Udmurts, Karels, Komi, Mari, and Mordva are steadily becoming Russians. The Republic of Karelia, once a separate Soviet Socialist republic from 1940-1956, has gone from being 57% Russian in 1926 to 82% by 2010 (and 94% amongst infants), while the comically named Jewish autonomous oblast has seen its Jews decline from 16% of the population in 1939 to 1% by 2010, and becoming 93% Russian overall (98% amongst infants).

Unsurprisingly, the Ukrainians and Belorussians are becoming Russians at an even faster pace, as are as the few remaining Jews and Germans.

Only the Tatars and Bashkirs are holding their own in their ethnic republics, though outside them, they too are dissolving into Russiandom.

However, in regions already mostly populated by highly fertile, underdeveloped, and lower IQ ethnic minorities, such as the North Caucasus (esp. “DICh”, i.e. Dagestan, Ingushetia, Chechnya) and some Siberian regions such as Tyva and the Sakha Republic, the share of ethnic Russians is falling, often at a precipitous rate.

If Russia has an equivalent to US states like Arizona and Texas, where the original White American stock is steadily being outpaced by demographic expansionism from more virile southern ethnicities, it is Stavropol krai (81% total vs. 77% infants), Astrakhan oblast (67% vs. 64%), and the Altai republic (57% vs. 51%).

yuray-map-european-census However, these are literally the only major exceptions to a pattern where ethnic Russians are stable or increasing in the parts of the country where they already constitute a solid majority. In this sense, Russia is far better off not just relative to the US, where non-Hispanic Whites now total 62% of the population and account for less than 50% of new births since 2011, but also many West European countries that have gone from being ~99% to 85%-90% White in the space of just a couple of generations (see Mark Yuray’s map to the right).

Since ethnic Russians don’t have particularly high fertility rates (though they are not significantly lower than those of non-DICh and Mongoloid Siberian minorities), the primary vehicle through which Russianizationization occurs must happen on account of differential rates of intermarriage with Russians (in such marriages, children typically adopt the dominant Russian culture).

Another blogger, Oleg Lisovsky, has compiled figures on intermarriage for both men and women.

Around 70% of Ukrainians and Belorussians marry Russians, so assimilation there is particularly fast, considering also the barely indistinguishable nature of those cultures.

These figures are considerably lower amongst the Christian Caucasian (Armenians, Georgians) and Finno-Ugric (20%-50%) nationalities, and extremely low amongst the Tyvans and DICh peoples (<5%).

On the basis of this data, Vladimirov also compiled a map of the intermarriage coefficient for Russia’s regions. Unfortunately, the scale is not specified, but one can make out the general pattern:

  • High levels of intermarriage in the regions where there are substantial ethnic minorities amongst large Russian majorities;
  • Moderate levels of intermarriage in regions with near homogenous Russian populations and predominant ethnic minorities;
  • Extremely low levels of intermarriage in DICh (who barely even intermarry amongst themselves).

acer120-map-russia-intermarriage-coefficient

One notes that this applies even to small population groups within DICh, such as the Laks, of whom there are 161,000 in Dagestan and 179,000 in Russia according to the 2010 census. Male Laks marry female Laks 85% of the time and ethnic Russians 5% of the time (my grandfather is a very rare case); female Laks marry male Laks 88% of the time and ethnic Russians a mere 1.2% of the time.

Three are three main lessons to take away from this:

(1) Russia is simply not undergoing population replacement/displacement on the American or West European model. There is, to be sure, considerable… métissage, but it is primarily happening between genetically and psychometrically similar peoples – and in many cases, this is something that has been happening for centuries anyway (e.g. north Russians are basically admixed Slavs and Finno-Ugrics anyway).

(2) The DICh regions are a lost cause in terms of assimilation, but in all fairness, they probably always were. They are very distinct from the rest of Russia, and understandably so, since like Central Asia, they were only annexed in the middle of the 19th century. They are also absurdly ethnocentric in terms of marriage and reproduction.

