The most “based” (not to mention correct) countries are Eastern Europe minus Poland, Portugal, and the Brits and Irish.
Portugal is surprising. The usual explanation for why they don’t have a lot of Muslims – just 0.4% of the population, which is a basically Visegrad number – is that they are too poor, and that’s surely the most important point, but probably the racism helps.
I’m assuming the okayish British/Irish scores are thanks to much of the IQ/HBD literature being in English.
Czechs continues to impress. Sweden continues being Sweden Yes.
The questions aren’t exactly the same, but American polls [WaPo; Reuters] on Black intelligence suggest they’d score around 22%, slightly above the level of Britain and Ireland.
I suspect this may be partly linked to 90%+ of the HBD/IQ literature being in English.
Another interesting observation: Even the most hardcore East Europeans are only about as racist as late 1990s Americans.
Am I an anti-Semite? The SPLC and RationalWiki both seem to think so. But there are also those who believe I am a hasbara shill, or even Jewish myself. Either way, I don’t appear to be a particularly enthusiastic philo/anti-Semitic propagandist – of the 1,200+ posts to date at my Unz.com archive, only about 15 are actually mainly about Jews (and I hope this will be the last one for some time).
Fortunately, the ADL has attempted to make at least a minimal attempt at quantification. You qualify as an anti-Semite if you answer Probably True to six or more of the following questions:
Jews are more loyal to Israel than to [this country/to the countries they live in]
Jews have too much power in the business world
Jews have too much power in international financial markets
Jews still talk too much about what happened to them in the Holocaust
Jews don’t care what happens to anyone but their own kind
Jews have too much control over global affairs
Jews have too much control over the United States government
Jews think they are better than other people
Jews have too much control over the global media
Jews are responsible for most of the world’s wars
People hate Jews because of the way Jews behave
In this post I will try to systemically answer each of these statements, but before I finalize my excommunication from ZOG, there’s a couple of caveats that I wish to make.
First, many of these combine an observation – often a statistically correct one – with a normative judgment. Of course Jews have many more billionaires and elite journalists per capita than any other major ethnicity. Is this good or bad – or even more ambiguously, “too much”? Difficult to say. For a committed blank slatist, the answer should be “Probably True”. Hence, the “anti-Semitism” of the more honest and consistent Leftists. Then again, knowledge of race differences in IQ, and the correlation of IQ with economic success, explains most if not all of the residual. But even though it annuls many of the more extreme anti-Semitic arguments, this form of argumentation is itself racist – and ironically, it was overwhelmingly Jews, e.g. Franz Boas, Leon Kamin, Gould, Lewontin, etc. – to a degree disproportionate even to their IQ advantage – who developed the modern blank slatism that tabooed such perspectives (although I have mixed opinions about his work, I think Kevin McDonald demonstrates this pretty conclusively). In other words, it was the Jews themselves who torpedoed the single most succinct and powerful argument against anti-Semitism; hence, also, the “anti-racist” IQ denialism amongst some of the more overt anti-Semites. Very amusing and ironic.
Second, these are also all negative stereotypes and perceptions. There are many things one may admire in Jewry. For instance, it is pretty much impossible for any educated person not to hold a considerable degree of appreciation for Jewish cultural and scientific accomplishments. As a “Russian alt-right, white nationalist anti-Semitic conspiracy theorist”, I will also admit to a no lesser degree of appreciation for the Jews’ verbal IQ-powered political acumen – simultaneously running a nationalist regime in Israel that is the envy of the Alt Right and exerting an inordinate degree of influence over US foreign policy via the Lobby, while somehow managing to maintain a reputation for erudite, tolerant, progressivism. Although normies will consider this as more of a negative stereotype. Oops. There go the paradoxes, again.
But this does go to show how fluid the boundaries are. For instance, the South Koreans are highly anti-Semitic by the ADL’s schema, but it’s a sort of anti-Semitism through philo-Semitism: “The idea of emulating Jews in order to get ahead in the world has gotten other people’s backs up as well. On the blog +972, Mairav Zonszein wrote: “I can’t blame the South Koreans for being interested, and it is indeed a compliment of sorts—but it brings up a point that I have written about before: the fetishization of Jews, whereby singling Jews out for greatness is the same as discriminating against them or stereotyping them.””
Conversely, just as there is much to like and praise, there is also much to dislike and criticize in all peoples. On the pages of this blog I have made fun of the Amerimutt, the Britbong, the Eternal Kraut, Sweden Yes, and the Butthurt Belt of Europe. I have called for kebab removal and named the Mongoloids soulless drones. Paradoxically, I am also one of the most hardcore Russophobes out there; anyone who has read me long enough has probably figured out that I consider my own people to be no better than White Negroes. Probably the only ethnicity I haven’t called subhuman scum at some time or other are Gypsies – and only because it is so self-evident in their case. So bear this in mind before consigning me to the ranks of hardcore anti-Semites – I actually hate all ethnicities, to some extent. Except the Czechs.
So with these preliminary comments out of the way, let’s answer the ADL survey point by point.
1. Jews are more loyal to Israel than to [this country/to the countries they live in]
The dual loyalties of the Jews is a popular stereotype, so much so that around a third of Americans and half of Europeans believe that they are more loyal to Israel than to their own country.
