RSS
What Richard Nixon and Daniel Patrick Moynihan, a Harvard professor of government and education, who had been his chief domestic policy adviser in 1969-70, are discussing in this October 1971 Watergate Tape is the revolution in the social sciences of the previous 5 years, beginning with the federally funded Coleman Report in 1966.
Paid for by the 1964 Civil Rights Act, it was intended to provide the social science foundation for LBJ’s Great Society in education. Except sociologist James Coleman’s massive data mostly showed that what kids bring to school matters more than school budgets. Another milestone was Arthur Jensen’s 1969 Harvard Education Review meta-analysis of racial differences in IQ.
And now Nixon had sent Moynihan, formerly his chief domestic adviser, Herrnstein’s article on how meritocratic cognitive testing would lead to growing class stratification in American life (a prediction that certainly appears to have come true over the last 47 years).
Nixon starts out talking to Moynihan about Richard Herrnstein’s September 1971 article in The Atlantic: “I.Q.” (I can recall reading it at the corner library around 1973.) Pat Buchanan had forwarded Herrnstein’s Atlantic article to Nixon.
Unfortunately, the bulk of this important article is not online. Here’s a Harvard Crimson interview with Herrnstein about it. Here’s Noam Chomsky’s views on it. Here’s psychometrician Chris Chabris’s views on it as of 1998.
Of course, Herrnstein went on to co-author The Bell Curve with Charles Murray 23 years later.
Moynihan went on to serve four terms as a Democratic Senator from New York and upon his retirement was succeeded by Hillary Clinton.
I got interested in social science the following summer of 1972, so this was roughly the state of the art at the time. It’s funny how all the pundits condemning Charles Murray in 2017 are largely ignorant today of what Nixon knew 46 years ago by reading state of the art social science.
Another interesting aspect is that Moynihan, whose chief interests were domestic policy and social science, was considered a neoconservative at the the time, while Nixon’s chief foreign policy adviser, fellow Harvard prof Henry Kissinger, was not thought of as a neocon.
Today, of course, neoconservatism is mostly thought of as an Israel-obsessed foreign policy movement. But back in its origins, it had a lot of interest in social sciences and a lot of Catholics like Moynihan and James Q. Wilson.
Date: October 7, 1971
Time: 10:32 am – 10:58 am
Location: White House TelephoneThe President talked with Daniel P. Moynihan.
[See Conversation No. 285-16A]Moynihan’s schedule
-New York
-United Nations [UN]
-SovietsPresident’s schedule
-Speech
-Florida
-Walker’s Cay
-Richard J. HerrnsteinRace relations
-Herrnstein
-Arthur R. Jensen
-Racial differentiations
-Black groups
-Asian groups
-Eskimos
-English and Irish
-Northern Ireland
-Edmund BurkeSocial policy
-Nathan Glazer
-Commentary, “The Limits of Social Policy”
-Family assistance
-Sweden, Britain
-Work ethic
-Work requirement
-Welfare
-Limits
-Lyndon B. Johnson
-Howard University speech
-New towns in towns
-Fort Lincoln
-Washington, DCIntegration
-James Coleman
-Blacks
-Chicanos
-Teaching staff
-Frederick Mosteller’s and Moynihan’s study
-Coleman’s efforts
-Fellow students
-School expenditures
-Middle class achievements
-Spiro T. Agnew
-Comments regarding black leadersWorld governments
-Black countries
-Leaders from contested elections
-Vietnam
-Liberia
-William R. Tolbert
-Mobutu Sese Seko
-Congo [Zaire]
-Jomo Kenyatta
-Haiti
-Blacks
-Government
-Latin American governments
-Mexico
-Colombia
-Venezuela
-Salvador Allende Gossens
-Luis Munoz Marin
-President’s Visit in 1958
-Lima, Caracas
-Latins
-Italians
-Spanish
-French
-Types of government
-Capacity
-Compared with Black countries
-Haiti, Liberia, Ethiopia
-Compared with Asia
-Japan, Philippines
-Thailand
-Government
-Thanom Kittikachorn
-Iran
-GovernmentRace relations
-Capacity for government
-Asians
-Caucasians
-Latins
-Africans
-Athletics
-Music, dance
-Poetry
-Lawyers
-Edward W. Brooke
-William H. Brown III
