Can someone give me an idea of what IQ 70 and IQ 90 correspond to, in terms of what a person can and can’t do?

I remember reading an article that stated that your average 8 year old white European child would score 70 on an adult IQ test. As this is the average of most Black African countries, it’s easy to understand why so many Africans are impulsive, easily manipulated and semi-literate.
At what age would an average white person attain an IQ of 90? 12 or 13 years ? Just a guess. Hopefully, some reader will be able to cite an authoritative source.

The leftists have their ideology and propaganda out there in front of the youth growing up to indoctrinate them from an early age. This is quite deliberate and Lynn’s biography demonstrates this with his early acceptance of it. Since he was capable of learning beyond that of the average person and was able to revise his beliefs he could move past his youthful thinking and evolved it based on what he actually could see. Most people can’t which is why the leftists infiltrate the educational system so as to get them young. Science has been politicized and people not spouting the party line are being intimidated into silence. It looks like we’re in for a long period of tyranny as the totalitarians try to control absolutely everything.

The tribe will not tolerate the truth. And THEY run the Media in the West. You think that taqiyya is only for Muslims? The tribe is exceptionally fluent in it as well!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I remember reading an article that stated that your average 8 year old white European child would score 70 on an adult IQ test.

Any asshole can write an article.

If you want to criticize me, do it to my face, you arsehole.

This scholarly, if hyperliberal, article makes plain that mental retardation is an IQ below 70 to 75. Previously, it was below 85. This is the average IQ for an African American. Was the change to accommodate this ? Quite probably.

https://www.hrw.org/legacy/reports/2001/ustat/ustat0301-01.htm

If you want to criticize me, do it to my face, you arsehole.

It was meant for you. It was not a criticism of you…but a criticism of the article you cited. Citing an article without reference is useless…dumbass. Furthermore we are on the internet which means it is impossible to criticize you, to your face, you asshole.

How’s that!!!

What were the economic and political interests or forces behind the formulation and implementation of the Commonwealth Citizens Act (1948)?

It varies, because IQ isn’t everything; you also have conscientiousness, time orientation, aggression and other such personality characteristics that will also matter a lot for what someone can accomplish in real life. But for some brief guidelines:

IQ 90 is about what you traditionally need in way of brainpower to finish junior high if you work for it (that’s probably less now, given declining standards). The US Army generally won’t accept anyone who scores much lower than this. This is also (or again, used to be) about the average intelligence for unskilled workers in a high-intelligence society such as Britain or the United States. At this level, you won’t usually have any trouble doing the reading, writing and arithmetic needed of you to be a basically functional citizen, although you can’t go all that much lower if you want to be one, and you probably also won’t be reading novels for pleasure either way. But nothing here precludes you from leading what we consider a normal life and making a positive contribution to society if you’re a responsible, law-abiding personality type.

IQ 70 on the other hand is clinically retarded, at least in the context of European societies. You probably will not be able to finish elementary school the normal way; you will be able to read and write simple texts, but not sufficiently well to be considered functionally literate. Counting your change right or remembering phone numbers is likely to be difficult. On the other hand, you won’t normally need institutional care, as long as someone else helps you with anything that requires paperwork. In olden times, you could probably scrape by doing simple rote work (preferably under supervision) for a living. Your prospects for self-supporting employment in a modern economy really suck, however. This is what “Moron” used to mean back when it was a serious medical diagnosis rather than a general slur.

The words science and psychology should never be used in the same sentence just in case some low IQ individual might equate them.

Psychology is one of the basket weaving disciplines that can’t prove a damned thing. Why would anyone give credence to some windbag psychologist?

” The current crisis in the West’s universities has been thirty years in the making.”

Far longer than that – look at the treatment of Eysenck in the UK and E.O. Wilson in the States.

“On Tuesday 8 May (1973!) Professor Eysenck, who holds certain controversial views about the intellectual abilities of American negroes, was forcibly prevented from expressing his views at the London School of Economics. Responsibility for this political censorship was claimed by a Maoist group.”

“Placing his hands slowly on either side of the podium, a gentle, perhaps ironic smile on his lips, he said softly, “Well, I hope I’m not going to say anything too controversial.” That was as far as he got. A young woman leapt from the front row and pulled down the microphone. The entire front row then dived across the table separating them from Eysenck. The podium crashed onto the floor and a brawl broke out. The auditorium exploded into pandemonium…

Rushton and his friend took a walk around the block to let their adrenaline subside. They rehearsed what they were going to say to the police, hoping to identify some of the assailants. But upon returning, they learned the police had never been called. The Maoists were boasting of the success of their “revolutionary action,” while most LSE students and some of the faculty seemed to think Eysenck got what he deserved.”

https://www.amren.com/features/2020/05/rushton-tells-his-own-story-part-i/

You’re no realist at all. You really are up your own arse.

After his publication of Race, Intelligence and Education ( 1971), Eysenck was a marked man. Unfortunately, he was “cucking” ( in the modern parlance ) even as he published it. He got Paul Barker, Editor of New Society, to write the preface. They claimed that most of the gap might be closed if black Africans were better nourished and given multivitamins, especially when they were children.
After that, it was all back pedalling. His work on racial differences and IQ rapidly diminished, as his desire to maintain his foothold in academia increased.

Like many people, I have trouble with Prof Lynn’s claims of quite large differences in IQ between closely connected countries of the same race, e.g. 9 IQ points between Greece and Albania. However, his work on the IQ differences between races has stood up to serious scrutiny. He has never cucked and has stood his ground. He is a real academic and a real man. Modern academia would never let someone like him in, now. That’s the measure of the collapse of standards in the West.

Impulse control.

The ability to foresee consequences, weigh the risks and harm and obey a mental stop sign.

I have also seen troubling evidence of a lack of empathy with lower IQ clients, and especially blacks.

They can give a surface, Yes man mimic of authentic emotions, but when it comes down to rolling a blunt with a 40 verses buying their 13 year old daughter school supplies- their base needs always come first.

This applies to all lower IQ clients I have sat and talked with about their criminal choices.

They know the words but not the music. Meaningful human interaction?

No- its transactional.

I had heard that up until the 70’s that an IQ lower than 85 was considered retarded but the bar was lowered to accommodate the large black population in the US who did not meet that bar. I do believe that one of the pieces of dialogue in Forrest Gump puts him in at 83 which was considered too low for public school.

Hi all:
As a black woman, that learned 5 idioms by myself, had 8 children, dislike sports ( I found it to be the stupid thing to have a bunch of people running after a ball and I ask: “Why don’t they get a ball each and go around playing?”) and love Math and physics, I find the article missing something. I have two college diplomas and a university certificate (which I did while working during the day and studying at night as well as caring for the family husband and all). English is my 4th idiom, after German ( I study for nursing in Berlin and worked in hospitals there).

I spoke before, one year old and at 5 I could read and write. At seven, I helped my mother with her accounting business. yes, I wrote the ledgers on books almost my size.

As, I look at my life experiences and the survival I have had to endure in a racist, sexist, society where economic class warfare is preponderant, I read the article and my gut feeling tells me something is missing.
I totally agree that people ought to be able to express themselves and study all matters and be treated with dignity. I sympathize with Prof. Richard Lynn and will be reading more of his studies, in order to answer some of my own questions.

Wishing you all many blessings,

With an average IQ of 70, which is the intelligence of a moron, HALF of the population of sub-Saharan Africa has even sub-moron intelligence, which explains a lot for the situation in that part of the world. But of course, leftists ascribe it all to the effects of “colonialism”.

Psychology is part philosophy and part science, reason why there are different “schools” in psychology, but the part of testing of intelligence is science in my book.

One wonders why the idea that all men are not equal meets so much hysterical reaction in many people. Is it because they suffer from an inferiority complex?

No mention of the Flynn Effect. No mention of the demolition job Ron Unz did on some aspects of Lynn and Vanhenen’s inadequately analysed data. What are UR threads (and articles) coming to? Still thanks for the review of Lynn’s memoir which I would like to read if I have time.

I think you’ll find that Verymuchalive is trying to demonstrate the way that a person with an IQ below 70 thinks. That he read the article in no way suggests that he himself wrote the article, though that is certainly possible. Similarly, your vulgar comment about the writer should not be seen as aimed at the reader. That, though possible, is unlikely, because a person of average intelligence (and I’m not suggesting anything) would come straight to the point and accuse the reader, if that were the intended target. Verymuchalive’s groping reminds me of Dud being unsure whether being followed was the same thing as following.

Can you give one example of Muslims practicing “taqiyya”?

The IQ of this website is 65 total

“Special” posing as Alternative

Toxic Colonial European delusions of Grandeur to justify the monstrous crimes against 80% of humanity

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Cannibal_Club

Interesting article. I wouldn’t care to comment on the psychology argument as I am not acquainted with it. But I’ve heard of Lynn from time to time, and this article gives some insight into what he is — never mind the academic stuff. His background, personal history and range of interests fit him into a very British mould; a type that recognisably goes back centuries. A kind of Dalek ( — look up the Doctor Who science fiction series of British television). The type that generated the world-conquering, exterminating aspect of British history.

According to the article in 1969-72 Lynn was engaged

… to carry out research on the economic and social problems of Ireland. Foremost among these was that Ireland was quite economically backward compared with Britain, and I researched the literature to see what contribution I could make. It was not long before I discovered a study that reported that the IQ of Irish 12-year-olds was 90 compared with 100 in Britain.

The suggestion is that the stupid Irish Paddies were destined by their innate inferiority to forever trail behind their Dalek masters. Nothing to with centuries of conquest, subjugation, expproriation and extermination of the Paddies by the Dalek master-race.

Now that Ireland has surpassed Britain economically, what are we to make of Lynn’s brilliant discovery?

Very interesting article, thanks. – I always thought that pre computer educated folks – 50, 60s, 70s etc. { in Universities esp. } and those that actually had to memorise, write notes, use Books, in their curriculum and studies, would have an intellectual advantage, { adding a computer, also } , in their professions, later on in life. Why wouldn’t the IQ of most people rise with age, world experience and wisdom ? Maybe this is why the populace after these folks, had to be dumbed down. In my profession – Construction management , and starting as a laborer . going through a trade school , then working my way to foreman, Superintendent/ Project Management , I could write out the whole project, or put it in the computer – because of my previous schooling and decades, of jobs I worked on around the world. Yes, some honest jobs/professions take decades . Doesn’t ones IQ rise the same? At 70 yrs my memory is still very sharp, even tho there are some things I wish I didn’t remember – regrets etc. lol

The problem of blacks is not low IQ. The problem with blacks is that they are aggressive, violent and hyper-sexual.

White people with Down’s syndrome tend to test low on IQ tests but are gentle and kind. They don’t rob and rape others.

I think too much is made of “IQ”. It is important in some areas, not in others.

Of course, in our current technological age, intelligence and cognition are more important for many professions in a way that wasn’t true centuries ago, when African slaves were brought for backbreaking work that didn’t require much intelligence.

We should forget about trying to “close the gap” or worry so much about “IQ”, and just try to pacify American blacks, perhaps with some form of genetic engineering, or if not crossbreeding them with African pygmies, which would make them smaller and less scary, also much less attractive to white women. LOLz.

“closely connected countries of the same race, e.g. 9 IQ points between Greece and Albania”

I’d have thought those two countries have been pretty isolated from each other for a long time?

… his [Lynn’s] compilation of studies on race and IQ around the world along with the “cold winters” theory of their origin.

Funnily enough, Lynn does agree with his critics about the influence of environment on IQ, just that his time scale is on the order of not 10 but 10000 years.

Otherwise, a very interesting article about herd mentality and its preponderance in the higher IQ groups; and this, does seem to be very much influenced by the environment. This is supported by my own anecdotal observations.

I’m new to all of this stuff, so was wondring if there has been any thought on a cross generational eugenic process, where everyone gets to have children, but say 1sd below average parents get 1, parents in the middle are allowed 2, and parents 1sd above average have as many as they want.. obviously with incentives to the high iq people to breed.

Would be a lot less cruel than working on the current generation, and all races could remain, as the average could be worked out for individual races.

“Any asshole can write an article”.

Or, a fortiori, a comment.

“It varies, because IQ isn’t everything…”

Indeed, it is very far from being “everything”. That has been understand, probably, as long as people have thought and debated.

As Calvin Coolidge warned about a century ago:

“Nothing in the world can take the place of persistence. Talent will not; nothing is more common than men with talent. Genius will not; unrewarded genius is almost a proverb. Education alone will not; the world is full of educated derelicts. Persistence and determination alone are omnipotent”.

Coolidge did not mention that, to achieve the greatest success, genius must be combined with persistence and determination. As genius tends to make life relatively easy, the combination is quite rare.

Rather harsh, RoatanBill. Consider that, just a few centuries ago, the same could be said of physics and chemistry as practised by all but the very elite.

The question is whether psychologists are aspiring to greater rigour and certainty. With generous help from such rapidly advancing disciplines as neurology, I believe they are.

