The Unz Review: An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 TeasersiSteve Blog
Jews Make Up 11 of World's 50 Richest
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Troll, or LOL with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used once per hour.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

From the Jewish Telegraphic Agency (a news wire service) last year:

Mark Zuckerberg is the world’s richest Jew, according to Forbes billionaire list

March 2, 2016 12:20pm

(JTA) — Mark Zuckerberg is the sixth richest person in the world, and the richest Jew, after accumulating more wealth than anyone else in the past year.

Eleven of the 50 richest people in the world are Jewish, according to the 30th annual Forbes billionaires list released Tuesday. The list features five Jews in the top 15 and seven in the top 25 spots.

If Jews make up about 0.2% of the world’s population, 22% of the Top Fifty represents about two orders of magnitude higher representation.

Last I checked, in 2011, Jews also represented about 22% of the hard science (Physics, Chemistry, Medicine) Nobel Prize winners since 1901. That’s impressive.

It’s doubly impressive to be equally well-represented in two types of achievement — making billions and winning Nobels — that are pretty different in personality.

 
Hide 146 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
  1. But I’ll be damned if they’re not a repressed minority deserving of special treatment here in America.

    • Replies: @cucksworth
    there is a sign at my virtue signaling local brunch diner that says 'we stand with Muslims, LBTQ, Immigrants yadda yadda', then at the bottom the last oppressed group is "Jewish people". and I get triggered every time I walk past it.
  2. • Replies: @Paul Walker - Most beautiful man ever...
    "Can I get you anything? some water?"
    This is some great passive aggressive trolling, and these hateful globalists like (((Summers))) need to be trolled constantly.
  3. anonymous • Disclaimer says: • Website

    If Jews make up about 0.2% of the world’s population, 22% of the Top Fifty represents about two orders of magnitude higher representation.

    and

    While far less numerous than their male counterparts, there are a number of Jewish women billionaires. On the list are Shari Arison ($3.9 billion), Pritzker family scion Karen Pritzker ($3.8 billion), Lynn Schusterman ($3.4 billion), Joan Tisch ($3.3 billion) and Gap co-founder Doris Fisher ($2.6 billion).

    There’s a gender gap!

  4. The “hard” sciences, and money, strike me as being basically of the same “family” of achievement.

    Your admiration for Jews always struck me as strange, Steve. You’re such an easy going laid back guy, one imagines you enjoy your pleasures and relaxations.

    You utterly lack the intensity of the Jewish personality, the zeal, the single minded focus, the inability to see “through” life and laugh at it, not take it too seriously.

    I don’t think you’d really like whites to become more Jewish, however much you seem to admire them. It’d be a nightmare for you.

    • Agree: utu
    • Replies: @Dave Pinsen
    I don't think there's a Jew in the world with Jeff Bezos's intensity (and before Syon or someone else pastes in 10 paragraphs from Wikipedia: yes, I know Bezos isn't Jewish; hence my use of him here as a contrast). I saw recently on Twitter that before Bezos settled on the name Amazon.com, he bought the domain Relentless.com.

    A friend married a literal Amazon who works at Amazon. They recently got divorced. She was more type-A than Hollywood's version of a type-A business gal.
    , @Doug
    I don't think that's necessarily true. Jews also make up some of the countries most prominent slackers and men of leisure: Seth Rogen, James Franco, Danny McBride, Anthony Bourdain. The list goes on.

    By all accounts Jews are just as much overachievers at relaxing as they are at highly intense pursuits.
    , @Joe Walker
    Steve just kisses their asses in the hopes that he might score a job at the New York Times or some other Jewish media outlet.
    , @iffen
    one imagines you enjoy your pleasures and relaxations.

    Such insight, it frigging staggers me.

    , @Ghost of Bull Moose
    "You utterly lack the intensity of the Jewish personality...the inability to see “through” life and laugh at it, not take it too seriously."

    Maybe if Jews could learn how to tell jokes, they'd loosen up a little.
    , @SFG
    Actually, with his argumentativeness, love of politics and public affairs, and wide-ranging interests, he'd probably make a pretty good Jew if he wanted to convert. (Not that I'm saying he SHOULD.) He'd be the annoying right-wing guy in the back of the temple, but he would otherwise fit in pretty well I think.
    , @LilyoftheValley
    'the inability to see “through” life and laugh at it'

    And that would be why there are so few Jewish comedians.
  5. I guess Bezos is not Jewish.

    • Replies: @Clyde
    The last time Jeff Bezos, the 49-year-old CEO and founder of Amazon, saw his biological father, he was three years old.

    His biological father, whose name is Ted Jorgensen, was 18 when he impregnated Bezos' mother, Jacklyn Gise, who herself was 17. They were both still in high school at the time. They got married before their son was born.

    The marriage lasted only 17 months, reports Brad Stone at Bloomberg Businessweek, who has unearthed astonishing new details about Bezos' family's early years.

    Gise moved in with her parents because Jorgensen stayed out late, and drank too much, and was generally an inattentive father and husband says Stone. He agreed to a divorce, and paid a small amount of child support to Gise when he had money. Other times he missed the payments.

    Three years after their divorce, Gise married another man, Miguel Bezos, a Cuban immigrant who taught himself English, and eventually worked at Exxon. Miguel adopted Jeff, and Jeff took his last name. Jorgensen had to sign off on the name change, which he did, Stone reports.

    For a brief period Jorgensen remembered the Bezos name, but through the years he forgot about it, and dropped completely out of touch with his ex-wife and his son.

    Jorgensen's absence from Bezos' life was so complete that in a 1999 interview with Wired, Bezos said of Jorgensen, "I've never met him," although, in reality he lived with him for the first year of his life.

    "The reality, as far as I'm concerned, is that my Dad is my natural father. The only time I ever think about it, genuinely, is when a doctor asks me to fill out a form," said Bezos in 1999.

    Jorgensen, for his part, had a nearly identical attitude about Bezos.

    However, Stone managed to find Jorgensen, now 69, who owns a bike shop in Glendale, Arizona.

    Here's how Jorgensen reacted when Stone introduced himself: "He had no idea what I was talking about. Jorgensen said he didn’t know who Jeff Bezos was and was baffled by my suggestion that he was the father of this famous CEO."

    Stone jogged Jorgensen's memory, trotting out details about Bezos and his mother. Says Stone, "The old man’s face flushed with recognition. 'Is he still alive?' he asked, not yet fully comprehending."

    Bezos' biological father had disconnected so thoroughly from Bezos life that not only did he not remember his name, and not only did he not realize his son was one of the richest men in the world, but he wasn't even sure if his son was still alive.

    Jorgensen says that in his younger days "I wasn’t a good father or a husband." He eventually quit drinking, got his act together and opened his bike shop. He's married, but had no other children in his life beyond Bezos.

    A family friend told Stone later that Jorgensen felt overwhelmed with sadness and regret. He wants to get in touch with Bezos, but it's unclear if that will ever happen.

    Stone has a book coming out about Amazon. It's excerpted at Bloomberg BusinessWeek. The stuff about his father starts at the bottom of the seventh page.
    http://www.businessinsider.com/jeff-bezos-biological-father-2013-10
    , @syonredux

    (Jeffrey Preston Jorgensen)
    January 12, 1964 —
    If this was HispanicOrNotHispanic.com, Amazon.com founder Jeff Bezos would make an excellent profile. Yes, he is often referred to as Hispanic, but the link comes from his Cuban stepfather.

    But this is not HispanicOrNotHispanic.com...

    If this was ScandinavianOrNotScandinavian.com, Amazon.com founder Jeff Bezos would make an excellent profile. You see, despite the non-nordic last name, he is Scandinavian! His birth father, a star unicyclist(!), was named Jorgensen.

    But this is not ScandinavianOrNotScandinavian.com...

    This is JewOrNotJew.com, of course! And we're not sure if Amazon.com founder Jeff Bezos would make an excellent profile on this website...

    But enough people are asking!

    Verdict: Sadly, not a Jew.
     
    http://www.jewornotjew.com/profile.jsp?ID=1827
  6. “It’s doubly impressive to be equally well-represented in two types of achievement — making billions and winning Nobels”

    So why hate on them? One hates people who’re ONLY good at a bad thing, right? Aren’t your criticism of them a lot like others’ criticism of whites?

    “Whites were just good at stealing our stuff”. Well, that, and also inventing stuff and exploring stuff and imagining stuff and running stuff and saving stuff etc. etc. They just happened to go through a phase where they were rocking in many many things, good AND bad.

    Why not extend the same courtesy to Jews? It’d at least have the virtue of intellectual consistency!

    • Replies: @Joe Walker
    We hate Jews because they use their money and power to undermine white gentiles. Jews are big advocates of multiracial, multi-religious and multi-ethnic migration to Europe and the United States but want to keep Israel for the Jews. The Jews won't be happy as long as there is a single nation where white gentiles are a dominant majority.
    , @AnotherDad

    Why not extend the same courtesy to Jews? It’d at least have the virtue of intellectual consistency!
     
    Vinay, I think you have the 'arrow of hostility' pointing the wrong way.
    , @mobi

    Why not extend the same courtesy to Jews? It’d at least have the virtue of intellectual consistency!
     
    Try this thought experiment:

    'Every parasite has earned its success every bit as much as every host has (true). Therefore, why should any host object to being parasitised?'

    Correct, or not correct?

    (You appear to be too slow a learner to actually be one of them).

  7. Show us the figures for the USA.
    Go ahead, I dare you.

  8. @Luke Lea
    I guess Bezos is not Jewish.

    The last time Jeff Bezos, the 49-year-old CEO and founder of Amazon, saw his biological father, he was three years old.

    His biological father, whose name is Ted Jorgensen, was 18 when he impregnated Bezos’ mother, Jacklyn Gise, who herself was 17. They were both still in high school at the time. They got married before their son was born.

    The marriage lasted only 17 months, reports Brad Stone at Bloomberg Businessweek, who has unearthed astonishing new details about Bezos’ family’s early years.

    Gise moved in with her parents because Jorgensen stayed out late, and drank too much, and was generally an inattentive father and husband says Stone. He agreed to a divorce, and paid a small amount of child support to Gise when he had money. Other times he missed the payments.

    Three years after their divorce, Gise married another man, Miguel Bezos, a Cuban immigrant who taught himself English, and eventually worked at Exxon. Miguel adopted Jeff, and Jeff took his last name. Jorgensen had to sign off on the name change, which he did, Stone reports.

    For a brief period Jorgensen remembered the Bezos name, but through the years he forgot about it, and dropped completely out of touch with his ex-wife and his son.

    Jorgensen’s absence from Bezos’ life was so complete that in a 1999 interview with Wired, Bezos said of Jorgensen, “I’ve never met him,” although, in reality he lived with him for the first year of his life.

    “The reality, as far as I’m concerned, is that my Dad is my natural father. The only time I ever think about it, genuinely, is when a doctor asks me to fill out a form,” said Bezos in 1999.

    Jorgensen, for his part, had a nearly identical attitude about Bezos.

    However, Stone managed to find Jorgensen, now 69, who owns a bike shop in Glendale, Arizona.

    Here’s how Jorgensen reacted when Stone introduced himself: “He had no idea what I was talking about. Jorgensen said he didn’t know who Jeff Bezos was and was baffled by my suggestion that he was the father of this famous CEO.”

    Stone jogged Jorgensen’s memory, trotting out details about Bezos and his mother. Says Stone, “The old man’s face flushed with recognition. ‘Is he still alive?’ he asked, not yet fully comprehending.”

    Bezos’ biological father had disconnected so thoroughly from Bezos life that not only did he not remember his name, and not only did he not realize his son was one of the richest men in the world, but he wasn’t even sure if his son was still alive.

    Jorgensen says that in his younger days “I wasn’t a good father or a husband.” He eventually quit drinking, got his act together and opened his bike shop. He’s married, but had no other children in his life beyond Bezos.

    A family friend told Stone later that Jorgensen felt overwhelmed with sadness and regret. He wants to get in touch with Bezos, but it’s unclear if that will ever happen.

    Stone has a book coming out about Amazon. It’s excerpted at Bloomberg BusinessWeek. The stuff about his father starts at the bottom of the seventh page.
    http://www.businessinsider.com/jeff-bezos-biological-father-2013-10

    • Replies: @BB753
    Gise is either a rare English surname or a German surname. Is Bezos Jewish on his mother's side?
    , @Anonymous
    Jeff Bazos is 53, not 49.
    , @George
    Of the tech pioneers Bezos, Jobs, and Ellison were adopted. It seems tech pioneers come disproportionately from one of 2 backgrounds, private schooling up to high school and broken homes.
    , @Gunnar
    I would like to offer an alternative theory of why Jorgensen seemed puzzled and disconnected and asked, "Is he still alive." It is possible that he was told at a certain the boy had died, just to permanently get him out of their new lives.

    This happened to a friend of mine. He was told by his mother that his father wanted nothing to do with him. Post-divorce, his mother, meanwhile, now living several states away, told the father that my friend was killed in a car accident. 30 years later, after the mother had died, my friend used the Internet to look up his father. He left a message on an answering machine, and a very puzzled father called back, thinking there must be a mistake. A few weeks later, there was a big tearful family reunion, as my friend discovered a family he didn't know he had, half-brothers and half-sisters and cousins.

    Anyway, something like that could explain Jorgensen's confusion.
  9. La Griffe du Lion calculates that Jews should constitute about a quarter of any group whose distinguishing characteristic is very high intelligence, in this and a few other articles:

    http://www.lagriffedulion.f2s.com/dialogue.htm

    • Replies: @ANON
    No argument here, so long as we all agree at the outset that ethnic nepotism equals achievement.
  10. Jews Rock!

    • Replies: @Jenner Ickham Errican
    Inspired by Kars4Kids?

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hLcyzwwfumA
  11. @Anon Chief
    La Griffe du Lion calculates that Jews should constitute about a quarter of any group whose distinguishing characteristic is very high intelligence, in this and a few other articles:

    http://www.lagriffedulion.f2s.com/dialogue.htm

    No argument here, so long as we all agree at the outset that ethnic nepotism equals achievement.

    • Replies: @Anon Chief
    Ethnic nepotism can take you to a grocery store job, but it can not take you all the way to a Nobel Prize.

    Or a Fields Medal, or an ACM Turing Award, or a Westinghouse Science Prize, or a world chess championship. Or even to dozens of billions of dollars, for that matter.

    La Griffe du Lion offers a more useful model:

    http://www.lagriffedulion.f2s.com/ashkenaz.htm
    , @Jake
    There is a great deal of truth in that. Jews, regardless of professed ideology, manage to use their positions to find and promote a seemingly endless number of Jews. And that means cutting out whitey the Gentile.

    Of course, none of that could have happened in any area of life and work in the Anglosphere if the WASP Elites hadn't wanted it. The WASP Elites wanted Jews as allies to make it much harder for non-Elite whites to compete.
    , @Reg Cæsar

    No argument here, so long as we all agree at the outset that ethnic nepotism equals achievement.
     
    I was unaware of the high levels of achievement in Cambodia, Venezuela, and Somalia:

    https://www.transparency.org/news/feature/corruption_perceptions_index_2016
    , @Deso Dogg
    It's really amazing how Jews, 0.2% of the world's population, are somehow capable of using "muh nepotism" (which Sicilians, Somalis, Chinese, etc. have definitely never heard of) to achieve success across so many different domains in some fashion that no subgroup of the Gentiles making up the other 99.8% of the world's population are able to replicate.

    Your argument is strikingly comparable to that of anti-European "scholars"/activists who deny the reality of extensive European accomplishment by claiming at every even remotely plausible turn that People Of Color played a critical yet now forgotten role. (E.g. "the US's prosperity is the result of slavery and genocide".)
  12. Just wanted to let y’all know, I’m not one of those eleven billionaires, and I haven’t won the Nobel Prize.

    • Replies: @JackOH
    LOL, IJ:) The two sons of a childhood, observant Jewish friend of mine are an assistant manager at a discount store, and a newly minted Ph. D. who's resigned himself to being an academic gypsy working on year-to-year contracts. Paternal grandfather made some money in neon signs. Maternal grandfather was a plumber. I get my car fixed at a small shop whose Jewish owner-mechanic is the second generation. Looks like they missed the memo on sumpin'.
    , @Anonymous

    Just wanted to let y’all know, I’m not one of those eleven billionaires, and I haven’t won the Nobel Prize.

     

    No kidding, and no sarcasm:
    I (Anonymous) am genetically 50% Jewish,
    not even a millionaire, close to retirement,
    and I have been twice nominated for Nobel Prize in Physics, but evidently will not get it;
    and nowI definitely feel I did not deserve N.P.
    *
    Joke: "But I stayed in Holiday Inn Express last night."
    , @Moshe
    Just wanted to let y’all know, I’m one of the billionaires and I won the Nobel Prize.

    Neither of which are reported, for tax reasons.
    , @ic1000
    > Just wanted to let y’all know... I haven’t won the Nobel Prize.

    Yet.
    , @Jus' Sayin'...
    Slacker!
    , @Olorin
    Hm. Have you tried inventing dynamite?
    , @Paul Walker - Most beautiful man ever...
    "Just wanted to let y’all know, I’m not one of those eleven billionaires, and I haven’t won the Nobel Prize."
    Well, according to the literature you're considered the Untalented Tenth.
  13. @Luke Lea
    I guess Bezos is not Jewish.

    (Jeffrey Preston Jorgensen)
    January 12, 1964 —
    If this was HispanicOrNotHispanic.com, Amazon.com founder Jeff Bezos would make an excellent profile. Yes, he is often referred to as Hispanic, but the link comes from his Cuban stepfather.

    But this is not HispanicOrNotHispanic.com…

    If this was ScandinavianOrNotScandinavian.com, Amazon.com founder Jeff Bezos would make an excellent profile. You see, despite the non-nordic last name, he is Scandinavian! His birth father, a star unicyclist(!), was named Jorgensen.

    But this is not ScandinavianOrNotScandinavian.com…

    This is JewOrNotJew.com, of course! And we’re not sure if Amazon.com founder Jeff Bezos would make an excellent profile on this website…

    But enough people are asking!

    Verdict: Sadly, not a Jew.

    http://www.jewornotjew.com/profile.jsp?ID=1827

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    I'd call Bezos 1/4th Hispanic through his adoptive father (assuming a 50/50 nature/nurture split).
  14. @Paul Walker - Most beautiful man ever...
    Jews Rock!
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jgNDA_Z2H0U

    Inspired by Kars4Kids?

    • Replies: @riches
    Thanks for the big aha

    I've been muting the jingle at its opening strains for years. (Our local CBS o&o radio station would've folded its transmitter long ago if not for the revenue it hauls in from k4k.)

    Now I have a more defensible reason.
  15. @AaronB
    The "hard" sciences, and money, strike me as being basically of the same "family" of achievement.

    Your admiration for Jews always struck me as strange, Steve. You're such an easy going laid back guy, one imagines you enjoy your pleasures and relaxations.

    You utterly lack the intensity of the Jewish personality, the zeal, the single minded focus, the inability to see "through" life and laugh at it, not take it too seriously.

    I don't think you'd really like whites to become more Jewish, however much you seem to admire them. It'd be a nightmare for you.

    I don’t think there’s a Jew in the world with Jeff Bezos’s intensity (and before Syon or someone else pastes in 10 paragraphs from Wikipedia: yes, I know Bezos isn’t Jewish; hence my use of him here as a contrast). I saw recently on Twitter that before Bezos settled on the name Amazon.com, he bought the domain Relentless.com.

    A friend married a literal Amazon who works at Amazon. They recently got divorced. She was more type-A than Hollywood’s version of a type-A business gal.

    • Replies: @AaronB
    That is true, Bezos is in a class of his own. As is Musk. And Kalanick. All cut from the same cloth of relentlessness.

    But that really shows you what this game is about...

    Maybe one day HBDers will get over their unscientific belief that motivation is unvarying across ethnic groups....

    Once we get motivation-denialists to admit their position is unscientific, we will force them to take the next step dictated by science, and admit that groups exhibit variation in personality traits over time - i.e, today's highly motivated may become tomorrow's lazy bums - and that a broad range of social and historical conditions can be considered relevant to such variations, such as, say, recent defeats, recent victories, sense of threat, sense of being under siege, sense of purpose and meaning, need to prove oneself, neurotic anxiety, and countless other factors.

    We will get them, finally, to admit the existence of Time, which they currently deny - and force them to abandon their astonishing habit of treating contemporary conditions as enshrining eternal truths and literally ignoring the entire historical record with its fascinating account of change and reversal, as if it didn't exist.

    But maybe I am being too optimistic.

    , @Stan Adams
    I have something in common with Jeff Bezos that (most likely) no one reading this comment has. It's nothing important, and it certainly doesn't link us in any meaningful way, but it is a minor attribute that we share that sets us apart from the great bulk of mankind.
  16. The Nobel for Literature is politicized to the point where it’s mostly garbage, but my sense is that WASPs still dominate novels. Great WASP genre novelists like Neal Stephenson and Kim Stanley Robinson are better than most non-WASP literary novelists, I’d venture. And among literary novelists, few match the likes of Pynchon or Franzen.

    • Replies: @johnmark7
    No current American novelist matches the Puritan descended (1630) Mark Butterworth, but then he is one quarter Jewish. Oy Vey, his family miscegenated with immigrants.

    https://www.amazon.com/River-Park-Mark-Butterworth-ebook/dp/B00ULL7YH0/ref=asap_bc?ie=UTF8

    https://www.amazon.com/My-Inferiors-Mark-Butterworth-ebook/dp/B008KO2MBS/ref=asap_bc?ie=UTF8

    https://www.amazon.com/Like-White-World-Mark-Butterworth-ebook/dp/B00BR53TPA/ref=asap_bc?ie=UTF8

    https://www.amazon.com/Like-White-World-Mark-Butterworth-ebook/dp/B00BR53TPA/ref=asap_bc?ie=UTF8
  17. anon • Disclaimer says:

    There is definitely some variable besides IQ at play as well. Maybe some combination of extroversion, drive, and nepotism (depending on the industry).

    I always thought it was funny how many of the trashy daytime talk shows (what wikipedia calls tabloid talk shows) had Jewish hosts.

    From back in its 90s heyday, when I was kid with endless summer days, I can recall:

    Oprah
    Phil Donahue
    Montel Williams
    Maury Povich
    Ricki Lake
    Sally Jesse Ralphael
    Jenny Jones
    Jerry Springer

    So that’s five people of Jewish descent, two blacks, and a white gentile! Jewish women also seem highly over-represented in other forms of entertainment genres with working-class audiences: relationship advice (Dr. Laura, Dear Abby, Ann Landers), psychic Sylvia Browne, and Judge Judy.

    • Replies: @Anon 2
    Even though Jenny Jones (née Janina Stroński) was
    born in Bethlehem, Palestine, she is not Jewish.
    Her parents were Polish Christians. Her father was
    a Polish officer who happened to be with the British
    Armed Forces in 1946 when she was born. So that
    makes two talk show hosts - her and Martha Stewart
    (née Kostyra) - who are Polish Americans. Meg Ryan
    (née Hyra) - the queen of the 1990s romantic comedies -
    also has Polish ancestry
    , @Stan Adams
    Don't forget Geraldo Rivera, son of a Puerto Rican father and a Jewish mother.

    Geraldo's maternal grandparents were sufficiently leery about their daughter's marrying a Catholic that his father felt compelled to change his last name:

    My father Allen Cruz Rivera worked for Republic [Aviation]. "Allen" was Dad's nom de mariage, taken to assuage his Jewish in-laws when he married my mother Lilly Friedman. Cruz, which translates as "cross" in English, was Dad's real first name, but he worried that my mother’s family would choke on the Christianity of it.
     
    His mother didn't help matters:

    When I was born, my mother filled in my birth certificate with the name Gerald Riviera, adding an extra “i” to my father’s surname. She did the same thing for my sister Irene. Later, she would drop the pretense for my sister Sharon, only to pick it up again with the birth of my baby brother Craig. Whenever we asked about the inconsistencies, she would shrug shyly and joke her way out of it. “I just forgot how to spell it,” she would say, and leave it at that. Underneath, I came to realize, she was deeply embarrassed over what was a clumsy attempt at an ethnic cover-up.

    With my parents and youngster sister known as Rivera, and with various documents bearing one spelling or the other, we were all confused. School officials were also stymied. My high school yearbook carried one spelling for my graduation photo, and the other for my team pictures. Over the years, the name-game has been an absurd humiliation, forcing me into countless and often contradictory explanations. Once I became a public person, it even gave rise to the convoluted tale — first spun by a New York disc jockey in 1973 — that I was a Jew posing as a Puerto Rican to cash in on affirmative action, and that my real family name was Rivers.
     



    Phil Donahue* was the godfather of the daytime TV talkfest, and was regarded by some as the most "legitimate" of the bunch.

    The names you listed were only the most successful. Over the years, there have been dozens, if not hundreds, of short-lived gabfests. Legions of celebrities, including such illustrious names as Carnie Wilson, Roseanne Barr, Anderson Cooper, and Katie Couric**, have tried, and failed, to grab a piece of the action.

    This clip is only one minute long, but it gives you a sense of the borefest that was Carnie, the most-hyped new talk show of the 1995/96 TV season:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U-JeE3ZX-AE

    In the early '80s, David Letterman had a daytime show. It was such a convoluted hodgepodge that it included a (serious) news segment hosted by Edwin Newman - the guy who anchored NBC's coverage of such events as the Kennedy assassination and the Reagan assassination attempt.

    Fortunately, the network higher-ups finally figured out that Letterman was a late-night talent and gave him the coveted after-Carson time slot.

    Letterman's slot had long been occupied by Tom Snyder, a 6'4" Jew. Years later, the after-Letterman slot was given to Bob Costas, an Irish-Greek manlet best known for hosting NBC's (all but unwatchable) coverage of the Olympics.