During the course of the next century, it seems inevitable that Russians will fade away from the other ethnic minority Caucasian republics, such as Karachaevo-Cherkessia, Kabardino-Balkaria, and North Ossetia, as well as Kalmykia and Tyva.

The only places in the North Caucasus where a demographic “struggle” of sorts is occuring with respect to traditional Russian majority regions are Stavropol krai and Astrakhan oblast, but even there, the scale of the problem is decidedly smaller than in America’s borderlands with Mexico’s or Western Europe’s inner cities.

(3) The system of ethno-republics, apart from feeding corrupt regional oligarchies, also seems to act as a break on assimilation. The prime historical example is of course the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic, which foistered a Ukrainian identity upon Malorussians within its territories – including Novorossiya, where they were essentially just settlers – whereas the Malorussians of the Russian Kuban have almost all became Russians since the 1920s by dint of being in the RSFSR. However, as the demographic statistics above make it clear, the same trends are playing out, to some extent, even within the Russian Federation proper.

This is why most Russian nationalists have tended to dislike federalism and ethnic minority republics, and urge a return to the imperial system of guberniyas.

 
• Category: Race/Ethnicity • Tags: Demographics, Minorities, Russia 
🔊 Listen RSS
 

Who is really the greatest Russian?

Okay, formally, the Levada survey that put Stalin in the lead asked about the “of all times and places.” However, in practice – and this isn’t just limited to Russia – most people interpret it as “who is your greatest countryman.”

In my opinion, to be considered “great,” you must be both eminent (i.e. frequently mentioned in encyclopedias and reference works) and to have positively impacted the world, or at least your own country. Few would call Hitler great, though he was almost surely the most influential/eminent Austrian (and one of the most influential Germans).

So perhaps the least controversial approach is to just tally the Great People (scientists, artists, inventors, etc).

Charles Murray’s Human Accomplishment database is not the worst place to start.

To qualify, the persons below either had to have been born in Russia, and at least either worked in Russia, or had Slavic ethnicity. (Otherwise the most influential Russian would have been Georg Cantor, whose connections to Russia were fleeting at best; his Jewish parents left Saint-Petersburg with him for Germany when he was 11 years old).

It’s morbidly funny to note that Lenin and Stalin, respectively ranked #4 and #1 by Russians, were instrumental in getting a noticeable percentage of the people on this list – e.g. Zworykin, Sikorsky, Gamow – to permanently leave Russia, and convincing Dobzhansky to stay there (a good thing for him considering the Lysenkoism of the 1930s).