I remember this nonsense from both undergraduate and graduate studies. The argument of heredity vs environment is absolutely stupid because it was always, always cast as an either-or. I remember being chastized for having the temerity to suggest that it is a both/and. While it may be useful to look at each separately, at some point you have to look at both factors together.

I really do not understand why these so-called disciples of evolution are so fearful of the heredity side of things and why they are so absolutely terrified of eugenics. If a creature is an evolved being, and is also aware of that, then why wouldn’t that creature take the necessary steps to improve? We do it with animals to improve them, but breeding retarded humans is OK?

Stupid

Cool story bro.

Thank you. You have helped me to a glimpse of the obvious. A dim person can be a nice loving, helpful person but there would be limits to their empathy – their getting sympathetically, or indeed with malice, into the mind of another – if they lacked the intellectual capacity because their brains lacked both the content and the speed of the smarter person’s brain.

Just because someone uses numbers as part of their mysticism, doesn’t make it a science. Climate Scientists are frauds, for example. Anyone that claims knowledge without the ability to prove it is a fraud.

For those disciplines that want to become a science one day, they should learn how to prove their assertions are actually true. It is because some disciplines are undeservedly given an aura of respectability that we find ourselves listening to charlatans in Economics (banking, finance, etc) that are just about to ruin the worlds economies, witch doctors in Medicine (medical science) that spout bullshit but still have the authority to lock the whole world down on their flimsy say so and politicians (political science) that routinely murder millions around the globe by instigating wars that the totally stupid in the society volunteer for.

There’s no such thing as soft science, only hard science that can prove what it claims. If we had learned that a century ago, we wouldn’t be restricted in our movements for a flu and about to see our life savings wiped out once the funny money known as the US Dollar becomes toilet paper as part of a plan cooked up by the priests that been allowed to lie us into believing in their fantasies.

IQ 70 on the other hand is clinically retarded, at least in the context of European societies…. In olden times, you could probably scrape by doing simple rote work (preferably under supervision) for a living. Your prospects for self-supporting employment in a modern economy really suck, however.

Your average European sees a boatload of migrants being delivered to the EU by some NGO or even one of its navies, and no doubt thinks, “Ah, these are the future doctors and engineers of Europe!”

What is not mentioned in your comment is their propensity to crime, but that is a different form of IQ.

But I do have one serious question: Is there a link to IQ and sociopathy, or is sociopathy more of a genetic thing?

If you are telling the truth that is very interesting and encouraging. When you say you are black I guess you are the daughter of a German woman and an American army or air force officer who like you only qualifies as black according to something like the one drop rule. Right?

And so as not to corrupt the UR comment sections would you please arrange for Ron Unz to know enough about you to assure readers that your self description is accurate…

I bet you can find a copy of Instincts of the Herd on the DARPA bookshelves….

This site shouldn’t be allowed to exist

When disciplines have advanced as much as chemistry has or real physics, then they can demand our attention as part of the sciences. Till then, they are frauds if they claim equality.

Currently, astrophysics is laying claim to being a science when it is just practicing voodoo with their black holes, neutron stars, dark matter, etc. They can ‘t prove any of it exists and have been able to scam billions in funding for their religion. By associating their witch craft with true physics, they have fooled the world because people want to give them a pass on proof. That’s a huge mistake.

If a discipline can’t prove their basic assertions and demonstrate their worth, that branch of faux knowledge should, at most, be able to get a bachelor degree, reserving Masters and PhD for the real sciences and engineering.

A pity you and the author seem unfamiliar with Ron Unz’s article or articles pointing out the absurdity of taking the old Irish IQ figures as strong evidence of genetic causes of difference on IQ tests from their cousins across the Irish Sea. I also think you omit the negative effects of Irish Catholicism on Irish achievement and intellectual development for many years, in striking contrast to the work of Irish missionaries about 1000 years earlier.

Very impressive, indeed. Perhaps you are the exception that proves the rule.

For the record, I did not write the article. It was actually an article in American Renaissance by a clinical psychologist about 10 to 12 years ago. I did download it, but soon lost it during my travels.
Also, I shouldn’t have lost it with Realist, even when he’s being unrealistic.

Ireland has actually not surpassed the UK economically: far from it, which is why the boggers are still coming over here in large numbers.
It is well known that Eire is a corporate tax haven, particularly for US companies. This has grossly dis torted Ireland’s GDP and makes it appear that the country is much wealthier than it actually is.

Economists note that Ireland’s distorted GDP is now distorting the EU’s aggregate GDP,[106] and has artificially inflated the trade-deficit between the EU and the US.[107]

See:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leprechaun_economics
And:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ireland_as_a_tax_haven

In the first half of the 20th century, the borderline for mental retardation in the strict sense was generally considered to lie at an intelligence quotient two standard deviations below mean (as normed for white people), which works out to about 70. Intelligence quotients above this were not usually considered clinical cases (unless there were comorbidities), although obviously subnormal.

However, persons in the approximate IQ 70 to 85 range (and especially at the lower end) could often be considered feeble-minded, a less strict term that included not only clinical morons, but also those capable of marginal or partial functionality in society without formal assistance. In modern parlance, this would be roughly equivalent to “borderline intellectual functioning” as defined in the DSM.

I suspect the 1969 difference might be caused by the UK having a better education system, schools in Ireland spent far too much time teaching religion. Today I think Ireland has on average a better education system than the UK

Not That long. Before 1190 AD, Albania had been part of the Byzantine Empire. Afterwards, they were independent, but Orthodox Christians. Before that, they had both been part of the Roman Empire and prior to that there had been numerous Greek settlements in what was then Illyria.
It was only in the C15th that the Ottoman Empire expanded into Albania.
They reached the Albanian Ionian Sea Coast in 1385 and erected their garrisons across Southern Albania in 1415 and then occupied most of Albania in 1431
It was only after this that Albanians and Greeks become isolated. It was Ottoman policy to separate minorities one from another, especially if they were Christian. Worst still, the Turks were able to convert most of the Albanians to Islam, which reinforced the isolation.
Having said that, I know several Orthodox Albanians, who now live in Greece. The Greeks treat them almost as if they are Greek. There have been Catholic Albanian refugees in Italy for centuries. These people are now part of the scenery. 250,000 Albanian speakers live around Catania, Sicily, where they have been for hundreds of years. Also, Albani is a common Italian surname. I believe several Popes had that surname.
Muslim Albanians are pretty isolated from other non-Muslim peoples, but that isolation is quite recent.

It is, of course, absolutely obvious that all people are not – and cannot possibly be – equal. Otherwise, apart from anything else, how could we tell them apart? I am reminded of the wonderful cover illustration of Compton Mackenzie’s “The Lunatic Republic”.

One of the major problems with our thinking about IQ is that it measures a very limited kind of intelligence. There are actually over a dozen other measures. All these IQ tests measures is how well different populations think in the way Europeans tend to think. I’ve known people with very high IQs who could do certain tasks extremely well while their personal lives sucked because they were emotionally and spiritually stupid. If you put them in a room in front of a screen running a simulation of life then they would do quite well but in the real full-spectrum scrum that is real life maybe not so well. Certainly, in terms of jumping through the hoops of economic life, they do well on average whereas those of us who are more creative and artistic may have more trouble.

We’ve know since the 70s that intelligence is multi-faceted and concentrating on the narrow view of IQ such that we value people for their high IQ is mistake. Even for IQ where there are genetic tendencies they can be changed through nurture–I think we know that the brain is has far more plasticity than people ordinarily think and genetics whether for intelligence or a tendency towards illness is cued by environmental conditions particularly stress.

There’s nothing wrong with looking at IQ as long as we understand what we are measuring.

“English is my 4th idiom, after German…”

Which is probably why you use “idiom” for “language”. The more languages you know, even fluently, the easier it is to mix up their special vocabularies. Especially as these things often defy logic.

When my mother was a young woman she was in Germany for a while learning the language. She lodged with a friendly old couple, who didn’t speak a word of English. That was to the good – usually – as she had to speak German all the time.

One day she went up a mountain with friends, but to their disappointment the view was blotted out by mist. On her return, her hosts – who knew of the expedition – asked her what she had seen from the mountain top.

Suddenly it occurred to her that she didn’t know the German word for “mist”. So she improvised, hoping it would be the same. “Nur Mist”, she replied, and was surprised by the odd looks they gave her.

Reaching her room she looked it up, and found that in German “Mist” means “manure”.

I can only re-post my opinion (I’m IQ almost skeptic).

It all boils down to unreliability of psychometry as such. And I’m not talking about geniuses, bursts of creativity & similar stuff.

Simply, what those tests should measure is talent, gift, capability for some area. If limited to such, rather narrow field, psychometry tests could work very well.They could show that some people are gifted for numbers, or for engineering tasks, good with words, or good in space orientation etc.

But it is absurd to derive (I know the argument of factor analysis, but it is bollocks) that some magical number, IQ, is the final product which will show a person’s success in life in general. What is “success”? How can we measure capability of an individual to attain”success” in a given field?

There are many problems with IQ ideology which remain insurmountable.

We all use the word “intelligence” & even if we look at psychology dictionaries & agree with it, nonetheless the concept remains vague. Probably there are a few types of intelligence: verbal, arithmetic, geometrical & maybe a few others. Why would we lump these types of intelligence together is beyond my comprehension.

As for musical ability, various types of talents in other fields…better not call this “intelligence” (social “intelligence, emotional “intelligence”,..). This is a misuse of the word. Ability, talent, whatever…

Intelligence, as defined by textbooks, is by no means as important & decisive in modern societies as IQ religionists would like us to believe. More, I would rather call it TQ (talent quotient) or CQ (capability quotient), than IQ. There are a few CQ, we all know this:

* CQ for something like mathematics
* CQ for abstract thinking in words (not eloquence)
* CQ for ….

In short, old “multiple intelligences” theory was onto something, although not in the old, dogmatic way. How many capabilities are to be measured- I’d leave it to psychometricians as long as they follow common sense. I’d say 10-15.

But to “extract” one figure from all those variegated talents is absurd (I don’t buy the factor analysis argument). If one could, say, try to assess AQ (artistic quotient) from areas of literary writing, music, painting, dance, … for a guy who is a genius painter, but abysmally bad in dancing, music,…- we would get a mediocre AQ, a figure which doesn’t tell us anything. The guy is a genius in one area & moron in others.

Then, there remains the big, big elephant of creativity. Sorry, but creativity is something different & cannot be reduced to any psycho test; it, at its peaks, comes in flashes including intuition, dreaming, imagination,…

Creativity is not, as yet, described or classified satisfactorily. For instance, invention is somehow connected to creativity, but these terms are not identical.

Then, there are different types of creativity: “flash” type of creativity, which is “inspiration”, like in Haiku or Zen painting, so different from long, “high structural” creativity, a good example being Michelangelo’s Sistine Chapel.

Perhaps in some future we will be able to ascertain, experimentally, through neuro-imagining, neurophysiology, brain investigation …. some new aspects & dimensions of human cognition and behavior (emotion, impulse control, ethical development,..) and intuition and imagination and …

Until then, IQ “wars” are like masturbation compared to real sex.

And it is even more absurd to try it with human collectives.

We all see with our own eyes what different human collectives are capable of, and it is not some magical number that will give us varieties of human accomplishment & functionality of human collectives, given the historical moment, ideas, manners, environment, … and even more- hope, self-reliance, adaptability, stubbornness, morals..

https://iq-research.info/en/average-iq-by-country/mn-mongolia

Mongolia: Avg. IQ 101

GDP per capita- PPP: $ 13,700

https://iq-research.info/en/average-iq-by-country/lt-lithuania

Lithuania: Avg. IQ 91

GDP per capita- PPP: $ 32,400

Andrew Joyce writes on this question in his essay for the The Occidental Observer : The SS Empire Windrush: The Jewish Origins of Multicultural Britain

Worth a read, the entire affair was very confused and hazy, there is now a mythos around post-war immigration to Britain in that they were “needed to rebuild the UK” (similar to how black slaves “built America” I suppose) but in reality they faced chronic unemployment and engaged in crime at higher rates when they arrived here. They were never needed and British people always wondered why they came.

Between the 1948 Nationality Act and 1962 when an amendment was made to it, Britain pretty much had open borders between us and our former colonies, even after 1962 the immigration policy was fairly liberal and the floodgates were really opened in 1997 under Tony Blair, in the era of affordable jet travel. When the Tories were elected in 2010, they had promised a reduction in immigration but as anyone who has been paying attention to this knows, it never came. Last year saw the highest net immigration of non-Europeans into the UK since records began.

A person’s raw potential intelligence (g factor, IQ) peaks in the early 20s in most cases. This is a purely physiological function, similar to what happens with physical strength: the brain, like the muscles, is simply at its most efficient at this stage of bodily development, and then begins to decline — slowly at first, then more rapidly with advanced age. It’s an old saw that most great insights in the natural sciences tend to be developed by young men (Newton was the example often brought up, back when the idea of genius was not yet politically incorrect), and this would be the reason.