This isn’t just a goyim stereotype. Even America’s premier Jewish mag openly speaks of the “burden” of having one’s loyalties “inevitably divided” for Diaspora Jews. The Jews are themselves inordinately obsessed with this issue. For instance, several years ago, the Israeli immigration absorption and foreign ministries polled tens of thousands of Jewish Americans on where their loyalties would lie in the event of a crisis between Israel and the US. Unfortunately, this polling project was halted when it came to light, so as far as I know, we do not have any hard numbers on what Jews think themselves.
Israel, 1949. The world’s first Stalinbus. Now the Jews pretend they always hated Stalin, just like Balts like to think that they had nothing to do with Communists coming to power in Russia.
Historically, it seems to me Jewish loyalty was highly contingent on what best served Jewish interests (opposite example: Germans, who have tended to be remarkably loyal to their host countries, even when they were at war with Germany).
Consider Russian history. Jews were strongly hostile to the Russian Empire – Minister of the Interior Vyacheslav von Plehve estimated that 40% of its revolutionaries in the early 1900s were Jews. That said, I am not one of those people who ascribe the Bolshevik Revolution to Jews – the Bolsheviks were a predominantly ethnic Russian party, and it was the Balts, not Jews, who were instrumental in terrorizing central Russia into submission in the critical early months of the Civil War. Still, Jewish loyalty to the new, highly philo-Semitic early USSR soon picked up, and they ended up manning 40% of the NKVD for most of the 1930s and procuring Stalin the secrets of the atomic bomb from America – where WASP elites largely barred Jews from social (if not economic) advancement.
But as Brezhnev’s USSR instituted pro-majority affirmative action - which is all that late Soviet “anti-Semitism” amounted to – the Jews started joining dissident circles, emigrating, and lobbying for anti-Soviet sanctions in the US. Meanwhile, as America itself became a much nicer place for the Jews and the world’s foremost champion of Israel, the most visible face of Jewish political activism transitioned from Trotskyist internationalism to that weird form of Jewish-American nationalism called neoconservatism.
Today, Russia is one of Europe’s more pro-Israel countries, and according to the ADL, it is more philo-Semitic than almost any other East European nation. Putin’s daughter married a Jewish minigarch, just like Trump’s. Consequently, there are plenty of Jewish-Russian “conservative/patriots” types both in Russia – Soloviev (Shapiro), Khinshtein come to mind – and in Israel – Lieberman, Eskin, and even a few odd nationalists (mostly prominently the “son of a lawyer” Zhirinovsky, though he is half-Russian and does not identify as Jewish). Even so, Russia is in a new cold war with the United States, which is a much more dedicated – and powerful – champion of global Jewish interests, so Jews are likewise considerably overrepresented in the ranks of the Russian pro-Western liberal opposition (Khodorkovsky, half of the Echo of Moscow crowd) and massively overrepresented in the ranks of the Western Russophobes (Ioffe, Elder, Applebaum, Nemtsova, Weiss, etc). It is certainly telling that this resurgence of Jewish hostility came at just the point when Russia became something approximating a sovereign state, even if it is more philo-Semitic today than at any other point in its history since at least the 1920s.
Now obviously, the Jews don’t constitute a hive mind, and there exists a wide range of opinions among them, as Winston Churchill eloquently argued in his 1920 article Zionism vs. Bolshevism. Even so, it appears to me that Jewish practice of and rationalization of dual loyalty is central to their own view of themselves to an extent unseen with any other major people, and it has been that way since at least the age of the Pharaohs and ancient Babylonia.
So, that’s at least Probably True.
2. Jews have too much power in the business world
There is no question that Jews are massively overrepresented amongst the ranks of the world’s super-rich. They are the world’s “market dominant minority,” to borrow Amy Chua’s terminology.
Jews constituted 36% of the Forbes 400 in 2010, and 21% of the 200 richest Russians (down from 6/7 of the Semibankirschina oligarch cabal that as good as ruled Russia in the late 1990s).
In the meantime, they constituted about 2% of the US population, and less than 0.2% in Russia.
Admittedly, a large (though far from total) percentage of this overrepresentation is crisply explained by higher Jewish IQ, and I have speculated that Mediterranean peoples – Greeks, Levantines, and yes, Jews – might be especially talented at making money, even relative to IQ.
However, as I have already pointed out, this is where progressive Leftism faces a major paradox – their dogmatic blank slatism precludes IQ-based arguments, while their postmodern relativism also rules out traditional conservative arguments ascribing Jewish success to superior culture, such as propensity for thrift, hard work, etc. Consequently, the only route left open to them is to go the full mile and ascribe Jewish economic success to, well, Jewish privilege. Hence why the more honest and committed – or more socially autistic – leftists, e.g. Corbynites and ethnic minority SJWs in the US, tend to veer into “anti-Semitism”, drawing the ire of neoliberal ZOG.
So it’s ultimately pretty hard to say. Although I was initially slightly inclined to say Probably False, the fact that a lot of this privilege-speak was developed by Jews in the first place annoys me and tilts me towards Probably True.
