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

 Remember My Information



=>
 TeasersiSteve Blog
/
India

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New Reply
🔊 Listen RSS
During election years, everybody is supposed to genuflect to Hispanic Numbers, although the usual acts of obeisance are often inept. For example, the Obama Administration engineered that the Democratic nomination for the U.S. Senate in Arizona go to Richard Carmona, a guy with a remarkable track record: high school dropout; Vietnam vet; sheriff; nurse; doctor; surgeon; was shot by a lunatic but the wounded Carmona pulled his gun and killed the shooter; Surgeon General under Bush; the GOP wanted him to run for Congress in 2006; but he then changed from Republican to Independent in protest over various Bush policies. 

The only problem is: Carmona’s not Mexican. He’s a Puerto Rican from New York City. This is a general problem: 35 million Mexicans in the U.S. and not a lot of amazing individuals. Thus, the recent silliness of everybody pretending the ceremonial mayor of San Antonio is really a powerhouse executive.

All immigrant groups are not created equal. Polish Catholics, for instance, appear roughly equal in number to Jews in the U.S., but have negligible clout in U.S. culture outside of maybe outfielders. Consider the Borat episode in 2006, in which Polish-American complaints about being assaulted with a giant old-fashioned Polish Joke of the kind that Yiddish-speakers brought to the U.S., and having Borat wildly celebrated by Jewish critics went virtually unheard.

Likewise, I’ve often argued that in the long run, the most important element of the current immigration mix in terms of setting the tone of politics in the future are not Mexicans, but South Asians. They are articulate in English, and are one of the few groups who seem to like to argue in public. Indians, though, seem to lack the edge, that motor of internal hostility and aggression that makes male Jews the reigning World’s Heavyweight Champs at both getting the last word and at being funny.  For example, on the Atlantic Magazine’s 2009 list of the most important pundits in America, Jewish men were over-represented by a factor of about 50.

But it’s easy to imagine a future in which Asian Indians rank second among ethnic groups in opinion-molding in America.

So, it’s important to study the voting and ideology of South Asians. They are a high income group from a socially conservative part of the world, so they are natural Republicans, right.?From the Guardian:

An impressive 84% of the 2.85 million-strong Indian-American community voted for Mr Obama in 2008, second perhaps only to African-Americans as a minority group. 

Has he still got their love? It appears so. 

According to a Pew Research Center survey released in June, 65% of Indian-Americans approve of the way Mr Obama is handling the presidency. 

Of all the Asian American groups surveyed, Indian-Americans were the most Democratic-leaning, again at 65%. Only 18% favoured Republicans.

Well, good luck Republicans with the rest of the 21st Century. You will need it.

The most obvious step is to take away South Asians’ valuable status as minorities eligible for various minority-only benefits to business. Go back to pre-1982 when they were just Caucasians not entitled to racial spoils. Right now, South Asians have a financial incentive to identify as victimized minorities — indeed, the applications Indian entrepreneurs have to fill out for government benefits in terms of procurement and loans often demand that they concoct narratives about how discriminated against they are by whites. Remove this destructive incentive and the traditional South Asian aspiration to whiteness will re-emerge.

(Republished from iSteve by permission of author or representative)
 
• Tags: 2012 Election, India 
🔊 Listen RSS
I’ve never been to China or India, so I’m just going to talk through my hat here about the images of the two countries in the imagination of Stuff White People Like white people such as, well, me. In general, India seems to win hands down in a contest of stereotypical images in the heads of SWPLs:

- China is a dictatorship; India is a democracy.

- China is homogeneous; India is diverse.

- China is monocultural; India is multicultural.

- China is conformist; India is free-spirited.

- China is a nation; India is a subcontinent.

- China has factories where people work with their hands; India has call centers where people talk into headsets.

- China makes hardware; India does software.

- China bulldozes new freeways; Indians argue endlessly over whose backyard would have to go.

- China is good at math; India is good at verbal.

- China has ugly air pollution; India has blue skies. 

- China is modernizing; India is postmodernizing.

China looks at pictures of the old-fashioned Modern America that went to the Moon and says: “We want some of that.”

But is India becoming more like postmodern America or is postmodern America becoming more like India? Maybe India is already at where postmodernism leads? That the future for the postmodernist U.S. is Indian-style inequality and ineffectuality?

Consider, for example, India’s addiction to arranged marriages. A generation ago, that would have seemed appalling to Americans. But, now, at the upper reaches of American society, I sense an unspoken but growing sense suspicion that maybe the Indians have got it right about marriages.

The upper middle class spends much time and money stage-managing their children’s lives to get them into the right institutions with the right sort of people for them to find the right sort of spouse, but then the ungrateful little scions fail to pull the trigger. So, why not take the next step and instead of just hiring tutors and consultants to get them into nice colleges and nice law schools, go all the way and hire matchmaking consultants to get them a nice husband or wife?

I’m not saying that any SWPL has yet even articulated this thought internally, but the logic of social trends is leading in that direction. And once that thought starts to pop up in the minds of the SWPLs as they age, what ideological barrier is there? Are they going to tell themselves, “We are Westerners! Oriental despotism is not for us.” Yeah, right. 

What about women’s rights as an ideological impediment? Well, that’s more plausible, but the SWPLs who are going to seriously consider hiring matchmakers for their children are going to be not patriarchal fathers, but instead mothers with high-powered careers. They hire consultants all the time on the job, so why not hire a consultant to help their children find a mate?

Here’s an interesting betting proposition: What is the under-over line for the year of America’s First Arranged Gay Marriage? 2022?

(Republished from iSteve by permission of author or representative)
 
• Tags: India 
🔊 Listen RSS
India is off to a relatively good start in the 2012 summer Olympics, with a single bronze medal so far. Granted, the other giga-country, China, has 34 total medals. But that one bronze puts India roughly on pace to come close to its total of 3 medals in 2008 and beat its totals of one medal in each of the 2004 and 2000 Olympics.

(Republished from iSteve by permission of author or representative)
 
• Tags: India, Olympics 
🔊 Listen RSS

Last week, the Australian Council for Education Research put out a glossy, voluminous report updating the 2009 PISA school achievement test conducted by the deep-pocketed OECD. ACER reported on ten more “economies,” including two middling Indian states, which came in next to last out of 74 countries or regions.

Since I’ve been interested in China v. India for years, that struck me as pretty big news (so I blogged about it at length here), but it didn’t impress the rest of the Internet, apparently. Finally today, according to Google News, somebody else mentioned it. Here’s an editorial from an Indian publication called LiveMint that draws an appropriate lesson: India needs to get its act together.

There are few urban legends about India quite as destructive as the one that leads us to believe that the education system is doing a good job of educating our children. Coming on the heels of a comprehensive study, which exposed how poorly our kids were doing in some of the country’s best schools, is an international study that evaluates 15-year-olds’ skills in reading and mathematical and scientific literacy on a comparative basis—and India didn’t do any better here. 