However, for a long time (usually about four decades) the gradual decrease in raw intelligence is more than offset in most situations by the gathering of experience and other knowledge that makes us able to use our potential intelligence more effectively — rather than reinventing the wheel every time, we can frame new problems in patterns derived from our prior knowledge, making them much easier to solve. This would be what you are getting at: an experienced professional will of course be able to handle familiar issues much more effectively than a fresh graduate in most cases, even where his raw IQ score is lower. Where this applies to general life experience and common sense, this is what we generally consider the wisdom of age.

Raymond Cattell, one of the truly great men in psychometry next to Lynn, classified these respective categories as fluid intelligence and crystallized intelligence, respectively: raw mental ability versus problem solving aided by acquired knowledge.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fluid_and_crystallized_intelligence

Lynn is an ideologue and pseudoscientist who promotes outright nonsense, including bizarre ideas about race and dick size.

https://www.psychologytoday.com/intl/blog/unique-everybody-else/201210/the-pseudoscience-race-differences-in-penis-size

It turns out he relies on bogus self-reported data rather than peer-reviewed studies (which contradict his claims), furthermore, data he cites includes multiple non-existent sources, and misrepresents other sources that actually exist. This is shockingly bad.

All of Lynn’s other ideas like ‘cold winters theory’ have been widely discredited.

“Genuine scientist”. Thanks for the laugh.

The mean IQ of SSA was never 70.

Lynn only arrived at that very low figure by confirmation bias and using a flawed methodology.

http://racialreality.blogspot.com/2011/08/devastating-criticism-of-richard-lynn.html

Richard Lynn has long been criticized for his controversial studies on intelligence, but this latest series of criticism might just be the final nail in his coffin. Focusing on his much-condemned African IQ studies, it reveals serious flaws in his methodology and calls him out on manipulating and falsifying data, which has wider implications that make his entire body of work (and that of his associates) untrustworthy. It begins with Wicherts et al. 2010.

Note the above blog is by a ‘race realist’ (I’m not). But I’m using this source to show that Lynn’s reputation is even rock bottom among racial realists. No one takes him serious.

IQ test results are heavily influenced by the quality of a country’s public education in question.

I would argue it’s more a gauge of knowledge levels instead of intelligence.

With that out of the way. I do like IQ tests where there are no language involve. Part of the NYC selection process for gifted children program has it. But only a part of it.

Ron Unz has written about Irish IQ, and its increase with time:

http://www.ronunz.org/2013/06/07/raceiq-revised/

It is a remarkable example of how group IQ can change, and therefore cannot be determined by genetics alone. It would be interesting to hear Richard Lynn’s views on the subject today.

Ireland had substantial improvements in prosperity and education in the 20th Century. So did black America, but apparently without the same improvement in IQ. Understanding the reasons for the difference is vital to social policy in the USA, and it is a pity that the subject will not be studied because the entire field is covered by a taboo.

Blacks are saddled with the biblical “mark of Cain” which is a primitive way of stating that blacks sprang from a different pre-humanoid “root”, and as such cannot grasp concepts such as freedom, individual rights, planning for the long-term, responsibility for one’s own actions, and other human concepts. Such thinking is not possible for blacks, their DNA being “wired” differently.

Even Thomas Jefferson KNEW that blacks and whites could not co-exist peacefully, their DNA being so “different”.

Blacks are incapable of looking out for the long-term; the farthest they look is where the next meal is coming from. Not having invented the wheel, no metalworking capability, and the inability to extract the great wealth beneath their feet, despite living on a continent with the richest and most abundant natural resources, blacks are indeed deficient in advanced human behavior.

Planned agriculture is out of the question as the capacity for blacks to think long-term is nonexistent.

Deep down, blacks do realize that they can never compete with whites, (although they will never admit it), especially when it comes to technology or public administration (governments). However, their massive egos, and their lack of their ability to think logically and their technological inability gets in the way.

One avenue where blacks could prove their worth would be to observe and gain their knowledge of medicinal plants which could benefit all mankind, this area of science being understudied and underutilized.

You’re no realist at all. You really are up your own arse.

Oooh great come back.

We’ve know since the 70s that intelligence is multi-faceted and concentrating on the narrow view of IQ such that we value people for their high IQ is mistake. 

No, “we” don’t. Just because Howard Gardner vomits some nonsense about how athletic ability and ability to discern species of birds are unique “intelligences” doesn’t make it so. Gardner put out Multiple Intelligences specifically to cope with the IQ differences between races. He all but states this in his book, expressing outrage that someone would dare couple the “intelligences” by race. The whole theory is a semantics trick to redefine intelligence as something other than cognitive ability, and by refusing to devise any quantitative measure or study correlations between “intelligences” for actual intelligent people Gardner ensures that it remains in the realm of pseudoscience, no matter what dogmatic academics think

Why would smart people need an incentive, especially if they have it all figured out that its wise to increase their numbers 🤔 … Moreover, they can already have as many children as they want, so its really just a restriction on other people’s freedoms that you’re suggesting here, not incentives. And who should we grant such power? You? A concerned committee of people like you? Are you aware that most committees often, if not always over time, have their purposes corrupted, inverted even? I can see your committee to restrict who gives birth infiltrated by the very same SJWs who have our universities and government now. Maybe just maybe, you would find the high IQ score now meant you had to really prove your dedication and loyalty and services to those less than average and then and only then would you and your smart wife would be GRANTED permission to have “just one child”. So, again, smart people already have the freedom, have the disposable income and they presumably have the brains to start having lots of smart children so what is holding them back but themselves?

He observed that in advanced civilizations the more intelligent individuals tend to have fewer children, with the result that the intelligence of the population declines.

I thought the Flynn Effect shows that the IQ increases with time.

Test score increases have been continuous and approximately linear from the earliest years of testing to the present. For the Raven’s Progressive Matrices test, a study published in the year 2009 found that British children’s average scores rose by 14 IQ points from 1942 to 2008.[2] Similar gains have been observed in many other countries in which IQ testing has long been widely used, including other Western European countries, Japan, and South Korea.[1]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flynn_effect

If we in the West ignore the reality and salience of racial differences in IQ then the only explanation that is permissible to explain why it is that blacks do less well – more crime, more poverty, etcetera – than Chinese when living in the West is that white people are holding blacks down. This is obviously unfair on whites and even more crucially, it does nothing to solve the problem.

Also, it is only in the West that such science can be suppressed. You cannot stop the Asians and the Indians from doing race science, nor the Eastern Europeans and Russia. The USA is not the only country that does science.

John Regan’s answer is a good response to your specific question, but to put things in a broader context this graphic from Linda Gottfredson is helpful.

The figure originally appeared in this 1997 paper (the PDF linked at the top).
https://menghublog.wordpress.com/2012/05/20/why-g-matters-the-complexity-of-everyday-life-linda-gottfredson/

Along with James Thompson’s article describing her five categories further and adding two additional groups: Bright (top 1%) and Eminent (top 0.01%).

The first two categories (<75 and 75-90) roughly correspond to your 70 and 90 so I'll excerpt them here after the MORE.

“Nothing in the world can take the place of perseverance. Talent will not; nothing is more common than unsuccessful men with talent. Genius will not; unrewarded genius is almost a proverb. Education is not; the world is full of educated derelicts. Persistence and determination alone are omnipotent. Press on!” Calvin Coolidge.

Calvin is correct. Character will trump IQ most of the time. In my 40 years of managing people at The Big Phone Company, I have frequently seen people of limited IQ (black and white) succeed based on strong character traits. I have just as frequently seen high IQ individuals fail because of character flaws.

Probably 10% of jobs can be successfully done only by high IQ individuals.
And probably 10% of individuals lack the IQ to do any productive work.
But for the most part, IQ is overrated and character underrated.

The more languages you know, even fluently, the easier it is to mix up their special vocabularies

Cannot say I agree. Maybe for someone at the beginning level, yes, but much less likely for someone intermediate or above.

What do you mean by “special vocabularies”?

The story you related would have been even better if your mother had been given a present.

And what would

This site shouldn’t be allowed to exist

accomplish?

Whenever there is an article about race and intelligence it needs someone to point out that when Professor Lynn et al say that blacks have an average IQ of 70 one should not model them on a typical European with an IQ of 70.

A white man with an IQ of 70 is not a normal white man, and usually has an unusual appearance because he is probably developmentally stunted in other ways too. A black man with an IQ of 70 is OTOH healthy. He won’t look funny. Therefore blacks with an IQ of 70 – looking relatively normal, often gregarious and chatty – will seem to be more intelligent than they actually are, but their capacity for abstract, reflective thought is where they come up short.

The best way to think of a black man with an IQ of 70 is to think of a 12 year old white boy. Such a boy can learn many things like an adult, such as how to drive a car, how to buy and sell, but his capacity for abstract reasoning is less than that of a white adult.

85 is one standard deviation below the mean. This is an unlikely threshold for mental retardation, as per definition, more than 20 % of any homogeneous population (with a normal distribution and one single peak) would then be mentally retarded. 70-75 is much more plausible statistically.

I have noticed that several of those who attended one of these public schools retained a lifelong fear of breaking the conventional consensus and have a strong aversion to others who do so.

Very true. I went to one of these places. I was only once flogged – by an older boy.

After that, I did what I could to annoy our headmaster. I will not go into the details here. But I certainly managed to raise his blood pressure permanently. Despite all his efforts and those of his stooges – prefects and monitors – I was never caught. Plenty of others were suspects and seriously interrogated. I never got beaten again. 🙂

At what age would an average white person attain an IQ of 90? 12 or 13 years ? Just a guess. Hopefully, some reader will be able to cite an authoritative source.

In this comment I estimate an IQ 86 adult is roughly equivalent to an IQ 99 12.5 year old using David Becker’s IQ test norms.

https://www.unz.com/anepigone/white-leftists-on-black-agency/#comment-3957222

This graphic only covers one subtest of an IQ test, but is a rough and ready guide for getting some intuition about how age variation in IQ compares with population variation. IQ has average 100 and SD 15.

Graphic from
https://mindsbasis.blogspot.com/2016/03/rasch-measure-of-intelligence-age-2-25.html

It should not be necessary to say, but remember that IQ is not everything.

P.S. If you like this sort of thing, check out James Thompson’s blog here.

Very interesting and respectful essay towards a man of superior accomplishment, vision, and courage.

Truly sad that in the field of psychology the greats are far too often sidelined for daring to explore taboo subjects.

It happens even in biology and genetics.

Watson, the co-discoverer of the DNA molecule, has been professionally killed off for daring to suggest that some of the observed racial differences in human behavior are genetic in origin. What is even more absurd about this murder is that I have read comments from mediocrities like Rose that Watson does not know much about genetics!!

The so-called integrity of science has been corrupted.

Thanks for writing about a great man who had the integrity to explore an important subject and report on what he had discovered.

The Racialreality blog is run by an Italian nationalist who uses the term “Nordic Supremacism” unironically and spends most of his pages combating this bogeyman. He a priori hates anything that might suggest blond Anglo-Saxons are in any way superior to swarthy Sicilians, so naturally Lynn’s name is a red blanket to him.

His post that you refer to demonstrates his bias. To start with, the reader should note that he doesn’t even try to quote or summarize anything from Lynn’s rebuttal.

By contrast, The Alternative Hypothesis goes over the argument of both scholars in brief, non-technical terms. And more importantly, also has links to the complete article by Wichert et al, as well as the Lynn-Meisenberg reply, so we can read both and draw our own conclusions:

https://thealternativehypothesis.org/index.php/2016/04/15/iq-of-sub-saharan-africa/

This scholarly, if hyperliberal, article makes plain that mental retardation is an IQ below 70 to 75. Previously, it was below 85. This is the average IQ for an African American. Was the change to accommodate this ? Quite probably.

Not sure about that as sole reason. Though I suspect it played a role. Here is a history of the definition of mental retardation.
https://mn.gov/mnddc/parallels2/pdf/90s/99/99-MRI-MLW.pdf

The IQ 85 definition was from 1961 and the revision to IQ 70 happened in 1973. In 1977 they tweaked it further.

Allowance was made as well for diagnosing people with IQs up to 10 points above the 70 cutoff as having mental retardation of they also showed marked deficits in adaptive behavior.

More recently they have increased the focus on adaptive behavior. Which I think is reasonable.

I would assume the intended meaning was different when they were classifying 16% of whites as “retarded” than when it changed to 2%.

One reason the adaptive behavior focus matters is an IQ of 70 does not mean the same thing for all people. This post talks about black and white kids in the US, but I think the conclusions are even more true for Africans.
https://www.unz.com/jthompson/what-does-iq-70-mean-for-black-and/

Philippe Rushton did an IQ test with South African university students (both black and white) and came to the same conclusions as Richard Lynn. See this video, especially from 12.45 – 14.15 :

Video Link

Lynn’s other source is the world penis size website.