3. Jews have too much power in international financial markets
Obviously if Jews are overrepresented in the business world, then they will also be overrepresented in financial markets, since there is a great degree of overlap between these two spheres.
But there are a few critical caveats that make my assessment Probably False.
First, this question is largely an extension of the previous one, and I am averse to double counting – especially given the ambiguities I express on the last question.
Second, this question is too distinctly evocative of the Rothschild conspiracy theory, whereby the eponymous family cabal controls most of the world’s wealth and institutions along with the Rockefellers. This is complete nonsense. While the Rothschilds were Europe’s premier oligarchs in the 19th century, a century of inflationary defaults and dilution by inheritance have grinded them down, and today they constitute just a few small investment banks that are pretty much irrelevant next to the Goldman Sachs and J.P. Morgans of this world.
Third, Israel is a minnow in global financial terms. Its stock market capitalization is less than 20% that of Switzerland’s, despite having similar populations.
4. Jews still talk too much about what happened to them in the Holocaust
This is not just Probably True – it is obviously, objectively true.
I mean I don’t even fault them for it. I would probably go on about the Holocaust if I was a Jew myself.
Even pushing Holocaust denial laws serves Jewish ethnic interests by pushing extreme anti-Semitism to the margins and thereby reducing the probability of it getting repeated.
Note that Israel doesn’t rush to recognize other genocides – e.g., that of the Armenians. Then again, trying to maintain a monopoly on victimhood makes cynical sense.
5. Jews don’t care what happens to anyone but their own kind
This is just an absurd exaggeration of #1. Probably False.
Jews played a huge role in the US civil rights movement, and ultimately I don’t think it was wholly or even primarily driven by racial hostility to the majority European population. Charity is a constituent part of traditional Judaism, with Jews obligated to give up 10% of their income to the needy – and not all of that goes to other Jews.
The Jews might be more clannish than North-West Europeans, but not more so than typical Mediterraneans – and a great deal less so than Sicilians or Caucasians.
As the commenter MawBTW noted on Greg Cochran’s blog, Eliezer Shlomo Yudkowsky – one of the core people behind Effective Altruism, possibly the most inherently universalistic ideology out there – is one of the most Jewish Jews around: “Eliezer Shlomo Yudkowsky has a comically Jewish name and a comically Jewish face. He’s an atheist, but that’s a Jewish stereotype too. On the female side, you have Shula Firestone, who’s full name is Shulamith Bath Shmuel Ben Ari Feuerstein and who Wikipedia describes as “a central figure in the early development of radical feminism”. By some miracle she contrived to be born in Canada instead of the first synagogue from Ellis Island.”
6. Jews have too much control over global affairs
I don’t think so. Even though the US is somewhat under their thumb (see #7), it’s not like Israel was exactly getting its way under Obama. And Jews have far less influence in the rest of the world.
Besides, the flip side of the US vetoing all the anti-Israel UN resolutions is that an absurd percentage of those resolutions are made against Israel in the first place.
So that’s Probably False.
7. Jews have too much control over the United States government
This, on the other hand, is not just Probably True – it is obviously, glaringly true.
All this happened under an American President with well-known financial and familial ties to Jewish oligarchs and Chabad, whom many liberal American Jews nonetheless believe to be the second coming of Hitler.
Incidentally, I say all this as someone who has no dog in the fight over Israel and Palestine. So far as I’m concerned, these are two tribes locked in their tribal struggle – admittedly, one is far more intelligent and dominant than the other – but since neither is particularly pro-Russian or anti-Russian, I see no reason to favor one or the other independently of objective geopolitical calculations. I don’t go on about the “AngloZionists” as one columnist here does, nor do I particularly care about “Israeli apartheid” and the travails of the Palestinians – that’s the job of Israel (Shamir), not mine.
Still, that does not mean ZOG is entirely a figment of the anti-Semitic imagination.
Case in point: The taboo against even noticing the Jewish Lobby has reached such heights that there is now a bipartisan consensus in the US to effectively do away with the First Amendment in order to… criminalize advocacy of BDS. The American political elites are happy to scrap the very Constitution that they otherwise worship for make benefit of Israel.
8. Jews think they are better than other people
I think the only people who think otherwise are people who have not met many Jews. For instance, jokes like this about incompetent goyim are hardly atypical:
Ivan: What if we have to fight China? They have more than a billion people!
Pyotr: We’ll win with quality over quantity, just like the Jews with the Arabs.
Ivan: But do we have enough Jews?
This sense of superiority extends to Jewish religious texts.
For instance, Deuteronomy 14:2 – “For you are a people holy to the Lord your God. Out of all the peoples on the face of the earth, the Lord has chosen you to be his treasured possession.”
And this is tame. Some kabbalistic texts go as far as to describe non-Jews as “beasts in human form”.
Conclusion: Probably True.
Now admittedly, one might argue that the superiority complex is justified.
Source: Charles Murray – Human Accomplishment
After all, it is an objective fact that Jews are far wealthier, more successful, better educated (more than can be explained by IQ, as Ron Unz showed!), and higher achieving than the goyim.
This, as Richard Nixon correctly noted, engenders a certain arrogance on the part of certain Jews. Which I suppose can be looked over, if they could just keep it to themselves.