    In the late '90s, Snyder hosted an after-Letterman show on CBS. Snyder's replacement on that show was Craig Kilborn, a 6'5" frat-boyish goy who had been hosting Comedy Central's Daily Show. Kilborn, a washed-up jock, eventually washed out and was replaced by a succession of British imports.

    The first - Craig Ferguson - was a lanky Scotsman with a cheesy fake robotic sidekick; the second - James Corden - is a squat, fat Englishman whose main shtick is driving his guests around Los Angeles while forcing them to screech out tunes at the top of their lungs.

    Kilborn's replacement at Comedy Central was a short Jewish guy named Jon Stewart, who earlier had hosted a (very obscure) syndicated late-night show. Stewart made the Daily Show a lot more political, and by doing so put himself in a much higher tax bracket. (I've never found him funny, but there you go.)

    Stephen Colbert, Letterman's successor at CBS, is a) 5'11", b) not Jewish, and c) not funny.

    *When Donahue retired, he said of his competitors, "They are all my illegitimate children, and I love them all equally."

    **Useless trivia: What do Barbara Walters, Jane Pauley, Katie Couric, and Meredith Vieira have in common?

    (Only two of them - Walters and Couric - are Jewish, although Vieira's husband is Jewish and raised her kids as Jewish. See below.)

    The answer is all of them co-anchored NBC's Today show and then went on to host their own failed daytime talk shows.

    (Walters' show, Not for Women Only, was the most successful of the four.)

    Vieira was raised Catholic, and is raising her kids Jewish. She explains, "Richard is a cultural Jew. He's not observant. But he wanted to raise the children Jewish and I said, 'That's fine but you’ve gotta take the lead here because I don't really know much about Judaism.' He said 'no problem.'" The family celebrates Jewish holidays. "We love Passover," Vieira says. "But we don’t go to temple."
     
  18. @Dave Pinsen
    I don't think there's a Jew in the world with Jeff Bezos's intensity (and before Syon or someone else pastes in 10 paragraphs from Wikipedia: yes, I know Bezos isn't Jewish; hence my use of him here as a contrast). I saw recently on Twitter that before Bezos settled on the name Amazon.com, he bought the domain Relentless.com.

    A friend married a literal Amazon who works at Amazon. They recently got divorced. She was more type-A than Hollywood's version of a type-A business gal.

    That is true, Bezos is in a class of his own. As is Musk. And Kalanick. All cut from the same cloth of relentlessness.

    But that really shows you what this game is about…

    Maybe one day HBDers will get over their unscientific belief that motivation is unvarying across ethnic groups….

    Once we get motivation-denialists to admit their position is unscientific, we will force them to take the next step dictated by science, and admit that groups exhibit variation in personality traits over time – i.e, today’s highly motivated may become tomorrow’s lazy bums – and that a broad range of social and historical conditions can be considered relevant to such variations, such as, say, recent defeats, recent victories, sense of threat, sense of being under siege, sense of purpose and meaning, need to prove oneself, neurotic anxiety, and countless other factors.

    We will get them, finally, to admit the existence of Time, which they currently deny – and force them to abandon their astonishing habit of treating contemporary conditions as enshrining eternal truths and literally ignoring the entire historical record with its fascinating account of change and reversal, as if it didn’t exist.

    But maybe I am being too optimistic.

    • Agree: ic1000
    • Replies: @Dave Pinsen
    Of the three, I'd say Bezos is superior morally. His shareholders have done phenomenally well since Amazon's IPO, though he's hollowed out main streets across the country. Musk has starry-eyed ambitions, and his Tesla shareholders have done well recently, but he keeps diluting them and will eventually burn them to a crisp. Using Tesla to bailout his solar roof company run by his cousin, while benefiting from government largess in all three of his companies was sketchy.

    Kalanick rides the caboose morally. Uber is sleazier than the taxi cartels it disrupted.

    , @Moshe
    Are you ignoring genetics?

    "DRIVE" (or taking-things-as-weighty perhaps) appears to be a large factor in western style "Success!"

    It's common knowledge by now that women have intelligence capacities that far outshine their "Accomplishments!" and, though I may as yet be the only man on Earth with this insight, I have found that people of recent primarily sub-saharan ancestry have Far greater intelligence capacities than their "Successes!" might imply to less chilled out ethnics.

    I admire them both. The former was laid out by Mencken (in greatest detail buy a book dedicated to the subject which he had originally intended to be sarcastic), the whether women use this principle-less approach to gain happiness rather than babies is of greater doubt. Mencken as well as more contemporary people appear to believe that women are, on average, far less happy than men.

    As for ppl of recent primarily sub-saharan ancestry, they tend not to have too many externally-relevant principles either but, more importantly, they benefit (though not with...."SUCCESS!") from not feeling an atavistic evolutionary drive to extend their consciousness - and conscientiousness - beyond the moment.

    If the Lord has a chosen people to whom he shows his favor it is them.

    Noticeably, "going easy" becomes less pronounced with cheap out-of-africa genetic introgression.

    But yes, from hundreds of personal interactions it appears to me that blacks, on Average, appear to be a whole hell of a lot more intelligent than they appear by Western judges of What Is Best In Life.

    , @ic1000
    Sorry, I didn't mean to hit the "Agree" button. Your response to Dave Pinsen was fairly silly, IMO.

    > Maybe one day HBDers will get over their unscientific belief that motivation is unvarying across ethnic groups…

    Re: Motivation being "unvarying across ethnic groups": I suppose that means it's not "nurture" (as "culture" generally has a substantial "ethnic-group" component), and also not heritable (as ethnic identity is generally inherited). Perhaps Motivation is an entirely stochastic trait, and some HBD'er, somewhere, may believe that. However, I don't recall reading a claim along those lines.
  19. We can do better.

    My distant uncle arrived in this country with barely enough money to buy an apartment building and a very, VERY small textile factory.

  20. two types of achievement — making billions and winning Nobels — that are pretty different in personality.

    Not really. Psychological intensity and networking for both.

  21. @AaronB
    That is true, Bezos is in a class of his own. As is Musk. And Kalanick. All cut from the same cloth of relentlessness.

    But that really shows you what this game is about...

    Maybe one day HBDers will get over their unscientific belief that motivation is unvarying across ethnic groups....

    Once we get motivation-denialists to admit their position is unscientific, we will force them to take the next step dictated by science, and admit that groups exhibit variation in personality traits over time - i.e, today's highly motivated may become tomorrow's lazy bums - and that a broad range of social and historical conditions can be considered relevant to such variations, such as, say, recent defeats, recent victories, sense of threat, sense of being under siege, sense of purpose and meaning, need to prove oneself, neurotic anxiety, and countless other factors.

    We will get them, finally, to admit the existence of Time, which they currently deny - and force them to abandon their astonishing habit of treating contemporary conditions as enshrining eternal truths and literally ignoring the entire historical record with its fascinating account of change and reversal, as if it didn't exist.

    But maybe I am being too optimistic.

    Of the three, I’d say Bezos is superior morally. His shareholders have done phenomenally well since Amazon’s IPO, though he’s hollowed out main streets across the country. Musk has starry-eyed ambitions, and his Tesla shareholders have done well recently, but he keeps diluting them and will eventually burn them to a crisp. Using Tesla to bailout his solar roof company run by his cousin, while benefiting from government largess in all three of his companies was sketchy.

    Kalanick rides the caboose morally. Uber is sleazier than the taxi cartels it disrupted.

    • Replies: @AaronB
    You may be right about Bezos. I was reading he is a true intuitive organizational genius, also...

    And Kalanick is just a miserable human being...

    But I'm reminded of that NYT article a while ago about conditions at Amazon. Our most highly educated people, our best talent, are enduring horrific and abusive conditions in order to accomplish a task of truly world-historical importance....cutting down delivery times from a day to a few hours...

    Sure, its not Bezos fault, these people are willing slaves. But it is remarkable.
  22. Russia has a large Armenian diaspora (0.8% of the population), who contributed to different aspects and culture of Russia. Armenians also hold disproportionate amount of wealth and businesses. Russian IQ is estimated at 98. You would think that Armenians should have really impressive IQ, but it’s just 94. Even if Armenians in Russia have slightly higher IQ on average then Armenians in Armenia it doesn’t explain their success in Russia.
    Another example. Lebanese diaspora in Latin America. They are doing quite well. Carlos Slim, once the richest person in the world, current president of Brazil, current first lady of Argentina … if there was statistics on wealth of Lebanese diaspora compared with average Latin American population I’m quiet sure, Lebanese would hold disproportionate amount of wealth as well.

    What is common, they are all tribal, have close bonds and would prefer someone of their ethnicity to non-Jew, non-Armenian, non-Lebanese. Of course, those are averages.

    Let’s take facebook as example. Zuckerberg, Moscovits, Saverin have central role in it and literally made tens of billions of dollars. McCollum, Hughes, Winklevoss not so. You can argue that they didn’t play a key role, left it or Winklevoss was a charlatan. I don’t argue these may be the real reasons. But if you look up other examples, it repeats itself, again and again, reminding you of a pattern when there are those behind the scene and those who made billions. Take this:

    In late 2007, Mark Zuckerberg (Jew), co-founder and chief executive of Facebook, met Sandberg (Jew) at a Christmas party held by Dan Rosensweig (Jew). Zuckerberg had no formal search for a COO, but thought of Sandberg as “a perfect fit” for this role.

    See, how easy. Same with Susan Wojcicki. Or read the story of Elena Kagan. How she was promoted and who she promoted during her tenure at Harvard. Seariosly, read it.

    I don’t want to dispel contribution made by Jews to science and culture. But there are more whites with IQ >130 (and their average would be ~140-145) than Jews in America. So, there are other more important factors (like tribalism) that play role in Jewish success.

    • Replies: @Ghost of Bull Moose
    Arabs and Jews and other people do well in Latin America because they don't have to deal with a Protestant work ethic.
    , @Anon 2
    Susan Wojcicki, CEO of YouTube, is only half-Jewish.
    Her father is Stanley Wojcicki, chair of the Physics Dept.
    at Stanford, who is a Polish Christian. Wojcicki is a common
    Polish name.

    I discussed the matter with someone who said he was Jewish.
    He insisted on the one-drop rule which would make her Jewish
    without any qualifications. I pointed out that the one-drop
    rule would make perhaps 30% of all Americans black (incl. Hispanics
    with some African ancestry), maybe even himself. He was not happy
    with this counterargument.

    Albert Michelson, the first foreign-born American to win the Nobel
    Prize in Physics, partly for the famous Michelson-Morley
    experiment that disproved the existence of ether, was another example
    of someone who was half-Polish, half-Jewish. He was born in Strzelno
    in central Poland, interestingly very close to Copernicus' birthplace.
    In the 19th century the area was under Prussian rule.
    There were about 3 million Jews living among Polish Christians in the
    Polish lands in the 19th century. Although intermarriage was rare, it
    did happen. Proximity breeds.

    Some people have pointed out that Jews are overrepresented in boring,
    indoor, bourgeois occupations, and severely underrepresented among great
    explorers, astronauts, sea captains, military generals, admirals, officers,
    great athletes, mountain climbers, naturalists (e.g., biologists), park
    rangers, hunters, painters, sculptors, architects (except recently), inventors
    and engineers (except recently)
  23. @Dave Pinsen
    Of the three, I'd say Bezos is superior morally. His shareholders have done phenomenally well since Amazon's IPO, though he's hollowed out main streets across the country. Musk has starry-eyed ambitions, and his Tesla shareholders have done well recently, but he keeps diluting them and will eventually burn them to a crisp. Using Tesla to bailout his solar roof company run by his cousin, while benefiting from government largess in all three of his companies was sketchy.

    Kalanick rides the caboose morally. Uber is sleazier than the taxi cartels it disrupted.

    You may be right about Bezos. I was reading he is a true intuitive organizational genius, also…

    And Kalanick is just a miserable human being…

    But I’m reminded of that NYT article a while ago about conditions at Amazon. Our most highly educated people, our best talent, are enduring horrific and abusive conditions in order to accomplish a task of truly world-historical importance….cutting down delivery times from a day to a few hours…

    Sure, its not Bezos fault, these people are willing slaves. But it is remarkable.

    • Replies: @Dave Pinsen
    Oh, Bezos is no saint. Amazon is a tough place to work, from the offices to the warehouses. I was just ranking the three of them.

    And morality aside, Bezos is the greatest entrepreneur of his generation (I'd rank Bloomberg as the best among boomers, and Zuckerberg as the best among millennials).
  24. It’s doubly impressive to be equally well-represented in two types of achievement — making billions and winning Nobels — that are pretty different in personality.

    I would guess there is a multiplier effect at work. If you are AZ, you have a modest IQ boost, but also there is a pretty good chance you have parents who are pretty intelligent and in a better position to help you financially. It’s far easier to start a successful business if you come from a wealthy family. It’s far easier to become a successful intellectual if your parents are already somewhat intellectual.

    • Agree: prole
  25. @Anonymous
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XtWx-8VESC8

    “Can I get you anything? some water?”
    This is some great passive aggressive trolling, and these hateful globalists like (((Summers))) need to be trolled constantly.

  26. Only 22%! Once we rid the scourges of anti-semitism and White Privelege we will be in the majority to finally end you goy cattle!

  27. Kyle McKenna [AKA "MIKA-NON"] says:

    This is the first time and place that I’ve read that Jeff Bezos wasn’t Jewish. Not that I gave it too much thought previously. At least he’s removed all the books relating to holocaust revisionism from Amazon.com.

    Of course, you could always just look at him. That’s how we knew about Madeleine Albright long before the NYT admitted it.

  28. Doug says:
    @AaronB
    The "hard" sciences, and money, strike me as being basically of the same "family" of achievement.

    Your admiration for Jews always struck me as strange, Steve. You're such an easy going laid back guy, one imagines you enjoy your pleasures and relaxations.

    You utterly lack the intensity of the Jewish personality, the zeal, the single minded focus, the inability to see "through" life and laugh at it, not take it too seriously.

    I don't think you'd really like whites to become more Jewish, however much you seem to admire them. It'd be a nightmare for you.

    I don’t think that’s necessarily true. Jews also make up some of the countries most prominent slackers and men of leisure: Seth Rogen, James Franco, Danny McBride, Anthony Bourdain. The list goes on.

    By all accounts Jews are just as much overachievers at relaxing as they are at highly intense pursuits.

    • Replies: @Anonymous

    I don’t think that’s necessarily true. Jews also make up some of the countries most prominent slackers and men of leisure: Seth Rogen, James Franco, Danny McBride, Anthony Bourdain.

     

    LOL, "slackers". All of these men worked hard to get where they are now (and stay there).
  29. @International Jew
    Just wanted to let y'all know, I'm not one of those eleven billionaires, and I haven't won the Nobel Prize.

    LOL, IJ:) The two sons of a childhood, observant Jewish friend of mine are an assistant manager at a discount store, and a newly minted Ph. D. who’s resigned himself to being an academic gypsy working on year-to-year contracts. Paternal grandfather made some money in neon signs. Maternal grandfather was a plumber. I get my car fixed at a small shop whose Jewish owner-mechanic is the second generation. Looks like they missed the memo on sumpin’.

    • Replies: @Jake
    You are missing the point, probably intentionally.

    Are you familiar with Samuel Goldenberg and Schmuyle in Mussorgsky's Pictures at an Exhibition? What Mussogrsky is getting at i that piece is the fact of then Jewish economic life in Eastern Europe. A group of Jews would be extremely rich and powerful, and they would make certain that the sons of those not in the 'elite' group' would not compete with their sons.

    Jews leaving the shtetl finally found freedom to achieve - the evil white Gentiles were far, far more open to recognizing and promoting talent and brilliance among 'non-Elite' Jews than were the 'Elite Jews.' But the funny thing that happened on the way to the forum is that when non-Elite Jews became ensconced in the newly Liberal and secular West, they began to act just like the Elite Jews had. The difference was that the newly rich and powerful Jews in secularized nations acted to protect their new wealth and status by keeping out Whitey.

    The Rabbinical game of exclusion to stifle competition is much broader now.
  30. iSteve,

    There is another very important dimension in the social, technical, and economic success of Jews: Jews working together and sticking together to promote their individual and collective well-being. As an axiom often expressed in your blog articles, “What is good for the Jews …,” governs their interactions with the rest of society.

    Jews are also relentless. I first experienced this with Jewish professors at the university. I also experienced this with upper caste Indians and Lebanese during my years working in the Middle East. Indeed, my conclusion at the time was that the Lebanese could “out Jew the Jews”. As one Lebanese explained, if he wasn’t a millionaire by age 30 his family would consider him a failure. Abject humiliation.

    I’ve run across a number of sources that relate that in northern Europe through the 19th Century, the common wisdom was that Jews were good at trading and money lending but little else. Kind of like a tribe of Roma servicing the upper class.

    The Jews then bought newspapers and other media to change that perception … putting their collective wealth to work in their collective interest. The myth of Einstein was allegedly one of the first calculated products from that initiative. He got lots of help. Einstein might have had an extremely high IQ, but that is only half of the story. Knowing that I often wonder if a measure of Jewish social, technical, and economic success is due to the collective help they give each other in getting into the right universities, getting the right jobs, working the right deals, being put in touch with the right people, working collectively to have their articles and scientific papers published, and the rest is history. It’s the network, network, network. A networks that the goyim do not have.

    Put another way, if White Privilege is a myth, Jewish Privilege is not. I once had a company IT infrastructure issue affecting my software development program. I didn’t know how to reach the right people in the company. One of my software developers offered, “Don’t worry about it. I’ll take care of it. The CIO attends my Temple.”

    Knowing elements of the story, could Mark Zuckerburg have succeeded as he did without the clan’s help at Harvard, Wall Street, and Silicon Valley? I doubt it. Without that help, Facebook would still be a niche application for picking up girls.

    • Replies: @Deso Dogg

    There is another very important dimension in the social, technical, and economic success of Jews: Jews working together and sticking together to promote their individual and collective well-being. As an axiom often expressed in your blog articles, “What is good for the Jews …,” governs their interactions with the rest of society.
     
    The non-Orthodox Jewish outmarriage rate in the US is around 70%. I couldn't quickly find any data on the fertility rate, but it's probably close to, if not below, replacement for the non-Orthodox. So to be clear:

    Jews are so insanely ethno-centric, and so talented at advancing at their own interests, that they're able to magick themselves into hard science Nobel Prizes, huge fortunes earned in competitive markets, chess championships, etc. at rates orders of magnitude above their population share. This is the result only, or at least primarily, of ethno-centric networking, which must be extremely opaque and complex, not of real, tangible accomplishment.

    But somehow, these same extremely ethno-centric Jews aren't marrying Jews or having many Jewish children, and are quickly dissipating the genetic and cultural gradient between Jews and European Gentiles (in the US.)

    I’ve run across a number of sources that relate that in northern Europe through the 19th Century, the common wisdom was that Jews were good at trading and money lending but little else. Kind of like a tribe of Roma servicing the upper class.
     
    Steve agrees! He's perceptively suggested that, before the 19th century, Jews tended to be more focused on making money than being intellectuals.


    The Jews then bought newspapers and other media to change that perception … putting their collective wealth to work in their collective interest.
     
    It's hard to believe that networking is the only, or even primary, factor in Jewish success. Eventually, a business based on nepotism will be outcompeted, a scientist's theories will be falsified, a chess player will be defeated, etc. (It's like how, if women were really paid much less than they worth because of patriarchy/male privilege, founding a corporation with all women would be an easy way to make money.)
    , @SFG
    Einstein's a bad example--every physicist I know really does think he was that impressive.

    Your overall statement I agree with though. Say you need an IQ of 130 to do groundbreaking science work. That's 3% of the general American population and 16% of the Jewish population (assuming a 1 SD advantage). That's only an overrepresentation by a factor of 5, when the actual factors for money and science seem to be about 100.

    But it can't *just* be the network, because lots of other groups are nepotistic too! So I'd argue it's talent *plus* nepotism--they have the advantage of an ethnic network that also happens to be substantially brighter than average.

    To be honest I think it is more about being hooked into the American Ivy League network than a specifically Jewish network at this point. Those old Old Testament-obsessed Puritans' descendants have interbred with the ultimate Old Testament group, and the elite got a huge influx of fresh blood into their veins. Now is that good for the *rest* of the USA? That's another question. As Machiavelli said, the populace doesn't want to be oppressed by the nobles, and the nobles want to oppress the populace. Our nobles are happy to have some clever new blood. Should the populace be happy?
  31. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @International Jew
    Just wanted to let y'all know, I'm not one of those eleven billionaires, and I haven't won the Nobel Prize.

    Just wanted to let y’all know, I’m not one of those eleven billionaires, and I haven’t won the Nobel Prize.

    No kidding, and no sarcasm:
    I (Anonymous) am genetically 50% Jewish,
    not even a millionaire, close to retirement,
    and I have been twice nominated for Nobel Prize in Physics, but evidently will not get it;
    and nowI definitely feel I did not deserve N.P.
    *
    Joke: “But I stayed in Holiday Inn Express last night.”

    • Replies: @Moshe
    I don't know how nominations work but does that mean that you are Nobel or close to Nobel material as a physicist? If so, what specifically have you been working on or, perhaps more relevantly for laymen, what physics fact can you tell us that would blow our minds?
  32. @International Jew
    Just wanted to let y'all know, I'm not one of those eleven billionaires, and I haven't won the Nobel Prize.

    Just wanted to let y’all know, I’m one of the billionaires and I won the Nobel Prize.

    Neither of which are reported, for tax reasons.

  33. @AaronB
    That is true, Bezos is in a class of his own. As is Musk. And Kalanick. All cut from the same cloth of relentlessness.

    But that really shows you what this game is about...

    Maybe one day HBDers will get over their unscientific belief that motivation is unvarying across ethnic groups....

    Once we get motivation-denialists to admit their position is unscientific, we will force them to take the next step dictated by science, and admit that groups exhibit variation in personality traits over time - i.e, today's highly motivated may become tomorrow's lazy bums - and that a broad range of social and historical conditions can be considered relevant to such variations, such as, say, recent defeats, recent victories, sense of threat, sense of being under siege, sense of purpose and meaning, need to prove oneself, neurotic anxiety, and countless other factors.

    We will get them, finally, to admit the existence of Time, which they currently deny - and force them to abandon their astonishing habit of treating contemporary conditions as enshrining eternal truths and literally ignoring the entire historical record with its fascinating account of change and reversal, as if it didn't exist.

    But maybe I am being too optimistic.

    Are you ignoring genetics?

    “DRIVE” (or taking-things-as-weighty perhaps) appears to be a large factor in western style “Success!”

    It’s common knowledge by now that women have intelligence capacities that far outshine their “Accomplishments!” and, though I may as yet be the only man on Earth with this insight, I have found that people of recent primarily sub-saharan ancestry have Far greater intelligence capacities than their “Successes!” might imply to less chilled out ethnics.

    I admire them both. The former was laid out by Mencken (in greatest detail buy a book dedicated to the subject which he had originally intended to be sarcastic), the whether women use this principle-less approach to gain happiness rather than babies is of greater doubt. Mencken as well as more contemporary people appear to believe that women are, on average, far less happy than men.

    As for ppl of recent primarily sub-saharan ancestry, they tend not to have too many externally-relevant principles either but, more importantly, they benefit (though not with….“SUCCESS!”) from not feeling an atavistic evolutionary drive to extend their consciousness – and conscientiousness – beyond the moment.

    If the Lord has a chosen people to whom he shows his favor it is them.

    Noticeably, “going easy” becomes less pronounced with cheap out-of-africa genetic introgression.

    But yes, from hundreds of personal interactions it appears to me that blacks, on Average, appear to be a whole hell of a lot more intelligent than they appear by Western judges of What Is Best In Life.

    • Replies: @AaronB
    I have traveled extensively, and I have noticed that many so-called stupid people around the world are far more intelligent than we imagine....

    I was once in a book shop in Thailand which was less well organized than it could be. When I told the owner he could increase sales by better alphabatizing his books, he merely shrugged his shoulders and told me he makes quite enough money already, and he doesn't need the hassle. He then went on to express highly sophisticated opinions on a range of subjects.

    Countless similar experiences have made me understand that motivation is perhaps the *key* in understanding variations in Western-style success across countries, and probably within countries as well....

    One of the first things you notice in a poor country is the different attitude to life....yet for some inscrutable reason, this cannot be taken to have any significance......

    In the end, we are guilty of simple projection, a universal human trait. We naively imagine everyone wants what we want - We are the very pattern of humanity, indeed the only "real people". How can anyone value different things than our unsurpassedly magnificent selves? It is impossible - and therefore outcomes must be about ability.

    It is the same reason Turks and Arabs always see conspiracies and plots where they don't exist - it is how "they" would do things, you see. They cannot imagine others do it differently.

    We cannot face the possibility that "our choices" may, actually, be the wrong ones. To avoid that, we cannot accept that they are even choices at all. No, they are the default of humanity.
  34. That’s right. I am steadfast in my efforts to combat middle class greed, which hurts billionaires in need.

    In spite of all this, George still has a way to get me to pay for his political projects, even though he never pays me back for his share.

  35. “The Jews are like other people, only more so.”
    -Chaim Weizmann

    • Replies: @Mr. Anon

    “The Jews are like other people, only more so.”
    -Chaim Weizmann
     
    The Jews are more so, unlike many other people.
  36. Only eleven?

  37. This is a clear case of disparate impact. We need a comprehensive program of affirmative action quotas to ensure proportionate representation of gentiles. Then equality will truely be achieved.

  38. @International Jew
    Just wanted to let y'all know, I'm not one of those eleven billionaires, and I haven't won the Nobel Prize.

    > Just wanted to let y’all know… I haven’t won the Nobel Prize.

    Yet.

  39. @AaronB
    That is true, Bezos is in a class of his own. As is Musk. And Kalanick. All cut from the same cloth of relentlessness.