I respect Richard Lynn for standing up for freedom of scientific inquiry on an important but taboo subject. I don’t so much admire his cherry picking of data, his definite pronouncements on meaningful genetic race differences when environmental and genetic factors in IQ are so notoriously methodologically difficult to disentangle, and for comparing IQs that are really not comparable at all because of massive differences in education, nutritrion and health. Even the Euro-East Asian IQ difference could well be due to known non cognitive differences.( To Lynn’s defense, cherry picking and idiotic comparisons to bolster preconceived wisdoms are all too common in societally relevant parts of academia, economics, for example.)
His ice age speculation (really just a variant of enlightenement science racism) is neither original, nor is it all that plausible with today’s knowledge.
Evolution accelerated after the ice age with population growth. Europe was repopulated from the southeast where climate had not been as harsh, and East Africa/Sahel, Australia, Greenland or tierra del fuego also have difficult to navigate climates, still, Greenlanders and Alaskan as well as Siberian and Australian natives tend to struggle in the Euroean-dominated modern societies they now find themselves in, thrown into modernity straight from their still largely mesolithic or neolithic ways of life.
Genetic ethnic differences in IQ — if they exist — could have been driven by sociological processes in neolithic times and later. It’s somewhat plausible that sociological processes led to a genetic IQ advantage in Ashkenazy Jews as well as to a depression in US ghetto blacks. “Race” coud be a misleading category here, as these are recent evelopments in subgroups of “races”. Also, parts of Africa and India have caste to reckon with.

exterminating aspect

Extermination aspect??? What????

Generally speaking, I agree, however “hard” science is still subject to interpretation. For example, there are Climate Scientists who disagree with the Climate Doomers looking at the same data, because they have a different view/understanding of how it all fits together. Both maintain their view/understanding is the correct one, and provide “proof” of it.
Medicine declares homeopathy to be a fraud, yet when Pharmacologist Madeline Ennis set out to disprove the dilution basis of homeopathy, her study couldn’t, and actually showed it did retain structure. The response is that the study was flawed.
In every field, scientific or otherwise, there are frauds, because their “proof” is accepted when it shouldn’t be, while the “fraud” of the unaccepted proof is labeled “dis-credited” by those in control.

As for psychology, I prefer to look at it from this perspective: if it is truly as phony as people think it is, why is so much money spent on marketing? What makes people want an iPhone rather than an Android, and vice versa when there is little to choose between them. Clearly somebody understands human behavior and knows what buttons to push. Given the results of marketing are observable, there has to be some level of science in it. Part of Tesla’s criticism of Einstein was that his “science” was not observable. In that sense, psychology is more scientific than Einstein’s science was. That, of course, doesn’t mean all aspects of psychology are scientific.

“White supremacy” can’t exist without “Black inferiority”

Simpletons!

Thank you for your endeavours.

It should not be necessary to say, but remember that IQ is not everything
As Hans Eysenck said himself. It is an imperfect test of intelligence, and says little about any other personal qualities of the person taking it.
However, without a minimum level of intelligence, civilisation becomes difficult to attain and maintain.

The point most people miss, is that these are average IQs. I have met many very intelligent Blacks, but if, for example, 10 Blacks have an IQ of 120 and 100 have an IQ of 65, the average is 70. I suspect there are plenty of Whites with IQs of 65, but there are many many more Whites with IQs at 120 to raise the average above 70. I’ve seen plenty of Down’s Syndrome Whites, some Asian, but do not recall seeing any Down’s Syndrome Blacks. The average IQ of those afflicted with Down’s is 50, which presumably takes in all races. Some Down’s are “dull normal” and function quite well, others need constant care. That is the nature of averages. Distribution within the range of IQs is what is really at play.

Mongolia: Avg. IQ 101
GDP per capita- PPP: $ 13,700

Lithuania: Avg. IQ 91
GDP per capita- PPP: $ 32,400

Comparing a a country in northern Europe with access to the Baltic with a country that is landlocked, with limited resources and poor transport is not a fair comparison.

Mongolia does not have oil, gas, forests, rivers or arable land. Add to that the coldest winters imaginable. Merely surviving in such a harsh environment is a major achievement. Ever wonder why they invaded and occupied so many other countries when they could?

Tiny, you’re not funny any more, just tedious.

You could use any other Lynn’s stats to prove the point: it is worthless.

Being landlocked means nothing; all IQ fetishists variables are completely useless. For instance, Beethoven couldn’t multiply ordinary numbers, like 3*5.

So, I guess, he would have flunked at useless IQ test.

I don’t need any test to see that blacks are, as a group, not suited to modern civilization.

Try this:
https://theconversation.com/explainer-the-evidence-for-the-tasmanian-genocide-86828

Charles Dilke (1843 – 1911) was a Radical Whig or Liberal politician who was expected to become Prime Minister, until his involvement in a messy divorce case scuppered his prospects. But his book Greater Britain went to many editions over half a century or so. In it he declared that the British, as the only extirpating race in the world, were the only race fit to assume world domination for the greater good of humanity. He proved his point by tracking the record of the British Empire in exterminating inferior races around the globe.

Judging by the article which is the subject of this discussion, Richard Lynn seems like good company for Dilke.

if it is truly as phony as people think it is, why is so much money spent on marketing?

You’ve really answered your own question. Marketing – professional lying – is required to convince people of a truth by endless repetition when it is actually a deception / scam / lie / etc. Advertising and marketing are REQUIRED when trying to convince people that what is actually false is true and what is true is false. Advertising and marketing should be called propaganda.

My issue with what is going on today in the supposed sciences is that one branch declares a fact and another uses it to then declare their new fact ad infinitum, piling error atop error. This leads to not investigating alternatives because a faux truth is already known. It’s therefore no wonder that science has advanced little in many decades. Chasing gremlins that don’t exist is a recipe for disaster.

… a theory built on questionable assumptions should never be the basis for new theories. – Stephen Smith

For example : Plasma physics explains cosmic phenomena much better than the cosmologists, astrophysicists and astronomers, IMO. Where conventional wisdom favors Big Bang, dark matter & energy, black holes and other assorted unicorns, plasma physics extrapolates lab experiments to explain the observable universe without need to invoke any imaginary entities.

It’s when one branch of science fraudulently declares a truth and others branch innocently run with that lie that we end up in dead ends. It’s for that reason I’m dead set against allowing assertions to masquerade as fact.

”All these IQ tests measures is how well different populations think in the way Europeans tend to think“

That’s not what an IQ test does at all. Have you studied their history or even taken one?

”There’s nothing wrong with looking at IQ as long as we understand what we are measuring.“

Indeed.

One reason the adaptive behavior focus matters is an IQ of 70 does not mean the same thing for all people. This post talks about black and white kids in the US, but I think the conclusions are even more true for Africans.

Yes, I am aware of Thompson’s views. They seem logical and reasonable.
Also, Rushton and others had ideas about racial differences in personality. Crudely put, East Asians were more likely to be introspective, Blacks more extroverted and Whites somewhere in between. Obviously, cultural differences will play a part in this, also.
So retarded and low IQ Blacks may appear confident, outgoing and superficially “normal”. As an example, Rushton quoted the example of the boxer Muhammad Ali. His Army Test showed he had an IQ of 78. He certainly had the gift of the gab, but once you listened carefully, you realised there wasn’t much there ( even without the heavy blows to the head ).

Scientism is the primary religion of those individuals who consider themselves educated. Largely because of technological and mechanical advances in the 19th Century, many of them undergirded by scientific breakthroughs; science developed a godlike reputation in the minds of accelerating numbers of people.

Consider the direct “religification” of science, such as the church founded by Mary Baker Glover Patterson Eddy: The Church of Christ Scientist. Wow! That’s a dead giveaway. Fast forward to the 20th Century and we find a successful sci-fi writer come up with yet another Lulu: Scientology. Boy, now that sounds very dignified and even official, as if it were based on demonstrable experimentation predicated by provable precepts. Ah yes, the language of science—and also the semantics of science.

Semantics, this is where we arrive at the “soft” sciences…word games. Most particularly egregious, IMHO, is “political science”. By definition, politics is the ART of the possible. Certain scientific or take your choice of quasi-scientific or pseudo-scientific methodologies may be utilized by “political scientists” such as graphs, charts and statistics—BUT—the underlying concept is little more than semantics, a word-game calculated to grant a level of acceptability and yes, dignity. My first quarter of study at a Land Grant university commenced as majoring in political science. By the second quarter in my freshman year I had become thoroughly disabused of that notion and switched over to a subject I then considered to be based on facts and not mere theoretical posing—history.

In our culturally devolutionary era of high-tech, artificial intelligence and similar whiz-bang wizardry the eminence of scientism as a secular religion has achieved astounding heights. However, when you begin to conceptualize the destruction of our environment by Dupont’s “better living through chemistry” and similar memes and mantras of the advertising/P.R. nexus, a discerning individual tends to become a bit chary of rationalistic materialism and all the nuclear metaphysical fallout emanating from the false god of scientism and his consort, the bitch goddess success.

This culture, through such agencies as chemistry and nuclear physics, has brought this great green planet to the very verge of massive ecotastrophe.

Regarding the IQ difference between Greece and Albania, I found a plausible explanation: Albans are muslim, marrying very endogamously – they normally marry someone from their tribe in the village. Endogamy is not the best way improving or maintaining IQ…

“Islam is a religion of peace.” Virtually every page of the Quran extolls the domination of the religion over every other religion or ideology and prescribes violence against any who do not submit “peacefully”. It is a religion of war.

I think that’s a narrow approach. Again, my personal experience for hanging out with a lot of super-intelligent people is that they are not very smart in many areas and the same is true about people, like my wife, who has a high degree of intuitive, emotional and artistic intelligence. I can see that you, like many others who share your view, have a very narrow (from my POV) view of life and its possibilities–and that may be a good thing as long as you don’t burn people like me or Gardiner at the stake.

As a psych major I studied all kinds of tests. I just don’t think it’s a good idea to put such a high value on IQ as the only measure of worth or intelligence–life experience has taught me differently.

I’m familiar with who RR is and I’m not a fan. He owns the Anthroscape forum. He’s scientifically illiterate for sure – the only reason I quoted him was to show Richard Lynn isn’t liked among other people who identify as ‘racial realists’ i.e. people who argue human biological races exist. Anyway, I debated RR in 2016 on another topic-
https://www.tapatalk.com/groups/anthroscape/cro-magnon-were-not-caucasoid-t59620.html

After highlighting RR’s mistakes and idiocy, I was apparently blocked after only 5 posts.

As for ‘Alternative Hypothesis’ – his real name is Ryan Faulk:

https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Ryan_Faulk

Despite his name, there’s nothing “alternative” about him and he parrots white nationalism/alt-right talking points. Boring. I wouldn’t trust blatant ideologues like this on race and intelligence. Another contributor to Faulk’s website is Sean Last:

https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Sean_Last

Again, another white nationalist ideologue. Not a reliable source.

Why?

Being landlocked means nothing;

https://www.thoughtco.com/economic-struggles-of-landlocked-countries-1434532

If a country is landlocked, it is likely to be poor. In fact, most countries that lack coastal access are among the world’s Least Developed Countries (LDCs), and their inhabitants occupy the “bottom billion” tier of the world’s population in terms of poverty.*

Outside Europe, there is not a single successful, highly developed, landlocked country when measured with the Human Development Index (HDI), and most of the countries with the lowest HDI scores are landlocked.

This paper has some useful discussion.
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/5112526_Economic_Development_Problems_of_Landlocked_Countries

Assuming that Lynn’s thesis that IQ is largely genetic is correct: it is interesting and if true, puzzling, that the Irish IQ is much lower than the English, when one considers that their genomes are very similar and the amount of coming and going between the Scots and the Irish would lead one to suppose a good deal of genetic mixing between them. (No one, I think, suggests that the Scots are more stupid than the English!)

On another point: that the public schools turn out conformists; this is undoubtedly true and it should warn parents of any child with a scientific bent to avoid sending it to a public school as conformist scientists are obviously a drag on science. It also suggests that university faculties of the sciences should take care to teach their students of the dangers of the “herd mentality” in Science. It is undoubtedly a BIG problem!

But I do have one serious question: Is there a link to IQ and sociopathy, or is sociopathy more of a genetic thing?

I have no Scientific data to base my belief on, but I think it almost certain that sociopathy is usually learned rather than genetic. However, to “get away with” sociopathic behaviour, one probably needs a fairly high degree of intelligence, so to that extent, there is an obvious link.

How about that over-used and questionable claim by Einstein that doing the same thing repeatedly and expecting a different result is insanity? That seems to rule out persistence.

The Voice of Reason! Thank you very much, sir.

I can’t believe you ordinarily attempting-to-simulate-cynical crabheads just love such ridiculous witch-doctorism as psychology when it suits your purposes. Have you noticed how transparent you are. Maybe you can’t. But others can see right through you. Just look in the mirror.

Downs Syndrome is as common amongst blacks as any other race, however their survival rate is much lower.

This is the virtual equivalent of the Cannibal Club…

For exhibitionists

There are many ethnic Greeks in southern Albania as part of the autonomous region of Northern Epirus. They are not Albanian Orthodox but ethnic Greeks who speak Greek. They have an easy pathway to Greek citizenship. However, there are also Albanian Orthodox which are ethnic Albanians that are Orthodox and Albanian speaking, mostly Tosk. These are separate communities.