-Equal Employment Opportunities Commission [EEOC]
-Mexicans
-Culture-free tests
-Language skills
-Responsibilities of a President
-Edmund S. Muskie
-Black as a Vice President
-Jews
-Barry M. Goldwater
-Catholic
-Oklahoma
-Discouraging latent prejudice
-Woman on the Supreme Court
-Importance of equal opportunity
-BrookeRewards for excellence
-US employees at UN Secretariat
-Ralph Bunche and Paul G. Hoffman
-Medal of Freedom
-Nobel Prize
-Health
-Samuel W. GoldwynRace relations
-Memorandum to President
English
Arabic
Chinese (Simplified)
Dutch
French
German
Hebrew
Hindi
Italian
Persian
Portuguese
Russian
Spanish
Swedish
I don’t think you meant to have the embedded link start midway through. The discussion of the Hernstein article is at the start of the clip.
It is disorienting to hear, with the only presidents in my adult life being W, Obama, and Trump, a President of the United States show this type of intellectual ability and curiosity, or such a genuine concern for the well-being of Americans apart from political considerations. You could see than Nixon was familiar with the Coleman Report, which is more than 500 pages long and full of education statistics, especially those dealing with race and income.
There is a moment where Nixon says to Moynahan, “Did you read Glazer’s piece in Commentary recently?” and not a half a second passes before Moynahan responds, “Yeah, the Limits of Social Policy” Then my mind darkens in depression to think about the equivilent conversations would be between Trump and his primary policy advisors Jared, Ivanka™, and the dyslexic American University grad Gary Cohn. Perhaps something like his private conversations with Billy Bush or his longest extended interviews, which were on the Howard Stern show.
Steve,
The 26 minute telephone conversation covered all (or a good part) of the listed topics. WOW!
The sheer breath of coverage is impressive in itself – and especially with regard to the HBD discussion which as you noted is important this very day!
I’ve always had mixed feelings about Nixon, but now my feelings are on the upswing.
The article Nixon discussed is available online
https://www.commentarymagazine.com/articles/the-limits-of-social-policy/
It is mostly common sense social conservatism: welfare causes illegitimacy, which is a worse problem than the poverty it was designed to remedy. There is a refreshing pessimism to it: there should be work requirements to get welfare, but don’t expect the work requirements to do much good.
There is a kind of ambition to the article that a lot of conservative writing now lacks, as Glazer directs his arguments against the welfare state toward moderates and liberals. Conservatives don’t try to do that much anymore. Partly that is because conservatives writers are now mainly employed as entertainers on talk radio or Fox News, or else are at money-losing publications funded by billionaires or lobby groups. Another reason is the left has greatly changed since 1971, and assuming they are public spirited citizens who are open to rational argument is no longer tenable.
Since the Left has determined that race “doesn’t exist”, but that “historical racism” must be removed through protectionism and affirmative action, all these fine discussions are largely worthless.
The D’s have slowly backed themselves into a corner on race/identity politics. Their coalition of “hate whitey, blame whitey, kill whitey” has given them control of all urban areas and won them the previous two presidential elections. But it’s created a party of races that hate each other and just want to step on each other for more power.
If they stick with it, no white person will vote for them and their leadership will be entirely diversity hires who get smoked by the more meritocratic whites—-and thus become a minor party— or have whitey leave the nation and end up with Zimbabwe.
But if they try to reduce identity politics, they will lose a lot of support as the race-mongers in them will say, “Why should I vote D if I ain’t getting any?” and thus end up becoming a minor party anyway.