    But that really shows you what this game is about...

    Maybe one day HBDers will get over their unscientific belief that motivation is unvarying across ethnic groups....

    Once we get motivation-denialists to admit their position is unscientific, we will force them to take the next step dictated by science, and admit that groups exhibit variation in personality traits over time - i.e, today's highly motivated may become tomorrow's lazy bums - and that a broad range of social and historical conditions can be considered relevant to such variations, such as, say, recent defeats, recent victories, sense of threat, sense of being under siege, sense of purpose and meaning, need to prove oneself, neurotic anxiety, and countless other factors.

    We will get them, finally, to admit the existence of Time, which they currently deny - and force them to abandon their astonishing habit of treating contemporary conditions as enshrining eternal truths and literally ignoring the entire historical record with its fascinating account of change and reversal, as if it didn't exist.

    But maybe I am being too optimistic.

    Sorry, I didn’t mean to hit the “Agree” button. Your response to Dave Pinsen was fairly silly, IMO.

    > Maybe one day HBDers will get over their unscientific belief that motivation is unvarying across ethnic groups…

    Re: Motivation being “unvarying across ethnic groups”: I suppose that means it’s not “nurture” (as “culture” generally has a substantial “ethnic-group” component), and also not heritable (as ethnic identity is generally inherited). Perhaps Motivation is an entirely stochastic trait, and some HBD’er, somewhere, may believe that. However, I don’t recall reading a claim along those lines.

    • Replies: @AaronB
    No, its not entirely a stochastic trait.

    Its in response to various environmental factors - contingent historical situations - but probably also has a genetic component that varies over time.

    I'll give you a few concrete illustrations -

    The Chinese in the 19th century were knows as "lazy", compared to the frenetic activity of Europeans. Now the roles have been reversed. What changed? Their self-perception, their sense of threat, their need to prove themselves, their understanding of their place in the world, their sense of trauma at the hands of Europeans?

    I am sure, you, ic1000, would be an entirely different person, say, if you lived in dangerous and unstable times, or in safe and prosperous ones. They would bring out different sides of your personality.

    Perhaps, radical idea, observed behavior at any given time can be seen as genes mediated by environmental and psychological factors - now one side of the personality emerges, now another, depending on perceptions of self in relation to environment (which can be highly subjective, and even delusional), and on actual changes in environment.

    There may be a genetic component, but not in a straightforward way - Jewish "success", I am quite certain, is motivated in huge part by neurotic anxiety, and the resultant desire for control of one's environment, and a nagging inner fear that one does not "measure up" - in other words, self-image issues.

    Yet how many people would link great success in the world, Jewish or otherwise, to anxiety, fear, and self-image problems?

    Isn't it time our thinking became a little less superficial and we move beyond our childish simplicities?

  40. Late last year after wishing everyone Merry Christmas and Happy Hanukkah, Mark Zuckerberg announced that he was no longer an atheist and considers religion important. He has also expressed an interest in his wife’s religion of Buddhism. At this year’s Harvard commencement he talked about the Jewish prayer that he recites to his daughter and made mentions of church and religion.

    I assume it all a marketing ploy.

    • Agree: Dan Hayes
    • Replies: @PiltdownMan
    Sometimes, I find it hard to tell who is the more crass and shameless of the two, Mark Zuckerberg, or his minion, Sheryl Sandberg?
  41. @Triumph104
    Late last year after wishing everyone Merry Christmas and Happy Hanukkah, Mark Zuckerberg announced that he was no longer an atheist and considers religion important. He has also expressed an interest in his wife's religion of Buddhism. At this year's Harvard commencement he talked about the Jewish prayer that he recites to his daughter and made mentions of church and religion.

    I assume it all a marketing ploy.

    Sometimes, I find it hard to tell who is the more crass and shameless of the two, Mark Zuckerberg, or his minion, Sheryl Sandberg?

  42. President Trump must nip any presidential aspirations emanating from Mark Zuckerberg in the bud. Zuckerberg and many other billionaire Jews push nation-wrecking mass immigration and amnesty for illegal aliens. President Trump must convince Mark Zuckerberg that running for president will be unpleasant.

    President Trump could also convince many Jew billionaires that spending their money to push mass immigration is an unwise use of resources. New Yorker Trump knows Jews better than Kevin MacDonald knows Jews. President Trump loves Jews who love the United States. Jews who love the United States do not push nation-wrecking mass immigration.

    This tweet from 2015 sums it up:

  43. @Moshe
    Are you ignoring genetics?

    "DRIVE" (or taking-things-as-weighty perhaps) appears to be a large factor in western style "Success!"

    It's common knowledge by now that women have intelligence capacities that far outshine their "Accomplishments!" and, though I may as yet be the only man on Earth with this insight, I have found that people of recent primarily sub-saharan ancestry have Far greater intelligence capacities than their "Successes!" might imply to less chilled out ethnics.

    I admire them both. The former was laid out by Mencken (in greatest detail buy a book dedicated to the subject which he had originally intended to be sarcastic), the whether women use this principle-less approach to gain happiness rather than babies is of greater doubt. Mencken as well as more contemporary people appear to believe that women are, on average, far less happy than men.

    As for ppl of recent primarily sub-saharan ancestry, they tend not to have too many externally-relevant principles either but, more importantly, they benefit (though not with...."SUCCESS!") from not feeling an atavistic evolutionary drive to extend their consciousness - and conscientiousness - beyond the moment.

    If the Lord has a chosen people to whom he shows his favor it is them.

    Noticeably, "going easy" becomes less pronounced with cheap out-of-africa genetic introgression.

    But yes, from hundreds of personal interactions it appears to me that blacks, on Average, appear to be a whole hell of a lot more intelligent than they appear by Western judges of What Is Best In Life.

    I have traveled extensively, and I have noticed that many so-called stupid people around the world are far more intelligent than we imagine….

    I was once in a book shop in Thailand which was less well organized than it could be. When I told the owner he could increase sales by better alphabatizing his books, he merely shrugged his shoulders and told me he makes quite enough money already, and he doesn’t need the hassle. He then went on to express highly sophisticated opinions on a range of subjects.

    Countless similar experiences have made me understand that motivation is perhaps the *key* in understanding variations in Western-style success across countries, and probably within countries as well….

    One of the first things you notice in a poor country is the different attitude to life….yet for some inscrutable reason, this cannot be taken to have any significance……

    In the end, we are guilty of simple projection, a universal human trait. We naively imagine everyone wants what we want – We are the very pattern of humanity, indeed the only “real people”. How can anyone value different things than our unsurpassedly magnificent selves? It is impossible – and therefore outcomes must be about ability.

    It is the same reason Turks and Arabs always see conspiracies and plots where they don’t exist – it is how “they” would do things, you see. They cannot imagine others do it differently.

    We cannot face the possibility that “our choices” may, actually, be the wrong ones. To avoid that, we cannot accept that they are even choices at all. No, they are the default of humanity.

    • Replies: @res
    Choosing a book shop owner as an example of "so-called stupid people." LOL!
    , @Moshe
    Yep. I agree. Unfortunately comma the people with western-style success in mind have and inappropriately large ability to change the world for the worse. Fortunately comma they also have the ability to change the world for the better. For example, decreasing violence pretty much everywhere they spread their civilization. Then again, dictators do much the same thing and always have.
    , @Ghost of Bull Moose
    You may be on to something.

    I suspect that's what 'implicit bias' means- I secretly think this about Certain people, so you must think the same things about them.

    Black people especially. They don't trust each other, and can't believe anyone else does. It's why they despise free-to-be-you-and-me liberals, and it explains the fixation with not airing 'dirty laundry,' ie public self-criticism.
    , @Anonymous
    "In the end, we are guilty of simple projection, a universal human trait. We naively imagine everyone wants what we want – We are the very pattern of humanity, indeed the only “real people”. How can anyone value different things than our unsurpassedly magnificent selves? It is impossible – and therefore outcomes must be about ability."

    I find this post quite insightful, because we share a similar view.

    When others belittle Muslims -like some here, from authors to posters- for their lack of major successes in worldly life, I find that amusing.

    It is all about priorities. Allah(swt) exhorts mankind that success in this world is of little value, and real success or failure is reserved for later.

    We have consciously chosen that success, and are diligently working towards it, while the extremely successful west, spiritually lost, is trying to find hope in pagan dogma.

    The western civilisation rejects His Oneness, ascribes partners to Him, and holds delusions that its accomplishments will result in a pass in His court? Be ready for a rude awakening.

    But, you guys go right on ahead. I do like my gadgets.


    "It is the same reason Turks and Arabs always see conspiracies and plots where they don’t exist "

    Don't exist? Given the reality of what is happening in the ME, and who started it all, and who sustains it, don't quite know what to make of that.

    Was that an attempt at disparaging Muslims, in some way, again? Ok.
    , @Stan Adams
    I knew a Jewish bookstore owner who had the most disorganized shop you could ever possibly imagine. There was no apparent rhyme or reason to his shelving scheme, but somehow he always knew where everything was. (Maybe he enjoyed impressing customers with his photographic memory.)

    He kept some of his inventory in the bathroom. (I'm not kidding - there was a shelf full of books right above the toilet.)

    I also knew an old Jewish guy who hoarded a garageful of old magazines - not anything exciting, like cult or pulp titles, but stuff like Time and Newsweek - in the hope that one day he could open up a shop specializing in ... old magazines. (His long-suffering wife thought he was a kook.)
    , @RobRich
    "...I was once in a book shop in Thailand which was less well organized than it could be. When I told the owner he could increase sales by better alphabatizing his books..."

    Careful. What do you know about bookstores? Many small bookstores do this to discourage theft. Large chains worry about that less and more about personally productivity.

    The Thai guy probably knows his country and his customer. Do you? Many seemingly 'irrational' economic decisions are quite reasonable when you see it from their local knowledge as the Austrian economists point out.
  44. @Flip
    "The Jews are like other people, only more so."
    -Chaim Weizmann

    “The Jews are like other people, only more so.”
    -Chaim Weizmann

    The Jews are more so, unlike many other people.

  45. @ANON
    No argument here, so long as we all agree at the outset that ethnic nepotism equals achievement.

    Ethnic nepotism can take you to a grocery store job, but it can not take you all the way to a Nobel Prize.

    Or a Fields Medal, or an ACM Turing Award, or a Westinghouse Science Prize, or a world chess championship. Or even to dozens of billions of dollars, for that matter.

    La Griffe du Lion offers a more useful model:

    http://www.lagriffedulion.f2s.com/ashkenaz.htm

    • Agree: for-the-record
    • Replies: @Moshe
    You are precisely as likely to convince these folk of that as you are to convince we wuz kang's and shit blacks (and cargo cult Papuans) that whites aren't evily conniving with each other to horde all the good stuff and keeps brothas down.

    It's a waste of energy that could be put to better use sleeping or taking a long satisfying piss.
    , @Medvedev
    All you need is to outcompete the rivals, supposedly gentile Whites and Asians. A little help here, a little there and you're ahead of others. And as the time goes by the gap widens.
    Let's take, our family friend (half-Jew), who emigrated to the US in 1993 after the collapse of the USSR. He's a smart fellow, but his dad was just a heavy machinery worker. Yeah, not all Jews are millionaires. Jewish philanthropic orgs helped him a lot at first, to accommodate his stay, to get around, to understand the system and get to college and he graduated it almost debt-free. I can only imagine, that heavily Jewish college boards would prefer Jew to non-Jew with same credentials and knowledge. So, as you can see a little help here and there and he was able to make 80 grands by 1998, although he arrived in US just with high school diploma. Sergey Brin's parents - the same story about help from Jewish community. And if our family friend had great ideas on how to change the world, I'm quiet sure, there would be Jewish entrepreneurs and philanthropists who would support and help other fellow.

    Meanwhile, a Slavic guy often would have to work his way from the bottom even when he has a master's/PhD. Nowadays, it's easier cause there is greater need for skilled workers and American society is more "accepting". Working in tech I can attest that many Slavics would prefer American to interview them rather then other Slavic fellow. Why? Because Russian/Belorussian/Ukrainian interviewer maybe be more captious towards other Russian/Belorussian/Ukrainian person and may not feel the need to be politically correct.

    So, networking, connections and preference for someone from your ethnic group really matters and makes the difference.
    , @for-the-record
    Ethnic nepotism can take you to a grocery store job, but it can not take you all the way to a Nobel Prize ... La Griffe du Lion offers a more useful model

    This makes eminent sense. If you believe Ashkenazi Jews have a significant IQ advantage (10-15 points), their disproportionate performance in lots of intelligence-related fields (science, chess, billionaires, law, medicine, etc.) can be easily explained. In other areas (e.g., media, revolutionary leaders) presumably it is an interactive mix of intelligence and "group" factors.

  46. @ic1000
    Sorry, I didn't mean to hit the "Agree" button. Your response to Dave Pinsen was fairly silly, IMO.

    > Maybe one day HBDers will get over their unscientific belief that motivation is unvarying across ethnic groups…

    Re: Motivation being "unvarying across ethnic groups": I suppose that means it's not "nurture" (as "culture" generally has a substantial "ethnic-group" component), and also not heritable (as ethnic identity is generally inherited). Perhaps Motivation is an entirely stochastic trait, and some HBD'er, somewhere, may believe that. However, I don't recall reading a claim along those lines.

    No, its not entirely a stochastic trait.

    Its in response to various environmental factors – contingent historical situations – but probably also has a genetic component that varies over time.

    I’ll give you a few concrete illustrations –

    The Chinese in the 19th century were knows as “lazy”, compared to the frenetic activity of Europeans. Now the roles have been reversed. What changed? Their self-perception, their sense of threat, their need to prove themselves, their understanding of their place in the world, their sense of trauma at the hands of Europeans?

    I am sure, you, ic1000, would be an entirely different person, say, if you lived in dangerous and unstable times, or in safe and prosperous ones. They would bring out different sides of your personality.

    Perhaps, radical idea, observed behavior at any given time can be seen as genes mediated by environmental and psychological factors – now one side of the personality emerges, now another, depending on perceptions of self in relation to environment (which can be highly subjective, and even delusional), and on actual changes in environment.

    There may be a genetic component, but not in a straightforward way – Jewish “success”, I am quite certain, is motivated in huge part by neurotic anxiety, and the resultant desire for control of one’s environment, and a nagging inner fear that one does not “measure up” – in other words, self-image issues.

    Yet how many people would link great success in the world, Jewish or otherwise, to anxiety, fear, and self-image problems?

    Isn’t it time our thinking became a little less superficial and we move beyond our childish simplicities?

    • Replies: @ic1000
    > Yet how many people would link great success in the world, Jewish or otherwise, to anxiety, fear, and self-image problems? Isn’t it time our thinking became a little less superficial and we move beyond our childish simplicities?

    If your point is that most people don't think very deeply about any given subject, you're probably right. Here, you seem to suggest that it has not yet occurred to those who do think hard about personality traits, that these can be two-edged swords -- beneficial in some circumstances and harmful in others.

    If that is your supposition, it's not correct. For a start, check the sidebar for James Thompson's posts.
    , @SFG
    Here's what gets me about a lot of HBD thought. They seem to think racial groups have an essence that persists across all times and places.

    The 'Viking spirit' is hardly in evidence in modern Scandinavia outside of black metal. Indians are dumber than average in England and smarter than average in America. Jews were not particularly smart in the ancient world, are smarter than average in the modern world, and are warlike in Israel and cowardly in America. It's pretty clear that the same ancestral population can diverge if subjected to varying selection pressures, whether by selective immigration (Indians in America are selected from doctors or engineers) or emigration (Jews who don't want to serve in the army don't go to Israel).
  47. There could be 1 million Jews, all of them lawyers, in a host nation of 300 million Americans, but there could never be 300 million Americans, all of them lawyers. This doesn’t reflect on either groups innate lawyer abilities. A tiny specialised minority can perform stastistical feats of overrepresentation the majority can’t.

    There could be a population boom in Israel and they now have a proper nation of a hundred million. All the mundane jobs formerly done by their host nation is now performed by other Jews. All those extra Jewish farmers, factory workers and truck drivers would drive down the average fraction of theoretical physicists and chess champions.

  48. Jake says:
    @ANON
    No argument here, so long as we all agree at the outset that ethnic nepotism equals achievement.

    There is a great deal of truth in that. Jews, regardless of professed ideology, manage to use their positions to find and promote a seemingly endless number of Jews. And that means cutting out whitey the Gentile.

    Of course, none of that could have happened in any area of life and work in the Anglosphere if the WASP Elites hadn’t wanted it. The WASP Elites wanted Jews as allies to make it much harder for non-Elite whites to compete.

  49. Jake says:
    @JackOH
    LOL, IJ:) The two sons of a childhood, observant Jewish friend of mine are an assistant manager at a discount store, and a newly minted Ph. D. who's resigned himself to being an academic gypsy working on year-to-year contracts. Paternal grandfather made some money in neon signs. Maternal grandfather was a plumber. I get my car fixed at a small shop whose Jewish owner-mechanic is the second generation. Looks like they missed the memo on sumpin'.

    You are missing the point, probably intentionally.

    Are you familiar with Samuel Goldenberg and Schmuyle in Mussorgsky’s Pictures at an Exhibition? What Mussogrsky is getting at i that piece is the fact of then Jewish economic life in Eastern Europe. A group of Jews would be extremely rich and powerful, and they would make certain that the sons of those not in the ‘elite’ group’ would not compete with their sons.

    Jews leaving the shtetl finally found freedom to achieve – the evil white Gentiles were far, far more open to recognizing and promoting talent and brilliance among ‘non-Elite’ Jews than were the ‘Elite Jews.’ But the funny thing that happened on the way to the forum is that when non-Elite Jews became ensconced in the newly Liberal and secular West, they began to act just like the Elite Jews had. The difference was that the newly rich and powerful Jews in secularized nations acted to protect their new wealth and status by keeping out Whitey.

    The Rabbinical game of exclusion to stifle competition is much broader now.

    • Replies: @Moshe
    All of which is why your clear and witty prose was overlooked by the Nobel Committee. If only we could clone a mind as fruitful, coherent and tidy as yours!

    You are a credit to your race.
  50. @AaronB
    I have traveled extensively, and I have noticed that many so-called stupid people around the world are far more intelligent than we imagine....

    I was once in a book shop in Thailand which was less well organized than it could be. When I told the owner he could increase sales by better alphabatizing his books, he merely shrugged his shoulders and told me he makes quite enough money already, and he doesn't need the hassle. He then went on to express highly sophisticated opinions on a range of subjects.

    Countless similar experiences have made me understand that motivation is perhaps the *key* in understanding variations in Western-style success across countries, and probably within countries as well....

    One of the first things you notice in a poor country is the different attitude to life....yet for some inscrutable reason, this cannot be taken to have any significance......

    In the end, we are guilty of simple projection, a universal human trait. We naively imagine everyone wants what we want - We are the very pattern of humanity, indeed the only "real people". How can anyone value different things than our unsurpassedly magnificent selves? It is impossible - and therefore outcomes must be about ability.

    It is the same reason Turks and Arabs always see conspiracies and plots where they don't exist - it is how "they" would do things, you see. They cannot imagine others do it differently.

    We cannot face the possibility that "our choices" may, actually, be the wrong ones. To avoid that, we cannot accept that they are even choices at all. No, they are the default of humanity.

    Choosing a book shop owner as an example of “so-called stupid people.” LOL!

    • Replies: @AaronB
    The likely intelligence of a book shop owner proves my point, res. In fact, it is essential to my point.

    I was showing how a *behavior* that would appear "stupid" to Europeans (leaving books un-alphabetized, reducing sales), is actually a life-style choice and not a question of intelligence at all.

    Make sense?

    My point requires the selection of someone not likely to be stupid.

    Glad you enjoyed my anecdote, though.
  51. @Doug
    I don't think that's necessarily true. Jews also make up some of the countries most prominent slackers and men of leisure: Seth Rogen, James Franco, Danny McBride, Anthony Bourdain. The list goes on.

    By all accounts Jews are just as much overachievers at relaxing as they are at highly intense pursuits.

    I don’t think that’s necessarily true. Jews also make up some of the countries most prominent slackers and men of leisure: Seth Rogen, James Franco, Danny McBride, Anthony Bourdain.

    LOL, “slackers”. All of these men worked hard to get where they are now (and stay there).

  52. @res
    Choosing a book shop owner as an example of "so-called stupid people." LOL!

    The likely intelligence of a book shop owner proves my point, res. In fact, it is essential to my point.

    I was showing how a *behavior* that would appear “stupid” to Europeans (leaving books un-alphabetized, reducing sales), is actually a life-style choice and not a question of intelligence at all.

    Make sense?

    My point requires the selection of someone not likely to be stupid.

    Glad you enjoyed my anecdote, though.

    • Replies: @res
    To my mind the appropriate observation is about the likely intelligence of anyone who either:
    1. Conflates stupidity and laziness.
    2. Assigns a non-low probability to the likelihood of a book shop owner being stupid.

    And thanks for the patronizing tone. It really added to the conversation.
  53. @AaronB
    The "hard" sciences, and money, strike me as being basically of the same "family" of achievement.

    Your admiration for Jews always struck me as strange, Steve. You're such an easy going laid back guy, one imagines you enjoy your pleasures and relaxations.

    You utterly lack the intensity of the Jewish personality, the zeal, the single minded focus, the inability to see "through" life and laugh at it, not take it too seriously.

    I don't think you'd really like whites to become more Jewish, however much you seem to admire them. It'd be a nightmare for you.

    Steve just kisses their asses in the hopes that he might score a job at the New York Times or some other Jewish media outlet.

    • Replies: @Deso Dogg
    Yeah, when I think "Steve Sailer", I think "guy who has spent his life kissing up to the mainstream media, particularly Jews, avoiding saying anything offensive in order to have a byline in a big name publication."
  54. @Vinay
    "It’s doubly impressive to be equally well-represented in two types of achievement — making billions and winning Nobels"

    So why hate on them? One hates people who're ONLY good at a bad thing, right? Aren't your criticism of them a lot like others' criticism of whites?

    "Whites were just good at stealing our stuff". Well, that, and also inventing stuff and exploring stuff and imagining stuff and running stuff and saving stuff etc. etc. They just happened to go through a phase where they were rocking in many many things, good AND bad.

    Why not extend the same courtesy to Jews? It'd at least have the virtue of intellectual consistency!

    We hate Jews because they use their money and power to undermine white gentiles. Jews are big advocates of multiracial, multi-religious and multi-ethnic migration to Europe and the United States but want to keep Israel for the Jews. The Jews won’t be happy as long as there is a single nation where white gentiles are a dominant majority.

  55. @ANON
    No argument here, so long as we all agree at the outset that ethnic nepotism equals achievement.

    No argument here, so long as we all agree at the outset that ethnic nepotism equals achievement.

    I was unaware of the high levels of achievement in Cambodia, Venezuela, and Somalia:

    https://www.transparency.org/news/feature/corruption_perceptions_index_2016

  56. @International Jew
    Just wanted to let y'all know, I'm not one of those eleven billionaires, and I haven't won the Nobel Prize.

    Slacker!

  57. @AaronB
    No, its not entirely a stochastic trait.

    Its in response to various environmental factors - contingent historical situations - but probably also has a genetic component that varies over time.

    I'll give you a few concrete illustrations -

    The Chinese in the 19th century were knows as "lazy", compared to the frenetic activity of Europeans. Now the roles have been reversed. What changed? Their self-perception, their sense of threat, their need to prove themselves, their understanding of their place in the world, their sense of trauma at the hands of Europeans?

    I am sure, you, ic1000, would be an entirely different person, say, if you lived in dangerous and unstable times, or in safe and prosperous ones. They would bring out different sides of your personality.

    Perhaps, radical idea, observed behavior at any given time can be seen as genes mediated by environmental and psychological factors - now one side of the personality emerges, now another, depending on perceptions of self in relation to environment (which can be highly subjective, and even delusional), and on actual changes in environment.

    There may be a genetic component, but not in a straightforward way - Jewish "success", I am quite certain, is motivated in huge part by neurotic anxiety, and the resultant desire for control of one's environment, and a nagging inner fear that one does not "measure up" - in other words, self-image issues.

    Yet how many people would link great success in the world, Jewish or otherwise, to anxiety, fear, and self-image problems?

    Isn't it time our thinking became a little less superficial and we move beyond our childish simplicities?

    > Yet how many people would link great success in the world, Jewish or otherwise, to anxiety, fear, and self-image problems? Isn’t it time our thinking became a little less superficial and we move beyond our childish simplicities?

    If your point is that most people don’t think very deeply about any given subject, you’re probably right. Here, you seem to suggest that it has not yet occurred to those who do think hard about personality traits, that these can be two-edged swords — beneficial in some circumstances and harmful in others.

    If that is your supposition, it’s not correct. For a start, check the sidebar for James Thompson’s posts.

    • Replies: @AaronB
    In my experience, HBDers, and most writers on Unz who discuss these issues, like Sailer, Karlin, Derbyshire, do not think at all deeply on these issues.

    They have an extremely simplistic model of the world.

    For them, genes cannot have a circular, paradoxical, vexed, and roundabout relationship to outcomes - is is simple and linear.

    Group success = IQ. Its really that simple for them.

    If they consider personality at all - which is extremely rare for them, they dislike it, it is too "fuzzy" - then that too is simple and linear.

    Genes directly code for "good" things like conscientiousness, perseverence, or motivation - it cannot be, it is too paradoxical, too disturbing to think about, that "good" things like ambition can be a roundabout result of "bad" things like anxiety or insecurity.

    No - the world is simple, neat, and well organized. All "bad" things in one column, all "good" things in another.

    And environmental interaction with observed behavior? No thank you, sir. That would complicate things. Each group is always the same - no history for us, please.