I am onside with the assumptions that a discovery in one area does not necessarily translate to another, and I have long maintained that the creationist theory was no whackier than the Big Bang, just different. I am not that familiar with plasma physics, but suspect it is not inconsistent with William Crooks photographing materialist mediums with their spirits 150 years ago. Life everlasting, but not within the Christian belief system.
Yes, marketing is lying, for the most point. My point with marketing and psychology is that they are experimenting with which lies work, on whom, and track observable results. Perhaps scientific lying is an oxymoron, but that is essentially what the mixture of marketing and psychology is. Is it propaganda? Perhaps, but it also may be giving propaganda a bad name. LOL.

“Good propaganda does not need to lie, indeed it may not lie. It has no reason to fear the truth. It is a mistake to believe that people cannot take the truth. They can. It is only a matter of presenting the truth to people in a way that they will be able to understand. A propaganda that lies proves that it has a bad cause. It cannot be successful in the long run.” ~ Joseph Goebbels

“All these IQ tests measures is how well different populations think in the way Europeans tend to think.”

There are two rebuttals to this.

1. Since we are living in the West we are, astonishingly, interested in whether people will prosper whilst they are living in the West. Why should we concern ourselves with their tracking abilities or some other aptitude useful to hunter gatherers but useless in the technology-rich society white people have created? Even if there are many facets to intelligence, we are entitled to only care about the one measured by IQ tests that we have devised, since it is relevant to where we live.

2. There was a scientist who appeared on Stefan Molyneux – before he was banned by youtube – who made the point that the Pygmies living in the Congo who scored the highest, relative to other pygmies, on (Western style) IQ tests were also those that were the most successful in Pygmy society. They had the most wives, they owned the most cattle, etcetera. I think he made the same point about the Australian Abos but I can’t quite remember.

Your work on IQ is pretty decent (although I disagree with your views on race in general). It would help though if you made clear on the IQ controversy what your estimate is for between-group heritability – I’ve argued for 0.05-0.125 (5-12.5%). Lynn argues for above 0.5 (50%) which is the standard hereditarian hypothesis since Jensen (1973). This is not something I agree with and have long criticised as untenable and far too high. I do not though support zero between-group heritability (aka blank-slatism).

The problem is hereditarians arguing for > 0.5 between-group heritability set up a straw man that says anyone who denies or questions the standard hereditarian hypothesis is arguing for 0% genes. So they often redefine hereditarianism as above-zero heritability and lump someone who is arguing for 5% genes in with 50% which is highly misleading.

With “outside of Europe”, you buried your (OK, the author buried his) thesis. If something claims to be scientific, it should be universal. No ifs & no buts.

Besides, the entire IQ controversy is not worthy of attention for reasons I’ve already mentioned:

1. IQ, as a single figure, is ill defined. It is meaningless. It doesn’t matter whether it is mostly heritable or not. It doesn’t predict anything (for instance, other psychological traits like non-conformity or eruptive temperament may be of more importance than “IQ”- a 180 points IQ man will not achieve any societal success because he is, say, utterly individualist & destructive in behavior toward a broader society).

2. people differ in their talents, capabilities- but this is trivial. Life will sort out talents without any measurement.

3. groups of people differ in their talents. It is wrong to think that culture, in the broadest sense, can be altered. Culture, as a way of life, is almost completely unalterable. Italians can never behave like Japanese & vice versa. Their values, perception of life, ambitions, strengths & weaknesses, fetishes, talents … are carved in stone.

4. collective IQ is stratospheric nonsense. It is averred that American blacks’ IQ is 85, while Indians’ (in India) is 82. And any “argument” about castes is irrelevant. It is bell curve in both cases.

We all know- if we know- that despite its squalor & shithollery, India has great scientists, nuclear power, scientific institutes, high intellectual culture. While US blacks ….

Jordan and Iran have IQ 84. Does anyone of sane mind think that these countries would be as functional as US blacks’ national home, if American blacks were given their nation-state somewhere in the US, say Texas plus Louisiana (both with access to the sea), and left to their own devices?

Would ex-US blacks build their new roads, power plants, school engineers, organize the military & diplomacy … as does Iran, with her supposedly lower IQ?

This is completely ridiculous…

Anyone that promulgates the false theories of the Eugenics Movement deserves to be outed and rendered persona non-grata and booted from tertiary education for failure to learn the historiography and empirical science.

Eugenicists like Galton and Lombroso were rabid dog racists and if I were in charge of handing out honorary degrees I too would deplatform the title of emeritus given that individuals that espouse such nonsense are not scientists but rather propagandists fomenting hatred towards human beings that have more genes in common as opposed to those that are dissimilar.

Three words for Lynn come to mind readily!

Fuck off, imbecile.

Sincerely,

RW

Assuming that Lynn’s thesis that IQ is largely genetic is correct: it is interesting and if true, puzzling, that the Irish IQ is much lower than the English, when one considers that their genomes are very similar and the amount of coming and going between the Scots and the Irish would lead one to suppose a good deal of genetic mixing between them. (No one, I think, suggests that the Scots are more stupid than the English!)

The fact you can find ethnic groups that are closely genetically related (with very low Fst values) but have large differences in mean IQ scores between them is strong evidence against Lynn’s hereditarian hypothesis. I’ve debated this on this site before and hereditarians are quick to change topic when this is mentioned. Lynn argues the mean IQ scores for countries we don’t have can be predicted using geographical neighbours we have with IQ scores… but this is usually bullshit. You can even find large IQ-score differences between not only adjacent countries but between tribes and ethnic groups within single countries. Nigeria and China are good examples. Correlation between geography and IQ is weak – opposite of what Lynn’s hereditarian hypothesis predicts.

Whenever there is an article about race and intelligence it needs someone to point out that when Professor Lynn et al say that blacks have an average IQ of 70 one should not model them on a typical European with an IQ of 70. A white man with an IQ of 70 is not a normal white man,

I’d like to hit the agree button, but the analogy with a 12 year old boy is still a poor one because black children exceed whites in rote association learning. For instance a new black child in a school can put a name to all their fellow pupils faces relatively quickly, and that is why many teachers disbelieved Arthur Jensen’s conclusions about IQ differences. He explained:

When persons are equated in degree of original learning of simple material, their retention measured at a later time is only slightly if at all correlated with IQ. The retention of more complex learning, however, involves meaningfulness and the way in which the learner has transformed or encoded the material. This is related to the degree of the learner’s under­standing, the extent to which the learned material is linked into the learner’s preexisting associative and conceptual network, and the learner’s capacity for conceptual reconstruc­tion of the whole material from a few recollected principles. The more that these aspects of memory can play a part in the material to be learned and later recalled, the more that retention measures are correlated with IQ.

These generalizations concerning the relationship between learning and IQ may have important implications for the conduct of instruction. For example, it has been suggested that schooling might be made more worthwhile for many youngsters in the lower half of the IQ distribution by designing instruction in such a way as to put less of a premium on IQ in scholastic learning (e.g., Bereiter, 1976; Cronbach, 1975). Samuels and Dahl (1973) have stated this hope as follows: “If we wish to reduce the correlation between IQ and achievement, the job facing the educator entails simplifying the task, ensuring that prerequisite skills are mastered, developing motivational procedures to keep the student on the task, and allocating a sufficient amount of time to the student so that [they] can master the task.”

With “outside of Europe”, you buried your (OK, the author buried his) thesis. If something claims to be scientific, it should be universal. No ifs & no buts.

So you fail to understand the relevance of functional neighbors with functional transport networks, customs, etc. to the issue of being landlocked.

Something has been buried here, and it is not that thesis.

Similarly with your IQ is meaningless statement.

If you really care about your Jordan and Iran analogy you might want to look into the “smart fraction” idea.

Care to outline which of Galton’s eugenics ideas you consider false? For bonus points, provide evidence.

Well, in Darwins world, we get IQ and Eugenics.
Thats just how it is, folks.
You have to chose a world-view.
You do that also when you reject something.
Comprendo?
Yes, hope you do, cause rejecting Christianity, is chosing a woid, to be filled.
Often with said Darwinism.
Rockefeller said, where there is a void, fill it.
Everyone knows by now, that a void will indeed be filled.
Meaning, in another world, low IQ doesn’t have to be killed!

Interesting,
What is your take on African IQ?

I think James Thompson’s essay here offers the best introduction to this subject.

https://www.unz.com/jthompson/the-7-tribes-of-intellect/?highlight=Seven

IQ is, I believe, pretty much fixed from birth. If you knew what tests to administer, you could probably reckon a child’s IQ by the time he or she was 3 years old.

Here’s a BBC article that takes this point of view:
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-hampshire-17702465

Thanks. 45 years of diverse engineering experience, (the best teacher, if the rest of you haven’t heard), says the same.
Smarts r important.
Race differences a reality.
Character and work makes good stuff happen.

Genetic variation is such that we share more genes in common than we have dissimilar. Moreover, phenotype is not indicative of genotype, and genotype is wholeheartedly shared via Deoxyribonucleic Acid. DNA via genetic drift is not that dissimilar to its origins in civilization via human genome.

People of colour are not less intelligent than their white counterparts, but they are indeed disproportionately excluded from bureaucracy of governance, media empire, finance empire, and employment hierarchy of tertiary education worldwide. Additionally, the USA is primary sovereign funding mechanism for all tertiary education in the Western empire.

Sewing discord via in-group white culture in contradistinction to out-group people of colour and the abject poverty they were historically disadvantaged by via education is not fair play for reasoned judgement or opinion that one group is more or less deserving than any other. White Anglo-Saxon culture has always found ways to discriminate against cultural differences and individual differences too.

Black African Americans share their genetic makeup with white Americans where dissimilarity is not empirically significant if one examines the genes we share in common. Hereditary discrimination goes hand-in-hand with the same oxymoron of American exceptionalism that has been sufficiently repudiated by all throughout the world that understand the science behind human genetics and evolutionary drift/spread when it comes to the human gene pool and dissimilarity between groups along lines of phenotype and genotype.

White America is fat, stupid, and uneducated where people like Trump represent false intelligence as confidence men in cerebral drag. Trump is white and uneducated in the extreme compared to black America that have become educated through the school of hard knocks that losers like Trump could never endure given white supremacist bureaucracy and his upbringing of entitlement due to his skin colour and family background of systemic discrimination towards people of colour in America.

RW

The leading Eugenicists were Lamarckians not Darwinists. Few were as explicit as Ernest MacBride the leading race and eugenics scientists were Lamarckians until the late 30′ s. Ernest Hooton said an American type could not be altered by immigration, because the American environment would alter the immigrants’ genetic qualities toward American norms. Hence genetic mixture of the American type population with new immigrants would be overborne by Lamarckian modification of the immigrant genes acquiring the characteristics of American genes.

Eugenicists were targeting problematic white individuals and the Appalachians population of poverty prone white who had failed to alter for the better despite living in the US for hundreds of years, thereby showing themselves to be a pathological degenerate element not susceptible to Lamarckian genetic per environmental improvement. I think Lamarckian assumptions lie behind much of the intelligentsia’s jaundiced view of the white working class. Also, the higher the IQ, the less an individual believes in genetically fixed IQ.

Why the Jew Grows Stronger
A famous Anthropologist’s views on Anti-Semitism
by Earnest Albert Hooton Collier’s Weekly, May 6, 1939, pp. 12-13

“When you say you are black I guess you are the daughter of a German woman and an American army or air force officer who like you only qualifies as black according to something like the one drop rule.”

One hopes an officer would have enough sense to use a condom.

“Idioms”!

The main argument against eugenics is it’s morally objectionable to compel or coerce an individual’s reproductive behaviour. The right to reproduce without interference is a fundamental freedom and human right.

The usual response by the eugenicist is to say they only support positive not negative eugenics, so they aren’t coercive. But every eugenicist I’ve read supports both, including Galton. There never was eugenicists only supporting positive eugenics (regardless there are separate moral arguments against the latter)

Galton supported both positive and negative eugenics:

Initially Galton preferred positive eugenics, but late in life he stated that ”the first object of eugenics is to check the birth rate of the unfit, instead of allowing them to come into being.”

– Dowbiggin, 2008

As RW said, Galton was a rabid dog racist. And if you read his literature it’s clear who he thought the “unfit” were and he wanted to interfere with their freedom to procreate.

I have problems with Lynn ‘s IQ differences between southern Ireland and northern Ireland,_5points .Yet the two areas are quite similar in ethnicity and race.Could it be a little religious bias on Mr Lynn’s behalf. He is orangeman from the north.

Genetic variation is such that we share more genes in common than we have dissimilar.

Lewontin’s fallacy is alive and well. That does not prevent there being important phenotypic differences between groups.

Moreover, phenotype is not indicative of genotype

Well, perhaps “not determinative”, but it is certainly indicative. And genotype is certainly related to phenotype.

and genotype is wholeheartedly shared via Deoxyribonucleic Acid. DNA via genetic drift is not that dissimilar to its origins in civilization via human genome.

Not sure what that even means. Anyone?

People of colour are not less intelligent than their white counterparts

A century of IQ tests beg to disagree with you about that being true on average. At least for Europeans compared to Sub Saharan Africans.