… In India, only two states, Himachal Pradesh and Tamil Nadu, were part of the survey. Now, these are both states that are thought to offer the best educational infrastructure to schoolchildren in the country. But the results on a global scale are abysmal, with Himachal Pradesh recording the lowest reading score in PISA 2009 and 2009+, on a par with Kyrgyzstan. Tamil Nadu did slightly better with its overall score, which was nonetheless lower than any other country’s, besides Kyrgyzstan. One shudders to think of the results in states with worse general indicators than these two, such as Rajasthan or Bihar. 

… A lot of success stories we hear are despite the system, not because of it, and the sooner we recognize that, the better the chances that we’ll do something to fix the status quo. 

The current state of affairs will lead to a future where we will have let down millions of young Indians, who will be shut out of the job market because they were failed by the state. The demographic dividend we keep talking about— the one that’s going to give us an edge over China in the decades to come—is going to be more of a demographic disaster if we cannot equip our young people with the skills required in this new global economy. The government must make school education a priority if it is to arrest the decline of this most valuable of institutions.

My vague impression is that Indians tend to make more sophisticated marketers than Chinese do. One American consultant said that the typical Chinese factory owner’s idea of marketing is: “Real cheap! You buy now!” But it’s important for Indians not to fall for their own marketing. India needs less spin and more China-like grim determination if it’s going to improve its fundamental institutions.

By the way, all the talk in the press about Indian benefiting from a “demographic dividend” of a rapidly growing population is respectable Davos Man craziness at its craziest.

More generally, India conforms to the Davos model of elite advancement while not talking about the masses because we, uh, don’t want to hurt their feelings. In contrast, Dengist China conforms more to old-fashioned nationalism — the kind of thing that worked in Japan, Taiwan, South Korea, Singapore, Germany, and, perhaps most of all, in pre-1846 England and in pre-1960s USA.

(Republished from iSteve by permission of author or representative)
 
• Tags: India, PISA 
🔊 Listen RSS
The conventional wisdom expressed in Obama Administration speeches and the like is that American students get crushed by kids in China and India on international tests of school achievement. But the evidence for this is not as abundant as you might assume … especially not for India. While the city of Shanghai shot the lights out on the 2009 PISA, test scores haven’t been released for other parts of China. 
But, Westerners going back to Marco Polo have generally assumed the Chinese have a lot on the ball, so they are likely to do pretty well. 
What about India, the other giga-country? I first noticed in early 1981 that there were a lot of smart Indians in the U.S., and over the decades this has become a cliche.

But, what about India itself? India has never participated as a country in broad-based international tests.

The future of India is A) an intrinsically interesting subject; B) one that could make or lose you a lot of money; C) could make or lose the whole world a lot of money (just as the widespread assumption that the population of the Sand States could pay back those big mortgages proved costly for everyone, so could an unrealistic assumption down the road that the Indian masses are ready for big loans could spark a future global bubble and bust).  

Last year, I pointed out in VDARE that TIMSS had been given unofficially in two Indian states, Orissa and Rajasthan, and both had done badly.
Now the OECD has released 2009 PISA test scores for 15-year-olds for ten more places, two of them Indian states. The new news is that the Indian states, Tamil Nadu in the southeast (east of Bangalore, the technology center) and Himachal Pradesh, a Hindu state in the Deep North, did miserably, fighting it out with Kyrgyzstan for last place out of 74 countries or regions on all three tests: reading, math, and science. (Not surprisingly, the southern state beat the northern state on all three tests.) 
And there isn’t much inequality in the Indian scores: it’s not like some geniuses in these states score high but the places are dragged down by illiterates. There are a lot of illiterates, of course, but almost nobody scores at the top level, at least not in the schools where these tests were given. (Allow me to insert here my usual caveat about testing, which is that an 80/20 rule applies to methodology: it’s pretty easy to get a crudely accurate picture, but really hard to get a highly accurate one. For example, how representative were the tested students in India? Beats me.)
Here’s the 13 meg PDF.
India ought to be able to do better than score at sub-Saharan levels. Indians in other countries do better. For example, this same report has Mauritius, a mixed race country in the middle of the Indian Ocean where 52% of the population is Hindu, scoring like a Latin American country rather than a sub-Saharan African country. 
But, India itself has a long way to go. It’s likely to take 1-2 generations to get India up to speed, and we don’t really know what up to speed for India means yet.

In other news from this report by Australians on the additional ten marginal places to take the test, Costa Rica does pretty good for a Latin American country (as stereotypes of Costa Rica as a nice place would suggest), Malta does okay, the rich United Arab Emirates do pretty good for an Arab place, and Moldova and Georgia do very bad for white countries. 

(Republished from iSteve by permission of author or representative)
 
• Tags: India, PISA, Tests 
🔊 Listen RSS
A recurrent topic at iSteve is trying to estimate the long term average IQs of the two most populous countries, China and India. If you want to know what the world will be like in a generation, a question that is interesting to investors, strategists, and anyone with a general interest in the human race, then one of the really big, obvious, but seldom-asked questions is: what is the IQ potential of the populations of the two biggest countries?
Obviously, there are a fair number of very smart Chinese and Indians in the West. But a big question is: How deep is the bench in each country?
The consensus of Western observers going back to Marco Polo has been that the average Chinese has a fair amount on the ball. We need to learn far more about regional and class differences within China, but it seems likely that the national average will shake out into the three digit range.
India, however, seems much more complicated than China. For one thing, while the Chinese like to paper over their differences to present a show of unity and harmony to the world, the Indians have tried to increase their internal differences through the caste system, endogamy, and the like. 
Moreover, Indian historical inventions tend to be rather more esoteric than Chinese historical inventions. For example, the medieval Chinese had a natural gas drilling and pipeline industry not all that different from the modern natural gas industry. Using bamboo for pipes, Chinese drilled up to a couple of miles deep, and piped gas up to 20 miles to use in city streetlights, something Europeans, for example, didn’t catch up with until the 19th Century. In contrast, the Indians invented the concept of zero. 
Natural gas drilling versus zero is an obvious apples and oranges comparison. I don’t really know what to make of it. (Another aspect is that we have quite good records from much of Chinese history, but terrible records for most of Indian history)
Some Western intellectuals such as Schopenhauer, were greatly impressed by the profundity of Indian thought. On the other hand, a Western genius who knew India well, Kipling, was not as impressed. (Kipling was the kind of guy who would have been more impressed by a working natural gas industry.)
A few years ago, I published a lengthy attempt by Rec1Man to estimate the long-term potential for Indian average IQ. Here’s NSAM’s summmary of the revised version. He came up with 94, which sounds plausible to me, but I certainly don’t know enough to comment on the components. 
Here’s another Indian’s attempt at pulling together some of the evidence. I’ll give away the bottomline, which is that Pensive Brahmin comes up with the same number: 94. 