It’s a tightrope the party elders (if they care at all about the future of the party and the country, which I doubt) will have to have a long-term vision of for the next 20 years. Remember that it took 20 years for the D’s to drop the “Acid, Amnesty, and Abortion” and wussy-peacenik tags of McGovern and Carter and get to neo-liberalism with Bubba, who won with it. The Dems need to lay out a similar strategy now that will bear fruit come 2036.
Until mainline “conservative” publications are saying that race exists and it’s more than skin deep, their arguments won’t sway anyone on the alt-right. You know those guys—the ones who put Donald Trump into the White House and are cracking communist skulls in Berkeley. Actual winners.
The more I read about what Watergate actually was, the more I realize Nixon was crucified for doing something that every politician does. Unfortunately, Nixon had a modicum shame/honor in his blood, which Leftists don’t have, hence why he didn’t challenge Kennedy’s results in Chicago in 1960 and why he resigned due to Watergate instead of fighting it.
I can bet you Trump paid a lot of attention to that and wouldn’t make the same mistake.
Some entering freshmen at Princeton are in revolt against having yet another “tedious” social justice bromide forced down their throats. An open letter to the university president begs for an intellectually stimulating preread. Suggested authors include Thomas Sowell and SPLC-certified Islamophobe Ayaan Hirsi Ali. Also, the author of The War on Cops. Ta-Nehisi Coates didn’t make the cut.
https://thetab.com/us/princeton/2017/05/03/open-letter-president-eisgruber-4999
Wow. Discovering/uncovering this sort of stuff is one of the reasons I read you every day and donate mostly when the tine comes. Nice work Steve. Herrnstein and Jensen way back in the 1960s! This sort of content is like reading the secret history of the US.
If I’m not mistaken, as recently as ~2000 you yourself were an admirer of social science-focused neoconservatism. The “Iraq Attaq” stuff in the early 2000s was quite a whiplash.
LOL
https://www.unz.com/?s=israel&searchsubmit=Search&ptype=all
Nixon was clever, but not clever enough.
I think the odds are pretty good someone will forward this particular post to Trump.
Also whether intentional or not the starting point of the video is very interesting. Leaders shouldn’t speak the truth even if it’s known about certain issues. It’s basically an endorsement of political correctness. It’s also provides an explanation as to why Trump is so strongly objected to by many political & cultural elites even though he isn’t all that truthful. He’s just more truthful than the political establishment.
Looks like Chomsky acknowledge the IQ difference and claimed it would be moot in a socialist run economy.
Three of the first four books the admin sent to all incoming Princeton freshmen were black authors, one of them was a pop-science book promoting stereotype threat. The fourth is by a lady philosopher. The fifth, for this year, is a translation of a German professor’s book What is Populism?
Nixon’s mother was a Quaker, for what it’s worth. By the metric of Presidents who can casually walk the country into war for no good reason, Watergate is pretty pedestrian stuff.
Pat’s column provides some good context. The national media hated Nixon, like they’ve hated every Republican president.
Per Lot’s comment at # 1, yes, Nixon probably had the most intellectual horsepower since Eisenhower.
Trump is a hell of a lot smarter than his opponents think he is, when they’re not convincing themselves he’s literally-Hitler. But like most business executives I’ve known he doesn’t like reading a lot of dense text.
The only way Trump would resign is if Ivanka told him he had to.
>Remember that it took 20 years for the D’s to drop the “Acid, Amnesty, and Abortion”
Maybe the Rs will finally come around to Acid, Deportation and Depo-provera
It’s settled science that any discussion of limiting welfare will result in riots and burned cities. You’re far more likely to hear a public figure speak of means-testing Soc Sec benefits, which used to be the “third-rail”. Geezers vote, but don’t chimp out.
We’re riding the Welfare State all the way down, and everyone knows it, which is why more people with options are leaving the cities, more people are armed to the gills, and the commies with AFFH are trying to place the underclass amongst the middle-class as a thinly veiled extortion threat.