# Name Index Inventory Birth Death Birth Work Ethnos
1 Stravinsky, Igor 45.42 Music.West 1882 1971 Russia Russia Slavic
2 Tolstoy, Leo 40.53 Lit.West 1828 1910 Russia Russia Slavic
3 Dostoevsky, Fyodor 40.20 Lit.West 1821 1881 Russia Russia Slavic
4 Kandinsky, Vasily 30.62 Art.West 1866 1944 Russia Germany Slavic
5 Pushkin, Alexander 30.05 Lit.West 1799 1837 Russia Russia Slavic
6 Gogol, Nikolay 26.03 Lit.West 1809 1852 Russia Russia Slavic
7 Mendeleyev, Dmitry 25.03 Chem 1834 1907 Russia Russia Slavic
8 Turgenev, Ivan 24.30 Lit.West 1818 1853 Russia Russia Slavic
9 Chekhov, Anton 24.01 Lit.West 1860 1904 Russia Russia Slavic
10 Zworykin, Vladimir 21.79 Tech 1889 1982 Russia USA Slavic
11 Tchaikovsky, Piotr 20.48 Music.West 1840 1893 Russia Russia Slavic
12 Lobachevsky, Nikolay 19.41 Math 1792 1856 Russia Russia Slavic
13 Popov, Aleksandr 18.86 Tech 1859 1906 Russia Russia Slavic
14 Gorky, Maxim 18.82 Lit.West 1868 1936 Russia Russia Slavic
15 Ostwald, Wilhelm 18.31 Chem 1853 1932 Russia Germany Slavic
16 Sikorsky, Igor 16.89 Tech 1889 1972 Russia USA Slavic
17 Mayakovsky, Vladimir 16.29 Lit.West 1894 1930 Russia Russia Slavic
18 Mussorgsky , Modest 15.61 Music.West 1839 1881 Russia Russia Slavic
19 Rimsky-Korsakov, Nikolay 15.33 Music.West 1844 1908 Russia Russia Slavic
20 Malevich, Kasimir 14.63 Art.West 1878 1935 Russia Russia Slavic
21 Lenz, Emil 14.39 Eart 1804 1865 Russia Russia Slavic
22 Tsvet, Mikhail 14.27 Biol 1872 1919 Russia Russia Slavic
23 Dobzhansky, Theodosius 13.99 Biol 1900 1975 Russia USA Slavic
24 Lomonosov, Mikhail 12.82 Astr 1711 1765 Russia Russia Slavic
25 Lermontov, Mikhail 12.48 Lit.West 1814 1841 Russia Russia Scots
26 Tatlin, Vladimir 11.94 Art.West 1885 1953 Russia Russia Slavic
27 Ivanovsky, Dmitri 11.80 Biol 1864 1920 Russia Russia Slavic
28 Pasternak, Boris 11.76 Lit.West 1890 1960 Russia Russia Jewish
29 Shostakovich, Dmitri 11.55 Music.West 1906 1975 Russia Russia Slavic
30 Prokofiev, Sergei 11.52 Music.West 1891 1953 Russia Russia Slavic
31 Blok, Aleksandr 11.31 Lit.West 1880 1921 Russia Russia Slavic
32 Korolev, Sergei 10.54 Tech 1907 1966 Russia Russia Slavic
33 Claus, Carl 10.06 Medi 1796 1864 Russia Russia Germanic
34 Tamm, Igor 9.44 Phys 1895 1971 Russia Russia Jewish
35 Tsiolkovsky, Konstantin 8.51 Tech 1857 1935 Russia Russia Slavic
36 Kovalevskaya, Sonya 8.34 Math 1850 1891 Russia Sweden Slavic
37 Borodin, Alexander 8.18 Music.West 1833 1887 Russia Russia Slavic
38 Scriabin, Alexander 8.15 Music.West 1872 1915 Russia Russia Slavic
39 Oparin, Alexander 8.05 Biol 1894 1980 Russia Russia Slavic
40 Veksler, Vladimir 7.99 Phys 1907 1966 Russia Russia Slavic
41 Glinka, Mikhail 7.96 Music.West 1804 1857 Russia Russia Slavic
42 Goncharov, Ivan 7.95 Lit.West 1812 1891 Russia Russia Slavic
43 Bely, Andrei (Bugayev) 7.70 Lit.West 1880 1934 Russia Russia Slavic
44 Frank, Ilya 7.60 Phys 1908 1990 Russia Russia Jewish
45 Friedmann, Alexander 7.54 Phys 1888 1925 Russia Russia Slavic
46 Markov, Andrei 7.33 Math 1856 1922 Russia Russia Slavic
47 Tolstoy, Alexey N. 7.30 Lit.West 1882 1945 Russia Russia Slavic
48 Leskov, Nikolay 7.30 Lit.West 1831 1895 Russia Russia Slavic
49 Cherenkov, Pavel 7.27 Phys 1904 1990 Russia Russia Slavic
50 Rachmaninov, Sergei 7.13 Music.West 1873 1943 Russia Russia Slavic
51 Gelfond, Aleksander 6.82 Math 1906 1968 Russia Russia Jewish
52 Lebedev, Pyotr 6.62 Phys 1866 1912 Russia Russia Slavic
53 Karamzin, Nikolai 6.52 Lit.West 1766 1826 Russia Russia Slavic
54 Merezhkovski, Dmitri 6.15 Lit.West 1865 1941 Russia Russia Slavic
55 Saltykov, Mikhail (N. Shchedrin) 6.12 Lit.West 1826 1892 Russia Russia Slavic
56 Nekrasov, Nikolay 5.84 Lit.West 1821 1877 Russia Russia Slavic
57 Balakirev, Mily 5.80 Music.West 1837 1910 Russia Russia Slavic
58 Herzen, Aleksandr 5.46 Lit.West 1812 1870 Russia Russia Slavic
59 Andreyev, Leonid 5.42 Lit.West 1871 1919 Russia Russia Slavic