Indian IQ: Contained within is an alternative to the rec1man model of Indian IQ – it is not very structured but instead a mess of observations as a citizen. 

          First off, I think we can all agree that the 81 figure in Lynn &Vanhanen’s 2002 is deeply suspect, and does not tally with the historical record of highly advanced Indian civilization. Noted here is the fact that malnutrition at the moment in India exceeds that in sub-Saharan Africa by a significant margin, and the simple removal of that malnutrition certainly makes up a huge portion of the 1 S.D. gain of blacks from Africa to the U.S.A.

And Lynn & Vanhanen emphasize the role of nutrition in raising average IQs (including micronutrients — South Asians suffer a lot from iodine shortages, which can lead to cretinism).

          IQ is segregrated by caste. Castes are still chiefly endogamous even in relatively modernized areas, and thus there is genetic IQ difference. It seems likely that Brahmin > Kshatriya/Vaishya should be the usual IQ stratification among the upper castes or dwijas. 

After this broad division – contrary to what most would say – the subdivisions are very murky. Parsis perform on a Brahmin level or above it. The Kayasth – an administrative Kshatriya subcaste – have contributed 1 nobel laureate – Amartya Sen – and are competitive with Bengali Brahmins in Bengal. They seem to have done well in the sciences – Satyen Bose of Higgs boson fame for instance. Tamil Brahmins dominate the IITs , as well as hard sciences and mathematics. Compare with the Bengalis, who have nobels in economics and literature. 

Visual-Verbal split ? Quite likely, imo. The backward castes and dalits follow the forward castes. Backward castes do quite well in some places – dalits not so much.  

         Factors depressing Indian IQ at the moment include poor literacy and nutrition, but also Islam. Nutrition as I noted earlier is worse than SS Africa. Literacy is rising, and with any luck will keep maintaining the strong growth it has now. [ Incidentally, it would be interesting to study Sri Lankan IQ - highly literate, low malnutrition, similar racial makeup with South India...and the only study we have is one way back in 1954 with a sample size of 46, that too on eight year olds, when IQ is not very heritable. The figure of 79 it gives is quite meaningless in the present context. ] 

         Islam needs a whole book unto itself. It promotes intellectual coma to a degree that no other religion can. I am positive that the Middle-Eastern IQ would be higher if those nations simply converted to something like Judaism. Sephardim , I think, illustrate my point by outscoring Arabs comfortably 

         There are various racial minorities in India. Of note is the fact that Mongoloid populations in the NE region – similar to Thailand/Tibetan/Burmese people underperform compared to the rest of the country. All these regions fall below average income and are not very developed. Since Thai IQ is 91, this puts a floor on true Indian IQ of somewhat above 91. 

          Interestingly, the eastern city of Kolkata has held a sizeable minority of Chinese. They do not have any history of academic excellence per se, and are more famous for bringing their cuisine to India. Perhaps a segment of the left half of the Chinese curve, as I do not believe that Indians have a mean IQ above 105.
         
Raw Income/IQ/Academic data from the diaspora 

With the significant retarding effects on Indian IQ in India, we must look elsewhere. 

In the U.S.A, Indian Americans outperform the Chinese. But they are highly selected and barely representative, and hence unsuitable as samples. 

In the U.K., the Indian sample is quite representative of India. Lynn in his Race Differences in Intelligence gives some figures for Indians in Britain -
87 – 1967 , 91 – 1978 , 94 – 1983 , 97 – 1985 , 87 – 1992 [ 97 data point for Indians resident in Britain for 4+ years - the study used FoB immigrants scoring 83 as a comparison. Since this shows clear environmental influence, the FoB score which has presumably been environmentally deflated ha
s been removed. ] 

Unfortunately, Lynn has fudged the original Mackintosh data points, as Mackintosh mentioned in his review of the book.  

Using Mackintosh’s review as a basis, the data points become 87, 91, 94 , 97, 97, 91. You can read the relevant portions of his review at Dienekes : 

http://dienekes.blogspot.com/2006/09/more-massaged-data-from-richard-lynn.html 

Well, you have to massage the data to account for the Flynn Effect. But that makes it more likely for errors to creep into the process.

The IQ in the UK averages out to 93, which does not square with the Indians outperforming whites in terms of education and income. Perhaps a further relative flynn has taken place since 1992 ? Or perhaps culture is a huge bonus for Indians.

British school tests have a huge gender gap, with girls badly outperforming boys within each racial group. I don’t know whether there’s something wrong with the tests or with boys in Britain.

Mauritius – Mauritius is a mostly lower caste-based sample of Indians and may be taken as a lower estimate. The Mauritian IQ is 89 for Indians and creoles. Indians are 70% of the sample and have a mean IQ of 2.5 points more than the creoles. Using basic algebra, we find that the Indo-Mauritian IQ is 90. Note that Mauritius is far from a selective migration case – calculations are basing off Lynn’s Race Differences in Intelligence. 

Singapore : No IQ data here. But according to the 2005 Singstat income data -
Median income monthly : Chinese – 2500 Malay – 1800 Indian – 2480
Average income monthly : Chinese – 3610 Malay – 2200 Indian – 3660 

Malaysia : IQ data of 88 just after the heyday of NEP which widely discriminated vs Chinese and Indians in Malaysia, hence testing those children who suffered under it. The chinese of course were not hit as hard. The Malays at the same time averaged 89. During this time the Indian economic situation put them in a very bad state. Now however the Indians perform midway between Malays and Chinese in income – see http://www.malaysianews.net/story/308459 . Plotting Chinese IQ as 105 and using a crude linear basis, the Indian IQ from that distribution is 96. 

For a diaspora of plantation workers, 96 is quite impressive. 

In sum, the true Indian IQ should be around 94 corrected for environment and very multi-modal. India’s prospects in the 21st century in terms of IQ, while worse off than China’s 105, are not that bad, primarily as Verbal IQ is more helpful in terms of GDP prediction than IQ – see La Griffe Du Lion’s revised SFT – and East Asians lack verbal IQ comparatively. 

Finally, allow me to mention two studies of Indian IQ that have not drawn much attention :
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8240214 – note control group IQ
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15004297 , http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10740303 – two studies, same cohort – note control group IQ 

Indian IQ deserves a book length treatment, considering how diverse India is. What are your thoughts on Indian IQ ?

My thoughts are that it is a difficult and important question.