If money ever becomes not-free, wholly sheet.
OT: Unfortunately, the path for refugees to the United States is not near as doom and gloom as this article makes it sound. It’s not all bad news, some of the NGOs are having to lay off staff. USA Today even included a couple of quotes from Mark Kirkorian. The map with the detail from each country is pretty sobering, we have taken 101,545 people from Somalia since 2002. I wonder if any of the 80 people from Zimbabwe were white?
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2017/05/04/refugee-admissions-donald-trump-migrants/101036264/
And now Nixon had sent Moynihan, formerly his chief domestic adviser, Herrnstein’s article on how meritocratic cognitive testing would lead to growing class stratification in American life (a prediction that certainly appears to have come true over the last 47 years).
the tests don’t cause the stratification; rather the tests explain it: high-IQ people are more successful in life , and IQ is more important now than any other time in history
white people have no culture. it was all stolen from the non privileged
I know most of you will think that statement is false but People of Color agree with me and they are 90% of the world
For those who may be joining us late, I want to repeat Lot’s point. If you just click on Steve’s link and listen without rewinding, you’ll miss the most interesting parts of the tape.
“Don’t mention the war” kind of stuff — avoiding any talk of any truth regarding certain categories of people is a red flag of feminization. What do women do? Talk endlessly about how much they HATE HATE HATE Beta White Males for making dongle jokes or asking them out for coffee. And excuse any bad boy jihadi for blowing up Moms and Kids because tingles. Tingles!
Just like France will elect Macron and Open Borders since most of Frenchwomen have the tingles for immavaders with the IQ of a rock (a net plus for women who detest male intelligence like they do baseball stats and physics) not to mention a hard preference for gays over straight (White men). So too will American women ever prevent an honest discussion about how to provide a meaningful life and decent relations with other groups for that large portion of Blacks unable to operate at the higher end of the IQ curve. Nor is it just Dems — Republicans too avoid any honesty for the same reason — their women detest any honest discussion of flaws of the most favored racial group for which lower IQ is a net plus not a minus. Look at Ivanka. Think Trump can or will ever be honest with her as his Daddy’s Little Princess?
Nope — the way forward is to beat other racial groups at their own r-selected game. If most every White dude had five illegitimate kids, was hyper-violent like Billy the Kid, and as dangerous as Walter White, would any of this stuff happen? True we’d be in poverty, but that is a given anyway — it would just be majority White poverty instead of White in South Africa poverty. [Which is our future, not Brazil but South Africa and Iraq.] Call it the Skunk Strategy. Stink up America so much no one will move here and be so violent and dangerous our women find US the most Alpha. They’d be a lot happier anyway.
The Chomsky article is facinating. He basically concedes Herrnstein’s argument, but says it would be irrelevant in a socialist society. Socialism will work, Chomsky says, because decent people don’t care about money. He adds that right-thinking scientists should ignore Herrnstein’s findings because they are dangerous.
Fascinating, sorry.
Schooling can and does make a major, major, difference to educational outcomes. One of the studies prompted by the Coleman report, project follow through, the largest ever educational study which bizarrely few people on the left or the right are aware of, found a model that consistently produces large positive outcomes for all students, including minority students.
Liberals ignored it because it turned teaching from a profession into a technical role. Conservatives already believe Black’s are doomed by their lower iq.
It’s a sad and bizarre situation, really.
It is pretty cool that by simply using cultural power through the megaphone and educational institutions, you can systematically suppress and erase cutting edge social science that undermines your political agenda (“pseudoscience”). It so much more subtle than putting Lysenko in the gulag. Thank you Cultural Marxism, I was worrying that I wasn’t cynical enough!
Nixon was a coward trimmer on race and IQ in public; but Nixon was a IQ racial realist in private.