Unfortunately, that’s not always the case. Here’s the thing. Israel happens to be far more of a “national state” than any other Western country or even the Russian “Putlerreich” (that exists only in Western imaginations). Israel has a big wall, it deports Black African illegals en masse, and opinion polls suggest that half of Israeli school children oppose equal legal rights for Arab-Israeli citizens. Most importantly, Israel is The Jewish State. Even though ethnic Russians constitute a higher percentage of the Russian population than do Jews in Israel, they can only dream of a “Russia for Russians” in the Putlerreich.
No wonder, then, that many in the Alt Right, such asRichard Spencer, cite Israel as the sort of ethnostate that they themselves aspire to for their own people. Good luck with that, though – any European leader who aspires to a quarter of what Israel managed will immediately become a Second Hitler. Thanks in large if not exclusive part to…
What knowing goyim notice and dislike is that too many of their (((fellow white people))) combine progressive, pro-minority agendas with aggressive support of Israel across virtually all countries where they have a substantial demographic presence.
The US: While the Jewish Lobby supports Israel and influence the US to an extent that ROG can only dream of (see #7), other Jewish activist organizations – which substantially overlap with the Jewish Lobby – have played outsized role in promoting Marxism, feminism, anti-racism, etc., present immigration as a “core Jewish value”, and have been outspoken in trying to discredit Trump, the closest the US has ever had or might ever have to a Netanyahu.
Russia: As soon as the anti-extremist Article 282 was brought against the Russian liberal/Jewish nationalist Anton Nossik for advocating the extermination of Syrians, on the basis that it was good for Israel, the entire Echo of Moscow crowd suddenly became ardent proponents of absolute free speech, even though they had previously been at the forefront of writing Russia’s hate speech laws in the first place.
Perhaps the ultimate “Jewish spy” archetype is Julia Ioffe: From being an Israel First activist at university, wall and all (!), she seamlessly transitioned into condemning Americans who want the same for their own country: “Je Suis Refugee“, therefore you need Infinity Immigrants! (Ioffe was not, of course, a “refugee” from the USSR in any meaningful sense of the word). She has also castigated Russian “cattle” who had the temerity to vote for the Vladimir Putin, who she believes hates Jews because he once said that Russians sacrificed more than anybody to save Jews from the Holocaust – no, really!
I can’t think of any other major market-dominant minority that has a substantial percentage of people who push “nationalism for me, not for thee” on their host countries.
For instance, the Chinese in South-East Asia, though economically dominant, do not translate it into political power, or a “culture of critique” against their host societies. On the other hand, the locals also organize the occasional pogrom against them, so perhaps it is the Chinese who are doing it wrong?
Ironically, George Soros – despite his Emmanuel Goldstein status amongst anti-globalists – isn’t really a Jewish spy. He has gotten high on his own supply and trafficks to Israel too, with the result that Israel has disavowed him. (There were reports that he stopped financing FEMEN when they attempted to open an Israeli affiliate, but AFAIK that was fake news).
9. Jews have too much control over the global media
Jewish overrepresentation (even relative to IQ) in media, journalism, and Hollywood is too obvious to deny. However, is it “too much”?
On /pol/ you have memes floating by every so often suggesting that Jewish dominance in the media is near total. Here is one such example:
I don’t know to what extent this table is accurate and/or cherry-picked. It seems to be too extreme to be true, but who knows. Maybe we can establish that in the comments.
Anyhow, my rejoinder to the idea that Jews control the media and that this is a bad thing, which I employed in a email discussion with an Alt Right intellectual who is deep into the JQ, went as follows:
… According to Wikipedia, there are 15,000 Jews in Sweden. That’s <0.2% of the population. Even you would surely agree that this isn’t anywhere big enough to seize control of any significant institution, even for a people as intelligent and apparently wily as the Jews. (If it is then resistance is futile, assimilation is inevitable).
If France, Germany, and the UK are cuck countries, then Sweden is the cucklord supreme. It has by far the highest Third World immigration per capita of any major EU country (100k+/year), and it is also the only one where a majority of people continues to favor the opens doors approach!
In short, it appears that the Swedish people are perfectly fine with voting themselves out of existence and electing another. That is despite (or because?) the media, political, and business scenes in Sweden are dominated by ethnic Swedes. And it has the strongest political correctness culture in all of Europe, with transgressions against it being punished not only by ostracism, as in the US and much of Europe, but also by the real threat of prison time.
And it’s all almost entirely Judenfrei!
So, anyway… you’re probably anticipating my question/criticism here. How would Kevin MacDonald/Culture of Critique and the other propagators of the theory that there is are strong Jewish Ethnic Genetic Interests that unwaveringly works against Whites explain Sweden – a white country that is doing away with itself with the willing and happy connivance of not only its (ethnically Swedish) journalists and politicians but a strong majority of the (ethnic Swedish) population themselves?
Problem: That 0.1% includes the Bonniers:
My interlocutor replied:
Sweden is a bit of a mystery. The Jewish factor is not completely absent there however. The Jewish Bonnier family apparently owns several publishing companies, the private channel TV4 (with as many viewers as the main state TV channel), various other channels, a film company, cinema theaters, magazines, and newspapers, including two leading dailies.