(Republished from iSteve by permission of author or representative)
 
• Tags: India, IQ 
🔊 Listen RSS
A continuing theme here at iSteve over the years has been the future of India. 
As I first noticed back in 1981 when I was at UCLA, there sure are a lot of smart Indians in America. About a decade later, India’s economic growth started to come more in line with that observation. By now, it is a cliche of spokesmen for the conventional wisdom, such as Education Secretary Arne Duncan and Thomas Friedman, that India itself is full of superstudents to whom America’s lagging masses of youth must somehow try to catch up …  although what objective evidence that does exist suggests that eventuality has not fully gone through the formality of taking place yet. On the other other hand, evidence from places like Trinidad, South Africa, and Fiji suggests that pretty ordinary Indians do pretty well for themselves once they are free of Mother India.
To have a clue about India’s future, it helps to know something about India’s present and past. But that is inordinately complicated. Moreover, since Indians think about their society’s human capital potential in terms of only partial exogenous extended families (i.e., racial groups, dozens and dozens of racial groups), Americans have a hard time grasping what they are talking about. All this Indian talk about race and IQ, well, if Americans didn’t know that Indians are diverse and therefore, by definition, can’t be racist, well, they just wouldn’t know what to think.
A reader who calls himself Andy, writes to clear up matters about the intellectual structure of modern Indian life.
“Most of this information is passed through word of mouth from elders to youngsters and it would be hard to find this kind of detail in books. So enjoy!”
I’ll put Andy’s description of the different categories of South Asians and their rough IQ levels below the fold:
Rec1Man’s (I cannot guess who he might be) model is fundamentally flawed. It is true that North experienced lot more slaughter of elites and lower classes than south, but it also led to more challenge and response (Toynbee), and in many parts of Northern India (mainly Rajasthan), self immolation to keep ethnic purity high was routinely performed if the natives lost against the invaders. 
Marwaris (and Brahmins) also migrated a lot throughout India, founding large business empires (much like Jews spread in Europe). There is a deep resentment among Indians against Marwari and Brahmin success, and policies are enacted or pushed to shove these groups aside and make space for less “fortunate”.
The gradation levels by Rec1man are also very rudimentary and do not go into enough detail. I want to fill in some details and you can add these to your model if you like, but do not mention my name (Jeez!) due to obvious reasons …  I also feel that his model might not achieve what it hopes, and a large scale IQ exam (at least 5 exams given over a period of one week to at least 1000-10,000 exam takers per caste/social/ethnic group) is the only way to solve the Indian Subcontinent IQ puzzle. I would say look at the results of IIT/AIIMS/IIM exams and sort by surnames for input data to use his model.  For disclosure, my dad, uncles, many cousins all cracked the IITs or IIMs.
1. Muslim gradations:  Muslims in India are not just Dalit and Non-Dalit, or forward and backward castes. It is a lot finer than that.  Muslim gradations are as follows:
a) Ashraf :Upper castes (Brahmins, Merchants (including Marwaris) and Samurai class (Thakurs, Rajputs). Within Ashraf, there are four subclasses
i) Sayyads: Sayyads are at the top of the pyramid. These are mainly mixtures of Prophet Mohammed’s tribe’s elite descendants, local Indian merchants, and elite Brahmins. Mohammed’s tribe itself was of Merchant caste.  Pakistani Dictator Pervez Musharraf’s ancestors were Sayyads (sometimes spelled as Sayid, Sayed or Said) and his ancestral mansion is [not all that far from] my ancestral mansion in … Delhi.
ii) Ashraf proper: These are mainly either Brahmin converts or descendants of Oghuz/Chagatai Turkic elite or some Persian Nobility who settled in India and mixed with other Brahmin converts.  The richest Indian muslim, Azim Premji of Gujarat, owner of WIPRO IT giant is an Ashraf. Pakistan’s Army Chief Ashfaq Kayani is also an Ashraf, his ancestry being from Persian Nobility. 
iii) Mughals: These are rank and file Turkic soldier settlers, descendants of Turkic elite who mixed with local women irrespective of caste, or products of royal harems. Mughal elite used to impregnate thousands of women in their harems so there is a large population of Mughals in India.
iv) Pathans: These are Pashtun tribes from Afghanistan, Iran, Pakistan, Central Asia who joined their Oghuz or Chagatai Turkic superiors to subjugate India and became large landed nobility. However, they are at fourth level since they were/are considered barbarians, essentially muscle guys who had good fighting skills but not much else.
Most Bollywood stars are either Ashraf, Mughals or Pathans, and have light skin and hazel/green/occasionally blue eyes and are generally taller.
b) Azlaf: (lower Castes, peasants, Jats (a large farming community in NW India), Ahirs (milkmen, peasants), Gujjars (peasants, much like Jats but lesser rank).
Nikki Haley of South Carolina is from a successful Jat community in India which is spread over Sikh (Punjab State), Hindu (Haryana State) and Muslim (Pakistani Punjab). There is intense rivalry between Sikh and Hindu Jats and that is a major reason why Indian Punjab was split into Punjab, Haryana and Himachal Pradesh during 1960s.
c) Arzal:  These are the outcastes or Dalit Muslims who are at the lowest level and find very hard to mix with other muslims. They belong to the janitor, butcher, leather, and menial jobs occupations.  They have the lowest IQs perhaps.
When Arzals and Azlafs either through gaining wealth, power or fame are able to mix with Ashrafs, they consider it a mark of success. Just like Blacks, who crave Germanic blondes, and feel socially superior when they successfully mix with them and have kids.
IQ level is therefore Sayyads > Ashraf proper >> Mughals > Pathans > Azlafs > Arzals
A few notes on Hindus:
1. Brahmins:  Brahmins are further divided into four classes:
i) Saraswat Brahmins: They are at the top of the pyramid. These Brahmins originate between the extinct Saraswati river (recently its bed was identified through satelitte imagery) and the Ganges.  This means they are primarily from the Haryana, Himachal Pradesh, Kashmir, Rajasthan, Gujarat, Extreme Western Uttar Pradesh and Pakistani Sindh.     Nehru-Gandhi family are Saraswat brahmins (with a little parsi mix). Founder of Arya Samaj, the earliest Hindu nationalist organization was a Saraswat Brahmin from Gujarat state, which is India’s most conservative and prosperous state. 
Some of these Saraswat brahmins migrated south to peninsular India.  Infosys, another Indian IT giant’s top managment is almost all South Saraswat migrant brahmins.
ii) KanyaKubja brahmins: These are next in the pecking order and these originate mainly from India’s largest and most populated state Uttar Pradesh, mainly around Ganges and Yamuna river.  India’s first Hindu Nationalist Prime Ministers, AB Vajpayee is a KanyaKubja Brahmin. 
iii) Saryu Parin Brahmins:  These are eastern Brahmins and they have the lowest rank. From Bihar, Orissa, Bengal, Bangladesh, NE India’s seven sister states.
iv) Southern Brahmins: Many of these are actually the highest grade Saraswat brahmin migrants from North so its difficult to identify pure southern brahmins. These include Tamil brahmins (Noble laureates, CV Raman and S. Chandrasekhar etc) and fall broadly into Iyers or Iyengars. Pepsi CEO Indra Nooyi is a Southern Brahmin. 
There are other classifications of Brahmins, based on their lineage and priestly authority over the 4 Indian Vedas, the 4 books collectively like an Indian Bible. One Veda Lineage groups have their surnames as Vedi, 2 Veda lineage have higher rank and are called Dwi-vedi, 3 Vedas called Tri-vedi or Tri-pathi or Tiwari, and 4 Vedas called Chatur-Vedi. 
But this is not very popular since the first Veda, called Rig Veda is considered the most ancient and divine and if a lineage belongs solely to Rig Veda, then those Brahmins have higher rank than most others.   A mix of geographical and Veda lineage classification is more reliable according to Indian traditions. 
Brahmins were 4.35% according to 1931 British census (includes India, Pak, Bang), but I suspect they are probably less than 4% now due to lower birth rates compared to lower castes.
2) Merchant Castes:  They number about 15 million or 1.5% of India’s population and their birth rates are even lower than Brahmins.  Marwaris ~6.5-7 million are the more successful among them.  Among these the Agrawals and Mittals are most numerous, ~5 million, Birlas and Maheshwaris are ~0.5 million, and others are perhaps ~1 million.
Marwaris rival the Parsis in wealth and IQ intensive professions.  In fact Tatas (a leading Parsi family) and Birlas (a leading Marwari family) are considered the Rockefeller and Rothschilds of India.  John Maynard Keynes wrote a book on Marwari/Parsi  Business called “Indian currency and finance“. 
3) Samurai Caste: These are primarily the landed nobility from various parts of India, though over half of India’s royal families originate from the desert state of Rajasthan.  They are mostly the descendants of Scythians and local mixtures. Like Turks, they have a lot of vital intelligence but due to their reluctance to migrate into Quantitative, Math, Science professions, their mental IQ is perhaps not that high.
Kayasthas (Sub group among Samurais) are sometimes considered a mix of Samurai and Merchant class but occasionally they are considered at par with Brahmins. 
India’s Aishwarya Rai, the blue/green eyed Miss World is from the Samurai class who migrated to Southern India.  Only 1-2 million from her caste are left, and her ancestors founded the Chola Naval Empire, which takes much credit for transmitting Indian culture and political system to Malay Archipelago.
4) Shudras: Peasant Castes, farmers, iron workers, low skill workers. These are spread more or less evenly throughout India and I don’t have much to say any further.
5) Dalits or Outcastes: These are the most unfortunate, although they have made a lot of progress over last 3-4 decades.
I would say in terms of IQ-  Parsis, Saraswat Brahmins, Marwaris > Other Brahmins > Other Merchants >> Samurai Class > Lower classes > Outcastes.
Altogether if you put Hindus, Muslims, Sikhs all communities together from the Indian Subcontinent (1.6 Billion or 25% of Human race), there might be about 70-80 million who might have the median IQs between Shanghai and Japan.  5-6% of India’s population.
Also 3 out of top 10 in your PISA chart are city, quasi city state, or city state, (Shanghai, Singapore, HK) so you have to account for that. Metro cities are typically high in IQ compared to regions/countries where IQ varies between cities, towns, rural areas, nether-world and under-world.
I guess that is enough for tonight.
And Merry Christmas!