60 Ostrovsky, Aleksandr 5.34 Lit.West 1823 1885 Russia Russia Slavic
61 Ambartsumian, Viktor 5.34 Astr 1908 1996 Russia Russia Slavic
62 Bunin, Ivan 5.01 Lit.West 1870 1953 Russia Russia Slavic
63 Ehrenberg, Ilya 5.00 Lit.West 1891 1967 Russia Russia Jewish
64 Gamow, George 4.96 Phys 1904 1968 Russia USA Slavic
65 Bryussov, Valery 4.93 Lit.West 1873 1924 Russia Russia Slavic
66 Rodchenko, Alexander 4.87 Art.West 1891 1956 Russia Russia Slavic
67 Gabo, Naum 4.82 Art.West 1890 1977 Russia Russia Slavic
68 Griboyedov, Alexander 4.82 Lit.West 1795 1829 Russia Russia Slavic
69 Kapitsa, Pyotr 4.77 Phys 1894 1984 Russia Russia Jewish
70 Akhmatova, Anna 4.73 Lit.West 1889 1966 Russia Russia Slavic
71 Goncharova, Natalia 4.72 Art.West 1881 1962 Russia Russia Slavic
72 Lenin, Vladimir 4.65 Phil.West 1870 1924 Russia Russia Slavic
73 Chernyshevsky, Nikolay 4.43 Lit.West 1828 1889 Russia Russia Slavic
74 Babel, Isaak 4.33 Lit.West 1894 1941 Russia Russia Jewish
75 Derzhavin, Gavril 4.25 Lit.West 1743 1816 Russia Russia Slavic
76 Lomonosov, Mikhail 4.19 Lit.West 1711 1765 Russia Russia Slavic
77 Szymanowski, Karol 4.14 Music.West 1882 1937 Russia Poland Slavic
78 Archipenko, Alexander 4.14 Art.West 1887 1964 Russia France Slavic
79 Zoshchenko, Mikhail 4.11 Lit.West 1895 1958 Russia Russia Slavic
80 Kolmogorov, Andrey 4.09 Math 1903 1987 Russia Russia Slavic
81 Lenz, Jakob 4.07 Lit.West 1751 1792 Russia Germany Slavic
82 Sholokhov, Mikhail 4.04 Lit.West 1905 1984 Russia Russia Slavic
83 Tchebycheff, Pafnuty 3.94 Math 1821 1894 Russia Russia Slavic
84 Krylov, Ivan 3.94 Lit.West 1768 1844 Russia Russia Slavic
85 Fedin, Konstantine 3.77 Lit.West 1892 1977 Russia Russia Slavic
86 Pfitzner, Hans 3.70 Music.West 1869 1949 Russia Germany Slavic
87 Zamyatin, Yevgeny 3.51 Lit.West 1884 1937 Russia Russia Slavic
88 Glazunov, Alexander 3.51 Music.West 1865 1936 Russia Russia Slavic
89 Larionoff, Mikhail 3.39 Art.West 1881 1964 Russia Russia Slavic
90 Tyutchev, Fedor 3.38 Lit.West 1803 1873 Russia Russia Slavic
91 Dargomïzhsky, Alexander 3.31 Music.West 1813 1869 Russia Russia Slavic
92 Markovnikov, Vladimir 3.20 Chem 1838 1904 Russia Russia Slavic
93 Sologub, Fedor 3.15 Lit.West 1863 1927 Russia Russia Slavic
94 Korolenko, Vladimir 3.15 Lit.West 1853 1921 Russia Russia Slavic
95 Fonvizin, Denis 3.09 Lit.West 1745 1792 Russia Russia Slavic
96 Butlerov, Aleksandr 3.07 Chem 1828 1886 Russia Russia Slavic
97 Cui, César 2.94 Music.West 1835 1918 Russia Russia Slavic
98 Aksakov, Sergey 2.91 Lit.West 1791 1859 Russia Russia Slavic
99 Repin, Ilya 2.88 Art.West 1844 1930 Russia Russia Slavic
100 Fet, Afanasy 2.71 Lit.West 1820 1892 Russia Russia Slavic
101 Nabokov, Vladimir 2.68 Lit.West 1899 1977 Russia USA Slavic
102 Koltsov, Alexey 2.49 Lit.West 1809 1842 Russia Russia Slavic
103 Balmont, Konstantin 2.48 Lit.West 1867 1943 Russia Russia Slavic
104 Radishchev, Alexander 2.42 Lit.West 1749 1802 Russia Russia Slavic
105 Tolstoy, Alexey K. 2.38 Lit.West 1817 1875 Russia Russia Slavic
106 Katayev, Valentin 2.31 Lit.West 1897 1986 Russia Russia Slavic
107 Mandelstam, Osip 2.29 Lit.West 1892 1938 Russia Russia Jewish
108 Pisemsky, Alexey 2.28 Lit.West 1820 1881 Russia Russia Slavic
109 Kabalevsky, Dmitry 2.27 Music.West 1904 1987 Russia Russia Slavic
110 Garshin, Vsevolod 2.01 Lit.West 1855 1888 Russia Russia Slavic
111 Baratynsky, Evgeny 1.93 Lit.West 1800 1844 Russia Russia Slavic
112 Myaskovsky, Nikolay 1.68 Music.West 1881 1950 Russia Russia Slavic
113 Olesha, Yuri 1.52 Lit.West 1899 1960 Russia Russia Slavic
114 Vogel, Wladimir 1.24 Music.West 1896 1984 Russia Germany Slavic
115 Taneyev, Sergei 1.16 Music.West 1856 1915 Russia Russia Slavic
116 Glier, Reinhold 1.06 Music.West 1875 1956 Russia Russia Jewish
117 Arensky, Anton 1.00 Music.West 1861 1906 Russia Russia Slavic
118 Bortniansky, Dmitry 1.00 Music.West 1751 1825 Russia Russia Slavic