If you would like to learn more about this, here is a bibliography. You can start with the US Army test results from WWI discussed on page 7.
Subpopulation Differences in Performance on Tests of Mental Ability: Historical Review and Annotated Bibliography
https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/citations/ADA104444

Sewing discord

The word you are looking for is “sowing.” Think grain, not thread.

The rest of your comment did not seem worth reply, but at least it was entertaining.

P.S. And I will note you did not say a single thing about Galton’s eugenics views. At least AFAICT.

I think phenotype is somewhat indicative of genotype-

“Many human craniofacial dimensions are largely of neutral adaptive significance, and an analysis of their variation can serve as an indication of the extent to which any given population is genetically related to or differs from any other.” (Brace et al. 2005)

“In the present study, the frequency distributions of 20 discrete cranial traits in 70 major human populations from around the world were analyzed. The principal-coordinate and neighbor-joining analyses of Smith’s mean measure of divergence (MMD), based on trait frequencies, indicate that 1). the clustering pattern 1). the clustering pattern is similar to those based on classic genetic markers, DNA polymorphisms, and craniometrics;2).” (Hanihara et al. 2003)

http://archhades.blogspot.com/2011/05/genes-and-skulls-tell-same-story.html

These sorts of studies though do not support race realism but actually prove why human races don’t exist because there’s a clinal/smooth gradient patterning to the phenotypic variation by population — human populations physically blend into each other because of the significant amount of gene flow between them and any race classification will be arbitrary. Indeed, who has been categorised as White or Black has changed over time.

The main argument against eugenics is it’s morally objectionable to compel or coerce an individual’s reproductive behaviour. The right to reproduce without interference is a fundamental freedom and human right.

I tend to agree with that on the extremes, but there is room for discussion IMHO.

For example, how do you feel about increased welfare benefits being given for single mothers who have additional children while on welfare? That is surely dysgenic interference, right?

regardless there are separate moral arguments against the latter

Such as?

As RW said, Galton was a rabid dog racist. And if you read his literature it’s clear who he thought the “unfit” were and he wanted to interfere with their freedom to procreate.

Quotes would help here. It is not like there were hordes of blacks in Victorian England.

P.S. It is kind of you to jump in and help Robert White. He is clearly not up to making his own case.

bizarre ideas about race and dick size.

What about hooters? Where I live(East Asia) they almost never go beyond an A-cup, but where I am from (America mid-west, Wal-martville) They’ve got triple FFF-cups that orbit the belly button.

All kidding aside, your link just confirms the deprivation of what the field of psychology has become.

Irish intelligence. An oxymoron. Like military intelligence.

As Mike Judge has astutely and precisely pointed out, Beavis and Butthead are future engineers.

So much for engineers.

All this “statistical,” jargon-glutted, counterintuitive foofaraw laughably denominated “Scientific Racism” is nothing but a smokescreen behind which a bunch of middlebrows hide, scrabbling around searching for some way, any way, somehow to winkle out some kind, any kind, any kind at all, of respectable justification for their rank, unfounded, not-very-intelligent, and barbaric prejudices.

I also think you omit the negative effects of Irish Catholicism on Irish achievement and intellectual development…

Yea, because no one who believes in such a superstitious doctrine as Transubstantiation can understand mathematics, physics, chemistry, medicine, law, yadda yadda.

The “Own Goal” was a very interesting write up if I do say so. That and some of Chisela’s writings have really made me think a lot on this subject. I love having a site where Thompson, Murray, Lynn and other genetic hereditists and environmentalists like Chisela and Unz can post their articles.

I don’t engage racists or their foolish notions of Social Science as I am formally educated in Experimental Psychology and armed with a major in Personality Theory. My Honours B.A. tells me to ignore your uninformed antagonisms as they are tautological and worn out old tired thoughtless illogical canards of the uneducated merely repeated to annoy anyone with a knowledge base to work from.

Additionally, my opinions are informed opinions backed by a social science degree from an APA accredited and sanctioned school of Experimental Psychology.

RW

For example, how do you feel about increased welfare benefits being given for single mothers who have additional children while on welfare? That is surely dysgenic interference, right?

I am against child benefits but my opposition has nothing to do with eugenics. 75/195 (38%) of countries worldwide currently don’t have any child benefit programmes (source: ILO, 2015) so my position isn’t unusual. The fact I oppose child benefits won’t increase poverty because I support universal basic income. In fact, universal basic income has the potential to eradicate poverty. But I think I get the point you’re making about it being sometimes tricky to determine if financial incentives/disincentives are coercive in reproductive interference, but I don’t think they are as they’re not forcing someone in the literal sense to have or not have children.

Such as?

It’s rather subjective what is “fit” or “desirable”. So it’s arguably unethical in the first place to want to increase “desirable” traits. How are the traits or attributes that are considered to be perfect or optimal – decided? It seems to be a matter of personal taste as well as from what someone’s cultural bias, and so this will result in greater prejudices and inequalities if eugenics increases these subjective desirable traits. The only possible universal desirable thing is eradication of disease. But going with that there are objections such as the risk factor of genome editing going wrong, or having side effects and so then there’s the consent issue. There’s also concerns over misuse of the eugenics biotechnology.

Quotes would help here. It is not like there were hordes of blacks in Victorian England.

Galton held racist views typical of his time that certain races were inferior; I can’t be bothered to dig up quotes, simply search on Google Books.

For the record while I agree with some of what RW said, I’m against the idea of renaming buildings or institutions or whatever else after Galton because he held distasteful views. If we go down that road we will have to rename everything since pretty much everyone historical held distasteful views by modern standards on the issues of race and sex/gender, so it’s not practical or feasible, for example Aristotle was a sexist who thought women were inferior to men, so do we destroy all his ancient busts from museums or rename scholarly journals linked to his name like Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society? This nonsense is probably one of the few things we can agree on.

“Why would anyone give credence to some windbag psychologist?”

Because psychologists have “the science” to fight “racism” and “white supremacy” (and capitalism too)??

American Psychological Assoc. takes view America is ‘born from the blood of white supremacist ideology and capitalism’.

Biz Pac Review:

The American Psychological Association is calling for a “systemic change in U.S. culture,” and in part, is blaming the issue on capitalism.

The American Psychological Association is in the spotlight following the publication of a statement against “systemic” racism in U.S culture.

The APA is “the leading scientific and professional organization representing psychology in the United States, with more than 121,000 researchers, educators, clinicians, consultants and students as its members,” according to its website.

The statement called for “true systemic change in the U.S. Culture,” blaming the issues of the U.S. partially on capitalism.

The statement, published in September, said that “the association is working to dismantle institutional racism over the long term, including within APA and psychology.” APA said it believes that battling systemic racial inequities that still exist today requires the help of psychological research, treatment, and leadership to effectuate “systemic change” against the “racism pandemic.”

The President of the Association of Black Psychologists, Dr. Theopia Jackson, quoted in the APA statement, said, “Every institution in America is born from the blood of white supremacist ideology and capitalism—and that’s the disease.”

This disease is a “racism pandemic,” the statement says, quoting APA President Sandra Shullman, that may even be perpetuated in the field of psychology.

https://www.bizpacreview.com/2020/10/03/american-psychological-assoc-takes-view-america-is-born-from-the-blood-of-white-supremacist-ideology-and-capitalism-980344

https://www.apa.org/monitor/2020/09/systemic-change

Blacks are not in general suited to engineering. Issues with the math. Issues with planning.

For quite some time now, UR has been the go to place to make me relish my superior genes and IQ. I also learned to be thankful not to have been born Irish, with their inexplicable low IQ despite their being White like me.

The fool who persists in his folly will become wise.
William Blake.

” . . . I just don’t think it’s a good idea to put such a high value on IQ as the only measure of worth or intelligence–life experience has taught me differently.”

Well, I agree with that view of it.

Most of the population has “average” intelligence, and they get through life just fine. They work competently at most occupations, they raise their families OK, and they don’t disrupt society. In sum, they’re “good” people. High IQ types are the highly creative types, the high achievers in science, medicine, and technology. The world needs them. And, of course, the world needs Joe Sixpack.

There’s also “practical intelligence,” “street smarts”–call it what you will–that amounts to common sense and good judgment. That’s something IQ tests don’t measure. . . .

Neil I have bun sucher.

But he heard
Nein, ich bin sicher.

IQ 90 … But nothing here precludes you from leading what we consider a normal life and making a positive contribution to society if you’re a responsible, law-abiding personality type.

IQ 70 … In olden times, you could probably scrape by doing simple rote work (preferably under supervision) for a living. Your prospects for self-supporting employment in a modern economy really suck, however.

IQ 90 Modern society is full of IQ90 type work – just look around – and it does make a very positive contribution. Then there’s the acquisition of skills. After 5-6 years doing the same task this person will likely become quite skilled, and contented with the work.

IQ 70 With some care to provide a protected and structured environment I think that the same applies here.

But probably the most important requirement for these people is to have a unified society which regards them as part of the family. Not just disposable cheap labour or uncompetitive rejects (the core of Neoliberalism).

No, speaking as one whose first Australian forebear was Irish Catholic, at least nominally, it was because of the authoritarian conservative cultture which meant that Irish people of intellect and boldness tended to go to England or America….

I was a student there in the early 1980’s and the groupthink was truly impressive. At the time, the economics faculty was cheerleading for the de-industrialization of the West. Manufacturing was “old economy” while services (brain work) were “new economy”. Manufacturing was dirty and polluting while the new economy was clean and ecological. Manufacturing workers would retrain to become “knowledge workers”. Deindustrialization was required by David Ricardo’s theory of Comparative Advantage (never mind that it explained international trade in the 18th century). Deindustrialization would allow capital to be redirected to the “new economy” brain work sectors etc. etc.

The God figure was Milton Friedman and Chicago neoliberals, with a big fan club for Keynes and government stimulus deficit spending.

Altogether a total waste of time.

Impulse control.

The ability to foresee consequences, weigh the risks and harm and obey a mental stop sign.

This is definitely a factor. I remember watching a TV programme following US police on their daily call outs, with one officer saying that a good tactic to defuse a dangerous situation (in this case an armed robbery/hostage taking) was to repeatedly shout out how many years in prison the criminal would get if he used the gun. He hadn’t thought about that.

Obviously, you work with one segment of the population that is not representative of the population as a whole. Since I have so far in my lifetime become acquainted with both many people with above average and many people with below average IQ, the former mostly during my career as IT consultant, the latter mostly in private life, I can agree that there is a correlation between IQ and the capacity to foresee consequences of actions. I think it can even be considered a tautology.
However, when it comes to empathy, there are way more full-blown psychos among brainiacs than among dunces. The former just happen to be better than the latter at, well, foreseeing consequences, finding ways to get away with callous behaviour and refraining themselves when they judge that they can’t get away with it. Low IQ people are more likely than high IQ people to do harm inadvertently and as a corollary, when high IQ people do harm, it’s usually because they mean to do harm.
As a simple counter-example, women overall score lower than men overall on IQ tests, yet I doubt that even Unz readers will deny that women score much higher on empathy than men.

Charles Dilke may have his opinions. And yes there were such incidents as the Tasmanian genocide, but the British were definitely not the best race to rule the world on that account. Becuase there were some of the most pathetic genociders overall. In India they increased land under irrigation, brought Western medicine against diseases, brought stability and stopped inter-Indian War. What kind of incompetent pathetic genocide is this? Nigeria’s population increased during British Nigeria period.

Even Chinua Acebe, the Nigerian Igbo writer who did criticize colonialism on the aspect of culture had to admit later in his book ‘There was a Country’, p. 43.

“The British governed their colony of Nigeria with considerable care. There was a very highly competent cadre of government officials imbued with a high level of knowledge of how to run a country. This was not something that the British achieved only in Nigeria; they were able to manage this on a bigger scale in India and Australia. The British had the experience of governing and doing it competently. I am not justifying colonialism. But it is important to face the fact that British colonies were, more or less, expertly run.”

Chinua Achebe also sez
“Before (British Nigeria), justice may have been fierce but it could not be bought or sold . . . . There were titles and distinctions, but they were gained by hard work ….Now all that is changed.”
Ohaeto Ezenwa, Chinua Achebe: A biography (Indiana University Press, Bloomington, IN, 1997), p. 88

Sad and pathetic genociders. Definitely by Dilke’s standards, the Brits were incompetent race to assume world Domination. LOL.
And talking about Maoris (since that link does mention Maoris ), when the Maoris exterminated the peaceful Morioris, did they take IQ tests before their dastardly deed????

Thanks

That research was new to me – thanks. With the age of the computer, us older workers that went up the ladder, the old fashion way, were being replaced by younger workers that used computer programs that took the place of our decades of knowledge, but not really. This worked to a certain extent, but the young workers had no hands on training, { trade school and craft experience} so { in my case} a sub contractor could cut corners, use cheap labor and materials, and the young worker wouldn’t have a clue. And the client didn’t see it either unless they had an experienced rep or inspector, checking the job. When I worked in Ukraine for a Russian general contractor, all the key men in the field were older, very experienced men and were respected . As I was in the field and in the office. So I stayed.