(Republished from iSteve by permission of author or representative)
 
• Tags: India, PISA 
🔊 Listen RSS

Here’s a curious op-ed by Ashok Mitra in the Calcutta Telegraph that makes me fear I missed the point of “Slumdog Millionaire.” I assumed that “Who Wants to Be a Millionaire?” was just a passing fancy in India like it was in America. But, I should have noticed by the fanaticism with which Indians in America approach things like spelling bees that something deeper was going on.

Parlous times, unless well-versed in the culture built around ‘quiz’ programmes, one would hardly be considered civilized. In one such programme, participants are grilled on their knowledge of the exact length of La Manche, otherwise known as the English Channel: is it 563 or 564 or 565 kilometres? Another ‘quiz’ wants participants to pick the number of children Queen Victoria bore: six, eleven, or whatever. Yet another demands to know whether the Gettysburg Address was delivered on March 25, 1865 or on February 28, 1860 or on November 1, 1863.

A multiple choice test on the date of the Gettysburg Address is reasonable because you can work it out from the concurrent date of the Battle of Gettysburg and the Fall of Vicksburg, which famously hit the newspapers on July 4, 1863. Of course, that’s a reasonable question for Americans, not for Indians.

A multiple choice test on whether the English Channel is 563, 564, or 565 km long is just stupid for everybody.

Not just in India, but over the entire subcontinent too, a child’s intellectual prowess is being judged by the criterion of his or her ability to cope with frivolities of this nature. How does it matter to the realities of living for children in these former colonial countries if the length of the English Channel is a kilometre more or a kilometre less, or whether the Gettysburg Address was delivered on this particular date in the 1860s? To be well-informed on the number of children that prim woman, Queen Victoria, gave birth to is surely not a matter of life and death, either, for South Asian children circa the first decade of the 21st century. It could not, but it is being made out that it is. A great colonial haze hovers over the post-colonial sky. …

A child’s mind can absorb only so much of information; … In the given social framework, the vacuity of mind amongst the rich influences the roster of daily existence of children belonging to lower echelons. Once, within their circle, it is a matter of pride for sons and daughters of affluent households to know the precise length of La Manche, it becomes essential for children from financially far worse off families too to be equipped with the same load of junk; otherwise they will not be able to survive the competition.

The grand coalition of the creamy layer at home and the diaspora emerged as determinants of Indian culture and civilization. It is terribly important in the context of this nascent, but assertive, cultural milieu that the members of the new generation do not mess up the dates of earthshaking events in the United States of America and Europe.

Okay, but maybe Indians just like memorizing stuff. Maybe they’re just good at it … Remember how well Indian children did on that Wechsler Digit Span test of working memory? You don’t? Well, then you probably aren’t Indian.

But if Indians love historical trivia so much, how come they didn’t write any down when it was happening to them? The Chinese, in contrast, kept records on everything. We know that the Crab Nebula was a supernova that became visible on Earth on July 4, 1054 because Chinese bureaucrats wrote down the exact date they first saw it. One reason Indians ask each other questions about Western historical trivia is because Indian history is so vague. Nobody bothered to write down what had just happened, so Indian history is hard to use as trivia questions, which need precise answers.

I mean, here’s a paragraph from Wikipedia on the origin of the Gupta Empire:

The origins of the Guptas are shrouded in obscurity. The Chinese traveler Yijing(see also Xuanzang) provides the first evidence of the Gupta kingdom in Magadha. He came to north India in 672 CE and heard of Maharaja Sri-Gupta, who built a temple for Chinese pilgrims near Mrigasikhavana who lost their lives in epic battle . I-tsing gives the date for this event merely as ’500 years before’. This does not match with other sources and hence we can assume that I-tsing’s computation was a mere guess. Very recently a few scholars have linked Guptas with rulers mentioned in Bhagwatam; however, these things are largely disputed and the idea seems politically motivated and to promote the sale of books written and promoted by some entities.[1]

What the hell kind of trivia questions can you make up out of that? “What year did that Chinese guy visit India who first heard of something or other having to do with the Gupta Empire that was built “500 years before”?”