.

 
• Category: Race/Ethnicity • Tags: Human Achievement, Russia 
🔊 Listen RSS
 

The population of the world’s major regions according to the UN’s World Population Prospects 2017 report.

World Population Prospects (2017) 2015 2050 2100
WORLD 7,383,008,820 9,771,822,753 11,184,367,721
Sub-Saharan Africa 969,234,251 2,167,651,879 4,001,755,801
East Asia 1,635,150,365 1,586,491,284 1,198,264,520
South Asia 1,823,308,471 2,381,796,561 2,230,668,781
South-East Asia 634,609,846 797,648,622 771,527,666
MENA & C. Asia 551,964,576 850,895,914 1,045,856,658
Europe 740,813,959 715,721,014 653,261,252
Latin America 632,380,831 779,841,201 712,012,636
North America 356,003,541 434,654,823 499,197,606
Oceania 39,542,980 57,121,455 71,822,801

Assume the usual S.D.=15, and that their average IQs as of 2017 are as follows: Sub-Saharan Africa 70, East Asia 100, South Asia 80, South-East Asia 85, MENA & C. Asia 85, Europe 100, Latin America 85, North America 100, Oceania 90.

This should look plausible to people who’ve looked at the data. East Asian (Japanese, Korean, Chinese) IQ tends to be higher than 100, usually around 103-105, but I am giving it as 100 because in practice, for unclear reasons, East Asian IQs also tend to be “worth” 5 points less than Euro-American ones so far as economic performance and human accomplishment go.