    Such are the requirements of the scientistic mind, I fear.
  58. @ic1000
    > Yet how many people would link great success in the world, Jewish or otherwise, to anxiety, fear, and self-image problems? Isn’t it time our thinking became a little less superficial and we move beyond our childish simplicities?

    If your point is that most people don't think very deeply about any given subject, you're probably right. Here, you seem to suggest that it has not yet occurred to those who do think hard about personality traits, that these can be two-edged swords -- beneficial in some circumstances and harmful in others.

    If that is your supposition, it's not correct. For a start, check the sidebar for James Thompson's posts.

    In my experience, HBDers, and most writers on Unz who discuss these issues, like Sailer, Karlin, Derbyshire, do not think at all deeply on these issues.

    They have an extremely simplistic model of the world.

    For them, genes cannot have a circular, paradoxical, vexed, and roundabout relationship to outcomes – is is simple and linear.

    Group success = IQ. Its really that simple for them.

    If they consider personality at all – which is extremely rare for them, they dislike it, it is too “fuzzy” – then that too is simple and linear.

    Genes directly code for “good” things like conscientiousness, perseverence, or motivation – it cannot be, it is too paradoxical, too disturbing to think about, that “good” things like ambition can be a roundabout result of “bad” things like anxiety or insecurity.

    No – the world is simple, neat, and well organized. All “bad” things in one column, all “good” things in another.

    And environmental interaction with observed behavior? No thank you, sir. That would complicate things. Each group is always the same – no history for us, please.

    Such are the requirements of the scientistic mind, I fear.

    • Agree: utu, Talha
    • Disagree: ic1000
  59. @Clyde
    The last time Jeff Bezos, the 49-year-old CEO and founder of Amazon, saw his biological father, he was three years old.

    His biological father, whose name is Ted Jorgensen, was 18 when he impregnated Bezos' mother, Jacklyn Gise, who herself was 17. They were both still in high school at the time. They got married before their son was born.

    The marriage lasted only 17 months, reports Brad Stone at Bloomberg Businessweek, who has unearthed astonishing new details about Bezos' family's early years.

    Gise moved in with her parents because Jorgensen stayed out late, and drank too much, and was generally an inattentive father and husband says Stone. He agreed to a divorce, and paid a small amount of child support to Gise when he had money. Other times he missed the payments.

    Three years after their divorce, Gise married another man, Miguel Bezos, a Cuban immigrant who taught himself English, and eventually worked at Exxon. Miguel adopted Jeff, and Jeff took his last name. Jorgensen had to sign off on the name change, which he did, Stone reports.

    For a brief period Jorgensen remembered the Bezos name, but through the years he forgot about it, and dropped completely out of touch with his ex-wife and his son.

    Jorgensen's absence from Bezos' life was so complete that in a 1999 interview with Wired, Bezos said of Jorgensen, "I've never met him," although, in reality he lived with him for the first year of his life.

    "The reality, as far as I'm concerned, is that my Dad is my natural father. The only time I ever think about it, genuinely, is when a doctor asks me to fill out a form," said Bezos in 1999.

    Jorgensen, for his part, had a nearly identical attitude about Bezos.

    However, Stone managed to find Jorgensen, now 69, who owns a bike shop in Glendale, Arizona.

    Here's how Jorgensen reacted when Stone introduced himself: "He had no idea what I was talking about. Jorgensen said he didn’t know who Jeff Bezos was and was baffled by my suggestion that he was the father of this famous CEO."

    Stone jogged Jorgensen's memory, trotting out details about Bezos and his mother. Says Stone, "The old man’s face flushed with recognition. 'Is he still alive?' he asked, not yet fully comprehending."

    Bezos' biological father had disconnected so thoroughly from Bezos life that not only did he not remember his name, and not only did he not realize his son was one of the richest men in the world, but he wasn't even sure if his son was still alive.

    Jorgensen says that in his younger days "I wasn’t a good father or a husband." He eventually quit drinking, got his act together and opened his bike shop. He's married, but had no other children in his life beyond Bezos.

    A family friend told Stone later that Jorgensen felt overwhelmed with sadness and regret. He wants to get in touch with Bezos, but it's unclear if that will ever happen.

    Stone has a book coming out about Amazon. It's excerpted at Bloomberg BusinessWeek. The stuff about his father starts at the bottom of the seventh page.
    http://www.businessinsider.com/jeff-bezos-biological-father-2013-10

    Gise is either a rare English surname or a German surname. Is Bezos Jewish on his mother’s side?

    • Replies: @Clyde
    https://www.houseofnames.com/gise-family-crest

    Gise is a Norman-English last name with the more common spelling being Giese. More hits for Giese....hmmm...actually Giese is more German derived.
  60. @Anonymous

    Just wanted to let y’all know, I’m not one of those eleven billionaires, and I haven’t won the Nobel Prize.

     

    No kidding, and no sarcasm:
    I (Anonymous) am genetically 50% Jewish,
    not even a millionaire, close to retirement,
    and I have been twice nominated for Nobel Prize in Physics, but evidently will not get it;
    and nowI definitely feel I did not deserve N.P.
    *
    Joke: "But I stayed in Holiday Inn Express last night."

    I don’t know how nominations work but does that mean that you are Nobel or close to Nobel material as a physicist? If so, what specifically have you been working on or, perhaps more relevantly for laymen, what physics fact can you tell us that would blow our minds?

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    The nominations for Nobel Prize in Physics
    are accepted for consideration by the Committee
    1) from any winner of Nobel Prize in any specialty,
    2) from scientists invited by the Committee specially to nominate a candidate in a particular year.

    None of nominators in my case, AFAIK, was Jewish.

    No other comments in response to Moshe.

  61. @AaronB
    I have traveled extensively, and I have noticed that many so-called stupid people around the world are far more intelligent than we imagine....

    I was once in a book shop in Thailand which was less well organized than it could be. When I told the owner he could increase sales by better alphabatizing his books, he merely shrugged his shoulders and told me he makes quite enough money already, and he doesn't need the hassle. He then went on to express highly sophisticated opinions on a range of subjects.

    Countless similar experiences have made me understand that motivation is perhaps the *key* in understanding variations in Western-style success across countries, and probably within countries as well....

    One of the first things you notice in a poor country is the different attitude to life....yet for some inscrutable reason, this cannot be taken to have any significance......

    In the end, we are guilty of simple projection, a universal human trait. We naively imagine everyone wants what we want - We are the very pattern of humanity, indeed the only "real people". How can anyone value different things than our unsurpassedly magnificent selves? It is impossible - and therefore outcomes must be about ability.

    It is the same reason Turks and Arabs always see conspiracies and plots where they don't exist - it is how "they" would do things, you see. They cannot imagine others do it differently.

    We cannot face the possibility that "our choices" may, actually, be the wrong ones. To avoid that, we cannot accept that they are even choices at all. No, they are the default of humanity.

    Yep. I agree. Unfortunately comma the people with western-style success in mind have and inappropriately large ability to change the world for the worse. Fortunately comma they also have the ability to change the world for the better. For example, decreasing violence pretty much everywhere they spread their civilization. Then again, dictators do much the same thing and always have.

  62. @Anon Chief
    Ethnic nepotism can take you to a grocery store job, but it can not take you all the way to a Nobel Prize.

    Or a Fields Medal, or an ACM Turing Award, or a Westinghouse Science Prize, or a world chess championship. Or even to dozens of billions of dollars, for that matter.

    La Griffe du Lion offers a more useful model:

    http://www.lagriffedulion.f2s.com/ashkenaz.htm

    You are precisely as likely to convince these folk of that as you are to convince we wuz kang’s and shit blacks (and cargo cult Papuans) that whites aren’t evily conniving with each other to horde all the good stuff and keeps brothas down.

    It’s a waste of energy that could be put to better use sleeping or taking a long satisfying piss.

  63. @Jake
    You are missing the point, probably intentionally.

    Are you familiar with Samuel Goldenberg and Schmuyle in Mussorgsky's Pictures at an Exhibition? What Mussogrsky is getting at i that piece is the fact of then Jewish economic life in Eastern Europe. A group of Jews would be extremely rich and powerful, and they would make certain that the sons of those not in the 'elite' group' would not compete with their sons.

    Jews leaving the shtetl finally found freedom to achieve - the evil white Gentiles were far, far more open to recognizing and promoting talent and brilliance among 'non-Elite' Jews than were the 'Elite Jews.' But the funny thing that happened on the way to the forum is that when non-Elite Jews became ensconced in the newly Liberal and secular West, they began to act just like the Elite Jews had. The difference was that the newly rich and powerful Jews in secularized nations acted to protect their new wealth and status by keeping out Whitey.

    The Rabbinical game of exclusion to stifle competition is much broader now.

    All of which is why your clear and witty prose was overlooked by the Nobel Committee. If only we could clone a mind as fruitful, coherent and tidy as yours!

    You are a credit to your race.

  64. @Clyde
    The last time Jeff Bezos, the 49-year-old CEO and founder of Amazon, saw his biological father, he was three years old.

    His biological father, whose name is Ted Jorgensen, was 18 when he impregnated Bezos' mother, Jacklyn Gise, who herself was 17. They were both still in high school at the time. They got married before their son was born.

    The marriage lasted only 17 months, reports Brad Stone at Bloomberg Businessweek, who has unearthed astonishing new details about Bezos' family's early years.

    Gise moved in with her parents because Jorgensen stayed out late, and drank too much, and was generally an inattentive father and husband says Stone. He agreed to a divorce, and paid a small amount of child support to Gise when he had money. Other times he missed the payments.

    Three years after their divorce, Gise married another man, Miguel Bezos, a Cuban immigrant who taught himself English, and eventually worked at Exxon. Miguel adopted Jeff, and Jeff took his last name. Jorgensen had to sign off on the name change, which he did, Stone reports.

    For a brief period Jorgensen remembered the Bezos name, but through the years he forgot about it, and dropped completely out of touch with his ex-wife and his son.

    Jorgensen's absence from Bezos' life was so complete that in a 1999 interview with Wired, Bezos said of Jorgensen, "I've never met him," although, in reality he lived with him for the first year of his life.

    "The reality, as far as I'm concerned, is that my Dad is my natural father. The only time I ever think about it, genuinely, is when a doctor asks me to fill out a form," said Bezos in 1999.

    Jorgensen, for his part, had a nearly identical attitude about Bezos.

    However, Stone managed to find Jorgensen, now 69, who owns a bike shop in Glendale, Arizona.

    Here's how Jorgensen reacted when Stone introduced himself: "He had no idea what I was talking about. Jorgensen said he didn’t know who Jeff Bezos was and was baffled by my suggestion that he was the father of this famous CEO."

    Stone jogged Jorgensen's memory, trotting out details about Bezos and his mother. Says Stone, "The old man’s face flushed with recognition. 'Is he still alive?' he asked, not yet fully comprehending."

    Bezos' biological father had disconnected so thoroughly from Bezos life that not only did he not remember his name, and not only did he not realize his son was one of the richest men in the world, but he wasn't even sure if his son was still alive.

    Jorgensen says that in his younger days "I wasn’t a good father or a husband." He eventually quit drinking, got his act together and opened his bike shop. He's married, but had no other children in his life beyond Bezos.

    A family friend told Stone later that Jorgensen felt overwhelmed with sadness and regret. He wants to get in touch with Bezos, but it's unclear if that will ever happen.

    Stone has a book coming out about Amazon. It's excerpted at Bloomberg BusinessWeek. The stuff about his father starts at the bottom of the seventh page.
    http://www.businessinsider.com/jeff-bezos-biological-father-2013-10

    Jeff Bazos is 53, not 49.

  65. Wonder how many of the richest Jews are married to Gentiles, such as Zuckerberg. OTOH, how many of the richest Gentiles are married to Jews?

  66. The tribe is all about money and power, and every man for himself. Country be damned. That’s why they are all liberal hypocrite globalists who want to defeat nationalism. No matter who is in the WH, we all know it’s really the tribe running the show.

  67. Slatestarcodex recently published an excellent series of articles on this subject, focused on the Jewish population of Budapest in the early 20th century. Highly recommended.

    http://slatestarcodex.com/2017/05/26/the-atomic-bomb-considered-as-hungarian-high-school-science-fair-project/

    • Replies: @SFG
    The guy has a very interesting blog. He's liberal but anti-SJW, accepts HBD if you read between the lines, and is trying to censor his comments just enough to avoid having his career torpedoed by SJWs (and has admitted as much).
  68. @Vinay
    "It’s doubly impressive to be equally well-represented in two types of achievement — making billions and winning Nobels"

    So why hate on them? One hates people who're ONLY good at a bad thing, right? Aren't your criticism of them a lot like others' criticism of whites?

    "Whites were just good at stealing our stuff". Well, that, and also inventing stuff and exploring stuff and imagining stuff and running stuff and saving stuff etc. etc. They just happened to go through a phase where they were rocking in many many things, good AND bad.

    Why not extend the same courtesy to Jews? It'd at least have the virtue of intellectual consistency!

    Why not extend the same courtesy to Jews? It’d at least have the virtue of intellectual consistency!

    Vinay, I think you have the ‘arrow of hostility’ pointing the wrong way.

  69. @Polynikes
    But I'll be damned if they're not a repressed minority deserving of special treatment here in America.

    there is a sign at my virtue signaling local brunch diner that says ‘we stand with Muslims, LBTQ, Immigrants yadda yadda’, then at the bottom the last oppressed group is “Jewish people”. and I get triggered every time I walk past it.

  70. The real reason Jews are so liberal and globalist is not because they want to grow their customer base or cheap labor base, which are just bonus, but the more non-whites that come into the western world, the more white it makes Jews look. In a mostly Christian white world, Jews were not considered white and were relegated to the bottom of the totem pole. Now with all these non-whites pouring in, they become a lot whiter by comparison.

    Of course, they’ve known this for a while in the world of academia, where Asians are the new Jews and Jews are the new WASPs. Thanks to their dominance of the media, academia, Wall Street, and white guilt, this is accomplished at a much quicker pace than they thought. The Jewish takeover of the world is nearly complete, i.e. the Circle, is nearly complete.

  71. @AaronB
    The likely intelligence of a book shop owner proves my point, res. In fact, it is essential to my point.

    I was showing how a *behavior* that would appear "stupid" to Europeans (leaving books un-alphabetized, reducing sales), is actually a life-style choice and not a question of intelligence at all.

    Make sense?

    My point requires the selection of someone not likely to be stupid.

    Glad you enjoyed my anecdote, though.

    To my mind the appropriate observation is about the likely intelligence of anyone who either:
    1. Conflates stupidity and laziness.
    2. Assigns a non-low probability to the likelihood of a book shop owner being stupid.

    And thanks for the patronizing tone. It really added to the conversation.

    • Replies: @AaronB
    I apologize for the patronizing tone, I did not intend it.

    As for your number 1, that is, of course, my point. We are being stupid when we don't realize poor countries are that way at least as much because of life-style choices as ability - except, I wouldn't call it "laziness", I would call it de-prioritizing money.

    As for your number 2, well, a typical Westerner would certainly view the behavior of that book shop owner as "stupid", and question his intelligence - this attitude, indeed, is the basis for for our approach to poor countries, and shapes the discussion on how to "help" them become more like us.

    But I am glad you, at least, question the intelligence of such an approach.

  72. @BB753
    Gise is either a rare English surname or a German surname. Is Bezos Jewish on his mother's side?

    https://www.houseofnames.com/gise-family-crest

    Gise is a Norman-English last name with the more common spelling being Giese. More hits for Giese….hmmm…actually Giese is more German derived.

  73. @AaronB
    You may be right about Bezos. I was reading he is a true intuitive organizational genius, also...

    And Kalanick is just a miserable human being...

    But I'm reminded of that NYT article a while ago about conditions at Amazon. Our most highly educated people, our best talent, are enduring horrific and abusive conditions in order to accomplish a task of truly world-historical importance....cutting down delivery times from a day to a few hours...

    Sure, its not Bezos fault, these people are willing slaves. But it is remarkable.

    Oh, Bezos is no saint. Amazon is a tough place to work, from the offices to the warehouses. I was just ranking the three of them.

    And morality aside, Bezos is the greatest entrepreneur of his generation (I’d rank Bloomberg as the best among boomers, and Zuckerberg as the best among millennials).

  74. @Moshe
    I don't know how nominations work but does that mean that you are Nobel or close to Nobel material as a physicist? If so, what specifically have you been working on or, perhaps more relevantly for laymen, what physics fact can you tell us that would blow our minds?

    The nominations for Nobel Prize in Physics
    are accepted for consideration by the Committee
    1) from any winner of Nobel Prize in any specialty,
    2) from scientists invited by the Committee specially to nominate a candidate in a particular year.

    None of nominators in my case, AFAIK, was Jewish.

    No other comments in response to Moshe.

    • Replies: @Moshe
    I'm not sure exactly what your final line meant but I want to clarify that my questions were not meant as a challenge whatsoever. I am genuinely tremendously interested. Whenever I speak with someone who is an expert in some field I shut up and listen. I was, and still am, hoping that you will allow me the opportunity to do just that. I am unfortunately a full-blown ignoramus on the subjects of your field and was excited by the opportunity to learn something. For the sake of myself and others, please consider doing so.
  75. @res
    To my mind the appropriate observation is about the likely intelligence of anyone who either:
    1. Conflates stupidity and laziness.
    2. Assigns a non-low probability to the likelihood of a book shop owner being stupid.

    And thanks for the patronizing tone. It really added to the conversation.

    I apologize for the patronizing tone, I did not intend it.

    As for your number 1, that is, of course, my point. We are being stupid when we don’t realize poor countries are that way at least as much because of life-style choices as ability – except, I wouldn’t call it “laziness”, I would call it de-prioritizing money.

    As for your number 2, well, a typical Westerner would certainly view the behavior of that book shop owner as “stupid”, and question his intelligence – this attitude, indeed, is the basis for for our approach to poor countries, and shapes the discussion on how to “help” them become more like us.

    But I am glad you, at least, question the intelligence of such an approach.

    • Replies: @res
    I should add (in case it isn't already clear) that I agree with the basic point you are making.

    I wouldn’t call it “laziness”, I would call it de-prioritizing money.
     
    That's fair and central to your overall point.

    a typical Westerner would certainly view the behavior of that book shop owner as “stupid”, and question his intelligence
     
    I wonder about that. Of course there is no shortage of stupid Westerners, and there is also a very real "my way is the right way" effect (your point, I think) even among people I would not call stupid. So perhaps you are correct.
  76. @Joe Walker
    Steve just kisses their asses in the hopes that he might score a job at the New York Times or some other Jewish media outlet.

    Yeah, when I think “Steve Sailer”, I think “guy who has spent his life kissing up to the mainstream media, particularly Jews, avoiding saying anything offensive in order to have a byline in a big name publication.”

    • LOL: PV van der Byl
  77. @ANON
    No argument here, so long as we all agree at the outset that ethnic nepotism equals achievement.

    It’s really amazing how Jews, 0.2% of the world’s population, are somehow capable of using “muh nepotism” (which Sicilians, Somalis, Chinese, etc. have definitely never heard of) to achieve success across so many different domains in some fashion that no subgroup of the Gentiles making up the other 99.8% of the world’s population are able to replicate.

    Your argument is strikingly comparable to that of anti-European “scholars”/activists who deny the reality of extensive European accomplishment by claiming at every even remotely plausible turn that People Of Color played a critical yet now forgotten role. (E.g. “the US’s prosperity is the result of slavery and genocide”.)

    • Replies: @Hippopotamusdrome


    achieve success across so many different domains in some fashion that no subgroup of the Gentiles ... are able to replicate

     

    No other subgroup of Gentiles has been enumerated. Jews as a subgroup with a population of 10 million are considered, but the rest of the world is not divided into into a mosaic of 10 million genetically similar blocks. A genetic test that is fine grained enough to distinguish a German-Jew from a German non-Jew should be applied to distinguish German landed and merchantile classes from their working-class countrymen.
  78. @AaronB
    I have traveled extensively, and I have noticed that many so-called stupid people around the world are far more intelligent than we imagine....

    I was once in a book shop in Thailand which was less well organized than it could be. When I told the owner he could increase sales by better alphabatizing his books, he merely shrugged his shoulders and told me he makes quite enough money already, and he doesn't need the hassle. He then went on to express highly sophisticated opinions on a range of subjects.

    Countless similar experiences have made me understand that motivation is perhaps the *key* in understanding variations in Western-style success across countries, and probably within countries as well....

    One of the first things you notice in a poor country is the different attitude to life....yet for some inscrutable reason, this cannot be taken to have any significance......

    In the end, we are guilty of simple projection, a universal human trait. We naively imagine everyone wants what we want - We are the very pattern of humanity, indeed the only "real people". How can anyone value different things than our unsurpassedly magnificent selves? It is impossible - and therefore outcomes must be about ability.

    It is the same reason Turks and Arabs always see conspiracies and plots where they don't exist - it is how "they" would do things, you see. They cannot imagine others do it differently.

    We cannot face the possibility that "our choices" may, actually, be the wrong ones. To avoid that, we cannot accept that they are even choices at all. No, they are the default of humanity.

    You may be on to something.

    I suspect that’s what ‘implicit bias’ means- I secretly think this about Certain people, so you must think the same things about them.

    Black people especially. They don’t trust each other, and can’t believe anyone else does. It’s why they despise free-to-be-you-and-me liberals, and it explains the fixation with not airing ‘dirty laundry,’ ie public self-criticism.

  79. @AaronB
    The "hard" sciences, and money, strike me as being basically of the same "family" of achievement.

    Your admiration for Jews always struck me as strange, Steve. You're such an easy going laid back guy, one imagines you enjoy your pleasures and relaxations.

    You utterly lack the intensity of the Jewish personality, the zeal, the single minded focus, the inability to see "through" life and laugh at it, not take it too seriously.

    I don't think you'd really like whites to become more Jewish, however much you seem to admire them. It'd be a nightmare for you.

    one imagines you enjoy your pleasures and relaxations.

    Such insight, it frigging staggers me.

  80. @Medvedev
    Russia has a large Armenian diaspora (0.8% of the population), who contributed to different aspects and culture of Russia. Armenians also hold disproportionate amount of wealth and businesses. Russian IQ is estimated at 98. You would think that Armenians should have really impressive IQ, but it's just 94. Even if Armenians in Russia have slightly higher IQ on average then Armenians in Armenia it doesn't explain their success in Russia.
    Another example. Lebanese diaspora in Latin America. They are doing quite well. Carlos Slim, once the richest person in the world, current president of Brazil, current first lady of Argentina ... if there was statistics on wealth of Lebanese diaspora compared with average Latin American population I'm quiet sure, Lebanese would hold disproportionate amount of wealth as well.

    What is common, they are all tribal, have close bonds and would prefer someone of their ethnicity to non-Jew, non-Armenian, non-Lebanese. Of course, those are averages.

    Let's take facebook as example. Zuckerberg, Moscovits, Saverin have central role in it and literally made tens of billions of dollars. McCollum, Hughes, Winklevoss not so. You can argue that they didn't play a key role, left it or Winklevoss was a charlatan. I don't argue these may be the real reasons. But if you look up other examples, it repeats itself, again and again, reminding you of a pattern when there are those behind the scene and those who made billions. Take this:

    In late 2007, Mark Zuckerberg (Jew), co-founder and chief executive of Facebook, met Sandberg (Jew) at a Christmas party held by Dan Rosensweig (Jew). Zuckerberg had no formal search for a COO, but thought of Sandberg as "a perfect fit" for this role.
     
    See, how easy. Same with Susan Wojcicki. Or read the story of Elena Kagan. How she was promoted and who she promoted during her tenure at Harvard. Seariosly, read it.

    I don't want to dispel contribution made by Jews to science and culture. But there are more whites with IQ >130 (and their average would be ~140-145) than Jews in America. So, there are other more important factors (like tribalism) that play role in Jewish success.

    Arabs and Jews and other people do well in Latin America because they don’t have to deal with a Protestant work ethic.

  81. @AaronB
    The "hard" sciences, and money, strike me as being basically of the same "family" of achievement.

    Your admiration for Jews always struck me as strange, Steve. You're such an easy going laid back guy, one imagines you enjoy your pleasures and relaxations.

    You utterly lack the intensity of the Jewish personality, the zeal, the single minded focus, the inability to see "through" life and laugh at it, not take it too seriously.

    I don't think you'd really like whites to become more Jewish, however much you seem to admire them. It'd be a nightmare for you.

    “You utterly lack the intensity of the Jewish personality…the inability to see “through” life and laugh at it, not take it too seriously.”

    Maybe if Jews could learn how to tell jokes, they’d loosen up a little.

  82. @Vinay
    "It’s doubly impressive to be equally well-represented in two types of achievement — making billions and winning Nobels"

    So why hate on them? One hates people who're ONLY good at a bad thing, right? Aren't your criticism of them a lot like others' criticism of whites?

    "Whites were just good at stealing our stuff". Well, that, and also inventing stuff and exploring stuff and imagining stuff and running stuff and saving stuff etc. etc. They just happened to go through a phase where they were rocking in many many things, good AND bad.

    Why not extend the same courtesy to Jews? It'd at least have the virtue of intellectual consistency!

    Why not extend the same courtesy to Jews? It’d at least have the virtue of intellectual consistency!

    Try this thought experiment:

    ‘Every parasite has earned its success every bit as much as every host has (true). Therefore, why should any host object to being parasitised?’

    Correct, or not correct?

    (You appear to be too slow a learner to actually be one of them).

  83. @TheJester
    iSteve,

    There is another very important dimension in the social, technical, and economic success of Jews: Jews working together and sticking together to promote their individual and collective well-being. As an axiom often expressed in your blog articles, "What is good for the Jews ...," governs their interactions with the rest of society.

    Jews are also relentless. I first experienced this with Jewish professors at the university. I also experienced this with upper caste Indians and Lebanese during my years working in the Middle East. Indeed, my conclusion at the time was that the Lebanese could "out Jew the Jews". As one Lebanese explained, if he wasn't a millionaire by age 30 his family would consider him a failure. Abject humiliation.