(Republished from iSteve by permission of author or representative)
 
• Tags: India 
🔊 Listen RSS

Godless Capitalist, a co-founder of GNXP, suggests an approach for getting real achievement data by caste background for Indians in North America that’s similar to what Nathaniel Weyl and Stefan Possony did in the 1960s: surname analysis. Weyl and Possony made up lists of surnames that tend to belong to one ethnic group, like Clark is English, Wallace Scottish, Sullivan Irish, Lloyd Welsh, Schmidt German, and so forth; then figure out what percentage of the population has each surname from Social Security Administration data; then compare the base percentages to how frequently these names show up among lists of high achievers.

GC suggests you could do the same thing with social networking sites like Facebook where people put down their colleges, degrees, and jobs by comparing achievement levels to names associated with different castes and regions. For details of how to do it, see here.

(Republished from iSteve by permission of author or representative)
 
• Tags: India 
🔊 Listen RSS

Several weeks ago, I posted a message by a commenter named Rec1Man, who has been doing a lot of work to come up with a model of India’s potential average IQ. This is one of the most important questions for predicting the course of the 21st Century.

The first edition of Lynn and Vanhanen’s IQ and the Wealth of Nations reported four studies from India from 1959-1986, with averages varying only across a rather narrow range of 78-82.

On the other hand, as I’ve pointed out since 2002, India is the most complicated country in the world, so it’s hard to get a nationally representative sample.

Further, the higher IQs registered by Indians in their diaspora, like the higher IQs recorded by African Americans and West Indians compared to Africans, suggests that better nutrition, health, education, and so forth could raise the relative standing of Indians. After all, they’ve been plagued by extreme poverty, which is starting to abate. For example, India is particularly beset by lack of iodine in the diet, which is a relatively easy IQ-lowering problem to deal with.

Rec1Man’s goal has been to come up with a model that’s simple enough to comprehend. Lots of critics in the comments responded that his eight part categorization of Indian demographics was too simple. As Einstein said, Science should be as simple as possible, but no simpler.

Still, we need somewhere to start, so Rec1Man’s model, after being refined over the last few weeks, seems like a decent starting point.

First, here is fellow commenter Nsam’s verbal summary of Rec1Man’s approach, followed by Rec1Man’s latest quantitative summary:

Here is my attempt at a summary of rec1man’s analyses. This eight-segment breakdown of the Indian population provides a more accurate picture of the human resource potential of the Indian population, compared to simplistic unimodal population model with mean IQ of 85 and SD =15.

The Indian population can be grouped in terms of the four traditional caste super-categories :

1. Brahmin
2. Merchant,
3. Peasant,
4.1 Dalit (“Untouchable”)
4.2 Scheduled Caste
4.3 Low caste converts to Islam

cross-cutting with a

A. North vs.
B. South

geographical distinction.

Note: The usage of the 4 caste supercategories is not literal. For the purposes of estimating national average IQ, Syrian Christians or Parsees would be lumped in with the Brahmins, and the few peasant castes with a literate tradition would be moved up to the merchant class.

The “Brahmin” and “Merchants” have had multiple generations of a literate tradition and also engaged in professions that required greater cognitive ability (memorization, calculation), compared to the “Peasants” (who formed the ranks of the warrior class and had/have the most political power) and Dalits (who also have the least amount of central-west asian-european admixture and have been engaged in menial tasks on the fringes of society). [As in the Cochran-Harpending model of the evolution of high average Ashkenazi Jewish IQs, under Malthusian pressure, these occupational slots are theorized to have selected for higher IQs. -- Steve]

This model posits an IQ penalty for North Indian groups as a result of Islamic invasions/genocide of north Indian elites over a millennium.

Improvement in living conditions, nutrition, and access to education is expected to increase mean IQ by 7.5 points by the end of this century, relative to the Anglo-American average. India has the human resource potential to be to be a developed society with advanced technological capabilities by the end of this century. The cognitive elites of India will primarily come from the Brahmin and Merchant super-categories and numerically compare favorably with the other Asian superpower China.

And here’s Rec1Man’s latest summary table:

Current IQ

Southern Brahmin, 1% @ 120 IQ
Northern Brahmin, 4% @ 115 IQ
Southern Merchant, 3% @ 110 IQ
Northern Merchant, 12% @ 105 IQ
Southern Peasant, 8% @ 93 IQ
Northern Peasant, 32% @ 88 IQ
Muslim, 15% @ 75 iQ
Southern Dalit, 5% @ 75 IQ
Northern Dalit, 20% @ 75IQ

Avg = 86.10 IQ
Current Flynn for India is +7.8

Hypothesized Flynn effect for India in 21st Century:
Brahmins and merchants = +5
Peasants = +7
Muslims and Dalits = +10
The Flynn for Africa = +10

Future Indian IQ

Southern Brahmin, 1% @ 125 IQ
Northern Brahmin, 4% @ 120 IQ
Southern Merchant, 3% @ 115 IQ
Northern Merchant, 12% @ 110 IQ
Southern Peasant, 8% @ 100 IQ
Northern Peasant, 32% @ 95 IQ
Muslim, 15% @ 85 iQ
Southern Dalit, 5% @ 85 IQ
Northern Dalit, 20% @ 80IQ

Avg = 94

After Flynn
High End Indian IQ
Over 120 IQ = 55 mil
Over 130 IQ = 20 mil
Over 140 IQ = 5 mil

I certainly can’t comment on the validity of the empirical details that underlie this model — India being so complicated — but the general approach seems not unreasonable to me. The point is to put a framework out there for the public to consider.

One potential problem that jumps out at me with Rec1Man’s approach, though, is the potential for disparate fertility interfering with improving environmental conditions. Are fertility rates the same across all groups, or are lower IQ groups growing faster? The Bombay Parsis, who were the most affluent and educated group in India for much of the 20th century, are said to be imploding demographically. If IQ, education, and declining fertility are correlated, then dysgenic / dyscultural effects could undermine some of the gains from an improved environment.

Granted, we haven’t seen much hard evidence of a dysgenic / dyscultural relative effect yet. But, then, we haven’t seen much hard evidence of a positive Flynn relative effect. We’ve seen lots of evidence of an absolute Flynn effect, but little evidence of countries shifting relative average IQs, as I documented here. We’ve probably seen more evidence of relative changes in height than relative changes in IQ.

(Republished from iSteve by permission of author or representative)
 
• Tags: India, IQ 
🔊 Listen RSS

Since 2002, I’ve been pointing out that a crucial piece of missing information that anybody (such as an investor) interested in predicting the path of 21st global history would want to know is what is the potential average IQ of India.