Anyhow, if we also assume that regional IQs will remain “fixed” for the rest of the century, then the world average IQ will drop from 87 today to 82 by 2100, primarily on account of the massive demographic expansion of Sub-Saharan Africa.

However, fortunately, the number of people belonging to smart fractions” – which I will denote as people with an IQ above 160 (the approximate level that you have to be at to be capable of contributing to elite scientific progress today) – will remain similar to today, though it will be negatively impacted by demographic decline in Europe and East Asia.

Smart Fractions (No Flynn) 2015 2050 2100
WORLD 87,196 87,580 75,397
Sub-Saharan Africa 1 2 4
East Asia 51,787 50,246 37,951
South Asia 88 115 108
South-East Asia 182 229 221
MENA & C. Asia 158 244 300
Europe 23,462 22,668 20,690
Latin America 181 224 204
North America 11,275 13,766 15,810
Oceania 61 87 110

But what happens when we adjust for the FLynn effect? In his 2016 survey of psychometrists, Heiner Rindermann and co. compiled the following expert assessments.

future-FLynn-effect-to-2100

This leads to a massive increase in the number of smart fractions, almost entirely on account of East Asia.

China as a now fully developed country drives global scientific progress pretty much single-handedly, like Europe did in the 19th century.

IQ Flynn (Rindermann) 2015 2100
WORLD 87,196 294,485
Sub-Saharan Africa 1 63
East Asia 51,787 245,857
South Asia 88 1,266
South-East Asia 182 1,181
MENA & C. Asia 158 1,155
Europe 23,462 27,364
Latin America 181 1,504
North America 11,275 15,810
Oceania 61 285

That said, I don’t think those FLynn projects are realistic, in part because East Asia is projected to increase in IQ so incredibly fast even though it is already a reasonably well developed place.

China itself can still probably eke out 3-5 IQ points, but Chinese fertility has been dysgenic since the 1960s, so this won’t last. I suspect East Asia – which in demographic terms is pretty much just China – will remain at a consistent level, with FLynn and dysgenics canceling each other out over the course of the century.

What if we use the following estimates for IQ changes during the 21st century (broadly justified here):

  • +10: Sub-Saharan Africa, South Asia
  • +5: South-East Asia
  • 0: East Asia, MENA & Central Asia, Latin America
  • -5: Europe, North America

Resulting table of smart fractions in 2100:

IQ Flynn (AK) 2015 2100
WORLD 87,196 51,726
Sub-Saharan Africa 1 193
East Asia 51,787 37,951
South Asia 88 3,414
South-East Asia 182 1,181
MENA & C. Asia 158 300
Europe 23,462 4,797
Latin America 181 204
North America 11,275 3,666
Oceania 61 21

So what has basically happened is that smart fractions plummet in the high-IQ world due to a combination of demographic decline, dysgenic fertility, and low-IQ mass immigration.

Meanwhile, the quantity of smart fractions from the Global South will rise, due to some FLynn catchup, but absolute numbers will remain modest.

Overall, this is a pretty catastrophic outcome.

Not only do we see a halving of 160+ IQ smart fractions, but it is also very likely that the threshold for new scientific discoveries will have risen in the meantime, since problems tend to get harder, not easier as you climb up the technological tree.

For instance, if by 2100 the new “discovery threshold” is at an IQ of 175, the people still capable of driving global science forwards might number in the mere hundreds, in a world of more than ten billion.

The likely end result of this would be an end to scientific progress, and eventually, the Age of Malthusian Industrialism once a technologically stagnant and progressively more fecund world bumps up against the limits of the industrial economy.

 
🔊 Listen RSS
 

So we correctly make fun of people like Neil Turok and Deirdre McCloskey who expect to discover the next generation of Einsteins amongst 70-75 IQ Africans. Even if we could run the full FLynn program on Africa and raise it up to its genotypic IQ potential of 85-90, it’s not like countries with those sorts of figures today are brimming with geniuses (though they are not necessarily unpleasant places to live in, as Fred Reed constantly reminds us).