Please be informed that Monsignor Lemaitre was one of the many such benighted who believed in such “superstitions”!

who are the smart fraction in Iran?

Scientific racism is an oxymoron.

You can put a suit and tie on a pig, but it’s still a pig.

The world doesn’t need weapons of mass destruction, cancer, propaganda or torture. The products of high IQ…

“Also, Albani is a common Italian surname.”

I had a Neapolitan friend back in the day called Albanese. Same thing?

Right or wrong that’s not woke but decently civilised

Do you mean that? Is that a considered contribution that you wish to be taken seriously or are you just taking perverse pleasure in wasting people’s time wondering what the %#$& you mean?
Conceded only that most WMDs could not be created without the work of people with high IQs. Otherwise nonsense.

But I think I get the point you’re making about it being sometimes tricky to determine if financial incentives/disincentives are coercive in reproductive interference, but I don’t think they are as they’re not forcing someone in the literal sense to have or not have children.

Here is your original statement.

The main argument against eugenics is it’s morally objectionable to compel or coerce an individual’s reproductive behaviour. The right to reproduce without interference is a fundamental freedom and human right.

I agree that financial incentives are not compulsion, but I think it is hard to argue that they don’t fall on the slippery slope of coercion.

It’s rather subjective what is “fit” or “desirable”. So it’s arguably unethical in the first place to want to increase “desirable” traits. How are the traits or attributes that are considered to be perfect or optimal – decided?

That is one of the best objections. To paraphrase: Who decides? Why not let the parents decide?

I think the best eugenics measures are fairly simple. Require parents to bear the costs of their reproductive choices.

The only possible universal desirable thing is eradication of disease. But going with that there are objections such as the risk factor of genome editing going wrong, or having side effects and so then there’s the consent issue. There’s also concerns over misuse of the eugenics biotechnology.

Largely agreed there as well. but why not allow people to make their own decisions about desirable outcomes and acceptable risks?

Galton held racist views typical of his time that certain races were inferior; I can’t be bothered to dig up quotes, simply search on Google Books.

Agreed with your first sentence. But how about we try separating the racism from the eugenics ideas? Remember that I specifically asked RW which of Galton’s eugenics ideas he considered false. Of course it is arguable whether Galton’s racial views are more or less true than the racial views of goodthinkers like you and RW. But let’s not bother with that argument and focus on the eugenics ideas.

To the extent that Galton focused his ideas on England I doubt that he was talking about blacks much if at all given how few there were. That is why I asked for quotes. That you consider it more trouble than it is worth is an indicator of the thoughts you object to concerning eugenics not being a dominant part of his work. Though I suspect it would be pretty easy to find racist quotes. Especially since I am sure other anti-racists before you have gone to the trouble of compiling them.

This nonsense is probably one of the few things we can agree on.

Probably. At least in this area.

If you are a troll, congratulations. That was a good one. If you were being sincere, I’m not sure what to say–perhaps just that I hope your professional decisions don’t impact anyone else.

I think that’s called being part of the problem, not part of the solution.

You have a similar experience to my father, he only finished up to early middle high school, then trade schools and apprenticeships after. Very intelligent man.

It is a shame that oecd rating competition both degrades tertiary education and has made most of it worthless, and that a path such as yours or that of my father is no longer possible.

I went to university when standards (except for B.A.) were still high.

Took 1st -year Psychology as an elective. Distinction.

It is not total bullshit like sociology. Skinner, Pavlov, Piaget, the instincts of the human baby (e.g. strong grip) that fade within three days (a foal just stands up and keeps going), much more, very interesting.

It is all science. Big pharma’s marketing tool, U.S.A.. D.S.M., of course a very different matter.

I am not Irish but what’s your justification for the rank, unfounded, not-very-intelligent, and barbaric prejudice against the Irish Tyrone? You have the same biases with even less justification. Because you’re stupid.

I would guess the smarter Persians. Do you know any Iranian/Perisan immigrants?
https://djaunter.com/arab-persian-middle-eastern/

Lynn and David Becker both assign Iran an IQ of 78-84.

But I look at this 2019 paper and wonder about that.
Estimation of Mean Intelligence Quotient with Wechsler Scale in Iran: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6425765

The mean total IQ score in Iran was estimated 97.12 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 88.71–105.52), the practical intelligence was 92.84 (95% CI: 79.14–106.55), and the verbal intelligence was 94.50 (95% CI: 83.90–105.10). The total IQ score in the northern, southern, central, eastern, and western regions of Iran was 97.08, 108.90, 92.31, 101.76, and 96.45, respectively. The mean IQ score in Iran in subjects under 20 years of age is 97.73 and in subjects over 20 years of age is 105.61.

I don’t find that paper completely persuasive (and don’t have the time or inclination to dig into it right now), but a quick look at Table 2 seems to indicate there must be some smart subgroups in Tehran.

Why arent there smarter sub groups in Africa?Arent the africans more genetically diverse than the rest of the world?Many say that Igbo are smarter ,but there is no evidence in terms of IQ tests for that.

Btw there are low IQ studies for chinese too.In this study 513 students were tested and the score of the control group (normal) ones was 82 .The study was conducted by Chinese Journal of Endemiology

http://www.fluoridealert.org/wp-content/uploads/wang-2001.pdf

Another study

http://www.fluoridealert.org/wp-content/uploads/li-1995.pdf

The Anglo-Saxons still have a hard time accepting who actually taught them to read and write…lol

“It is certain the Irish hath had the use of letters very anciently and long before England.”…Edmund Spencer

Ireland is the first Western European country to create an extensive literature using its own vernacular, Irish, in addition to using Latin.

The Anglo-Saxon scholars and churchmen Aldhelm (d.709 as bishop of Sherbourne) and Bede (d.735 at Wearmouth-Jarrow), provide our clearest pictures of seventh-century Irish monastic education from an outsider’s perspective. Both Aldhelm and Bede grew up in an England that, only a generation before, had been pagan. The conversion of Ireland, on the other hand, had begun in the fifth century. The twelfth-century historian, William of Malmesbury, stated that Aldhelm had had an Irish teacher named Máeldub. This seems likely since Aldhelm had served as abbot of Malmesbury, and Bede (writing c.731) had referred toMalmesbury as Maildubi urbs, “Máeldub’s city”.

Bede himself was born into an Anglo-Saxon Northumbria only recently converted by the Irish. When Bede was between the ages of 13 and 33, Northumbria was ruled by the Irish-educated King Aldfrith. Bede’s monastery of Wearmouth-Jarrow had benefited from the royal patronage of Aldfrith. Both Aldhelm and Bede were ecclesiastics, and their primary concern with religious education is obvious in their remarks about Irish monastic schools.

The monastic school at Iona in Scotland, founded by Columba, had a profound influence on Anglo-Saxon Northumbria. Although Iona is not geographically in Ireland, at this time and for several centuries subsequently, much of Scotland was culturally and politically Irish. A significant body of literature, both in Latin and Irish, was produced in seventh century Iona.

Several Anglo-Saxon kings came under the influence of Iona. King Oswald (634-42), educated and baptized among the Irish, is commemorated in Irish records as ardrí Saxan sóerdae, “noble high-king of the English.”

Oswald invited Irish missionaries from Iona into his kingdom and even acted as interpreter for them. Bede (d.735) stated that King Oswiu (642-70), brother of Oswald, having been educated among the Irish, thought that no learning could be better.

King Aldfrith (685-705), son of Oswiu, had an Irish mother and Bede stated that he was educated among the Irish.

Aldfrith was renowned among the Irish for his scholarship and may have written texts in the Irish

Bishop Aldhelm himself had spent a few years there. Nevertheless, Aldhelm felt the need to defend the school at Canterbury against the prestige of Irish schools. Aldhelm complained of English students flocking to Ireland rather than staying in England for their educations. Aldhelm queried rhetorically: “Why, I ask, is Ireland,whither assemble the thronging students by the fleet-load, exalted with a sort of ineffable privilege?”

Aldhelm’s complaints, cited above, are found in a letter addressed to an Englishman named Ehfridus (Heahfrith) who had returned to England after six years of study in Ireland “bursting with praise for learning.”Aldhelm’s letter to Ehfridus implied that grammar, geometry, physics and Biblical exegesis were available to the English students in Irish monastic schools in the seventh century.

Etc…etc…etc…

https://www.academia.edu/21514741/Seventh_Century_Ireland_as_a_Study_Abroad_Destination

The Land of Saints and Scholars.

And of course warriors, as well.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Irish-American_Medal_of_Honor_recipients

😉

Richard Lynn came out with a book in 2019, Race Differences in Psychopathic Personality. According to Lynn, regarding IQ and psychopathic personality, evidence is mixed, so inconclusive. Some claim zero correlation, some studies report below average IQs in children with conduct disorders, delinquents, and adult psychopaths. Lynn thinks that adaptations to environmental conditions as races evolved made Northeast Asians the least psychopathic and most intelligent, followed by Europeans, North Africans/South Asians, New Zealand Maoris, Sub-Saharan Africans, and Australian Aborigines. Lynn states, “The race differences in psychopathic personality and intelligence evolved through different processes.”

But it does. So too bad for you.

Put down your phone. Phones are crimes against humanity invented by those same toxic Europeans, n which you are culturally appropriating, not to mention cars, planes, plumbing, n modern medicine. Take your outrage back to your grass hut, shallow ingrate.

Spoken like a true American.

One guideline to what can happen with an IQ of 68 is that it was the measured IQ of Timothy Evans, who was manipulated into a false confession to murders committed by Reginald Christie. Christie testified against him and Evans was hanged. Christie was later shown to be a serial killer of women (he used the thigh bone of one of his victims to prop up a fence in the back yard). It may be interesting to note that Christie was tested in prison before his execution and his IQ was 128. He was also a keen chess player in prison.

Much to my amazement there are still Albanian Christian communities in Italy who fled the Ottoman invasion of Albania. The Albanese surname apparently denotes this origin.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arb%C3%ABresh%C3%AB_people

The Arbëreshë (pronounced [aɾbəˈɾɛʃ]; Albanian: Arbëreshët e Italisë or Shqiptarët e Italisë), also known as Albanians of Italy or Italo-Albanians, are an Albanian ethnolinguistic group in Southern Italy, mostly concentrated in scattered villages in the regions of Apulia, Basilicata, Calabria, Campania, Molise and Sicily.[5] They are the descendants of mostly Tosk Albanian refugees, who fled from Albania between the fourteenth and eighteenth centuries in consequence of the Ottoman invasion of the Balkans.

During the Middle Ages, the Arbëreshë settled in Southern Italy in several waves of migration, following the establishment of the Kingdom of Albania, the death of the Albanian national hero Gjergj Kastrioti Skënderbeu and the gradual conquest of Albania and the Byzantine Empire by the Ottomans.

Their culture is determined by the main features that are found in language, religion, traditions, customs, art and gastronomy, still zealously preserved, with the awareness of belonging to a specific ethnic group. Over the centuries, the Arbëreshë have managed to maintain and develop their identities, thanks to their cultural value exercised mainly by the two religious communities of the Byzantine Rite based in Calabria, the Corsini College in 1732 then Corsini Adriano College of San Benedetto Ullano in 1794 and the Arbëreshë Seminary of Palermo in 1735, which was then transferred to Piana degli Albanesi in 1945.

Also Greeks in southern Italy.

Video Link

It took me 10 seconds to find and copy this link
http://galton.org/letters/africa-for-chinese/AfricaForTheChinese.htm

As to eugenics it really wouldn’t be too difficult to choose people to subsidise as breeders because the probabilities would be in favour of their having more
intelligent healthy non criminal offspring than the generality of citizens. E.g. what about removing all student debt from graduate women as they have their first, second and third children by the age of 35. Full tax deductibility for employing nannies to allow e.g. the female surgeon’s return to work…. etc etc.

‘“closely connected countries of the same race, e.g. 9 IQ points between Greece and Albania”

I’d have thought those two countries have been pretty isolated from each other for a long time?’

Au contraire. This isn’t the place and I’m not the authority to deliver an exhaustive lecture on just who the modern ‘Greeks’ are. However, as of the middle of the nineteenth century, some significant percentage of what is now considered ‘Greece’ was inhabited by Albanians.

Thanks. Amazing to read something that direct and IMHO accurate in a letter to a newspaper editor. Another time.

Regarding your ideas. First order, I think they make sense, but quickly get into problems like Oliver describes. In particular, who chooses the criteria. I’m not overfond of the idea of subsidizing woke studies graduates who generally possess little ability and worse political views.

I think the first task is just to remove some of the current dysgenic thumb on the scale.