From that alone, punching above one’s weight as ever! (In Poland, perhaps the most homogeneous country in Europe, the leading liberal daily constantly shaming the Poles for not being international and “modern” enough is owned by . . . Adam Michnik.)
Lack of country specific knowledge led me down a dead end, and forces me to acknowledge Probably True.
There used to be a site called J-DAR that scraped movie databases to calculate a “jewdar” score for Hollywood movies and “celebrate the Jewish contribution to the film industry.” Unfortunately, the site seems to have been folded, presumably because not everyone was celebrating. It would be interesting to revive the project and do some statistical analysis.
10. Jews are responsible for most of the world’s wars
First, this is simply not the case historically.
Jews had nothing to do with World War I (nor as Niall Ferguson showed did bankers want that war, later Communist propaganda regardless).
Jews only provoked World War II in Nazi propaganda.
Jews had nothing to do with the Cold War.
Nor did Jews have much to do with most post-Cold War conflicts. The only major recent war that could conceivably be somewhat-somehow attributed to Jewish influence is the invasion of Iraq, but there were lots of other, more important factors in play there. Otherwise, they were at best only incidental at most. The Syrian Civil War is primarily a Syrian conflict, stoked along by the US to be sure, but not incited by it. The main responsibility for the War in the Donbass ultimately lies on Russia; if not for Russian support, the rebellion would have been crushed in summer 2014.
I might change my assessment if the US ever does end up seriously bombing Iran, but the Jewish Lobby has had no luck with that – and I doubt that will change any time soon.
Second, ultimately only 6% of Congressmen are Jews, and the most prominent and aggressive warhawks (e.g. John McCain) don’t seem to be Jews.
The most visible face of ZOG in the current administration, the Kushnerites, might be more aggressive than isolationist Bannonites, but they are less aggressive than McMaster.
Jews figure prominent in the Russiagate conspiracy theory, to a greater extent than can be explained just by IQ, but they are nowhere near as uniformly Russophobic as other East European emigres (Brzezinski, Ros-Lehtinen, etc.). The Jew Stephen Cohen is probably the most eminent “Russophile” in the US, and there are no end of Jewish anti-war/anti-imperialist commenters (Greenwald, Chomsky, Blumenthal, Chapo Trap House).
Jews are significantly more hostile to Iran, but they don’t have a monopoly on it (e.g. Michael Flynn). Besides, it’s more understandable than with respect to Russia, since Iran actually is deeply hostile to Israeli interests.
Jews don’t seem to be hostile to China at all.
Third, while Israel itself is a relatively belligerent country, it’s not any kind of wild outlier by global standards.
11. People hate Jews because of the way Jews behave
Explanation 1: Pretty much everyone’s ancestors were evil anti-Semitic scumbags who loved to persecute and fleece Jews.
3. Poland – epicenter of the “Paradisus Iudaeorum” under the Commonwealth, eagerly welcoming in Jews exiled from the rest of Europe – is now the most anti-Semitic region of Europe, even more than half a century after the Nazis genocided the Jews out of Poland.
4. Israel’s neighbors hating Jews more than anyone else. Including 58% of Armenians, who are some of their closest relatives.
Though in fairness everyone in the Middle East hates each other anyway, and they quite reasonably all view each other with suspicion: “Beware Greeks bearing gifts”; regional variations on “It takes two [A] to deceive one [B]; two [B] to deceive one [C]“, …, in which A, B, C… = Turks, Greeks, Persians, Jews, Armenians, …
Conclusion: It takes two to tango, but since the politically correct position is to avoid blaming Jews at all, I suppose this would be Probably True.
FINAL RESULTS: 7/11. Anti-Semite!
I suppose I deserve my “accolades” from the SPLC and RationalWiki after all.
But then again, so does this rabbi, who scored 6/11 in a similar article for the Jewish mag The Forward. As I said at the start, things are complicated.
Fast forwarding to the 21st century, some of the most prominent Russian mafia bosses of recent years were the Kurdish Aslan Usoyan (“Grandpa Hassan”), assassinated in January 2013 by a competing kingpin rumored to be either the Georgian Tariel Oniani or the Azeri Rovshan Janiev. In the US, they had their counterparts in the Evsey Agron and Boris Goldberg; the heavily Jewish nature of the Russian mafia in the US was made clear in the 2005 movie Lord of War.
Georgia always had a disproportionately high number of crime bosses and still has a majority of the 700 or so still operating in the post-Soviet space and western Georgia (Kutaisi clan) is particularly well represented. …
The Russian criminal subculture of the thieves-in-law disproportionately included ethnic Georgians. During the 1970s Brezhnev stagnation, corrupt officials increasingly turned to the criminal underworld to source black market supplies. However, the Thieves Code explicitly forbade cooperation of any kind with the authorities, and at a 1982 summit of thieves in Tbilisi, the secret society was split in two, with Georgian thieves favouring closer collaboration with officials while this motion was opposed by Slavic ‘purists’.
… Zambian biochemist Chanda Chisala (2016 etc.) argued that Nigerian Scrabble performance was much higher than one would expect based on its national IQ estimate (given as 71.2 by Lynn and Vanhanen). His interpretation is that the tests are missing real ability present in this and other African populations. His study, however, was not systematic and did not include many other mental sports. The purpose of this study was to systematically examine the relationship between national skill at mental sports and national cognitive ability.