    I've run across a number of sources that relate that in northern Europe through the 19th Century, the common wisdom was that Jews were good at trading and money lending but little else. Kind of like a tribe of Roma servicing the upper class.

    The Jews then bought newspapers and other media to change that perception ... putting their collective wealth to work in their collective interest. The myth of Einstein was allegedly one of the first calculated products from that initiative. He got lots of help. Einstein might have had an extremely high IQ, but that is only half of the story. Knowing that I often wonder if a measure of Jewish social, technical, and economic success is due to the collective help they give each other in getting into the right universities, getting the right jobs, working the right deals, being put in touch with the right people, working collectively to have their articles and scientific papers published, and the rest is history. It's the network, network, network. A networks that the goyim do not have.

    Put another way, if White Privilege is a myth, Jewish Privilege is not. I once had a company IT infrastructure issue affecting my software development program. I didn't know how to reach the right people in the company. One of my software developers offered, "Don't worry about it. I'll take care of it. The CIO attends my Temple."

    Knowing elements of the story, could Mark Zuckerburg have succeeded as he did without the clan's help at Harvard, Wall Street, and Silicon Valley? I doubt it. Without that help, Facebook would still be a niche application for picking up girls.

    There is another very important dimension in the social, technical, and economic success of Jews: Jews working together and sticking together to promote their individual and collective well-being. As an axiom often expressed in your blog articles, “What is good for the Jews …,” governs their interactions with the rest of society.

    The non-Orthodox Jewish outmarriage rate in the US is around 70%. I couldn’t quickly find any data on the fertility rate, but it’s probably close to, if not below, replacement for the non-Orthodox. So to be clear:

    Jews are so insanely ethno-centric, and so talented at advancing at their own interests, that they’re able to magick themselves into hard science Nobel Prizes, huge fortunes earned in competitive markets, chess championships, etc. at rates orders of magnitude above their population share. This is the result only, or at least primarily, of ethno-centric networking, which must be extremely opaque and complex, not of real, tangible accomplishment.

    But somehow, these same extremely ethno-centric Jews aren’t marrying Jews or having many Jewish children, and are quickly dissipating the genetic and cultural gradient between Jews and European Gentiles (in the US.)

    I’ve run across a number of sources that relate that in northern Europe through the 19th Century, the common wisdom was that Jews were good at trading and money lending but little else. Kind of like a tribe of Roma servicing the upper class.

    Steve agrees! He’s perceptively suggested that, before the 19th century, Jews tended to be more focused on making money than being intellectuals.

    The Jews then bought newspapers and other media to change that perception … putting their collective wealth to work in their collective interest.

    It’s hard to believe that networking is the only, or even primary, factor in Jewish success. Eventually, a business based on nepotism will be outcompeted, a scientist’s theories will be falsified, a chess player will be defeated, etc. (It’s like how, if women were really paid much less than they worth because of patriarchy/male privilege, founding a corporation with all women would be an easy way to make money.)

  84. A lot of this “wealth” is ephemeral. Adelson gambling (only because he’s trying to keep online betting from being implemented). Google, just start using other search engines like Bing, DuckDuckgo. Pritzkers, hotel chains come and go. Zuckerberg, other platforms are being built. Bloomberg’s business will end when he dies.

    Nobel prizes lost their worth about 30 years ago.

    I see the end of the so-called “Jewish century” coming to an end. Not that there Jews really had much to do with it. It’s the refusal of white gentiles to fight back.

  85. Aside from Jews, Swedes and Norwegians (and the Swede/Norwegian diaspora) seem to be waaay over-represented in both Nobels and rich people (e.g. Jeff Bezos, the Ikea guy.) In absolute numbers, if you include the diaspora in the U.S., Australia, New Zealand, my guess is the English+Scots are #1 in both Nobels and rich people. But from a much larger base. But I would love somebody to break this down…

    • Replies: @Anonymous

    Aside from Jews, Swedes and Norwegians (and the Swede/Norwegian diaspora) seem to be waaay over-represented in both Nobels
     
    This is particularly true of the early years. Guess what? It's the Swedes who award the prize. Same old thing, "ethnic nepotism". E.g., year after year they failed to award the chemistry prize to Mendeleev. You probably heard of periodic table. Ever heard of Moissan furnace?
    , @Hippopotamusdrome


    Swedes and Norwegians ... seem to be waaay over-represented in ... Nobels

     

    List of countries by Nobel laureates per capita
    Faroe Islands ... 207 Laureats/10 million
  86. @Clyde
    The last time Jeff Bezos, the 49-year-old CEO and founder of Amazon, saw his biological father, he was three years old.

    His biological father, whose name is Ted Jorgensen, was 18 when he impregnated Bezos' mother, Jacklyn Gise, who herself was 17. They were both still in high school at the time. They got married before their son was born.

    The marriage lasted only 17 months, reports Brad Stone at Bloomberg Businessweek, who has unearthed astonishing new details about Bezos' family's early years.

    Gise moved in with her parents because Jorgensen stayed out late, and drank too much, and was generally an inattentive father and husband says Stone. He agreed to a divorce, and paid a small amount of child support to Gise when he had money. Other times he missed the payments.

    Three years after their divorce, Gise married another man, Miguel Bezos, a Cuban immigrant who taught himself English, and eventually worked at Exxon. Miguel adopted Jeff, and Jeff took his last name. Jorgensen had to sign off on the name change, which he did, Stone reports.

    For a brief period Jorgensen remembered the Bezos name, but through the years he forgot about it, and dropped completely out of touch with his ex-wife and his son.

    Jorgensen's absence from Bezos' life was so complete that in a 1999 interview with Wired, Bezos said of Jorgensen, "I've never met him," although, in reality he lived with him for the first year of his life.

    "The reality, as far as I'm concerned, is that my Dad is my natural father. The only time I ever think about it, genuinely, is when a doctor asks me to fill out a form," said Bezos in 1999.

    Jorgensen, for his part, had a nearly identical attitude about Bezos.

    However, Stone managed to find Jorgensen, now 69, who owns a bike shop in Glendale, Arizona.

    Here's how Jorgensen reacted when Stone introduced himself: "He had no idea what I was talking about. Jorgensen said he didn’t know who Jeff Bezos was and was baffled by my suggestion that he was the father of this famous CEO."

    Stone jogged Jorgensen's memory, trotting out details about Bezos and his mother. Says Stone, "The old man’s face flushed with recognition. 'Is he still alive?' he asked, not yet fully comprehending."

    Bezos' biological father had disconnected so thoroughly from Bezos life that not only did he not remember his name, and not only did he not realize his son was one of the richest men in the world, but he wasn't even sure if his son was still alive.

    Jorgensen says that in his younger days "I wasn’t a good father or a husband." He eventually quit drinking, got his act together and opened his bike shop. He's married, but had no other children in his life beyond Bezos.

    A family friend told Stone later that Jorgensen felt overwhelmed with sadness and regret. He wants to get in touch with Bezos, but it's unclear if that will ever happen.

    Stone has a book coming out about Amazon. It's excerpted at Bloomberg BusinessWeek. The stuff about his father starts at the bottom of the seventh page.
    http://www.businessinsider.com/jeff-bezos-biological-father-2013-10

    Of the tech pioneers Bezos, Jobs, and Ellison were adopted. It seems tech pioneers come disproportionately from one of 2 backgrounds, private schooling up to high school and broken homes.

  87. @syonredux

    (Jeffrey Preston Jorgensen)
    January 12, 1964 —
    If this was HispanicOrNotHispanic.com, Amazon.com founder Jeff Bezos would make an excellent profile. Yes, he is often referred to as Hispanic, but the link comes from his Cuban stepfather.

    But this is not HispanicOrNotHispanic.com...

    If this was ScandinavianOrNotScandinavian.com, Amazon.com founder Jeff Bezos would make an excellent profile. You see, despite the non-nordic last name, he is Scandinavian! His birth father, a star unicyclist(!), was named Jorgensen.

    But this is not ScandinavianOrNotScandinavian.com...

    This is JewOrNotJew.com, of course! And we're not sure if Amazon.com founder Jeff Bezos would make an excellent profile on this website...

    But enough people are asking!

    Verdict: Sadly, not a Jew.
     
    http://www.jewornotjew.com/profile.jsp?ID=1827

    I’d call Bezos 1/4th Hispanic through his adoptive father (assuming a 50/50 nature/nurture split).

  88. @anon
    There is definitely some variable besides IQ at play as well. Maybe some combination of extroversion, drive, and nepotism (depending on the industry).

    I always thought it was funny how many of the trashy daytime talk shows (what wikipedia calls tabloid talk shows) had Jewish hosts.

    From back in its 90s heyday, when I was kid with endless summer days, I can recall:

    Oprah
    Phil Donahue
    Montel Williams
    Maury Povich
    Ricki Lake
    Sally Jesse Ralphael
    Jenny Jones
    Jerry Springer

    So that's five people of Jewish descent, two blacks, and a white gentile! Jewish women also seem highly over-represented in other forms of entertainment genres with working-class audiences: relationship advice (Dr. Laura, Dear Abby, Ann Landers), psychic Sylvia Browne, and Judge Judy.

    Even though Jenny Jones (née Janina Stroński) was
    born in Bethlehem, Palestine, she is not Jewish.
    Her parents were Polish Christians. Her father was
    a Polish officer who happened to be with the British
    Armed Forces in 1946 when she was born. So that
    makes two talk show hosts – her and Martha Stewart
    (née Kostyra) – who are Polish Americans. Meg Ryan
    (née Hyra) – the queen of the 1990s romantic comedies –
    also has Polish ancestry

    • Replies: @anon
    Ah. Thank you.
  89. @Anonymous
    The nominations for Nobel Prize in Physics
    are accepted for consideration by the Committee
    1) from any winner of Nobel Prize in any specialty,
    2) from scientists invited by the Committee specially to nominate a candidate in a particular year.

    None of nominators in my case, AFAIK, was Jewish.

    No other comments in response to Moshe.

    I’m not sure exactly what your final line meant but I want to clarify that my questions were not meant as a challenge whatsoever. I am genuinely tremendously interested. Whenever I speak with someone who is an expert in some field I shut up and listen. I was, and still am, hoping that you will allow me the opportunity to do just that. I am unfortunately a full-blown ignoramus on the subjects of your field and was excited by the opportunity to learn something. For the sake of myself and others, please consider doing so.

  90. res says:
    @AaronB
    I apologize for the patronizing tone, I did not intend it.

    As for your number 1, that is, of course, my point. We are being stupid when we don't realize poor countries are that way at least as much because of life-style choices as ability - except, I wouldn't call it "laziness", I would call it de-prioritizing money.

    As for your number 2, well, a typical Westerner would certainly view the behavior of that book shop owner as "stupid", and question his intelligence - this attitude, indeed, is the basis for for our approach to poor countries, and shapes the discussion on how to "help" them become more like us.

    But I am glad you, at least, question the intelligence of such an approach.

    I should add (in case it isn’t already clear) that I agree with the basic point you are making.

    I wouldn’t call it “laziness”, I would call it de-prioritizing money.

    That’s fair and central to your overall point.

    a typical Westerner would certainly view the behavior of that book shop owner as “stupid”, and question his intelligence

    I wonder about that. Of course there is no shortage of stupid Westerners, and there is also a very real “my way is the right way” effect (your point, I think) even among people I would not call stupid. So perhaps you are correct.

  91. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @SimpleSong
    Aside from Jews, Swedes and Norwegians (and the Swede/Norwegian diaspora) seem to be waaay over-represented in both Nobels and rich people (e.g. Jeff Bezos, the Ikea guy.) In absolute numbers, if you include the diaspora in the U.S., Australia, New Zealand, my guess is the English+Scots are #1 in both Nobels and rich people. But from a much larger base. But I would love somebody to break this down...

    Aside from Jews, Swedes and Norwegians (and the Swede/Norwegian diaspora) seem to be waaay over-represented in both Nobels

    This is particularly true of the early years. Guess what? It’s the Swedes who award the prize. Same old thing, “ethnic nepotism”. E.g., year after year they failed to award the chemistry prize to Mendeleev. You probably heard of periodic table. Ever heard of Moissan furnace?

    • Replies: @Moshe
    Neither were Swedish.
  92. @Medvedev
    Russia has a large Armenian diaspora (0.8% of the population), who contributed to different aspects and culture of Russia. Armenians also hold disproportionate amount of wealth and businesses. Russian IQ is estimated at 98. You would think that Armenians should have really impressive IQ, but it's just 94. Even if Armenians in Russia have slightly higher IQ on average then Armenians in Armenia it doesn't explain their success in Russia.
    Another example. Lebanese diaspora in Latin America. They are doing quite well. Carlos Slim, once the richest person in the world, current president of Brazil, current first lady of Argentina ... if there was statistics on wealth of Lebanese diaspora compared with average Latin American population I'm quiet sure, Lebanese would hold disproportionate amount of wealth as well.

    What is common, they are all tribal, have close bonds and would prefer someone of their ethnicity to non-Jew, non-Armenian, non-Lebanese. Of course, those are averages.

    Let's take facebook as example. Zuckerberg, Moscovits, Saverin have central role in it and literally made tens of billions of dollars. McCollum, Hughes, Winklevoss not so. You can argue that they didn't play a key role, left it or Winklevoss was a charlatan. I don't argue these may be the real reasons. But if you look up other examples, it repeats itself, again and again, reminding you of a pattern when there are those behind the scene and those who made billions. Take this:

    In late 2007, Mark Zuckerberg (Jew), co-founder and chief executive of Facebook, met Sandberg (Jew) at a Christmas party held by Dan Rosensweig (Jew). Zuckerberg had no formal search for a COO, but thought of Sandberg as "a perfect fit" for this role.
     
    See, how easy. Same with Susan Wojcicki. Or read the story of Elena Kagan. How she was promoted and who she promoted during her tenure at Harvard. Seariosly, read it.

    I don't want to dispel contribution made by Jews to science and culture. But there are more whites with IQ >130 (and their average would be ~140-145) than Jews in America. So, there are other more important factors (like tribalism) that play role in Jewish success.

    Susan Wojcicki, CEO of YouTube, is only half-Jewish.
    Her father is Stanley Wojcicki, chair of the Physics Dept.
    at Stanford, who is a Polish Christian. Wojcicki is a common
    Polish name.

    I discussed the matter with someone who said he was Jewish.
    He insisted on the one-drop rule which would make her Jewish
    without any qualifications. I pointed out that the one-drop
    rule would make perhaps 30% of all Americans black (incl. Hispanics
    with some African ancestry), maybe even himself. He was not happy
    with this counterargument.

    Albert Michelson, the first foreign-born American to win the Nobel
    Prize in Physics, partly for the famous Michelson-Morley
    experiment that disproved the existence of ether, was another example
    of someone who was half-Polish, half-Jewish. He was born in Strzelno
    in central Poland, interestingly very close to Copernicus’ birthplace.
    In the 19th century the area was under Prussian rule.
    There were about 3 million Jews living among Polish Christians in the
    Polish lands in the 19th century. Although intermarriage was rare, it
    did happen. Proximity breeds.

    Some people have pointed out that Jews are overrepresented in boring,
    indoor, bourgeois occupations, and severely underrepresented among great
    explorers, astronauts, sea captains, military generals, admirals, officers,
    great athletes, mountain climbers, naturalists (e.g., biologists), park
    rangers, hunters, painters, sculptors, architects (except recently), inventors
    and engineers (except recently)

    • Replies: @syonredux

    Albert Michelson, the first foreign-born American to win the Nobel
    Prize in Physics,
     
    Moved to the USA at the age of two, though, and grew up in mining towns in Nevada and California.
    , @Moshe
    Obviously we are only looking at the past eighty years or so. Then again, if you are including conversos you might want to consider the argument for Christopher Columbus. I personally don't care, so I haven't.

    It is arguable however whether you are correct. Defining a Great astronaut is rather difficult but defining AN astronaut is less so.

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Jewish_astronauts

    Some of the other fields there seem unworthy to mein their current form so I don't even care to investigate it.

    I don't care about athletics either but I would assume that you are incorrect about it.

    I do care about genuine innovators/inventors as well as explorers and, sadly, great military men.

    And I would assume that the assumption you repeated there about them is inaccurate as well.

    I'm most interested in Exploration. It's unclear what criteria one would have for defining such an exercise in the modern world but I would assume that any list compiled for some other purpose (as Steve wisely looks for) would find Jews prominent among the greats in those fields.
  93. @Anonymous

    Aside from Jews, Swedes and Norwegians (and the Swede/Norwegian diaspora) seem to be waaay over-represented in both Nobels
     
    This is particularly true of the early years. Guess what? It's the Swedes who award the prize. Same old thing, "ethnic nepotism". E.g., year after year they failed to award the chemistry prize to Mendeleev. You probably heard of periodic table. Ever heard of Moissan furnace?

    Neither were Swedish.

  94. @Anon 2
    Susan Wojcicki, CEO of YouTube, is only half-Jewish.
    Her father is Stanley Wojcicki, chair of the Physics Dept.
    at Stanford, who is a Polish Christian. Wojcicki is a common
    Polish name.

    I discussed the matter with someone who said he was Jewish.
    He insisted on the one-drop rule which would make her Jewish
    without any qualifications. I pointed out that the one-drop
    rule would make perhaps 30% of all Americans black (incl. Hispanics
    with some African ancestry), maybe even himself. He was not happy
    with this counterargument.

    Albert Michelson, the first foreign-born American to win the Nobel
    Prize in Physics, partly for the famous Michelson-Morley
    experiment that disproved the existence of ether, was another example
    of someone who was half-Polish, half-Jewish. He was born in Strzelno
    in central Poland, interestingly very close to Copernicus' birthplace.
    In the 19th century the area was under Prussian rule.
    There were about 3 million Jews living among Polish Christians in the
    Polish lands in the 19th century. Although intermarriage was rare, it
    did happen. Proximity breeds.

    Some people have pointed out that Jews are overrepresented in boring,
    indoor, bourgeois occupations, and severely underrepresented among great
    explorers, astronauts, sea captains, military generals, admirals, officers,
    great athletes, mountain climbers, naturalists (e.g., biologists), park
    rangers, hunters, painters, sculptors, architects (except recently), inventors
    and engineers (except recently)

    Albert Michelson, the first foreign-born American to win the Nobel
    Prize in Physics,

    Moved to the USA at the age of two, though, and grew up in mining towns in Nevada and California.

  95. @Anon 2
    Susan Wojcicki, CEO of YouTube, is only half-Jewish.
    Her father is Stanley Wojcicki, chair of the Physics Dept.
    at Stanford, who is a Polish Christian. Wojcicki is a common
    Polish name.

    I discussed the matter with someone who said he was Jewish.
    He insisted on the one-drop rule which would make her Jewish
    without any qualifications. I pointed out that the one-drop
    rule would make perhaps 30% of all Americans black (incl. Hispanics
    with some African ancestry), maybe even himself. He was not happy
    with this counterargument.

    Albert Michelson, the first foreign-born American to win the Nobel
    Prize in Physics, partly for the famous Michelson-Morley
    experiment that disproved the existence of ether, was another example
    of someone who was half-Polish, half-Jewish. He was born in Strzelno
    in central Poland, interestingly very close to Copernicus' birthplace.
    In the 19th century the area was under Prussian rule.
    There were about 3 million Jews living among Polish Christians in the
    Polish lands in the 19th century. Although intermarriage was rare, it
    did happen. Proximity breeds.

    Some people have pointed out that Jews are overrepresented in boring,
    indoor, bourgeois occupations, and severely underrepresented among great
    explorers, astronauts, sea captains, military generals, admirals, officers,
    great athletes, mountain climbers, naturalists (e.g., biologists), park
    rangers, hunters, painters, sculptors, architects (except recently), inventors
    and engineers (except recently)

    Obviously we are only looking at the past eighty years or so. Then again, if you are including conversos you might want to consider the argument for Christopher Columbus. I personally don’t care, so I haven’t.

    It is arguable however whether you are correct. Defining a Great astronaut is rather difficult but defining AN astronaut is less so.

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Jewish_astronauts

    Some of the other fields there seem unworthy to mein their current form so I don’t even care to investigate it.

    I don’t care about athletics either but I would assume that you are incorrect about it.

    I do care about genuine innovators/inventors as well as explorers and, sadly, great military men.

    And I would assume that the assumption you repeated there about them is inaccurate as well.

    I’m most interested in Exploration. It’s unclear what criteria one would have for defining such an exercise in the modern world but I would assume that any list compiled for some other purpose (as Steve wisely looks for) would find Jews prominent among the greats in those fields.

    • Replies: @Anon 2
    I think now that there is a Jewish state that
    has existed for almost 70 years, it's safest to use
    stats concerning Israel. If we use American Jews,
    then the argument will come down to who is really
    Jewish. Does 1/2, or 1/4 count?

    In sports we could look at the number of Olympic
    medals won by Israel. In the area of exploration,
    has Israel produced great explorers like Amundsen,
    Heyerdahl or Edmund Hillary? Or great naturalists
    like E.O. Wilson? Or great writers like Hemingway
    or Faulkner? Has it landed astronauts on the Moon?
    Has it produced great tennis players or a great soccer
    team? etc
  96. Are Jewish people more prone to being short sleepers or sociopathic? Both are traits highly prevalent among billionaires.

  97. SFG says:
    @AaronB
    The "hard" sciences, and money, strike me as being basically of the same "family" of achievement.

    Your admiration for Jews always struck me as strange, Steve. You're such an easy going laid back guy, one imagines you enjoy your pleasures and relaxations.

    You utterly lack the intensity of the Jewish personality, the zeal, the single minded focus, the inability to see "through" life and laugh at it, not take it too seriously.

    I don't think you'd really like whites to become more Jewish, however much you seem to admire them. It'd be a nightmare for you.

    Actually, with his argumentativeness, love of politics and public affairs, and wide-ranging interests, he’d probably make a pretty good Jew if he wanted to convert. (Not that I’m saying he SHOULD.) He’d be the annoying right-wing guy in the back of the temple, but he would otherwise fit in pretty well I think.

  98. @Wazoo
    Slatestarcodex recently published an excellent series of articles on this subject, focused on the Jewish population of Budapest in the early 20th century. Highly recommended.

    http://slatestarcodex.com/2017/05/26/the-atomic-bomb-considered-as-hungarian-high-school-science-fair-project/

    The guy has a very interesting blog. He’s liberal but anti-SJW, accepts HBD if you read between the lines, and is trying to censor his comments just enough to avoid having his career torpedoed by SJWs (and has admitted as much).

  99. SFG says:
    @AaronB
    No, its not entirely a stochastic trait.

    Its in response to various environmental factors - contingent historical situations - but probably also has a genetic component that varies over time.

    I'll give you a few concrete illustrations -

    The Chinese in the 19th century were knows as "lazy", compared to the frenetic activity of Europeans. Now the roles have been reversed. What changed? Their self-perception, their sense of threat, their need to prove themselves, their understanding of their place in the world, their sense of trauma at the hands of Europeans?

    I am sure, you, ic1000, would be an entirely different person, say, if you lived in dangerous and unstable times, or in safe and prosperous ones. They would bring out different sides of your personality.

    Perhaps, radical idea, observed behavior at any given time can be seen as genes mediated by environmental and psychological factors - now one side of the personality emerges, now another, depending on perceptions of self in relation to environment (which can be highly subjective, and even delusional), and on actual changes in environment.

    There may be a genetic component, but not in a straightforward way - Jewish "success", I am quite certain, is motivated in huge part by neurotic anxiety, and the resultant desire for control of one's environment, and a nagging inner fear that one does not "measure up" - in other words, self-image issues.

    Yet how many people would link great success in the world, Jewish or otherwise, to anxiety, fear, and self-image problems?

    Isn't it time our thinking became a little less superficial and we move beyond our childish simplicities?

    Here’s what gets me about a lot of HBD thought. They seem to think racial groups have an essence that persists across all times and places.

    The ‘Viking spirit’ is hardly in evidence in modern Scandinavia outside of black metal. Indians are dumber than average in England and smarter than average in America. Jews were not particularly smart in the ancient world, are smarter than average in the modern world, and are warlike in Israel and cowardly in America. It’s pretty clear that the same ancestral population can diverge if subjected to varying selection pressures, whether by selective immigration (Indians in America are selected from doctors or engineers) or emigration (Jews who don’t want to serve in the army don’t go to Israel).

    • Replies: @AaronB
    Very true, what you say.

    Its the ancient philosophy of "essentialism" now hiding out in the usual quasi-scientific garb.

    You will find that many of our new "cutting edge" scientific views are just ancient philosophical positions re-expressed in language that is credible to modern audiences (if it isn't expressed in sciency-sounding language, it has no credibility in our times)

    They represent timeless human tendencies, but can no longer be credibly expressed in the old language.

    The HBDers need to be seen as a kind of sect - perhaps philosophical - that holds positions based partly on emotional appeal and party on evidence. Once you see this, their behavior - the strange lapses and lacunae in their positions - begins to make a lot more sense.

    , @RobRich
    Despite all the angst here, the US immigration laws are in fact very restrictive and unless you have a relative or are a refugee, select for people who are basically genius (130+) IQ smart proven by ability to invest or a graduate degree. This combines with some countries only letting their smart people out for political reasons (China).

    The US was founded and mostly populated by people smart enough to leave their dumber violent brothers behind in their authoritarian cesspools.

    So of course you now get smarter Indians, Chinese, Africans, Brits, Jews. You go to their countries, not so much.