Nixon was a sleazy Ohio boy by way of California. David Allan Coe sings this in a song: “I’m an Ohio boy.” Ohio should be proud of Coe, but not proud of Nixon. Ohio boy Nixon destroyed public schools in the South when he forced the integration of Blacks upon the South. Nixon was a dirtbag coward on matters involving race in the United States.
According to the internet, all 16 of Nixon’s great-great-grandparents were American-born. Most of Nixon’s ancestors sailed to America on wooden ships into ports in the mid-Atlantic colonies. All four of Nixon’s grandparent lines ended up in Ohio by the mid-1800s.
Ohio boy Nixon deliberately attacked the Southerners by swamping the public schools in the South with Blacks. Nixon was a weasel coward Ohio asshole. This is one of the reasons I always say that I am a post-Cold War Buchananite to separate out Pat Buchanan’s career from his time with Nixon and Reagan.
Slightly O.T. but very amusing:
dailycaller.com
/2017/05/04/trayvon-martin-awarded-posthumous-degree-in-aeronautical-science/You can’t make this stuff up.
Dude, the alt-right was at best a marginal reason Trump got in. The alt-right is not that big or influential.
And the ones “cracking heads” are people like Mike Cernovich, not effeminate Dicky Spencer.
And now comes this:
Sex differences in brain size and general intelligence (g)
Nixon had a great deal more “intellectual firepower” than Eisenhower.
Pretty fascinating stuff. One laments that they took the tape-recorder out of the Oval Office. It would be great to have this stuff on all the more recent presidents. Inner office candor reveals more about how government works than the galleries or C-span or the pundits ever could.
hard to know how smart Trump is because little is known about his private life, especially his youth. You cannot judge someone’s intellect by their public persona. I would guess an IQ of around 115.
it seems the majority of presidents have IQs around 125-145
Neoconservatism has its roots in Bolshevism.
Slightly OT, but evidently IQ is irrelevant. It’s the name you give your kid. UCLA research.
https://www.inc.com/bill-murphy-jr/science-says-giving-kids-these-kinds-of-names-makes-them-more-successful.html
For some reason Shaq isn’t on the list.
Nixon definitely seems to have been one of the brainiest presidents of the 20th century. But Eisenhower was arguably much more successful, so IQ points aren’t everything. JQ Adams was a lot smarter than Andrew Jackson (or at least much more capable of profundity), for that matter.
FDR was said to have a 2nd class intellect but a 1st rate temperament and Nixon was the opposite. Nixon was probably the finest legal mind to hold the Presidency since Taft (and for all the contempt that lawyers are held in, the law requires considerable intellect). If Nixon had not gone down in disgrace, then like Taft he would have made a great Supreme Court justice.
BTW, I could see Obama going on the Court in a few years after he has made more millions than he will ever need (assuming there is a Democrat President). Maybe to take the Clarence Thomas seat?
Interesting that in the list of about 50 bullet points (I didn’t count, I’m guessing) “Jews” occupy exactly 1, the same as Eskimos. What did they say about Eskimos?
If you can’t convince adults there is santa, go for the kids.
http://www.intellectualtakeout.org/blog/elementary-students-being-indoctrinated-minnesotas-top-school-district
A little OT but hilarious: Miss Black UT criticized for not being “black enough”
http://www.statesman.com/news/local/winner-miss-black-pageant-criticized-for-not-being-black-enough/iOFWVH14zG6sOBTIom7ggM/
“Schooling can and does make a major, major, difference to educational outcomes. One of the studies prompted by the Coleman report, project follow through, the largest ever educational study which bizarrely few people on the left or the right are aware of, found a model that consistently produces large positive outcomes for all students, including minority students.”
For god’s sakes, what was the model? School uniforms and gender segregation? What?
(and for all the contempt that lawyers are held in, the law requires considerable intellect). If Nixon had not gone down in disgrace, then like Taft he would have made a great Supreme Court justice.
yes, great intellects like Sotomayor and Kagen
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/may/05/venice-bans-kebab-shops-preserve-decorum-traditions-city
Venetians trying to preserve their culture.