We have some IQ data on India, as collected in Lynn and Vanhanen’s On the other hand, first, India is an extremely complicated place, so it’s harder to come up with a nationally representative sample there than in any other country.

Second, India has been severely burdened by malnutrition, disease, and illiteracy. We know from comparing Africans (average IQ around 70) to African-Americans (average IQs around 85, despite being no more than 20% white) that tropical poverty can prevent people from reaching their genetic potential in IQ.

Something similar is probably true in India. Its recent rapid economic progress makes it more plausible that the environmental deficits lowering average IQ in India will ameliorate to some substantial extent over the course of this century.

An iSteve commenter calling himself Rec1man has built a model of potential Indian average IQ based on IQ scores of the Indian diaspora in various countries more affluent than India. This seems like a plausible approach, so I’ve been discussing it with him via email and now I’m going to begin posting it.

I want to break my posting of Rec1man’s model up into several stages, because, in my experience, it’s easy for a reader to skip right to the bottom line of a complex model and accept or reject it as a whole, and then get invested in defending one’s initial reaction.

His is necessarily a complicated model because the Indian diaspora is extremely heterogeneous due to the caste system in India and the different selection filters for Indian immigrants in diaspora countries. Thus, for example, the average caste level of the Indian diaspora in the U.S. is much higher than in former British tropical colonies where the British were looking to import diligent peasants rather than computer programmers.

So, Rec1man has come up with estimates of the demographics of the Indian diaspora by caste for each country.

From there, he can work back to estimating IQ by caste within each diaspora country and then to potential IQ by caste in India and finally back to potential overall average IQ for India as a whole.

Today, though, I’m going to post just his demographic breakdowns by caste for Indians in various country, and leave his IQ estimates for another day. This is information I’ve never seen published before, even though I’ve long wondered about it.

But, I don’t know

India:

Brahmins, 5%
Upper Castes, 15%
Backward Castes, 40%
Muslims, 15%
Dalits [Untouchables] and Tribals, 25%

Indians in the U.S.A.

US Brahmins, 25%
US forward castes, 50%
US backward castes, 25%

The British exported castes as per their requirements.

Singapore:

30% upper caste
40% backward caste
30% Dalit.

In the UK, the British wanted factory workers after WW2, so they did not import dalits (agricultural workers). They imported peasant backward castes from Indian Punjab and Pakistani So, in UK:

Forward caste 60%
Backward caste 40%

Pakistanis in UK are all [descended from] backward castes [who converted to Islam].

In Pakistan, few forward castes and brahmins and dalits converted to islam. They remained hindu and went to Indian Punjab

Forward caste, 10%
Backward caste Backward caste 50%
Dalit 50%

Similarly, Bangladeshis in Bangladesh are
Backward caste 50%
Dalit 50%

Razib of GNXP.com comments:

US Brahmins, 25%
US forward castes, 50%
US backward castes, 25%

this looks skewed to me. around 50% of indians in the USA are gujaratis, mostly patels. about 25% are punjabis, often sikhs, who mostly be from jats (i think they’re classified as backward, but i don’t know, i think it depends on region and stuff). the other 25% are mixed up with various groups; a lot of these are brahmins, but not all. for example, christians from kerala are way overrepresented, and they’re derived from non-brahmins by and large. i think a brahmin figure on the order of 15% is more realistic. backward caste depends on how you classify it, since south indian non-brahmins are all technically “lower caste,” but i think kerala christians are considered forward. in short, bump up the forward caste number, and lower the brahmin and backward.

most of other numbers look OK, but i think a lot of the muslim classifications are by their nature guess work. i have no idea how backward and forward caste in bangladesh is assigned here. 90% of people in bangladesh are now muslim, and most of the hindus remaining are low caste groups who couldn’t or wouldn’t move to india for whatever reason. the general consensus is most bangladeshi muslim were non-forward caste peasants, as is true of hindus in west bengal. the only thing with bangladeshis in the UK is something like 90% are from one region of bangladesh, syhlet, but i doubt that makes a big difference in your assessment….

i would add a few other points

1) mauritius, mostly backward castes with a small minority of merchants and upper castes

2) south africa, the same (here the upper classes are disproportionately gujarati merchants)

3) the guyana & trinidad & suriname, the same

4) fiji, the same

a disproportionate number of the overseas diaspora in places where they were sent to do agricultural work are from eastern uttar pradesh and bihar; the north-central gangetic plain. malaysia and singapore are exceptional insofar as the indians are mostly tamils from the south from across the bay of bengal….

(Republished from iSteve by permission of author or representative)
 
• Tags: India, IQ 
🔊 Listen RSS

India has just had a remarkable election. An Italian lady led India’s left-of-center Congress Party to an upset triumph over the Hindu nationalist BJP, which, in a curious echo of the GOP’s failure to adopt the Sailer Strategy, had apparently been neglecting its base. [See Steve Sailer's blog: Scroll down.] This has reminded Americans of two things:

  • India, with its billion people and awakening economy, is awfully important.
  • We don’t know much about it.

With the help of my many South Asian readers, I’ve been trying tobrush up on India for the last five years, so let me share a few perspectives that you might not hear elsewhere.

It’s helpful to compare India to the other giga-country, China, which is India’s opposite in so many ways. China isn’t as simple as it looks, but it’s far less convoluted than India.

China’s ancient history is superbly documented and fairly simple, in its repetitive dynastic cycles of consolidation, decline, and chaos. But don’t bother trying to learn India’s history. It would be insanelycomplicated … if anyone had bothered to write it down while it was happening.

The Chinese have seen themselves as one nation, with one rightfulruler, going all the way back to the first emperor 2200 years ago. But no Indian ever thought of India as a “nation” until Gandhi visited South Africa at the end of the nineteenth century and found himself classified as an Indian.

Before then, India seemed to Indians not like a country or even asubcontinent, but like a world. The opening pages of Kipling’s Kim spectacularly depict India’s kaleidoscopic variety.

Ethnically, around 94 percent of the population of China is plain Han Chinese. Racially, China’s a little more complex, with northern and southern Chinese being somewhat different. L.L. Cavalli-Sforza, Stanford’s great population geneticist, has hypothesized that the north was settled by early modern humans coming out-of-Africa who took the northern route around the great mountains of central Asia. The ancestors of southern Chinese took the southern route along theIndian Ocean, and the two groups met up around what’s now Shanghai.

In any case, the two Chinese populations remained fairly similar inlooks. Moreover, the civilization invented by the northerners proved highly attractive to the southerners, who often peacefully assimilated.

India and its satellite countries share a long border with China. But the Himalayas are second only to the Sahara as a forbidding land barrier. Thus the sharpest racial divide on earth is found along the southern edge of the Himalayas. Mongoloid Tibetan Buddhists, such as the famous Sherpas of the Everest region, are found at high altitudes. Caucasoid Indo-European Hindus are found directly below them, in the warm lowlands where the East Asians won’t venture for fear of malaria, for which they lack resistance.