But there’s some who think this implies that Africa will inevitably collapse due to overpopulation and their absolute inability to run any kind of industrial civilization without help from Europeans or the Chinese, because apparently Sub-Saharan Africa can barely support one billion people let alone the four billion that the UN projects for the end of the century. Here’s one example of such an argument:

This reply could also cover Piltdown man too: You are making an assumption that these people can work in an organized fashion, use and take care of mechanical equipment, and have an infrastructure that will let all of the population have access to this productive farmland. I know you’ve heard of Zimbabwe, formerly Rhodesia – the breadbasket of Africa.

Obviously I am not going to go down the “racism” card like some bottom-tier SJW, but I would like to play the “reality” card.

(1) First off, why the implicit assumption that trade and technological links with the outside world must vanish? I suppose that if a gamma ray burst were to fry the northern hemisphere tomorrow and wipe the high IQ peoples from the planet, then SSA will also experience an economic and demographic collapse. Advanced manufacturing will vanish, there will be zero further technological/scientific progress and an outright regression in the stock of knowledge by a century or so.

But short of these sci-fi scenarios, how can this happen? Individual African countries might decide to drive foreign investors and any lingering white/Indian minorities out, but there are more than fifty separate polities in Africa. The likelihood that the continent as a whole adopts such self-destructive policies are diminishingly small. The Chinese in particular are interested in acquiring tracts of African lands to increase their food security. Their motives are of course self-interested, but it results in technology transfer and helps Africans too.

(2) Sub Saharan Africa is almost eight times as big as India in land area, and India now supports 1.3 billion people. It has twice as much arable land, but this can be expanded. I don’t think there’s any equivalent of the Ganges valley in SSA (or really anywhere on Earth) in terms of agricultural productivity, but still, there’s no shortage of productive land.

Africa pessimists like citing Zimbabwe, where crop yields are lower than they were half a century ago. But it’s not representative of the continent. Crop yields in the continent as a whole have increased by almost 50% since 1990. In Ethiopia, a country once synonymous with photos of starving children, they have more than doubled.

crop-yields-africa

SSA is now on average where India was in the 1980s, and the world in general was in the 1960s. And it’s not like agriculture is a particularly g loaded occupation.

world-irrigation Certainly I don’t see Africans introducing automated hydroponics farms that super-densely populated advanced countries like Japan and the Netherlands are experimenting with, but they don’t have to do that even to feed a quadrupled population; just getting to Brazil’s level (which is slightly above the world average) by 2100 would do.

They have plenty of time and plenty of low-hanging fruit to be picked up. For instance, irrigation, which can basically double yields, is almost entirely absent from SSA.

(3) Paradoxically, (moderate) global warming can actually help Africa.

Historically, it was during colder periods that Africa’s dry zones became even drier, leading to famines. The reverse might be true: Conditions may well become wetter in the West African Sahel, “in what would be a rare example of a positive tipping point” in response to global warming (Copenhagen Diagnosis 2009).

There is paleoclimatic evidence for this. In the warming at the end of the last Ice Age, the modern day Sahara turned into a lush savannah, with crocodiles, hippos and elephants roaming the plains. Progressive cooling turned the area into the dessicated desert it is today, pushing populations south and towards the Nile valley.

Severe warming (5C+) is one thing that would be very bad for SSA and will push all the above considerations into the margins. (Though, that said, the sort of commenters who envisage Africans as Piltdown men also tend to think climate change is a liberal elite conspiracy).

(4) All societies have undergone the demographic transition, so why exactly should Africa be the exception anyway?

(I mean, assuming that the Neo-Nazis are wrong about Africans being like rabbits with no ability to control their fertility, and that real world examples of Blacks undergoing the demographic transition when they reach a sufficient level of development like in Jamaica or Trinidad and Tobago are not figments of statistics bureaus’ imaginations).