Bizarrely, you didn’t bother linking to the study or even providing its name.
Perhaps it is a figment of your imagination?
Yeah, there seems to be a weak correlation (if any) between raw intelligence and presidential success, though of course all the men who make it to that level are above-average intellects (well, maybe not Harding). I’m certain Herbert Hoover was a good bit smarter than FDR.
We have some pretty good indications of the brain power of some recent politicians. We have the SAT scores for Bush, Kerry, Hillary Clinton, and Chuck Schumer. Hillary was a National Merit semi-finalist. This translates to a score of about the 98th percentile or an IQ of above 128.
One is tempted to say if Trump is so stupid (IQ 115) why did he defeat Hillary so easily?
The remarkable characteristic of Trump which all agree on is – he’s unpredictable. Hillary on the other hand was very predictable. She might excite you or she might disappoint you but she seldom surprised you. She seemed pre-programmed. This is hardly a characteristic of great intellect.
Trump is always doing something surprising. Part of this is probably just that he is a high energy person in the way that Obama was a low energy person. But Obama was very articulate whereas Trump is not a good speaker at all. People like him because they like what he says. They seldom particularly like the way he says it.
https://twitter.com/RabbiShmuley/status/859514352755453954/photo/1
Bannon with rabbi Boteach.
Most istevey photo of the year?
How about go on down the alphabet just a tad to something completely different:
Bears, Beets, Battlestar Galactica!”
IIRC it was a comment about Eskimo’s being smarter than whites (?). Part of a comment about racial differences in IQ and how it was good that whites weren’t at the top (paraphrasing). Also a comment about culture fair IQ tests.
Not sure if you are aware of the YouTube automatic transcript tool (click on More…). It’s good for checking on things like this. There are inaccuracies of course, but it’s a good way to find the timepoint to start listening.
The Jew comment mentioned Goldwater (as a counterexample actually) and the possibility that there might be a negative impact on electability, but saying so was verboten.
I was in high school during the Eisenhower administration. This was Arlington Virginia so we sometimes attended political events in the Capitol.
I remember we went to Constitution hall to hear Eisenhower speak. He was embarrassing. He stumbled and fumbled and his mind wandered. Later that evening his little talk was on the TV news. It was unrecognizable. They had edited out all the ‘duhs’ and incoherent phrases. He sounded normal.
But he wasn’t normal. His brain was gone. This was after the second stroke. He made little sense. He was more than just an ’empty suit’ he was a whole empty person.
Then a few years later I saw Eisenhower on TV in show on the Normandy Invasion. He was alert, lucid and cogent. He was the kind of leader you would follow. He was very impressive.
The thing you have to remember about Eisenhower was that he had been very sick while in office. When he was in the Army the other generals respected him above all others. He was the indispensable man in WWII. But he also had a couple years as President where he was pretty much brain dead.
If the USA survives into the 22nd Century ( yeah, I know, a very big if ), Richard Nixon’s reputation among historians will undergo a massive rehabilitation. This very complex man was by far the most effective, far seeing, and thoughtful chief executive of the second half of the 20th Century.
A government of thoroughly corrupt pygmies, such as we now labor under, cannot tolerate giants.
NMSF actually has a higher cutoff than that. From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Merit_Scholarship_Program
Thus the IQ threshold is more like 139 per http://www.iqcomparisonsite.com/iqtable.aspx
(I’m also used to 98% being quoted more like 130 as in this table, do you have a source for 128?).
The “per state” aspect adds an important wrinkle, but Illinois has a relatively high cutoff: http://www.compassprep.com/national-merit-semifinalist-cutoffs/
I assume it was similar back then.