Ability in mental sports is g-loaded:
… a meta-analysis of studies of chess players and non-chess players round a mean group difference of .50 d (Sala et al., 2017). In another study, Quiroga et al (Ángeles Quiroga et al., 2015; see also Foroughi, Serraino, Parasuraman, & Boehm-Davis, 2016) administered 12 video games to 188 students as well as traditional standardized tests, and found that they measured nearly identical constructs (r’s .93 to .96).
For games, we included every esport listed at https://www.esportsearnings.com/games with at least 1,000 top players. This resulted in the inclusion of 8 games: DOTA 2 (dota2), League of Legends (lol), Counter-Strike: Global Offensive (csgo), Starcraft 2 (sc2), Counter-Strike (cs), Hearthstone (hs), Overwatch (ow), and Super Smash Bros. Melee (ssbm). Furthermore, we included major non-esports: Chess, Go, Poker and Scrabble.
Controlling for population size, performance in mental sports correlated r=0.79 with Lynn and Vanhanen’s published national IQs.
General gaming ability score and national IQ. Orange line = linear fit (top left), blue line = local regression fit (span = 1.00). Weighted by square root of population size.
Contra Chisala’s arguments that Nigeria’s IQ estimates were spuriously low due to its good performance in Scrabble, not only were its results concordant with its reported IQ levels of ~70, but it was also the poorest performing country in the world when controlling for population size.
In reality, there were actually just four major outliers. North Korea was the biggest negative outlier, presumably due to very low Internet penetration. South Africa, Brazil, and the United States were positive outliers, which Kirkegaard suggests could be a smart fraction effect.
So why Nigeria’s (relative to its IQ) outstanding performance on Scrabble?
Because it has by far the least mental sports loading (correlation with performance in other games) out of the twelve games, less so even than go, which is almost entirely constricted to East Asia.
With regards to the arguments by Chisala concerning Nigeria and Scrabble, we find no support for mismeasured Nigerian intelligence. It is true, as he noted, that Nigerians are much better at Scrabble than one would expect (standardized residual for Scrabble is 1.55, rank 3). However, Nigerians underperform on the remaining 11 sports (all residuals are negative), and the overall factor score of Nigeria (-1.39) is about what one would expect based on the current estimates of the country’s mean cognitive ability and the relation to national IQ. Indeed, based on a linear regression with just IQ, the standardized residual for Nigeria is only -0.16, meaning that the country performs very slightly worse at mental sports in general than one would expect based on its mean national intelligence. The predicted IQ of Nigeria was 73.1 based on a nonlinear model with just game performance as the predictor, Lynn and Vanhanen’s (2012) estimate was 71.2, and a recent large-scale study (n ≈ 11k) using Raven’s Standard Progressive Matrices found a mean IQ of 65.5 (Hur, Nijenhuis, & Jeong, 2017). The anomalously high Scrabble performance is not plausibly interpreted as hidden ability, but rather as a cultural specific preference for a specific sport.
4. There is considerable outflow from the LDS Church (e.g. /r/exmormon), and they tend to be the brighter ones, like “dissidents” usually are. High IQ Mormons are a select group, considering especially that this is a very constrictive religion (no tea/coffee WTF, I’d sooner be a Salafi Muslim).
To what extent does this annul the higher fertility of high IQ Mormons?
That said, it does have several… what we might diplomatically call dubious distinctions.
So far as I’m aware, it is the only country in the in the world to kick off its independence with literal white genocide – the real deal, not some half-hearted ethnic cleansing.
It is now the poorest, lowest IQ, most dysfunctional country in the western hemisphere.
And it also appears to be one of the very few countries in the world that is poorer today than it was back in the 1940s.
Whereas Haiti was once level pegging with the Dominican Republic, there is now a more than twofold gap between the two. No doubt on account of the Dominican Republic’s superior environmental practices. /s
PS. Sputnik and Pogrom reaction: “While Putin imports hordes of “talented and hard-working” Gastarbeiters into the RF, who give the country “massive advantages for development,” Trump is calling Haiti and Nigeria “shitholes” and is demanding the US import Norwegians. What an anti-multinational bastard!“
A growing number of Russians are coming to the U.S. to give birth. These kids will have the right to live and work here, receive social services and, when they turn 21, will have the right to sponsor their parents for an American Green Card. Read more: https://t.co/4doKwLoChnpic.twitter.com/zUSom9ui1w
There are about 300,000 babies born to foreign citizens in the US every year, of which the vast majority will be accruing to Central American illegals.
Only an estimated 40,000 occurs due to birth tourism.
There are no hard statistics on this. However, some cursory searching gave me this thesis by Brandon J. Folse, which cites “more than 10,000″ Chinese women giving birth in the US in 2012, and 40-60 Russian women giving birth in Miami each month (based on a Moscow Times report). Consequently, its safe to say that the total figure is less than 1,000, since Miami is the center of Russian birth tourism in the US, not to mention the long-standing tendency of The Moscow Times to exaggerate Russia’s emigration stats.
This would furthermore be in line with general immigration statistics.