A somewhat related question on which I don’t recall your having written anything is which ethnic groups in the US have, together or separately, the standard average IQ of 100. Can you give your readers some assistance to clear thinking on this? I say “clear thinking” because it strikes me as muddled, quite apart from Flynn Effects and false precision, to quote 100 for the US and (as I have seen) 98 for Australia. The most striking source of improbability is to suppose the 13.5% black population could be offset by the 2.5% who are Jews. So, is it just “white Amrricans” that score 100? But who are they? The 60%, not including all or some Hispanics (illegals anyone?). Even the 100 for white Americans possibly including Jews and Hispanics who speak English at home raises at least one question. Given that whites have been breeding dysgenically (Protestants and Jews first, Catholics later) for a few generations what is the chance that a population which started with a lot of poor white trash, Britain’s lower class rejects, would score 100? By contrast Australia only has about 2.5 % of Aboriginal descent and no large percentage from the convicts who may or may not have been like the poor white trash ancestors in the US South. By contrast it would be surprising today if the average IQ measured on culture fair tests of all adults in Australia were not considerably higher than that of the US given that Ausstralia’s selective immigration has been relatively eugenic compared to that of the US, including illegals, for at least some decades. Can you help sort this one out for your readers? My apologies if you have already done so. Of course .y question is really about the US

Ron, since sending my last reply I have read Steve Sailer’s
https://www.takimag.com/article/asian-supremacy/print

It seems certainly relevant to the question I raised. For instance, how much would Asian test prep (for almost any test) improve measured IQ scores even on supposedly culture fair tests? (That practice on Raven’s Matrices can greatly improve performance is clear IMO).

It is a pity BTW Steve didn’t deal definitively with the anomalous line for blacks on his chart.

For combating dysgenic breeding it has to be kept simple and
potically saleable.Assuming graduates nearly all have IQs above average and other characteristics no worse than randomly distributed is enough to start with and would at worst split feminists.

uses the term “Nordic Supremacism” unironically and spends most of his pages combating this bogeyman

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nordicism

Thanks. As stated I do not recall seeing any. The Black population in my city is still relatively small (thank goodness).

Of course this is an SJW idea, but aside from the nitty gritty, the borderline condition – I don’t see why pushing society towards higher intelligence, on average, is bad.

Your point? Even the most extreme Nordicists never advocated segregation or anything else that could plausible be interpreted as “supremacism” by any sane person. Then there is more truth to the idea that “White Supremacism” is a big problem in the present day. Something approximating this has actually existed historically, even if few of its critics are old enough to remember it. “Nordic Supremacism” is a complete fantasy.

Not to mention that Nordicism as a movement (to the extent it ever was one) has also been deader than truth in the mainstream media since about May 7, 1945. For good or ill.

Yeah, Realist was the jerk who told me, when in early March I predicted exponential growth of the SARS-2 epidemic in the U.S., that only a fool would try to predict the future. A fortiori to the max in his case.

A logical causal chain to explain Lynn’s dual psychological ranking would be that low IQ limits tribal societies to low levels of organization, which in terms of natural selection could favor a high frequency of psychopathy. High-IQ, complexly-organized societies like ancient China and medieval northern Europe punished psychopathy severely, thereby exerting natural selection against it. At the hunter-gatherer level of societal organization selection against psychopathy was also evidently strong, i.e., band consensus for murder of band members who showed persistent psychopathic behavior.

Perhaps there is also a selective effect of average psychopathy on average IQ in low-IQ tribal societies such that psychopathic behavior leads to enough reproductive success to counter any reproductive success by higher-IQ individuals. Under this view, Sub-Saharan Africans are trapped in a selective standoff that has stalled psychological evolution, and such a selective standoff is what happens when a low-IQ population develops a tribal level of societal organization.

a population which started with a lot of poor white trash, Britain’s lower class rejects, would score 100

Your premise is completely flawed and startlingly ignorant. The pre-Revolutionary immigrants from Britain to North America were almost entirely middle-class people who were able to finance passage. They typically came as families. Exceptions were in the earliest period (early to mid-1600’s) when each colony was a business run by corporate owners; at that time immigrants would indenture themselves to pay the cost of the voyage. In these cases, there was selection by agents of the corporation to ensure that each indentured servant would be a good investment during the years of servitude. The dregs of Britain were not treated to an ocean cruise.

It is highly probable that the pre-Revolutionary British immigrants were better than the average British stock, more determined, more industrious, and more intelligent. As an example, the Scots-Irish (Ulster Plantation derived North Britons) of upland South Carolina self-organized an entire military force (mounted militia regiments; logistic operations including manufacture of rifles, swords, clothing, shoes, harness, etc.; intelligence operations; highly flexible command and control) which whipped the shit out of the British Regulars, British-incentivized Cherokee Indians, and Tory militias that attempted to subdue them. The victories of this self-organized Scots-Irish military force in the Second Cherokee War, at Musgrove’s Mill, Blackstock’s Plantation, Kings Mountain and Cowpens and dozens of smaller fights directly caused the failure of the British “Southern Strategy.” That is not an accomplishment possible by inferior people. They were poor, yes, while taming a wilderness. They were certainly not trash.

Lynns Irish IQ findings were weak, and almost certainly environmental. Else we would have to explain why the Irish – genetically singular to the Welsh, Scottish and English (where pure Anglo Saxon blood has been discredited) are so much weaker in intelligence.

The African IQ of 70 has largely environmental causes. I mean he knew about the Flynn effect.

I’m not saying that either are 100 absent environmental effects but it’s closer.

Kinda lost the anti racism trope there and reverted to Anglo Saxon supremacy.

You sound better informed than I though I am surprised that you don’t mention the sending of convicts to the American colonies and also, the inference that some (Greg Clark e.g I think) draw as to sources of improvement of British successful class IQs compared to the poor.
Have you read Nancy Isenberg’s “White Trash: the 400 Year Untold Story of Class in America”? I would be interested to know how it affects your thinking on the specific question you have discussed. It is well worth reading anyway even if it was given to me by a somewhat woke junior member of my family.

Well, I replied to counter your assumption, not to discuss all aspects of the peopling of North America. Of course the joking epithet among Georgians is, “That sumbitch must have come down from a convict.” When the British began to implement their Southern Strategy (conquering Georgia and South Carolina in preparation for taking back North Carolina and Virginia in order to make any independent country a small one composed of only New England), they quickly succeeded in the Coastal Plain and Lower Piedmont. Where they ran into an absolute buzzsaw was in the upper Piedmont which had been settled beginning in the 1750’s by Scots-Irish Presbyterians who originally arrived in Pennsylvania and migrated to the upper Piedmont of North Carolina, South Carolina and Georgia by coming down the Shenandoah Valley, either over a couple of generations or in one long wagon trip. Those people were my gene pool; I can trace ancestry to at least six Revolutionary militiamen. So if I wanted to make a self-serving interpretation of why the British military succeeded in the lowlands but not in the upper Piedmont, it would be that the Scots-Irish were better quality people than those from England who settled in the lowlands, some of whom as indentured servants or convicts.

No, I haven’t read Isenberg’s book. Two reasons being that any message from a Jewish sociologist is too suspect to bother with, and her style of one aside after another would annoy the hell out of me. But here is an excerpt from an Amazon review.

This book makes the case that the poor arrived 500 years ago when America was first settled, and most of them never rose to the middle or upper classes because “land was the principal source of wealth, and those without any had little chance to escape servitude. It was the stigma of landlessness that would leave its mark on white trash from this day forward”. The poor and their ancestors remained in the underclass for the most part, and still are today.

If that is truly the message, then the book is absolute bullshit. Land grants were made to all Revolutionary, War of 1812, and Indian war veterans, both soldiers and militiamen before 1862. State governments transferred land vacated by Amerindians to settlers by homestead grants or sold it to those who won the right to buy it in a lottery. In 1862 the Homestead Act opened vast stretches of Federal land to homesteading.

One of my great-grandfathers homesteaded on mountain land (farming a small valley between two ridges) in a southern state in 1852. He was illiterate. His sons either homesteaded other spots in the mountains or bought land in a large valley. His son who was my grandfather was 7 years old at the end the Civil War and received little schooling because the South was economically destroyed. He saved his earnings as a laborer until he could purchase a good farm. His sons and daughters went on to be middle-class workers and businessmen in urban settings. My father was manager of large local businesses with only an 8th grade education. My brother was an M.D. and had a Ph.D. in public health. My sister is a millionaire from lifelong investing.

Many friends have similar family histories. I have also observed younger people make foolish choices which destroyed their chances for economic security, or even destroyed their lives. Success is largely a matter of genetics. Genotypes are reshuffled every generation. Some of the phenotypes are highly functional and some are not. Poverty in the U.S. has nothing to do with land ownership 250 years ago.

When I was a professor, possibly the most impressive undergraduate student I met was a fellow from England who at 18 had joined the U.S. military there in order to get out of the dole-mentality that surrounded him. Some of his military service involved anti-drug operations in South America. He was not a desk jockey. After completing his military requirements, he got U.S. citizenship, college-funding, and was heading to medical school. Just another example of the perseverance that has payed off here for centuries.

Isenberg’s book is propaganda meant to divide Americans, and at the cost of discouraging those who are genetically less well-endowed but who could have better lives if they made the effort.

This link is to a well-written U.S. Park Service book about the Battle of Kings Mountain. It provides more insight into the social conditions of the upland South in early times than does Isenberg’s leftist propaganda.

https://www.nps.gov/parkhistory/online_books/kimo/battle.pdf

Thank you for the linked book which I shall, even before reading all of it, send to my young Columbia student relation who, I think, gave me the Isenberg book.

Tell me more please. I cannot find much evidence that Nancy Isenberg is either culturally or genetically Jewish since there are apparently Jewish and non-Jewish Eisenbergs from which her name probably derives. See, e.g
http://www.isenbergfamily.info/isenberg/eisenbergs-in-europe/

And as to her leftism, can you detect it here
https://www.salon.com/2016/07/09/the_deep_roots_of_white_trash_in_america_not_only_are_we_not_a_post_racial_society_we_are_certainly_not_a_post_class_society/ ?

Nancy Isenberg is a close associate of Andrew Burstein, who by his name is genetically Jewish. Isenberg may be genetically Jewish in whole or part, but her message is clearly in service of the Jewish century-long attack on America’s version of Western Civilization. The message is both to denigrate the lower genetic and economic stratum of the white, and especially Southern, population so that her woke readers will be motivated to vote, and secondly to divide whites by class. The article to which you link is less polemical than the book White Trash (a rather incendiary title you must admit, especially to use a year after the deplorables had elected Trump), but it carries a similar message.

Here is my worldview regarding socio-economic matters. 1. As per my Scots-Irish heritage, personal freedom is the ultimate good, greater than life itself. The Jewish “program” is authoritarian, as is Jewish culture for thousands of years. 2. Class is a natural outcome of differences in genetically-based ability, but rigidly hereditary class structure is inimical to widespread personal freedom. 3. Governance by democracy will be corrupted by whomever constitutes the upper class, and governmental/corporate power will be used to suck dry the lower classes. Therefore I strongly favor governance by demarchy.

Some personal experiences that support that worldview. First, the progress of people from my gene pool over three centuries was based on the availability of personal choice regarding how to invest one’s time. Second, the observation that some individuals are obsessed with social climbing, which will inevitably lead to a class structure even if the social climbing is expressed only as an intense work ethic. Third, I have owned large (50 acres first and 110 acres the second time) pieces of land in the Southern hinterlands. The neighbors included an annoying component of criminals, trespassers, and drug addicts (a couple of examples: a father who owned an adjacent parcel who was beaten to death while dealing drugs and his son and grandson killed together in a gunfight with other parties; two brothers who do pointless crimes as soon as they are released from prison, apparently so they can go back to free meals; a week long party in a doublewide that cost $14,000 for whores and cocaine). That Jefferson, or whatever other patrician, had negative opinions of the very lowest stratum of white society is neither surprising nor wrong. What is wrong is corporate actions, e.g. pushing opioids and credit card debt, which exploit such people. So I am an anti-Jewish Populist who wants governance done by individuals randomly selected from a pool from which has been screened out those with psychopathic tendencies and low IQ. I’m laying this out so that you don’t mistake me for a Republican.

A couple of comments about the historical composition of the Southern white population. The book “Plain Folk of the Old South” by Frank Owsley documents the presence of a strong middle-class in the antebellum South. Regarding convict transport. First, those transported were usually not career criminals. They were typically young people not old enough to have fully developed psychological executive function who stole some small item. Second, the number of transported convicts was small in comparison to the number of immigrants in family groups. 250,ooo Scots-Irish are believed to have immigrated between 1713 and 1775. Third, the rate of natural population increase was very high in family-based immigrant groups; the number of children per family in the colonies was double that of Britain (8 versus 4; that’s why the British class-structured society was thought worth fighting against). Therefore the transported convicts would have contributed much less to population growth than free immigrants in family groups.

Regarding the effect of Isenberg’s White Trash, I would use you as an example. Our conversation began with me objecting to your characterizing Southern people as of low IQ. That was something that you got as a takeaway message from Isenberg. Her rhetoric is diffuse, but it has the dual messages of the white overlord and the white trash idiot. Not a helpful way to understand either history or society, but good for making whites look bad.

Supremacism means believing something is supreme, and Nordicists believe Nordics are supreme. It’s dead in the mainstream media, but a lot of White Nationalists and other racialists are still Nordic supremacists.

Richard Lynn’s memoir presents his life story as a dissident psychologist and self-described genuine scientist.