    As the Libertarians say, they welcome Bill-of-Rights loving, peaceful (i.e. smart and hard-working enough to be peaceful) people to immigrate for citizen (for now non-citizen track immigrants willing to peacefully work should get less grief as well, then return to their countries to evangelize Americanism). This builds the US and brain-drains potential rivals. It also means more higher-IQ Americans should have free reign to live abroad and straighten those countries out. Smart.
  100. SFG says:
    @TheJester
    iSteve,

    There is another very important dimension in the social, technical, and economic success of Jews: Jews working together and sticking together to promote their individual and collective well-being. As an axiom often expressed in your blog articles, "What is good for the Jews ...," governs their interactions with the rest of society.

    Jews are also relentless. I first experienced this with Jewish professors at the university. I also experienced this with upper caste Indians and Lebanese during my years working in the Middle East. Indeed, my conclusion at the time was that the Lebanese could "out Jew the Jews". As one Lebanese explained, if he wasn't a millionaire by age 30 his family would consider him a failure. Abject humiliation.

    I've run across a number of sources that relate that in northern Europe through the 19th Century, the common wisdom was that Jews were good at trading and money lending but little else. Kind of like a tribe of Roma servicing the upper class.

    The Jews then bought newspapers and other media to change that perception ... putting their collective wealth to work in their collective interest. The myth of Einstein was allegedly one of the first calculated products from that initiative. He got lots of help. Einstein might have had an extremely high IQ, but that is only half of the story. Knowing that I often wonder if a measure of Jewish social, technical, and economic success is due to the collective help they give each other in getting into the right universities, getting the right jobs, working the right deals, being put in touch with the right people, working collectively to have their articles and scientific papers published, and the rest is history. It's the network, network, network. A networks that the goyim do not have.

    Put another way, if White Privilege is a myth, Jewish Privilege is not. I once had a company IT infrastructure issue affecting my software development program. I didn't know how to reach the right people in the company. One of my software developers offered, "Don't worry about it. I'll take care of it. The CIO attends my Temple."

    Knowing elements of the story, could Mark Zuckerburg have succeeded as he did without the clan's help at Harvard, Wall Street, and Silicon Valley? I doubt it. Without that help, Facebook would still be a niche application for picking up girls.

    Einstein’s a bad example–every physicist I know really does think he was that impressive.

    Your overall statement I agree with though. Say you need an IQ of 130 to do groundbreaking science work. That’s 3% of the general American population and 16% of the Jewish population (assuming a 1 SD advantage). That’s only an overrepresentation by a factor of 5, when the actual factors for money and science seem to be about 100.

    But it can’t *just* be the network, because lots of other groups are nepotistic too! So I’d argue it’s talent *plus* nepotism–they have the advantage of an ethnic network that also happens to be substantially brighter than average.

    To be honest I think it is more about being hooked into the American Ivy League network than a specifically Jewish network at this point. Those old Old Testament-obsessed Puritans’ descendants have interbred with the ultimate Old Testament group, and the elite got a huge influx of fresh blood into their veins. Now is that good for the *rest* of the USA? That’s another question. As Machiavelli said, the populace doesn’t want to be oppressed by the nobles, and the nobles want to oppress the populace. Our nobles are happy to have some clever new blood. Should the populace be happy?

    • Replies: @Buddy Ray
    According to Unz, Protestants got deselected from the Ivy League.
    , @Anon 2
    There is another point to be considered. Since
    the '60s science has lost a lot of its former status.
    Back in the '60s students at Berkeley, etc. started
    referring to scientists as "whores in the service of the
    military-industrial complex," and for better or worse
    this moniker still has currency. I see this among my
    more sensitive students. There is a degree of moral
    revulsion toward math, physics or chemistry because
    the students sense that every new discovery might
    have military applications.

    Another thing that people don't realize is that to become a
    reasonably good mathematician or physicist requires spending
    countless boring hours sitting indoors, and reading, writing,
    and calculating, i.e., following an extremely bourgeois lifestyle that
    people in the '60s, for better or worse, rebelled against.
    I realize that in the '80s the former hippies became yuppies
    but the aftereffects are still with us. Students no longer
    see science and engineering as very exciting. The low-hanging
    fruit has already been picked, and the payoff just isn't there
    anymore. In the '80s there was a mass exodus of U.S.-born
    students from the STEM disciplines, esp. at the Ph.D. level,
    into banking, finance, economics, and business. STEM
    is now left primarily to students who have fewer choices
    in life, esp. foreigners. The end of science may not be near, as
    John Horgan of Sci Am claims, but the Age of Genius is basically
    over. Even "physics lost its fizz," in Horgan's words. Nobel Prizes
    don't mean much anymore

    , @conatus
    "Your overall statement I agree with though. Say you need an IQ of 130 to do groundbreaking science work. That’s 3% of the general American population and 16% of the Jewish population (assuming a 1 SD advantage). That’s only an overrepresentation by a factor of 5, when the actual factors for money and science seem to be about 100."

    Kevin MacDonald discusses the relative size of the Goy v Jew Bell curves when it comes to IQ. Yeah Jews are smarter but their Bell curve is 32 times smaller.
    MacDonald says,
    "On the basis of IQ, the ratio of non-Jewish Whites to Jews should be around 7 to 1 (IQ >130) or 4.5 to 1 (IQ > 145)"

    from here:
    http://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/articles/MacDonald-Gottfried.html
  101. And yet so many Jews will tell you with a straight face how “oppressed” they are.

  102. @SFG
    Einstein's a bad example--every physicist I know really does think he was that impressive.

    Your overall statement I agree with though. Say you need an IQ of 130 to do groundbreaking science work. That's 3% of the general American population and 16% of the Jewish population (assuming a 1 SD advantage). That's only an overrepresentation by a factor of 5, when the actual factors for money and science seem to be about 100.

    But it can't *just* be the network, because lots of other groups are nepotistic too! So I'd argue it's talent *plus* nepotism--they have the advantage of an ethnic network that also happens to be substantially brighter than average.

    To be honest I think it is more about being hooked into the American Ivy League network than a specifically Jewish network at this point. Those old Old Testament-obsessed Puritans' descendants have interbred with the ultimate Old Testament group, and the elite got a huge influx of fresh blood into their veins. Now is that good for the *rest* of the USA? That's another question. As Machiavelli said, the populace doesn't want to be oppressed by the nobles, and the nobles want to oppress the populace. Our nobles are happy to have some clever new blood. Should the populace be happy?

    According to Unz, Protestants got deselected from the Ivy League.

  103. @Moshe
    Obviously we are only looking at the past eighty years or so. Then again, if you are including conversos you might want to consider the argument for Christopher Columbus. I personally don't care, so I haven't.

    It is arguable however whether you are correct. Defining a Great astronaut is rather difficult but defining AN astronaut is less so.

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Jewish_astronauts

    Some of the other fields there seem unworthy to mein their current form so I don't even care to investigate it.

    I don't care about athletics either but I would assume that you are incorrect about it.

    I do care about genuine innovators/inventors as well as explorers and, sadly, great military men.

    And I would assume that the assumption you repeated there about them is inaccurate as well.

    I'm most interested in Exploration. It's unclear what criteria one would have for defining such an exercise in the modern world but I would assume that any list compiled for some other purpose (as Steve wisely looks for) would find Jews prominent among the greats in those fields.

    I think now that there is a Jewish state that
    has existed for almost 70 years, it’s safest to use
    stats concerning Israel. If we use American Jews,
    then the argument will come down to who is really
    Jewish. Does 1/2, or 1/4 count?

    In sports we could look at the number of Olympic
    medals won by Israel. In the area of exploration,
    has Israel produced great explorers like Amundsen,
    Heyerdahl or Edmund Hillary? Or great naturalists
    like E.O. Wilson? Or great writers like Hemingway
    or Faulkner? Has it landed astronauts on the Moon?
    Has it produced great tennis players or a great soccer
    team? etc

  104. @SFG
    Einstein's a bad example--every physicist I know really does think he was that impressive.

    Your overall statement I agree with though. Say you need an IQ of 130 to do groundbreaking science work. That's 3% of the general American population and 16% of the Jewish population (assuming a 1 SD advantage). That's only an overrepresentation by a factor of 5, when the actual factors for money and science seem to be about 100.

    But it can't *just* be the network, because lots of other groups are nepotistic too! So I'd argue it's talent *plus* nepotism--they have the advantage of an ethnic network that also happens to be substantially brighter than average.

    To be honest I think it is more about being hooked into the American Ivy League network than a specifically Jewish network at this point. Those old Old Testament-obsessed Puritans' descendants have interbred with the ultimate Old Testament group, and the elite got a huge influx of fresh blood into their veins. Now is that good for the *rest* of the USA? That's another question. As Machiavelli said, the populace doesn't want to be oppressed by the nobles, and the nobles want to oppress the populace. Our nobles are happy to have some clever new blood. Should the populace be happy?

    There is another point to be considered. Since
    the ’60s science has lost a lot of its former status.
    Back in the ’60s students at Berkeley, etc. started
    referring to scientists as “whores in the service of the
    military-industrial complex,” and for better or worse
    this moniker still has currency. I see this among my
    more sensitive students. There is a degree of moral
    revulsion toward math, physics or chemistry because
    the students sense that every new discovery might
    have military applications.

    Another thing that people don’t realize is that to become a
    reasonably good mathematician or physicist requires spending
    countless boring hours sitting indoors, and reading, writing,
    and calculating, i.e., following an extremely bourgeois lifestyle that
    people in the ’60s, for better or worse, rebelled against.
    I realize that in the ’80s the former hippies became yuppies
    but the aftereffects are still with us. Students no longer
    see science and engineering as very exciting. The low-hanging
    fruit has already been picked, and the payoff just isn’t there
    anymore. In the ’80s there was a mass exodus of U.S.-born
    students from the STEM disciplines, esp. at the Ph.D. level,
    into banking, finance, economics, and business. STEM
    is now left primarily to students who have fewer choices
    in life, esp. foreigners. The end of science may not be near, as
    John Horgan of Sci Am claims, but the Age of Genius is basically
    over. Even “physics lost its fizz,” in Horgan’s words. Nobel Prizes
    don’t mean much anymore

    • Agree: AaronB
  105. @Deso Dogg
    It's really amazing how Jews, 0.2% of the world's population, are somehow capable of using "muh nepotism" (which Sicilians, Somalis, Chinese, etc. have definitely never heard of) to achieve success across so many different domains in some fashion that no subgroup of the Gentiles making up the other 99.8% of the world's population are able to replicate.

    Your argument is strikingly comparable to that of anti-European "scholars"/activists who deny the reality of extensive European accomplishment by claiming at every even remotely plausible turn that People Of Color played a critical yet now forgotten role. (E.g. "the US's prosperity is the result of slavery and genocide".)

    achieve success across so many different domains in some fashion that no subgroup of the Gentiles … are able to replicate

    No other subgroup of Gentiles has been enumerated. Jews as a subgroup with a population of 10 million are considered, but the rest of the world is not divided into into a mosaic of 10 million genetically similar blocks. A genetic test that is fine grained enough to distinguish a German-Jew from a German non-Jew should be applied to distinguish German landed and merchantile classes from their working-class countrymen.

  106. @SimpleSong
    Aside from Jews, Swedes and Norwegians (and the Swede/Norwegian diaspora) seem to be waaay over-represented in both Nobels and rich people (e.g. Jeff Bezos, the Ikea guy.) In absolute numbers, if you include the diaspora in the U.S., Australia, New Zealand, my guess is the English+Scots are #1 in both Nobels and rich people. But from a much larger base. But I would love somebody to break this down...

    Swedes and Norwegians … seem to be waaay over-represented in … Nobels

    List of countries by Nobel laureates per capita
    Faroe Islands … 207 Laureats/10 million

  107. @Anon 2
    Even though Jenny Jones (née Janina Stroński) was
    born in Bethlehem, Palestine, she is not Jewish.
    Her parents were Polish Christians. Her father was
    a Polish officer who happened to be with the British
    Armed Forces in 1946 when she was born. So that
    makes two talk show hosts - her and Martha Stewart
    (née Kostyra) - who are Polish Americans. Meg Ryan
    (née Hyra) - the queen of the 1990s romantic comedies -
    also has Polish ancestry

    Ah. Thank you.

  108. Another thing is the Jewish one drop rule. If only one parent is Jewish your accomplishments are considered 100% Jewish and 0% gentile.

    I went down the list of Jewish Nobel laureates starting at the earliest entry until I found one with a non Jewish parent. First entry of chemistry and medicine and fourth entry on physics.

    Chemistry:
    Adolf von Baeyer: “son of … a Prussian officer … a Lutheran”
    Physiology or Medicine:
    Élie Metchnikoff: “youngest of … a Russian officer of the Imperial Guard”
    Physics:
    Albert A. Michelson: Both parents Jewish
    Gabriel Lippmann: Both parents Jewish
    Albert Einstein: Both parents Jewish
    Niels Bohr: Father is Christian Bohr

    The Prussian and Russian upper classes that populated the officer corps have no distinct identity as a genetic group to trace their achievements, only indirectly when they marry Jews and their half European children have their accomplishments counted as 100% Jewish and 0% European.

    The German officers and officials at Nuremberg who had upper class backgrounds were shown to have an average IQ of 128. The highest IQ scorer at 143 was Hjalmar Schacht. His mother was a Danish baroness, making him related to Scandinavian aristocracy. He was also a banker.

    • Replies: @Anon 2
    Albert Michelson was only half-Jewish (read his
    biography, Wikipedia has it wrong). He was born
    in the part of Poland that was under Prussian
    administrative control (as we know, Prussia was
    a neighborhood bully in the 18-19th centuries
    in Central Europe). His father was a Polish Jew
    and his mother a Polish Christian.
  109. @International Jew
    Just wanted to let y'all know, I'm not one of those eleven billionaires, and I haven't won the Nobel Prize.

    Hm. Have you tried inventing dynamite?

  110. @Dave Pinsen
    I don't think there's a Jew in the world with Jeff Bezos's intensity (and before Syon or someone else pastes in 10 paragraphs from Wikipedia: yes, I know Bezos isn't Jewish; hence my use of him here as a contrast). I saw recently on Twitter that before Bezos settled on the name Amazon.com, he bought the domain Relentless.com.

    A friend married a literal Amazon who works at Amazon. They recently got divorced. She was more type-A than Hollywood's version of a type-A business gal.

    I have something in common with Jeff Bezos that (most likely) no one reading this comment has. It’s nothing important, and it certainly doesn’t link us in any meaningful way, but it is a minor attribute that we share that sets us apart from the great bulk of mankind.

    • Replies: @Dave Pinsen
    You're bald?
  111. @Anon Chief
    Ethnic nepotism can take you to a grocery store job, but it can not take you all the way to a Nobel Prize.

    Or a Fields Medal, or an ACM Turing Award, or a Westinghouse Science Prize, or a world chess championship. Or even to dozens of billions of dollars, for that matter.

    La Griffe du Lion offers a more useful model:

    http://www.lagriffedulion.f2s.com/ashkenaz.htm

    All you need is to outcompete the rivals, supposedly gentile Whites and Asians. A little help here, a little there and you’re ahead of others. And as the time goes by the gap widens.
    Let’s take, our family friend (half-Jew), who emigrated to the US in 1993 after the collapse of the USSR. He’s a smart fellow, but his dad was just a heavy machinery worker. Yeah, not all Jews are millionaires. Jewish philanthropic orgs helped him a lot at first, to accommodate his stay, to get around, to understand the system and get to college and he graduated it almost debt-free. I can only imagine, that heavily Jewish college boards would prefer Jew to non-Jew with same credentials and knowledge. So, as you can see a little help here and there and he was able to make 80 grands by 1998, although he arrived in US just with high school diploma. Sergey Brin’s parents – the same story about help from Jewish community. And if our family friend had great ideas on how to change the world, I’m quiet sure, there would be Jewish entrepreneurs and philanthropists who would support and help other fellow.

    Meanwhile, a Slavic guy often would have to work his way from the bottom even when he has a master’s/PhD. Nowadays, it’s easier cause there is greater need for skilled workers and American society is more “accepting”. Working in tech I can attest that many Slavics would prefer American to interview them rather then other Slavic fellow. Why? Because Russian/Belorussian/Ukrainian interviewer maybe be more captious towards other Russian/Belorussian/Ukrainian person and may not feel the need to be politically correct.

    So, networking, connections and preference for someone from your ethnic group really matters and makes the difference.

    • Replies: @Anonymous Nephew
    "So, networking, connections and preference for someone from your ethnic group really matters and makes the difference."


    There was an interesting Daily Mail biography of the literary agent Polly Samson, best known as wife of Floyd's Dave Gilmour and mother (by Heathcote Williams) of that brat who was jailed for rioting in London.

    Can't remember all the detail, but Ms Samson, whose parents got here from Germany, was doing something pretty dull like working in a stationer's in Portsmouth, when her aunt who was something in publishing wrote and said "let me take you away from all this". Ms Samson was bright, pretty and personable, and flourished in the literary world.

    Now there may have been other bright kids wasting their sweetness on the desert air of Portsmouth or Barnsley - but unless you get that chance you may never fulfil your potential.

  112. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @AaronB
    I have traveled extensively, and I have noticed that many so-called stupid people around the world are far more intelligent than we imagine....

    I was once in a book shop in Thailand which was less well organized than it could be. When I told the owner he could increase sales by better alphabatizing his books, he merely shrugged his shoulders and told me he makes quite enough money already, and he doesn't need the hassle. He then went on to express highly sophisticated opinions on a range of subjects.

    Countless similar experiences have made me understand that motivation is perhaps the *key* in understanding variations in Western-style success across countries, and probably within countries as well....

    One of the first things you notice in a poor country is the different attitude to life....yet for some inscrutable reason, this cannot be taken to have any significance......

    In the end, we are guilty of simple projection, a universal human trait. We naively imagine everyone wants what we want - We are the very pattern of humanity, indeed the only "real people". How can anyone value different things than our unsurpassedly magnificent selves? It is impossible - and therefore outcomes must be about ability.

    It is the same reason Turks and Arabs always see conspiracies and plots where they don't exist - it is how "they" would do things, you see. They cannot imagine others do it differently.

    We cannot face the possibility that "our choices" may, actually, be the wrong ones. To avoid that, we cannot accept that they are even choices at all. No, they are the default of humanity.

    “In the end, we are guilty of simple projection, a universal human trait. We naively imagine everyone wants what we want – We are the very pattern of humanity, indeed the only “real people”. How can anyone value different things than our unsurpassedly magnificent selves? It is impossible – and therefore outcomes must be about ability.”

    I find this post quite insightful, because we share a similar view.

    When others belittle Muslims -like some here, from authors to posters- for their lack of major successes in worldly life, I find that amusing.

    It is all about priorities. Allah(swt) exhorts mankind that success in this world is of little value, and real success or failure is reserved for later.

    We have consciously chosen that success, and are diligently working towards it, while the extremely successful west, spiritually lost, is trying to find hope in pagan dogma.

    The western civilisation rejects His Oneness, ascribes partners to Him, and holds delusions that its accomplishments will result in a pass in His court? Be ready for a rude awakening.

    But, you guys go right on ahead. I do like my gadgets.

    “It is the same reason Turks and Arabs always see conspiracies and plots where they don’t exist ”

    Don’t exist? Given the reality of what is happening in the ME, and who started it all, and who sustains it, don’t quite know what to make of that.

    Was that an attempt at disparaging Muslims, in some way, again? Ok.

  113. @anon
    There is definitely some variable besides IQ at play as well. Maybe some combination of extroversion, drive, and nepotism (depending on the industry).

    I always thought it was funny how many of the trashy daytime talk shows (what wikipedia calls tabloid talk shows) had Jewish hosts.

    From back in its 90s heyday, when I was kid with endless summer days, I can recall:

    Oprah
    Phil Donahue
    Montel Williams
    Maury Povich
    Ricki Lake
    Sally Jesse Ralphael
    Jenny Jones
    Jerry Springer

    So that's five people of Jewish descent, two blacks, and a white gentile! Jewish women also seem highly over-represented in other forms of entertainment genres with working-class audiences: relationship advice (Dr. Laura, Dear Abby, Ann Landers), psychic Sylvia Browne, and Judge Judy.

    Don’t forget Geraldo Rivera, son of a Puerto Rican father and a Jewish mother.

    Geraldo’s maternal grandparents were sufficiently leery about their daughter’s marrying a Catholic that his father felt compelled to change his last name:

    My father Allen Cruz Rivera worked for Republic [Aviation]. “Allen” was Dad’s nom de mariage, taken to assuage his Jewish in-laws when he married my mother Lilly Friedman. Cruz, which translates as “cross” in English, was Dad’s real first name, but he worried that my mother’s family would choke on the Christianity of it.

    His mother didn’t help matters:

    When I was born, my mother filled in my birth certificate with the name Gerald Riviera, adding an extra “i” to my father’s surname. She did the same thing for my sister Irene. Later, she would drop the pretense for my sister Sharon, only to pick it up again with the birth of my baby brother Craig. Whenever we asked about the inconsistencies, she would shrug shyly and joke her way out of it. “I just forgot how to spell it,” she would say, and leave it at that. Underneath, I came to realize, she was deeply embarrassed over what was a clumsy attempt at an ethnic cover-up.

    With my parents and youngster sister known as Rivera, and with various documents bearing one spelling or the other, we were all confused. School officials were also stymied. My high school yearbook carried one spelling for my graduation photo, and the other for my team pictures. Over the years, the name-game has been an absurd humiliation, forcing me into countless and often contradictory explanations. Once I became a public person, it even gave rise to the convoluted tale — first spun by a New York disc jockey in 1973 — that I was a Jew posing as a Puerto Rican to cash in on affirmative action, and that my real family name was Rivers.

    [MORE]

    Phil Donahue* was the godfather of the daytime TV talkfest, and was regarded by some as the most “legitimate” of the bunch.

    The names you listed were only the most successful. Over the years, there have been dozens, if not hundreds, of short-lived gabfests. Legions of celebrities, including such illustrious names as Carnie Wilson, Roseanne Barr, Anderson Cooper, and Katie Couric**, have tried, and failed, to grab a piece of the action.

    This clip is only one minute long, but it gives you a sense of the borefest that was Carnie, the most-hyped new talk show of the 1995/96 TV season:

    In the early ’80s, David Letterman had a daytime show. It was such a convoluted hodgepodge that it included a (serious) news segment hosted by Edwin Newman – the guy who anchored NBC’s coverage of such events as the Kennedy assassination and the Reagan assassination attempt.

    Fortunately, the network higher-ups finally figured out that Letterman was a late-night talent and gave him the coveted after-Carson time slot.

    Letterman’s slot had long been occupied by Tom Snyder, a 6’4″ Jew. Years later, the after-Letterman slot was given to Bob Costas, an Irish-Greek manlet best known for hosting NBC’s (all but unwatchable) coverage of the Olympics.

    In the late ’90s, Snyder hosted an after-Letterman show on CBS. Snyder’s replacement on that show was Craig Kilborn, a 6’5″ frat-boyish goy who had been hosting Comedy Central’s Daily Show. Kilborn, a washed-up jock, eventually washed out and was replaced by a succession of British imports.

    The first – Craig Ferguson – was a lanky Scotsman with a cheesy fake robotic sidekick; the second – James Corden – is a squat, fat Englishman whose main shtick is driving his guests around Los Angeles while forcing them to screech out tunes at the top of their lungs.

    Kilborn’s replacement at Comedy Central was a short Jewish guy named Jon Stewart, who earlier had hosted a (very obscure) syndicated late-night show. Stewart made the Daily Show a lot more political, and by doing so put himself in a much higher tax bracket. (I’ve never found him funny, but there you go.)

    Stephen Colbert, Letterman’s successor at CBS, is a) 5’11”, b) not Jewish, and c) not funny.

    *When Donahue retired, he said of his competitors, “They are all my illegitimate children, and I love them all equally.”

    **Useless trivia: What do Barbara Walters, Jane Pauley, Katie Couric, and Meredith Vieira have in common?

    (Only two of them – Walters and Couric – are Jewish, although Vieira’s husband is Jewish and raised her kids as Jewish. See below.)

    The answer is all of them co-anchored NBC’s Today show and then went on to host their own failed daytime talk shows.

    (Walters’ show, Not for Women Only, was the most successful of the four.)

    Vieira was raised Catholic, and is raising her kids Jewish. She explains, “Richard is a cultural Jew. He’s not observant. But he wanted to raise the children Jewish and I said, ‘That’s fine but you’ve gotta take the lead here because I don’t really know much about Judaism.’ He said ‘no problem.’” The family celebrates Jewish holidays. “We love Passover,” Vieira says. “But we don’t go to temple.”

  114. The non-Orthodox Jewish outmarriage rate in the US is around 70%.

    High intermarriage rates among non-Orthodox Jews is a recent phenomenon, so we should wait a generation or two to see how it unfolds.

    Intermarriage rates have risen from roughly 6% in 1950 and 25% in 1974, to approximately 40–50% in the year 2000. By 2013, the intermarriage rate had risen to 71% for non-Orthodox Jews

    Jews has become the wealthiest ethnic group and now intermarry with elite WASPs. Add to this recent influx of rich and smart Asians/Indians and you will have future American elite. America will have mixed elite who will rule over mixed population, which they promote through diversity, mixing and inclusion. This will create an illusion of post-racial society and that no-one is discriminated, since everyone is mixed (just like in Mexico or Puerto Rico) IMHO

    • Replies: @Anon 2
    Actually when Jews intermarry in the U.S.,
    they intermarry primarily with Catholics, not
    Protestants. One of the reasons is geography:
    Both Catholics and Jews are heavily overrepresented
    in the Northeast. Proximity breeds.

    Let's not forget, only 50% of U.S. Jews have college
    degrees. I was once roommates with a Jewish woman
    whose brother was a simple roofer. Actually, Indian
    Americans are better educated and more affluent than
    Jews, and their numbers are growing exponentially.
    On the other hand, the U.S. Chinese are not particularly
    affluent.