China also sends the largest number of immigrants to the US after Mexico, and accounts for almost a third of its international students. This is understandable. China has very close commercial and cultural links with the US, and all things American enjoy a great deal of prestige in China.
In contrast, Russian emigration to the US is much more modest, even in per capita terms. It does not make the first 20 countries by numbers of total immigrants, nor the top 10 by numbers of foreign students.
It also syncs well with other anecdotal evidence and pure logic.
Twitter user Richard Hollywood investigates: “searching for birth tourism and репродуктивный туризм on yandex only brings up news/what is this articles. there’s some dedicated birth tourism sites in russian but also in like five other languages”
In fairness, he did eventually find the site SFF-Miami, which offers birth tourism services to Russians and Ukrainians in Florida. I checked its visitorship numbers on SimilarWeb; there weren’t enough for it to even register there. Which is not surprising when you look at the prices – the standard “package” there costs $19,500. Another similarly obscure organization, AmeriMama, offers prices starting from $17,000.
These are prices that only perhaps 1-2% of Russians are able to pay out on just a lark, since birth tourism is essentially just a gamble that their children would 1) want to emigrate to the US on reaching adulthood, and 2) be subsequently willing to being their parents over on a Green Card.
Another important point.
Although I can understand that red-blooded Americans may not like foreigners essentially buying up US citizenships for their progeny on account of some outdated document written at a time when the Americas were still an unpopulated expanse, it’s worth noting that it’s not as if the children of rich birth tourists are going to be any sort of strain on the US welfare system. They will give birth, fork over $$$ to the US medical system, hotels, etc., and go back home. Even if their children do subsequently go to the US, the chances that they will end up collecting welfare are close to zero.
Theoretically, the US should if anything gain financially, because it is the only country in the world (along with Eritrea) to claim taxes on the worldwide income of their citizens. I say theoretically, because in practice, I am sure that virtually no child of birth tourists is going to be doing that.
So why the media suddenly kvetching over this complete non-issue of a few thousand Russians practicing birth tourism and forming, as one Drumpf Resistor on Twitter put it, “the colony of Russian ppl (especially in NYC) nobodies talking about. Who I know coming here having babies getting public aid”?
As opposed to concerning themselves with the few million anchor babies planted by illegal immigrants in just the past couple of decades?
The right-wing agitator Mike Cernovich, the writer John Derbyshire and an alt-right figure named Kyle Chapman (so notorious for swinging a lead-filled stick at Trump opponents at a protest in Berkeley, Calif., that he is now a meme) are all married to women of Asian descent. As a commenter wrote on an alt-right forum, “exclusively” dating Asian women is practically a “white-nationalist rite of passage.”
My blog has been recognized as an alt-right forum by the NYT, cool.
He is clearly obsessed with the topic and overdoes the theme, but still, there’s a distinct pattern out there.
As I skipped classes to smoke in the courtyard, read Baudelaire to seem the “interesting” kind of smart and attempted to distance myself from the stereotypes, I didn’t know that the idea I wanted to run from — of Asians as civilized, advanced and highly intelligent — had roots in white supremacy.
The Chinese are market dominant minorities across swathes of South-East Asia to a far greater extent than in the US.
But you can have too much of a good thing, as evidenced by them getting repeatedly pogromed by Southern Mongoloid supremacists.
The main problem with white women, as many alt-right Asian fetishists have noted, is they’ve become too feminist.
That said, one Unz.com commenter suggests a more mundane reason for OP’s unhappiness: “Audrea is upset because not enough white guys have yellow fever for her. And she’s from Canada living in Brooklyn. She needs to go back.”
History – discoveries, revolutions, innovations – has always been made by the select few: The extraordinarily intelligent, and the extraordinarily driven and curious.
It is easy to proxy the former (IQ tests), but quantifying the latter is more difficult.
My suggestion: Look at the demographic composition of the “out of left field” groups whose equivalents would have met up at the 18th century coffee salons of London and Paris to discuss the separation of powers and the settlement of the Americas.
Before we go further, I would argue that the H+/EA/LW-sphere are actually less conformist than both OWS and Burning Man. One is a standard Leftist protest movement, and not a particularly radical one at that, and while it was once countercultural, Burning Man has long been suborned by… well, The Man. To the contrary, discussing the efficacy of different nootropics, trying to quantify the conscious experience of a parakeet, and analyzing the different takeoff scenarios for superintelligence really is quite… eccentric, in the best sense of that very English word, not to mention a great deal more g-loaded than camping out in Central Park or the Nevada desert. I would wager that these people are some of the likeliest to achieve major successes in culture, science, and technology on a per capita basis.
The first thing that jumps out is the substantial underrepresentation of Hispanics, the severe underrepresentation of Blacks, and the astounding overrepresentation of Jews – a pattern present across all groups, but particularly extreme in the Rationalism sphere. This is no puzzle for non-IQ deniers, so I will leave this without further comment.
The second notable thing is the relative underrepresentation of Asians, and the overrepresentation of Whites; a pattern that holds even when you subtract Jews from Whites. This is especially puzzling when you consider that Asian-Americans (median age – 36) are considerably younger than American Whites (median age – 43), though perhaps this is counterbalanced by some fraction of them hiding out in the “Other” and/or multiracial categories.