There’s no evidence that SSA is going to be an exception. It is certainly lagging, as it is most other indicators, but it’s still happening.

africa-infant-mortality

The TFR for the continent as a whole has declined from close to 7 children per woman inaround 1980 to about 5 children today. The Africa pessimist crowd loves to single out Niger, probably the single most illiterate and backwards country in the world. But if you want to nitpick, why not instead pick Rwanda, run by Paul Kagame (an authoritarian technocrat who has been called Africa’s Lee Kuan Yew), which has gone from having 8 children per woman in 1980 to just 4 today?

Demographers tend to project fertility trends as gentle declines, but they can also take the form of sudden collapses. Famously, Iran’s TFR plummeted from more than 6 children per woman to below replacement level rate within less than a decade. The decline in China during the 1970s was almost as steep (and took place before the One Child Policy was implemented).

To illustrate this further, below is a screenshot from Paul Kennedy’s 1993 book Preparing for the 21st Century, citing contemporary UN Population Prospects forecasts for the year 2025.

demographic-forecast-1980s

These were actually more pessimistic than the 2017 update of the World Population Prospects that Sailer is citing in his recent series of pessimistic posts on African demographics.

Outside Africa: Pakistan now projected at 227 million, not 267 million; Brazil at 219 million, not 245 million; Indonesia at 285 million, not 263 million, but as the only upwards exception massively canceled out by Iran, which is projected to have 87 million by 2025, not 122 million.

Even within Africa, which has by and large yet to undergo the demographic transition, those forecasts are now clearly pessimistic in hindsight: Nigeria now projected to be at 234 million, not 301 million; Kenya at 60 million, not 77 million; Tanzania at 73 million, not 84 million; and Zaire (now DRC) the only upwards outlier, at 104 million instead of 99 million.

africa-infant-mortality

Anyhow, it’s not like SSA is in standstill. Literacy is improving, school enrollment is rising, infant mortality is falling, peasants are leaving for the cities, wmen are going into education and having careers. All the factors that have historically collapsed fertility rates around the world are now acting on SSA.

It would not be surprising if Africa’s demographic transition happens faster than expected, as in the Low variant of the current UN forecast, and ends up merely tripling instead of quadrupling as in the Medium scenario.

(5) As I pointed out in A Short History of the Third Millennium, modern societies strongly select for lower IQ and higher fertility. The FLynn effect has gone into reverse, and if technological progress was to stagnate – as it might well do so due to the depletion of “smart fractions” – it is also likely that the cultural innovations that have hitherto suppressed fertility will also fall by the wayside. Even leaving aside low-IQ Third World immigration, Europe and White America will likely be duller and more fecund (leaving aside technological singularities, CRISPR-transhumanism, etc).

Africa still has some potential to increase its IQ via better nutrition, etc., though whether it will ever manage to create institutions capable of maximizing them out as in the developed world today is questionable. However, at least it does not yet appear to be subject to the dysgenic pressures that are ravaging the developed world. And if its future demographic expansion was to constantly bump up against the Malthusian limits, these dysgenic trends may even be averted altogether.

After three or four centuries of scraping against the Malthusian grindstone, it’s not inconceivable that African IQ will fully converge with that of Europeans and East Asians.

And then Turok’s successors will finally find their African Einsteins who will take us into space aboard the pyramids.

kangz

 
• Category: Race/Ethnicity • Tags: Africa, Demographics 
No Items Found
Anatoly Karlin
About Anatoly Karlin

I am a blogger, thinker, and businessman in the SF Bay Area. I’m originally from Russia, spent many years in Britain, and studied at U.C. Berkeley.

One of my tenets is that ideologies tend to suck. As such, I hesitate about attaching labels to myself. That said, if it’s really necessary, I suppose “liberal-conservative neoreactionary” would be close enough.

Though I consider myself part of the Orthodox Church, my philosophy and spiritual views are more influenced by digital physics, Gnosticism, and Russian cosmism than anything specifically Judeo-Christian.