    Some people (e.g., some Israeli rabbis) don't regard
    the Ashkenazis as real Jews since genetically they turned
    out to be roughly 45% European and only 55% Middle-Eastern.
    So a typical Ashkenazi is about as Jewish as Obama is
    black. Hence Einstein genetically was only 55% Jewish

  115. Jews are magicians at creating the perception or narrative. Let’s take take the supposed conversation between me and the other guy on Jewish intelligence.

    he: Jews have really high IQ, the evidence is the number of achievements and inventions made by Jews.
    me: Wonder why Israel IQ is just 95.
    he: That’s because of Arabs.
    me: But if you account for Arabs having IQ similar to Syria and Iraq (~85) and others 90-95, Jewish IQ would be ~97.8
    he: That’s because of Mizrahi
    me: Yeah, but math still doesn’t add up …
    he: That’s because of Sephardic
    me: Almost half of Jews in Israel are Ashkenazi Jews, so their average is still around ~103
    he: That’s because the a lot of them mixed with Mizrahi/Sephardic Jews and the brightest emigrated to the US

    See, cherry-picking to the point when it’s not even possible to argue. If I picked smart 20-25% among French or Germans what their IQ would be? Or take Russians, their estimated IQ is 98. If I picked Moscow, with ~106-107 IQ based on PISA results and population two times bigger than number of Jews in the US (12 millions vs 5.5 million). In fact, there are almost as many people in Moscow as there are Jews in the world, including Mizrahi and Sephardic. So, why I don’t see Moscow as the center of the universe and scientific progress? Because there is nothing extraordinary about having smart fraction of the population numbering millions/tens of millions of people, even with average IQ of ~106-107.
    What’s more important is tribalism and having a sufficiently large host population (325 mln in US, 700 mln in US), where a smart fraction can thrive.

    • Replies: @Brady
    A parsimonious explanation would be how most races appear to demonstrate nearly a +1 standard deviation higher IQ in America than in their original territory, for all sorts of environmental reasons that I'll carelessly lump together as "living in a white-Euro-Christian society". Intelligence is heritable, but not 100% of it.

    Over multiple generations, Africans jump from an average of 70 to 85. Indians jump from 80 to 95. Jews jump from 98 to 113. White Americans either don't benefit because they were already at the higher baseline, or there is something horribly dysgenic going on (probably both).

    The overwhelming majority of Israeli Jews are not from the US. Most are from Russia and various Arab countries. Thanks to exposure to Marxism and Islamism, they're starting from the minimum environmental baseline rather than the maximum.

    One could summarize the hypothesis as: some combination of environment and epigenetics could be responsible for a range of perhaps -7 to +7 average IQ. The USA is near +7, Israel is somewhere between -7 and 0. This is a partially-testable hypothesis; if correct, we should see the average Israeli IQ start to creep upward over the next 3-5 generations, assuming Jewish birth rate keeps pace with Arabs (which it is now doing).
    , @Deso Dogg

    he: Jews have really high IQ, the evidence is the number of achievements and inventions made by Jews.
    me: Wonder why Israel IQ is just 95.
    he: That’s because of Arabs.
    me: But if you account for Arabs having IQ similar to Syria and Iraq (~85) and others 90-95, Jewish IQ would be ~97.8
    he: That’s because of Mizrahi
    me: Yeah, but math still doesn’t add up …
    he: That’s because of Sephardic
    me: Almost half of Jews in Israel are Ashkenazi Jews, so their average is still around ~103
    he: That’s because the a lot of them mixed with Mizrahi/Sephardic Jews and the brightest emigrated to the US
     
    The string of objections you list is really just one: "if you're responding to a claim about Ashkenazi Jews, you should use data on Ashkenazi Jews." Only about a third of Israelis are Ashkenazim, so this seems like a pretty reasonable objection.

    What’s more important is tribalism and having a sufficiently large host population (325 mln in US, 700 mln in US), where a smart fraction can thrive.
     
    Despite being a small country, Israel has won a lot of hard science Nobels per capita since 2000:

    http://slatestarcodex.com/2017/05/29/four-nobel-truths/
  116. @AaronB
    I have traveled extensively, and I have noticed that many so-called stupid people around the world are far more intelligent than we imagine....

    I was once in a book shop in Thailand which was less well organized than it could be. When I told the owner he could increase sales by better alphabatizing his books, he merely shrugged his shoulders and told me he makes quite enough money already, and he doesn't need the hassle. He then went on to express highly sophisticated opinions on a range of subjects.

    Countless similar experiences have made me understand that motivation is perhaps the *key* in understanding variations in Western-style success across countries, and probably within countries as well....

    One of the first things you notice in a poor country is the different attitude to life....yet for some inscrutable reason, this cannot be taken to have any significance......

    In the end, we are guilty of simple projection, a universal human trait. We naively imagine everyone wants what we want - We are the very pattern of humanity, indeed the only "real people". How can anyone value different things than our unsurpassedly magnificent selves? It is impossible - and therefore outcomes must be about ability.

    It is the same reason Turks and Arabs always see conspiracies and plots where they don't exist - it is how "they" would do things, you see. They cannot imagine others do it differently.

    We cannot face the possibility that "our choices" may, actually, be the wrong ones. To avoid that, we cannot accept that they are even choices at all. No, they are the default of humanity.

    I knew a Jewish bookstore owner who had the most disorganized shop you could ever possibly imagine. There was no apparent rhyme or reason to his shelving scheme, but somehow he always knew where everything was. (Maybe he enjoyed impressing customers with his photographic memory.)

    He kept some of his inventory in the bathroom. (I’m not kidding – there was a shelf full of books right above the toilet.)

    I also knew an old Jewish guy who hoarded a garageful of old magazines – not anything exciting, like cult or pulp titles, but stuff like Time and Newsweek – in the hope that one day he could open up a shop specializing in … old magazines. (His long-suffering wife thought he was a kook.)

  117. @Anon Chief
    Ethnic nepotism can take you to a grocery store job, but it can not take you all the way to a Nobel Prize.

    Or a Fields Medal, or an ACM Turing Award, or a Westinghouse Science Prize, or a world chess championship. Or even to dozens of billions of dollars, for that matter.

    La Griffe du Lion offers a more useful model:

    http://www.lagriffedulion.f2s.com/ashkenaz.htm

    Ethnic nepotism can take you to a grocery store job, but it can not take you all the way to a Nobel Prize … La Griffe du Lion offers a more useful model

    This makes eminent sense. If you believe Ashkenazi Jews have a significant IQ advantage (10-15 points), their disproportionate performance in lots of intelligence-related fields (science, chess, billionaires, law, medicine, etc.) can be easily explained. In other areas (e.g., media, revolutionary leaders) presumably it is an interactive mix of intelligence and “group” factors.

    • Replies: @Medvedev

    If you believe Ashkenazi Jews have a significant IQ advantage (10-15 points), their disproportionate performance in lots of intelligence-related fields (science, chess, billionaires, law, medicine, etc.) can be easily explained.
     
    Even if we assumed IQ to be 115 without evidence it still wouldn't explain overrepresentation. There would be <3 mln Jews in the US with IQ higher than 115. But there are 45-50 million Americans with IQ higher than 115.
  118. @Clyde
    The last time Jeff Bezos, the 49-year-old CEO and founder of Amazon, saw his biological father, he was three years old.

    His biological father, whose name is Ted Jorgensen, was 18 when he impregnated Bezos' mother, Jacklyn Gise, who herself was 17. They were both still in high school at the time. They got married before their son was born.

    The marriage lasted only 17 months, reports Brad Stone at Bloomberg Businessweek, who has unearthed astonishing new details about Bezos' family's early years.

    Gise moved in with her parents because Jorgensen stayed out late, and drank too much, and was generally an inattentive father and husband says Stone. He agreed to a divorce, and paid a small amount of child support to Gise when he had money. Other times he missed the payments.

    Three years after their divorce, Gise married another man, Miguel Bezos, a Cuban immigrant who taught himself English, and eventually worked at Exxon. Miguel adopted Jeff, and Jeff took his last name. Jorgensen had to sign off on the name change, which he did, Stone reports.

    For a brief period Jorgensen remembered the Bezos name, but through the years he forgot about it, and dropped completely out of touch with his ex-wife and his son.

    Jorgensen's absence from Bezos' life was so complete that in a 1999 interview with Wired, Bezos said of Jorgensen, "I've never met him," although, in reality he lived with him for the first year of his life.

    "The reality, as far as I'm concerned, is that my Dad is my natural father. The only time I ever think about it, genuinely, is when a doctor asks me to fill out a form," said Bezos in 1999.

    Jorgensen, for his part, had a nearly identical attitude about Bezos.

    However, Stone managed to find Jorgensen, now 69, who owns a bike shop in Glendale, Arizona.

    Here's how Jorgensen reacted when Stone introduced himself: "He had no idea what I was talking about. Jorgensen said he didn’t know who Jeff Bezos was and was baffled by my suggestion that he was the father of this famous CEO."

    Stone jogged Jorgensen's memory, trotting out details about Bezos and his mother. Says Stone, "The old man’s face flushed with recognition. 'Is he still alive?' he asked, not yet fully comprehending."

    Bezos' biological father had disconnected so thoroughly from Bezos life that not only did he not remember his name, and not only did he not realize his son was one of the richest men in the world, but he wasn't even sure if his son was still alive.

    Jorgensen says that in his younger days "I wasn’t a good father or a husband." He eventually quit drinking, got his act together and opened his bike shop. He's married, but had no other children in his life beyond Bezos.

    A family friend told Stone later that Jorgensen felt overwhelmed with sadness and regret. He wants to get in touch with Bezos, but it's unclear if that will ever happen.

    Stone has a book coming out about Amazon. It's excerpted at Bloomberg BusinessWeek. The stuff about his father starts at the bottom of the seventh page.
    http://www.businessinsider.com/jeff-bezos-biological-father-2013-10

    I would like to offer an alternative theory of why Jorgensen seemed puzzled and disconnected and asked, “Is he still alive.” It is possible that he was told at a certain the boy had died, just to permanently get him out of their new lives.

    This happened to a friend of mine. He was told by his mother that his father wanted nothing to do with him. Post-divorce, his mother, meanwhile, now living several states away, told the father that my friend was killed in a car accident. 30 years later, after the mother had died, my friend used the Internet to look up his father. He left a message on an answering machine, and a very puzzled father called back, thinking there must be a mistake. A few weeks later, there was a big tearful family reunion, as my friend discovered a family he didn’t know he had, half-brothers and half-sisters and cousins.

    Anyway, something like that could explain Jorgensen’s confusion.

  119. @Jenner Ickham Errican
    Inspired by Kars4Kids?

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hLcyzwwfumA

    Thanks for the big aha

    I’ve been muting the jingle at its opening strains for years. (Our local CBS o&o radio station would’ve folded its transmitter long ago if not for the revenue it hauls in from k4k.)

    Now I have a more defensible reason.

  120. @SFG
    Here's what gets me about a lot of HBD thought. They seem to think racial groups have an essence that persists across all times and places.

    The 'Viking spirit' is hardly in evidence in modern Scandinavia outside of black metal. Indians are dumber than average in England and smarter than average in America. Jews were not particularly smart in the ancient world, are smarter than average in the modern world, and are warlike in Israel and cowardly in America. It's pretty clear that the same ancestral population can diverge if subjected to varying selection pressures, whether by selective immigration (Indians in America are selected from doctors or engineers) or emigration (Jews who don't want to serve in the army don't go to Israel).

    Very true, what you say.

    Its the ancient philosophy of “essentialism” now hiding out in the usual quasi-scientific garb.

    You will find that many of our new “cutting edge” scientific views are just ancient philosophical positions re-expressed in language that is credible to modern audiences (if it isn’t expressed in sciency-sounding language, it has no credibility in our times)

    They represent timeless human tendencies, but can no longer be credibly expressed in the old language.

    The HBDers need to be seen as a kind of sect – perhaps philosophical – that holds positions based partly on emotional appeal and party on evidence. Once you see this, their behavior – the strange lapses and lacunae in their positions – begins to make a lot more sense.

    • Agree: utu
  121. NYT, 06/03/17 – Dissecting Marissa Mayer’s $900,000-a-Week Yahoo Paycheck

    https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/03/technology/yahoo-marissa-mayer-compensation.html?ref=todayspaper

    When a withered Yahoo is absorbed by Verizon Communications in the next week or so, it will be the end of an era for one of the pioneering names of the internet age.

    It will also conclude the remarkable five-year run of Yahoo’s chief executive, Marissa Mayer, who was paid nearly a quarter of a billion dollars — a generous sum even by Silicon Valley’s lofty standards — while presiding over the company’s continued decline.

    Ms. Mayer, now 42, was hailed as a savior when she left Google for Yahoo in 2012. But during her tenure, Yahoo was hit by two of the biggest privacy breaches in history. Advertisers, Yahoo’s bread and butter, fled the service. Users shifted ever more attention to Google, Facebook and other rivals. Yahoo’s staff shrank by almost 50 percent.

    The company ended up so weakened that its board had little choice but to sell…

    So why did Ms. Mayer receive more than $900,000 a week? The answer, like so many things about Yahoo, is surprisingly complicated…

  122. I’m a big devotee of music, so I’ve noticed some interesting patterns myself. I’m not sure how many people realize it, but virtually all of the “Great American Songbook” song writers were Jewish, with the exception of Cole Porter and Vincent Youmans (I could name lesser known figures like Louis Hirsch but few would recognize them). Of the big names, the following were all Jewish:

    Irving Berlin
    Richard Rodgers
    Jerome Kern
    George Gershwin
    Harold Arlen

    This is not including Jewish lyricists like Oscar Hammerstein, Ira Gershwin, and Yip Harburg (though other big name lyricists like Lorenz Hart, Johnny Mercer, and Otto Harbach were not Jewish).

    However, I know enough about the careers of these songwriters to know that they struggled to get their success, with many starting off as near-anonymous song-pluggers for established musicals and only getting the chance to write their own shows after a big hit (They Didn’t Believe Me in the case of Jerome Kern and Manhattan in the case of Richard Rodgers). Likewise, they all suffered major flops and disappointments at various points in their careers.

    In contrast to what some might suggest on this blog, Jewish songwriters like Richard Rodgers and Jerome Kern (especially with lyricist Hammerstein) each showed a strong love for the “old-fashioned” America of the 1890’s and the conservative standards of those eras.

    It was the bisexual (if not gay) non-Jew Cole Porter who was celebrating the loosening of moral standards in Anything Goes and especially the racy Nymph Errant while Jerome Kern was penning songs like “I’m Old Fashioned” and Rodgers and Hammerstein were celebrating the wholesome west in Oklahoma and small-town life in Allegro. Likewise Porter was the one songwriter of the era that was born into wealth and prosperity and largely treated songwriting as hobby rather than his livelihood.

    I write all this to preemptively refute the idea that these Jewish songwriters rose to prominence purely because of networking and social connections, a charge better leveled at Porter. They all deserved the acclaim they received, but I can’t really explain their collective rise apart from God-given (IQ derived?) talent and hard work.

    Moving into the modern era, the closest thing to the Great American songbook writers were probably the “Brill Building” pop songwriters like Burt Bacharach and Carole King (both Jewish). Yet in their case as well, their acclaim came after quite a bit of struggles and flops and was backed up by exceptional talent. I would single out Bacharach especially as perhaps the finest pop songwriter (in terms of melody) of the second half of the 20th century due to his use of highly unusual chords and time signatures in what are otherwise catchy and commercial pop songs. In contrast, the greatest Jewish singer-songwriters of the modern era, Bob Dylan and Leonard Cohen showed highly complex lyrical abilities but very little melodic complexity.

    Oddly enough, while Jews have done very well in pop music, they haven’t shown nearly the same prominence in the world of Classical music. Their are several great Jewish pianists like Alfred Brendel and Vladimir Horowitz, but I can’t think of many great Jewish composers. The exception is Arnold Schoenberg, who is responsible for serialism and the horrible dissonance of “modern classical” music prior to the rise of the minimalists.

    As I said, I don’t know what conclusions to draw other than to note these patterns in the world of music. Still, the names I listed deserve all the acclaim they’ve received if not more.

    • Replies: @Ian M.

    Oddly enough, while Jews have done very well in pop music, they haven’t shown nearly the same prominence in the world of Classical music. Their are several great Jewish pianists like Alfred Brendel and Vladimir Horowitz, but I can’t think of many great Jewish composers. The exception is Arnold Schoenberg, who is responsible for serialism and the horrible dissonance of “modern classical” music prior to the rise of the minimalists.
     
    Also Felix Mendelssohn.

    Thanks for the interesting and informative comment, by the way.
  123. @Stan Adams
    I have something in common with Jeff Bezos that (most likely) no one reading this comment has. It's nothing important, and it certainly doesn't link us in any meaningful way, but it is a minor attribute that we share that sets us apart from the great bulk of mankind.

    You’re bald?

    • Replies: @Stan Adams
    No, and neither is my sixty-year-old father. Baldness doesn't run on either side of my family.

    It is a trait that is mentioned in his Wikipedia article.
  124. @SFG
    Einstein's a bad example--every physicist I know really does think he was that impressive.

    Your overall statement I agree with though. Say you need an IQ of 130 to do groundbreaking science work. That's 3% of the general American population and 16% of the Jewish population (assuming a 1 SD advantage). That's only an overrepresentation by a factor of 5, when the actual factors for money and science seem to be about 100.

    But it can't *just* be the network, because lots of other groups are nepotistic too! So I'd argue it's talent *plus* nepotism--they have the advantage of an ethnic network that also happens to be substantially brighter than average.

    To be honest I think it is more about being hooked into the American Ivy League network than a specifically Jewish network at this point. Those old Old Testament-obsessed Puritans' descendants have interbred with the ultimate Old Testament group, and the elite got a huge influx of fresh blood into their veins. Now is that good for the *rest* of the USA? That's another question. As Machiavelli said, the populace doesn't want to be oppressed by the nobles, and the nobles want to oppress the populace. Our nobles are happy to have some clever new blood. Should the populace be happy?

    “Your overall statement I agree with though. Say you need an IQ of 130 to do groundbreaking science work. That’s 3% of the general American population and 16% of the Jewish population (assuming a 1 SD advantage). That’s only an overrepresentation by a factor of 5, when the actual factors for money and science seem to be about 100.”

    Kevin MacDonald discusses the relative size of the Goy v Jew Bell curves when it comes to IQ. Yeah Jews are smarter but their Bell curve is 32 times smaller.
    MacDonald says,
    “On the basis of IQ, the ratio of non-Jewish Whites to Jews should be around 7 to 1 (IQ >130) or 4.5 to 1 (IQ > 145)”

    from here:
    http://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/articles/MacDonald-Gottfried.html

  125. @Dave Pinsen
    You're bald?

    No, and neither is my sixty-year-old father. Baldness doesn’t run on either side of my family.

    It is a trait that is mentioned in his Wikipedia article.

  126. @for-the-record
    Ethnic nepotism can take you to a grocery store job, but it can not take you all the way to a Nobel Prize ... La Griffe du Lion offers a more useful model

    This makes eminent sense. If you believe Ashkenazi Jews have a significant IQ advantage (10-15 points), their disproportionate performance in lots of intelligence-related fields (science, chess, billionaires, law, medicine, etc.) can be easily explained. In other areas (e.g., media, revolutionary leaders) presumably it is an interactive mix of intelligence and "group" factors.

    If you believe Ashkenazi Jews have a significant IQ advantage (10-15 points), their disproportionate performance in lots of intelligence-related fields (science, chess, billionaires, law, medicine, etc.) can be easily explained.

    Even if we assumed IQ to be 115 without evidence it still wouldn’t explain overrepresentation. There would be <3 mln Jews in the US with IQ higher than 115. But there are 45-50 million Americans with IQ higher than 115.

    • Replies: @Brady
    Assuming a 115 IQ to be the magic cutoff for high-intelligence professions is probably not accurate. Remember we are dealing with a bell curve here, and 130+ is generally considered the threshold for "gifted". That's +1 SD (16%) for Jews and +2 SD (only 2.5%) for Whites.

    That adds up to a little under 1M Jews and 5.5M non-Hispanic Whites based on current demographics. So while 25% Jewish might be slightly over-represented, it's within the realm of explanation. Environmental factors could account for the rest (e.g. Jews concentrated in New York and California where the best opportunities are, not poorer states like Alabama or WV).

    I believe Steve has written at least once about the impact of geography and how smart white boys in poor/rural areas tend to get overlooked. The proportion of whites in high-g fields (as well as overall staffing levels) would probably be much higher if American corporations spent more recruiting dollars on economic/geographic diversity instead of racial diversity.
    , @anarchyst
    The "overrepresentation" that you describe is due to the cultural insularity and nepotism that jews (and only jews) reserve for themselves, while demanding that every other ethnic group succumb to the siren songs of "multiculturalism and diversity".
    Of course, a close second is the (red dot) Indians who also reserve their own cultural insularity for themselves while making sure that those outside their ethnic group "need not apply"...
  127. @Medvedev
    Jews are magicians at creating the perception or narrative. Let's take take the supposed conversation between me and the other guy on Jewish intelligence.

    he: Jews have really high IQ, the evidence is the number of achievements and inventions made by Jews.
    me: Wonder why Israel IQ is just 95.
    he: That's because of Arabs.
    me: But if you account for Arabs having IQ similar to Syria and Iraq (~85) and others 90-95, Jewish IQ would be ~97.8
    he: That's because of Mizrahi
    me: Yeah, but math still doesn't add up ...
    he: That's because of Sephardic
    me: Almost half of Jews in Israel are Ashkenazi Jews, so their average is still around ~103
    he: That's because the a lot of them mixed with Mizrahi/Sephardic Jews and the brightest emigrated to the US

    See, cherry-picking to the point when it's not even possible to argue. If I picked smart 20-25% among French or Germans what their IQ would be? Or take Russians, their estimated IQ is 98. If I picked Moscow, with ~106-107 IQ based on PISA results and population two times bigger than number of Jews in the US (12 millions vs 5.5 million). In fact, there are almost as many people in Moscow as there are Jews in the world, including Mizrahi and Sephardic. So, why I don't see Moscow as the center of the universe and scientific progress? Because there is nothing extraordinary about having smart fraction of the population numbering millions/tens of millions of people, even with average IQ of ~106-107.
    What's more important is tribalism and having a sufficiently large host population (325 mln in US, 700 mln in US), where a smart fraction can thrive.

    A parsimonious explanation would be how most races appear to demonstrate nearly a +1 standard deviation higher IQ in America than in their original territory, for all sorts of environmental reasons that I’ll carelessly lump together as “living in a white-Euro-Christian society”. Intelligence is heritable, but not 100% of it.

    Over multiple generations, Africans jump from an average of 70 to 85. Indians jump from 80 to 95. Jews jump from 98 to 113. White Americans either don’t benefit because they were already at the higher baseline, or there is something horribly dysgenic going on (probably both).

    The overwhelming majority of Israeli Jews are not from the US. Most are from Russia and various Arab countries. Thanks to exposure to Marxism and Islamism, they’re starting from the minimum environmental baseline rather than the maximum.

    One could summarize the hypothesis as: some combination of environment and epigenetics could be responsible for a range of perhaps -7 to +7 average IQ. The USA is near +7, Israel is somewhere between -7 and 0. This is a partially-testable hypothesis; if correct, we should see the average Israeli IQ start to creep upward over the next 3-5 generations, assuming Jewish birth rate keeps pace with Arabs (which it is now doing).

    • Replies: @res
    Don't forget the possibility of selective immigration. Lots of data useful for evaluating that at http://www.iab.de/en/daten/iab-brain-drain-data.aspx
    , @Medvedev

    A parsimonious explanation would be how most races appear to demonstrate nearly a +1 standard deviation higher IQ in America than in their original territory, for all sorts of environmental reasons that I’ll carelessly lump together as “living in a white-Euro-Christian society”.
     
    Short answer: no, they don't. Long answer: do not compare apples and oranges.

    Over multiple generations, Africans jump from an average of 70 to 85. Indians jump from 80 to 95. Jews jump from 98 to 113.
     
    No, their IQ didn't jump from 70 to 85.
    - African Americans have 20-25% white admixture + plus small
    mixing with Natives and Chinese.
    - African IQ is a moot and estimated by different sources in a range of 70-80.
    - You have to compare apples to apples, e.g. to the population from which African Americans were drawn from, not with the whole continent.
    I agree that Flynn effect plays a role, but certainly not 1 SD =)

    The overwhelming majority of Israeli Jews are not from the US. Most are from Russia and various Arab countries.
     
    Jews from Arab countries are called Mizrahi. Most Jews in the US are Ashkenazi of European descent.

    Thanks to exposure to Marxism and Islamism, they’re starting from the minimum environmental baseline rather than the maximum.
     
    No, they don't. And it certainly doesn't give 1 SD boost. At first, I started to write and answer, but then I just gave up. You are wrong on so many levels. And, certainly, I don't expect Russian IQ to skyrocket to 113 (or Ukrainian to 112) after collapse of communism, even though Russian/Ukrainian peasants were mostly subjected to severe malnutrition and famine, not Jews.

    One could summarize the hypothesis as: some combination of environment and epigenetics could be responsible for a range of perhaps -7 to +7 average IQ. The USA is near +7, Israel is somewhere between -7 and 0.
     
    Based on what? Sorry, but if you google it, Israel is a wealthy nation with high educational standards.
  128. @Medvedev

    If you believe Ashkenazi Jews have a significant IQ advantage (10-15 points), their disproportionate performance in lots of intelligence-related fields (science, chess, billionaires, law, medicine, etc.) can be easily explained.
     
    Even if we assumed IQ to be 115 without evidence it still wouldn't explain overrepresentation. There would be <3 mln Jews in the US with IQ higher than 115. But there are 45-50 million Americans with IQ higher than 115.

    Assuming a 115 IQ to be the magic cutoff for high-intelligence professions is probably not accurate. Remember we are dealing with a bell curve here, and 130+ is generally considered the threshold for “gifted”. That’s +1 SD (16%) for Jews and +2 SD (only 2.5%) for Whites.