Indian immigrant businessmen successfully petitioned the Reagan Administration back in 1982 to be lumped in with East Asians so they could get minority business development loans. But in fact India is more or less Caucasian. Genetically, Cavalli-Sforza found that Indians are about three times closer to West Europeans than to East Asians.

Still, making racial or ethnic generalizations about South Asia can be a mug’s game. It is the most anthropologically complex region on earth. Arguably, its democratic stability rests in part on its infinite divisions. Indians couldn’t arrange to hold a civil war because they couldn’t coalesce into just two sides.

There appear to have been three major waves populating India.

  • Several tens of thousands of years ago, an early out-of-Africawave left behind a substratum of modern hunter-gatherer tribes, and many of the 160 million Untouchables, at the bottom of the Hindu pyramid. They come in a variety of looks,from Caucasian to Negrito to Australoid. Thus they are hard to generalize about.
  • The second wave seems to have consisted of early Middle Eastern farmers. They now speak Dravidian languages and aremost concentrated in the South. These typically small and dark Caucasians were largely ignored by the rest of the world—until the last two decades when word of their upper castes’ impressive skills at math, science, and technology caught the attention of the business world. The center of India’s burgeoning software industry is Bangalore in the southernhighlands.
  • The last and most famous of the three waves were the Indo-European-speaking Aryan invaders—tall, light-skinned Caucasians from somewhere to the northwest. They introduced Hinduism and its accompanying system of social stratification: four major castes (plus the poor Untouchables), along with countless occupation-based inbreeding subcastes, allfurther divided by region.

The Aryan conquests are still clearly visible in skin color, in two dimensions: geographically and socially. Northerners and the upper castes tend to be fairer. And despite the impressive economic growth among some of the darker southerners, the northerners remain the social ideal. Bollywood movie stars are about as fair and tall as Greeks. Indian marriage ads are very choosy about how dark a prospective mate can be.

Although nominally outlawed a half century ago, the continuingoppression of the Untouchables in rural India may be the most brutal case of racial discrimination in today’s world, outside the Sudan. The Indian government runs a massive affirmative action program for Untouchables and is accordingly roundly criticized by Thomas Sowell inhis new book Affirmative Action Around the World. The program was originally supposed to be limited to 20 years duration and only to the lowest castes. But it has since become—surprise!—permanent and open to many higher up the social scale.

On the other hand, it’s not clear what else could be done to deal with diversity so severe.

The average IQ of India and China is crucial to the future of the world. But the question is far from settled. Richard Lynn and Tatu Vanhanen’s IQ and the Wealth of Nations found three IQ studies of China, which averaged out to 100 on a scale where the U.S. average is 98. As I’ve tried to emphasize, single-country averages from that important book should be taken with a grain of salt, but regional averages are more reliable. The more advanced and better-documented countries bordering China feature even higher average IQs. So the future looksbright for China.

In contrast, Lynn and Vanhanen found four studies of Indian IQ thataverage out to only 81.

Anecdotal evidence suggests that the variance in IQ is greater in India than in China. There may be more geniuses in India than in China but the average level of competence seems lower.

However, putting together a nationally-representative sample is harder in India than anywhere else on Earth. The caste system, by discouraging intermarriage, has in effect subdivided the Indian people into an incredible number of micro-races. In India, according to Cavalli-Sforza, “The total number of endogamous communities today is around 43,000…”

So I would keep an open mind on just what the IQ of India is. And, of course, better nutrition, health care, education, and more outbreeding could all work to raise it.

China focuses on giving the masses a solid basic education that prepares them for manufacturing jobs. The Chinese are building superb infrastructure to support their manufacturing economy. Indeed, the Chinese are building factories so fast, that more than a few observers have joked and/or warned that the Chinese intend in the future to manufacture everything in the world. They won’t ever quite get there, but the trend is remarkable … and alarming.

This could have dire consequences for America’s current political and military hegemony. But the cult of free trade, combined with the fact that nobody in the American media cares about factory work, means that the long-term Chinese challenge is seldom discussed. You might think that if America had to shed manufacturing jobs, we would prefer they go to Mexico to keep down the illegal immigration rate rather than to China, America’s strategic competitor. But no one seems to care enough to discuss this either.

India, outside of cyberspace, remains chaotic and impoverished. India focuses more on giving outstanding university educations to the meritocratic elite.

The top Indian colleges are by now probably the most selective in the world. And because they teach in English, their graduates are more of a competitive threat to American journalists and their spouses andfriends than are the Chinese, who are merely hammering blue collar Americans. And who cares about them?

Accordingly, over the last year, the press has devoted far morecoverage to outsourcing white collar jobs to India than the loss of blue collar jobs to China—or, of course, the insourcing of jobs in America to immigrants, legal and illegal.

Apparently, reporters instinctively sense that Indians in Bombay could do their jobs of rewriting press releases into news articles.

At the elite end of the journalism racket, I have more than a few Indian readers who could step in and write this column for me (Peter, please forget I said that!). But fewer Chinese readers could do the same. The language barrier is a big factor. But Indians also seem more interestedin the human biodiversity topics that I specialize in. Further, Indians tend to be of a more speculative and discursive turn of mind than the hard-headed, practical-minded Chinese.

Indian development has been held back until recently by their overly metaphysical focus. Fortunately for them, recent demands in the business world for extremely abstruse and abstract reasoning power have finally played into the Brahmins’ traditional strength.

Still, in the long run, homogenous China looks more formidable acompetitor for American than diverse India. One of my Indian correspondents wrote me:

“China has an enormous advantage over India: relative homogeneity. In China there is no significant difference in racial appearance between the rich and the poor. They come from the same people. In India, you can see a colour line dividing classes every inch of the way. Sure these lines aren’t cut and dry like black and white, and there are overlaps, but the trends are easy to follow for anyone willing to observe. The fact that the Chinese don’t have 4000 year old caste hatreds gives them an enormous advantage over India.”

As late as 1960, the U.S. looked like China— it was nearly 90 percent white. But now whites are down to some 75 percent—because, since the 1965 Immigration Act, public policy has been bent on making us interesting, like India.

How odd.

[Steve Sailer [email him] is founder of the Human Biodiversity Institute and

movie critic for The American Conservative. His website www.iSteve.blogspot.com features his daily blog.]

(Republished from VDare by permission of author or representative)
 
• Category: Foreign Policy • Tags: China, India 
No Items Found
Steve Sailer
About Steve Sailer

Steve Sailer is a journalist, movie critic for Taki's Magazine, VDARE.com columnist, and founder of the Human Biodiversity discussion group for top scientists and public intellectuals.


PastClassics
The unspoken statistical reality of urban crime over the last quarter century.
The “war hero” candidate buried information about POWs left behind in Vietnam.
The major media overlooked Communist spies and Madoff’s fraud. What are they missing today?
What Was John McCain's True Wartime Record in Vietnam?