It is however less of a puzzle to those aware of the “Asian Paradox” in HBD discussions – the tendency for East Asian nations to outperform White ones on IQ tests, but to underperform them on scientific output (e.g. Japan produces less elite science than either Germany or the UK, despite a higher average national IQ and a much bigger population of 127 million versus 82 million and 65 million, respectively) and even on economic productivity. 52 million South Koreans produce about as much elite science as 8 million Swiss, as proxied by the number of annual publications in Nature. This is despite Japan having no NAMs to drag its average down, as in the US and much of Europe.
This general pattern pertains to Asian Americans as well, which suggests that not only cultural/national factors are involved. Although they score substantially higher than American Whites on IQ tests, and are vastly overrepresented amongst elite college enrollments – around 40% at Caltech, and 15% at other colleges where they are discriminated against by affirmative action, according to the numbers compiled by Ron Unz – non-boring accomplishment tend to trail off after that point. For instance, (the Japanese researcher) Kenya Kura notes: “Among undergrads, 40% or more are Asians, but graduate students are something like 20% (depending on departments). Faculty members are well less than 10%.” (This is not a difference that can be wholly or even mostly ascribed to the different age structure of the White and East Asian population). On the other hand, they do go on to make a lot more money than Whites (something that SJW propagandists of “white privilege” studiously ignore). This suggests East Asians in particular have a proclivity towards taking the safe, conformist, socially respectable, path in life.
Incidentally, I would also note that the one “out of left field” group in which East Asians are slightly overrepresented is Burning Man (though this vanishes when you consider that many of its participants come from the West Coast). However, it has long ceased to be any sort of particularly subversive and countercultural undercurrent – certainly by 2014, which is when the cited survey was taken. Over the past several years, Burning Man has been trending its way into the Californian SWPL memeplex, complete with corporate endorsements, luxury camps for Silicon Valley oligarchs, and police crackdowns on its old freewheeling drugs and nudist culture. Can’t get much more straight-laced than that.
Women don’t differ much from men in terms of IQ (serious estimates range from equality to a 5 point disadvantage), though they do have thinner tails, so there are significantly fewer very intelligent women than there are very intelligent men and this starts to become an increasingly important factor from around IQ=130 or so. Moreover, women are marginally superior in terms of verbal IQ, which tends to correlate best with worldly success. However, as is well known, sex differences in human accomplishment is where pure IQ reductionism – despite its general successes – fails most thoroughly and consistently, regardless of 20th century feminist achievements (women accounted for 4% of Nobel Prize winners in literature and the sciences in 1900-1950, and 3% in 1950-2000).
Women have near parity in Burning Man participation and Occupy Wall Street. Neither are principally anti-systemic, both have a sort of a cool/fun factor to which ordinary people are drawn to, and OWS in particular has a marked Leftist tilt (politically, relative to men, women are conformist Leftists). However, the female share falls to around 10% in the rationalist-sphere, which is much more g-loaded (average IQ is at least 2 S.D. above the average), and where you can only really have fun if you have a very specific personality type (rational, open-minded, abstract, data-centric). If we are to assume that membership/participation in them can be considered a proxy for curiosity as well as IQ, and bearing in mind that the discovery threshold for major new scientific discoveries is perhaps another S.D. or two higher than for participating in those communities, then the lingering paucity of female achievement in those areas to this day becomes more intuitively understandable.
The Effective Altruism community is basically a less abstract/more practical extension of the rationalist community, with strongly charitably overtones, so women are more prevalent within it.
1. Sociological concepts like “structural oppression” has never explained anything well, so why should the “bamboo ceiling” be an exception? As opposed to qualities such as curiosity actually being important for management and CEO positions?
2. Maybe, just maybe – as John Derbyshire seems to have intuited – elite college discrimination against Asians actually serves a purpose?
At least if your goal is not fairness, or pure meritocracy, or increasing the supply of quality doctors and lawyers and engineers… but maximizing the rate of innovation.
3. There doesn’t seem to be any reason the above argument can’t be extended to women.
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:
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.
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?
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?
Edward 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.
Map of Muslim share of each European country today and in 2015 (High scenario).
Here are the assumptions behind each of them:
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.
Medium: Refugee flows of 2014-2016 stop, but “regular” (non-asylum) immigration continues at current levels. Muslims increase to 11.2% of the population.
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:
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.
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).
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.
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).
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.
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.
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.
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).
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:
Least patriotic regions:
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.
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).
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.
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”
Safety from sexual violence
In an earlier post I noted that Moscow is the last and only megacity in the world where Europeans remain a solid majority.
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.”
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.
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).
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.
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.
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.
If you like the words I write, and want to see more of them, here’s a way you can make that happen: http://akarlin.com/donations/
This is not so much meant to be comprehensive as to illustrate the themes and individual thinkers whom I follow and am inspired by.
I do not bother including any MSM outlets, since I’m sure they can do just fine without my publicity.
Blogs which I consider to be particularly good and/or prominent are highlighted in bold, and blogs that appear to have gone dormant appear at the end in italics. While I try to keep these things objective, if you include me in your blogroll that does vastly increase the chances that I’ll reciprocate.