    That adds up to a little under 1M Jews and 5.5M non-Hispanic Whites based on current demographics. So while 25% Jewish might be slightly over-represented, it’s within the realm of explanation. Environmental factors could account for the rest (e.g. Jews concentrated in New York and California where the best opportunities are, not poorer states like Alabama or WV).

    I believe Steve has written at least once about the impact of geography and how smart white boys in poor/rural areas tend to get overlooked. The proportion of whites in high-g fields (as well as overall staffing levels) would probably be much higher if American corporations spent more recruiting dollars on economic/geographic diversity instead of racial diversity.

    • Replies: @Anon Chief
    Note that the bell curve (normal distribution) has this fascinating mathematical property regarding its value at any given point: shifting on the Y axis has linear effect, whereas shifting on the X axis has quadratic effect.

    So for any difference in population size there is a point on the right where the small-population bell curve with a higher mean intersects the large-population bell curve with a lower mean. This is similar to y=x*x eventually intersecting y=50*x.

    Nobel/Fields/Turing/etc. award level might require IQ 145 cutoff which explains the typical 25% figure. World chess champion level might require IQ 160, which explains the observed 50% figure, a plausible intersection point of the two bell curves.
  129. @AaronB
    The "hard" sciences, and money, strike me as being basically of the same "family" of achievement.

    Your admiration for Jews always struck me as strange, Steve. You're such an easy going laid back guy, one imagines you enjoy your pleasures and relaxations.

    You utterly lack the intensity of the Jewish personality, the zeal, the single minded focus, the inability to see "through" life and laugh at it, not take it too seriously.

    I don't think you'd really like whites to become more Jewish, however much you seem to admire them. It'd be a nightmare for you.

    ‘the inability to see “through” life and laugh at it’

    And that would be why there are so few Jewish comedians.

  130. @Brady
    A parsimonious explanation would be how most races appear to demonstrate nearly a +1 standard deviation higher IQ in America than in their original territory, for all sorts of environmental reasons that I'll carelessly lump together as "living in a white-Euro-Christian society". Intelligence is heritable, but not 100% of it.

    Over multiple generations, Africans jump from an average of 70 to 85. Indians jump from 80 to 95. Jews jump from 98 to 113. White Americans either don't benefit because they were already at the higher baseline, or there is something horribly dysgenic going on (probably both).

    The overwhelming majority of Israeli Jews are not from the US. Most are from Russia and various Arab countries. Thanks to exposure to Marxism and Islamism, they're starting from the minimum environmental baseline rather than the maximum.

    One could summarize the hypothesis as: some combination of environment and epigenetics could be responsible for a range of perhaps -7 to +7 average IQ. The USA is near +7, Israel is somewhere between -7 and 0. This is a partially-testable hypothesis; if correct, we should see the average Israeli IQ start to creep upward over the next 3-5 generations, assuming Jewish birth rate keeps pace with Arabs (which it is now doing).

    Don’t forget the possibility of selective immigration. Lots of data useful for evaluating that at http://www.iab.de/en/daten/iab-brain-drain-data.aspx

  131. @Brady
    A parsimonious explanation would be how most races appear to demonstrate nearly a +1 standard deviation higher IQ in America than in their original territory, for all sorts of environmental reasons that I'll carelessly lump together as "living in a white-Euro-Christian society". Intelligence is heritable, but not 100% of it.

    Over multiple generations, Africans jump from an average of 70 to 85. Indians jump from 80 to 95. Jews jump from 98 to 113. White Americans either don't benefit because they were already at the higher baseline, or there is something horribly dysgenic going on (probably both).

    The overwhelming majority of Israeli Jews are not from the US. Most are from Russia and various Arab countries. Thanks to exposure to Marxism and Islamism, they're starting from the minimum environmental baseline rather than the maximum.

    One could summarize the hypothesis as: some combination of environment and epigenetics could be responsible for a range of perhaps -7 to +7 average IQ. The USA is near +7, Israel is somewhere between -7 and 0. This is a partially-testable hypothesis; if correct, we should see the average Israeli IQ start to creep upward over the next 3-5 generations, assuming Jewish birth rate keeps pace with Arabs (which it is now doing).

    A parsimonious explanation would be how most races appear to demonstrate nearly a +1 standard deviation higher IQ in America than in their original territory, for all sorts of environmental reasons that I’ll carelessly lump together as “living in a white-Euro-Christian society”.

    Short answer: no, they don’t. Long answer: do not compare apples and oranges.

    Over multiple generations, Africans jump from an average of 70 to 85. Indians jump from 80 to 95. Jews jump from 98 to 113.

    No, their IQ didn’t jump from 70 to 85.
    – African Americans have 20-25% white admixture + plus small
    mixing with Natives and Chinese.
    – African IQ is a moot and estimated by different sources in a range of 70-80.
    – You have to compare apples to apples, e.g. to the population from which African Americans were drawn from, not with the whole continent.
    I agree that Flynn effect plays a role, but certainly not 1 SD =)

    The overwhelming majority of Israeli Jews are not from the US. Most are from Russia and various Arab countries.

    Jews from Arab countries are called Mizrahi. Most Jews in the US are Ashkenazi of European descent.

    Thanks to exposure to Marxism and Islamism, they’re starting from the minimum environmental baseline rather than the maximum.

    No, they don’t. And it certainly doesn’t give 1 SD boost. At first, I started to write and answer, but then I just gave up. You are wrong on so many levels. And, certainly, I don’t expect Russian IQ to skyrocket to 113 (or Ukrainian to 112) after collapse of communism, even though Russian/Ukrainian peasants were mostly subjected to severe malnutrition and famine, not Jews.

    One could summarize the hypothesis as: some combination of environment and epigenetics could be responsible for a range of perhaps -7 to +7 average IQ. The USA is near +7, Israel is somewhere between -7 and 0.

    Based on what? Sorry, but if you google it, Israel is a wealthy nation with high educational standards.

  132. @Medvedev
    Jews are magicians at creating the perception or narrative. Let's take take the supposed conversation between me and the other guy on Jewish intelligence.

    he: Jews have really high IQ, the evidence is the number of achievements and inventions made by Jews.
    me: Wonder why Israel IQ is just 95.
    he: That's because of Arabs.
    me: But if you account for Arabs having IQ similar to Syria and Iraq (~85) and others 90-95, Jewish IQ would be ~97.8
    he: That's because of Mizrahi
    me: Yeah, but math still doesn't add up ...
    he: That's because of Sephardic
    me: Almost half of Jews in Israel are Ashkenazi Jews, so their average is still around ~103
    he: That's because the a lot of them mixed with Mizrahi/Sephardic Jews and the brightest emigrated to the US

    See, cherry-picking to the point when it's not even possible to argue. If I picked smart 20-25% among French or Germans what their IQ would be? Or take Russians, their estimated IQ is 98. If I picked Moscow, with ~106-107 IQ based on PISA results and population two times bigger than number of Jews in the US (12 millions vs 5.5 million). In fact, there are almost as many people in Moscow as there are Jews in the world, including Mizrahi and Sephardic. So, why I don't see Moscow as the center of the universe and scientific progress? Because there is nothing extraordinary about having smart fraction of the population numbering millions/tens of millions of people, even with average IQ of ~106-107.
    What's more important is tribalism and having a sufficiently large host population (325 mln in US, 700 mln in US), where a smart fraction can thrive.

    he: Jews have really high IQ, the evidence is the number of achievements and inventions made by Jews.
    me: Wonder why Israel IQ is just 95.
    he: That’s because of Arabs.
    me: But if you account for Arabs having IQ similar to Syria and Iraq (~85) and others 90-95, Jewish IQ would be ~97.8
    he: That’s because of Mizrahi
    me: Yeah, but math still doesn’t add up …
    he: That’s because of Sephardic
    me: Almost half of Jews in Israel are Ashkenazi Jews, so their average is still around ~103
    he: That’s because the a lot of them mixed with Mizrahi/Sephardic Jews and the brightest emigrated to the US

    The string of objections you list is really just one: “if you’re responding to a claim about Ashkenazi Jews, you should use data on Ashkenazi Jews.” Only about a third of Israelis are Ashkenazim, so this seems like a pretty reasonable objection.

    What’s more important is tribalism and having a sufficiently large host population (325 mln in US, 700 mln in US), where a smart fraction can thrive.

    Despite being a small country, Israel has won a lot of hard science Nobels per capita since 2000:

    http://slatestarcodex.com/2017/05/29/four-nobel-truths/

    • Replies: @Medvedev

    The string of objections you list is really just one: “if you’re responding to a claim about Ashkenazi Jews, you should use data on Ashkenazi Jews.” Only about a third of Israelis are Ashkenazim, so this seems like a pretty reasonable objection.
     
    No, he was wrong. What he did, made misleading claims, constantly moved goalposts and used cherry-picking at its finest.
    And Jewish achievements and inventions, which I don't dispel, do not equal IQ. Chinese may have lack of achievements per capita, which doesn't mean they have low IQ.
  133. @Deso Dogg

    he: Jews have really high IQ, the evidence is the number of achievements and inventions made by Jews.
    me: Wonder why Israel IQ is just 95.
    he: That’s because of Arabs.
    me: But if you account for Arabs having IQ similar to Syria and Iraq (~85) and others 90-95, Jewish IQ would be ~97.8
    he: That’s because of Mizrahi
    me: Yeah, but math still doesn’t add up …
    he: That’s because of Sephardic
    me: Almost half of Jews in Israel are Ashkenazi Jews, so their average is still around ~103
    he: That’s because the a lot of them mixed with Mizrahi/Sephardic Jews and the brightest emigrated to the US
     
    The string of objections you list is really just one: "if you're responding to a claim about Ashkenazi Jews, you should use data on Ashkenazi Jews." Only about a third of Israelis are Ashkenazim, so this seems like a pretty reasonable objection.

    What’s more important is tribalism and having a sufficiently large host population (325 mln in US, 700 mln in US), where a smart fraction can thrive.
     
    Despite being a small country, Israel has won a lot of hard science Nobels per capita since 2000:

    http://slatestarcodex.com/2017/05/29/four-nobel-truths/

    The string of objections you list is really just one: “if you’re responding to a claim about Ashkenazi Jews, you should use data on Ashkenazi Jews.” Only about a third of Israelis are Ashkenazim, so this seems like a pretty reasonable objection.

    No, he was wrong. What he did, made misleading claims, constantly moved goalposts and used cherry-picking at its finest.
    And Jewish achievements and inventions, which I don’t dispel, do not equal IQ. Chinese may have lack of achievements per capita, which doesn’t mean they have low IQ.

  134. @International Jew
    Just wanted to let y'all know, I'm not one of those eleven billionaires, and I haven't won the Nobel Prize.

    “Just wanted to let y’all know, I’m not one of those eleven billionaires, and I haven’t won the Nobel Prize.”
    Well, according to the literature you’re considered the Untalented Tenth.

  135. @Medvedev

    If you believe Ashkenazi Jews have a significant IQ advantage (10-15 points), their disproportionate performance in lots of intelligence-related fields (science, chess, billionaires, law, medicine, etc.) can be easily explained.
     
    Even if we assumed IQ to be 115 without evidence it still wouldn't explain overrepresentation. There would be <3 mln Jews in the US with IQ higher than 115. But there are 45-50 million Americans with IQ higher than 115.

    The “overrepresentation” that you describe is due to the cultural insularity and nepotism that jews (and only jews) reserve for themselves, while demanding that every other ethnic group succumb to the siren songs of “multiculturalism and diversity”.
    Of course, a close second is the (red dot) Indians who also reserve their own cultural insularity for themselves while making sure that those outside their ethnic group “need not apply”…

  136. @Hippopotamusdrome
    Another thing is the Jewish one drop rule. If only one parent is Jewish your accomplishments are considered 100% Jewish and 0% gentile.

    I went down the list of Jewish Nobel laureates starting at the earliest entry until I found one with a non Jewish parent. First entry of chemistry and medicine and fourth entry on physics.

    Chemistry:
    Adolf von Baeyer: "son of ... a Prussian officer ... a Lutheran"
    Physiology or Medicine:
    Élie Metchnikoff: "youngest of ... a Russian officer of the Imperial Guard"
    Physics:
    Albert A. Michelson: Both parents Jewish
    Gabriel Lippmann: Both parents Jewish
    Albert Einstein: Both parents Jewish
    Niels Bohr: Father is Christian Bohr

    The Prussian and Russian upper classes that populated the officer corps have no distinct identity as a genetic group to trace their achievements, only indirectly when they marry Jews and their half European children have their accomplishments counted as 100% Jewish and 0% European.

    The German officers and officials at Nuremberg who had upper class backgrounds were shown to have an average IQ of 128. The highest IQ scorer at 143 was Hjalmar Schacht. His mother was a Danish baroness, making him related to Scandinavian aristocracy. He was also a banker.

    Albert Michelson was only half-Jewish (read his
    biography, Wikipedia has it wrong). He was born
    in the part of Poland that was under Prussian
    administrative control (as we know, Prussia was
    a neighborhood bully in the 18-19th centuries
    in Central Europe). His father was a Polish Jew
    and his mother a Polish Christian.

    • Replies: @Hippopotamusdrome
    Wikipedia can be wrong?
  137. @Medvedev

    The non-Orthodox Jewish outmarriage rate in the US is around 70%.
     
    High intermarriage rates among non-Orthodox Jews is a recent phenomenon, so we should wait a generation or two to see how it unfolds.

    Intermarriage rates have risen from roughly 6% in 1950 and 25% in 1974, to approximately 40–50% in the year 2000. By 2013, the intermarriage rate had risen to 71% for non-Orthodox Jews
     
    Jews has become the wealthiest ethnic group and now intermarry with elite WASPs. Add to this recent influx of rich and smart Asians/Indians and you will have future American elite. America will have mixed elite who will rule over mixed population, which they promote through diversity, mixing and inclusion. This will create an illusion of post-racial society and that no-one is discriminated, since everyone is mixed (just like in Mexico or Puerto Rico) IMHO

    Actually when Jews intermarry in the U.S.,
    they intermarry primarily with Catholics, not
    Protestants. One of the reasons is geography:
    Both Catholics and Jews are heavily overrepresented
    in the Northeast. Proximity breeds.

    Let’s not forget, only 50% of U.S. Jews have college
    degrees. I was once roommates with a Jewish woman
    whose brother was a simple roofer. Actually, Indian
    Americans are better educated and more affluent than
    Jews, and their numbers are growing exponentially.
    On the other hand, the U.S. Chinese are not particularly
    affluent.

    Some people (e.g., some Israeli rabbis) don’t regard
    the Ashkenazis as real Jews since genetically they turned
    out to be roughly 45% European and only 55% Middle-Eastern.
    So a typical Ashkenazi is about as Jewish as Obama is
    black. Hence Einstein genetically was only 55% Jewish

  138. @Dave Pinsen
    The Nobel for Literature is politicized to the point where it's mostly garbage, but my sense is that WASPs still dominate novels. Great WASP genre novelists like Neal Stephenson and Kim Stanley Robinson are better than most non-WASP literary novelists, I'd venture. And among literary novelists, few match the likes of Pynchon or Franzen.

    No current American novelist matches the Puritan descended (1630) Mark Butterworth, but then he is one quarter Jewish. Oy Vey, his family miscegenated with immigrants.

  139. @Medvedev
    All you need is to outcompete the rivals, supposedly gentile Whites and Asians. A little help here, a little there and you're ahead of others. And as the time goes by the gap widens.
    Let's take, our family friend (half-Jew), who emigrated to the US in 1993 after the collapse of the USSR. He's a smart fellow, but his dad was just a heavy machinery worker. Yeah, not all Jews are millionaires. Jewish philanthropic orgs helped him a lot at first, to accommodate his stay, to get around, to understand the system and get to college and he graduated it almost debt-free. I can only imagine, that heavily Jewish college boards would prefer Jew to non-Jew with same credentials and knowledge. So, as you can see a little help here and there and he was able to make 80 grands by 1998, although he arrived in US just with high school diploma. Sergey Brin's parents - the same story about help from Jewish community. And if our family friend had great ideas on how to change the world, I'm quiet sure, there would be Jewish entrepreneurs and philanthropists who would support and help other fellow.

    Meanwhile, a Slavic guy often would have to work his way from the bottom even when he has a master's/PhD. Nowadays, it's easier cause there is greater need for skilled workers and American society is more "accepting". Working in tech I can attest that many Slavics would prefer American to interview them rather then other Slavic fellow. Why? Because Russian/Belorussian/Ukrainian interviewer maybe be more captious towards other Russian/Belorussian/Ukrainian person and may not feel the need to be politically correct.

    So, networking, connections and preference for someone from your ethnic group really matters and makes the difference.

    “So, networking, connections and preference for someone from your ethnic group really matters and makes the difference.”

    There was an interesting Daily Mail biography of the literary agent Polly Samson, best known as wife of Floyd’s Dave Gilmour and mother (by Heathcote Williams) of that brat who was jailed for rioting in London.

    Can’t remember all the detail, but Ms Samson, whose parents got here from Germany, was doing something pretty dull like working in a stationer’s in Portsmouth, when her aunt who was something in publishing wrote and said “let me take you away from all this”. Ms Samson was bright, pretty and personable, and flourished in the literary world.

    Now there may have been other bright kids wasting their sweetness on the desert air of Portsmouth or Barnsley – but unless you get that chance you may never fulfil your potential.

  140. @AaronB
    I have traveled extensively, and I have noticed that many so-called stupid people around the world are far more intelligent than we imagine....

    I was once in a book shop in Thailand which was less well organized than it could be. When I told the owner he could increase sales by better alphabatizing his books, he merely shrugged his shoulders and told me he makes quite enough money already, and he doesn't need the hassle. He then went on to express highly sophisticated opinions on a range of subjects.

    Countless similar experiences have made me understand that motivation is perhaps the *key* in understanding variations in Western-style success across countries, and probably within countries as well....

    One of the first things you notice in a poor country is the different attitude to life....yet for some inscrutable reason, this cannot be taken to have any significance......

    In the end, we are guilty of simple projection, a universal human trait. We naively imagine everyone wants what we want - We are the very pattern of humanity, indeed the only "real people". How can anyone value different things than our unsurpassedly magnificent selves? It is impossible - and therefore outcomes must be about ability.

    It is the same reason Turks and Arabs always see conspiracies and plots where they don't exist - it is how "they" would do things, you see. They cannot imagine others do it differently.

    We cannot face the possibility that "our choices" may, actually, be the wrong ones. To avoid that, we cannot accept that they are even choices at all. No, they are the default of humanity.

    “…I was once in a book shop in Thailand which was less well organized than it could be. When I told the owner he could increase sales by better alphabatizing his books…”

    Careful. What do you know about bookstores? Many small bookstores do this to discourage theft. Large chains worry about that less and more about personally productivity.

    The Thai guy probably knows his country and his customer. Do you? Many seemingly ‘irrational’ economic decisions are quite reasonable when you see it from their local knowledge as the Austrian economists point out.

  141. @SFG
    Here's what gets me about a lot of HBD thought. They seem to think racial groups have an essence that persists across all times and places.

    The 'Viking spirit' is hardly in evidence in modern Scandinavia outside of black metal. Indians are dumber than average in England and smarter than average in America. Jews were not particularly smart in the ancient world, are smarter than average in the modern world, and are warlike in Israel and cowardly in America. It's pretty clear that the same ancestral population can diverge if subjected to varying selection pressures, whether by selective immigration (Indians in America are selected from doctors or engineers) or emigration (Jews who don't want to serve in the army don't go to Israel).

    Despite all the angst here, the US immigration laws are in fact very restrictive and unless you have a relative or are a refugee, select for people who are basically genius (130+) IQ smart proven by ability to invest or a graduate degree. This combines with some countries only letting their smart people out for political reasons (China).

    The US was founded and mostly populated by people smart enough to leave their dumber violent brothers behind in their authoritarian cesspools.

    So of course you now get smarter Indians, Chinese, Africans, Brits, Jews. You go to their countries, not so much.

    As the Libertarians say, they welcome Bill-of-Rights loving, peaceful (i.e. smart and hard-working enough to be peaceful) people to immigrate for citizen (for now non-citizen track immigrants willing to peacefully work should get less grief as well, then return to their countries to evangelize Americanism). This builds the US and brain-drains potential rivals. It also means more higher-IQ Americans should have free reign to live abroad and straighten those countries out. Smart.

  142. Mark Zuckerberg is the world’s richest Jew, according to Forbes billionaire list

    But it’s not enough.

  143. @Anon 2
    Albert Michelson was only half-Jewish (read his
    biography, Wikipedia has it wrong). He was born
    in the part of Poland that was under Prussian
    administrative control (as we know, Prussia was
    a neighborhood bully in the 18-19th centuries
    in Central Europe). His father was a Polish Jew
    and his mother a Polish Christian.

    Wikipedia can be wrong?

  144. @RToulouse
    I'm a big devotee of music, so I've noticed some interesting patterns myself. I'm not sure how many people realize it, but virtually all of the "Great American Songbook" song writers were Jewish, with the exception of Cole Porter and Vincent Youmans (I could name lesser known figures like Louis Hirsch but few would recognize them). Of the big names, the following were all Jewish:

    Irving Berlin
    Richard Rodgers
    Jerome Kern
    George Gershwin
    Harold Arlen

    This is not including Jewish lyricists like Oscar Hammerstein, Ira Gershwin, and Yip Harburg (though other big name lyricists like Lorenz Hart, Johnny Mercer, and Otto Harbach were not Jewish).

    However, I know enough about the careers of these songwriters to know that they struggled to get their success, with many starting off as near-anonymous song-pluggers for established musicals and only getting the chance to write their own shows after a big hit (They Didn't Believe Me in the case of Jerome Kern and Manhattan in the case of Richard Rodgers). Likewise, they all suffered major flops and disappointments at various points in their careers.

    In contrast to what some might suggest on this blog, Jewish songwriters like Richard Rodgers and Jerome Kern (especially with lyricist Hammerstein) each showed a strong love for the "old-fashioned" America of the 1890's and the conservative standards of those eras.

    It was the bisexual (if not gay) non-Jew Cole Porter who was celebrating the loosening of moral standards in Anything Goes and especially the racy Nymph Errant while Jerome Kern was penning songs like "I'm Old Fashioned" and Rodgers and Hammerstein were celebrating the wholesome west in Oklahoma and small-town life in Allegro. Likewise Porter was the one songwriter of the era that was born into wealth and prosperity and largely treated songwriting as hobby rather than his livelihood.

    I write all this to preemptively refute the idea that these Jewish songwriters rose to prominence purely because of networking and social connections, a charge better leveled at Porter. They all deserved the acclaim they received, but I can't really explain their collective rise apart from God-given (IQ derived?) talent and hard work.

    Moving into the modern era, the closest thing to the Great American songbook writers were probably the "Brill Building" pop songwriters like Burt Bacharach and Carole King (both Jewish). Yet in their case as well, their acclaim came after quite a bit of struggles and flops and was backed up by exceptional talent. I would single out Bacharach especially as perhaps the finest pop songwriter (in terms of melody) of the second half of the 20th century due to his use of highly unusual chords and time signatures in what are otherwise catchy and commercial pop songs. In contrast, the greatest Jewish singer-songwriters of the modern era, Bob Dylan and Leonard Cohen showed highly complex lyrical abilities but very little melodic complexity.

    Oddly enough, while Jews have done very well in pop music, they haven't shown nearly the same prominence in the world of Classical music. Their are several great Jewish pianists like Alfred Brendel and Vladimir Horowitz, but I can't think of many great Jewish composers. The exception is Arnold Schoenberg, who is responsible for serialism and the horrible dissonance of "modern classical" music prior to the rise of the minimalists.

    As I said, I don't know what conclusions to draw other than to note these patterns in the world of music. Still, the names I listed deserve all the acclaim they've received if not more.

    Oddly enough, while Jews have done very well in pop music, they haven’t shown nearly the same prominence in the world of Classical music. Their are several great Jewish pianists like Alfred Brendel and Vladimir Horowitz, but I can’t think of many great Jewish composers. The exception is Arnold Schoenberg, who is responsible for serialism and the horrible dissonance of “modern classical” music prior to the rise of the minimalists.

    Also Felix Mendelssohn.

    Thanks for the interesting and informative comment, by the way.

  145. @Brady
    Assuming a 115 IQ to be the magic cutoff for high-intelligence professions is probably not accurate. Remember we are dealing with a bell curve here, and 130+ is generally considered the threshold for "gifted". That's +1 SD (16%) for Jews and +2 SD (only 2.5%) for Whites.

    That adds up to a little under 1M Jews and 5.5M non-Hispanic Whites based on current demographics. So while 25% Jewish might be slightly over-represented, it's within the realm of explanation. Environmental factors could account for the rest (e.g. Jews concentrated in New York and California where the best opportunities are, not poorer states like Alabama or WV).

    I believe Steve has written at least once about the impact of geography and how smart white boys in poor/rural areas tend to get overlooked. The proportion of whites in high-g fields (as well as overall staffing levels) would probably be much higher if American corporations spent more recruiting dollars on economic/geographic diversity instead of racial diversity.

    Note that the bell curve (normal distribution) has this fascinating mathematical property regarding its value at any given point: shifting on the Y axis has linear effect, whereas shifting on the X axis has quadratic effect.

    So for any difference in population size there is a point on the right where the small-population bell curve with a higher mean intersects the large-population bell curve with a lower mean. This is similar to y=x*x eventually intersecting y=50*x.

    Nobel/Fields/Turing/etc. award level might require IQ 145 cutoff which explains the typical 25% figure. World chess champion level might require IQ 160, which explains the observed 50% figure, a plausible intersection point of the two bell curves.

Comments are closed.

Subscribe to All Steve Sailer Comments via RSS