P.S. Trump should have test scores out there. He has referred to them obliquely. I think he either tests a good bit better than 115 or has a learning disability (e.g. dyslexia) which knocks his score down in some situations. In my experience dyslexics tend to have compensatory abilities (e.g. good memories or more facile verbal/people skills) but a lack of affinity for reading (sound like anyone we know?) is a handicap. Given Trump’s business background/success I suspect he has decent quantitative skills (but would love to know if I am correct or not).
Has Obama ever shown any interest in Clarence Thomas’ seat?
Daniel Patrick Moynihan got me out of Urban Planning. I think I’m grateful.
I went to George Washington University for graduate school in urban planning. At the time it was probably the best planning school in the nation – at least that’s what everyone seemed to say around GWU. As it happened I hated Urban Planning.
The studio was given a local (Washington DC) slum as a project. We visited the desolation that followed the MLK riots. We were to plan for a new and better Washington. We had black community leaders come in to scold all us nice white grad students about black realities. They were very condescending but they had some really stupid and self serving ideas.
I decided that the restoration of the burned out area was hopeless. The black leadership was simply too unrealistic. We got lectured by economic illiterates. I became convinced that none of our work would go anywhere. But I still had to produce a redevelopment ‘plan’ for that semester.
Moynihan was in the news, so I appropriated one of his phrases as the title for completely blank semester ‘plan’. I called it ‘Benign Neglect’.
My idea was that we should do nothing and just wait for the community to become more reasonable. In fact that’s what eventually happened – nothing. No one was going to spend a fortune in federal money to make some black preachers rich. So nothing was done for many years thereafter.
I of course had to get out of planning – but that worked out just fine.
We don’t want Trump to be reading magazines like Commentary. People like Glazer basically ran the W. Bush administration.
Listened to only the first half for now and I felt that kind of depressing feeling barely 1:00 in others have attested to.
Nixon strongly believes and establishes that IQ differences are real and that it is *very* important the president of the United States know this, but not everyone else. He says this lack of knowledge and idealism is what doomed Johnson’s Great Society.
First thing that gave me pause, as someone who survived public schools in the Deep South, was Nixon focusing on intelligence (and not violence). Lots and lots and lots of kids paid physical prices for these dreams of raising Black achievement that excite Nixon in this conversation.
Nixon discussing half-Latin France was hilarious for some reason.
At the halfway point, Nixon and Moynihan discuss childishness…you’ll have to listen for yourself.
Absolutely brilliant post, Steve. Bravo!! No wonder so many of us tune in morning and evening.
Having read the NY press and watched TV since the Eisenhower Administration, a time which Goodwhites spoke continually about what an awful and ignorant man Nixon was, it is mind-boggling to see first-hand what an intelligent and far-seeing brain he possessed, in the same way as Reagan was denigrated as a know-nothing with just a nice smile until you realized that he had indeed written his political column on his own and actually thought his own thoughts. . . I guess it is too much to hope for, but perhaps today’s Trump-despisers hearing this conversation might take a second to contemplate how much about Trump they actually do not know or understand.
Can you list the books so we can see for ourselves–or link to the list?
Noam Chomsky in the above linked article about Race and IQ:
https://libcom.org/files/chomsky%20-%20iq%20building%20blocks%20new%20class%20system.pdf
“The mean I.Q. of individuals of a certain racial background is irrelevant to the situation of a particular individual, who is what he is.”
– Chomsky does not understand, what societal consequences arise if IQ – as in the US – is related to income and success.
He is totally relaxed when arguing about such questions especially because of – Socialism – waiting just around the corner anyway (such were the Sixties…).
A big surprise is, that he hints at the 100m dash – his remark, that the hundred meter dash results might “in part” be “genetically determinated” indeed hints at a new tendency (German Armin Hary did win the 100m Gold medal in the Olympics in Rome, 1960).
By and large: Chomsky doesn’t grab the more interesting (or relevant) facts. As so often, he appears to be socially tone-deaf – unless somebody uses a fog-horn or a siren…
Trump’s performance on the campaign trail was amazing. People loved his speaking style, especially since he used no notes or teleprompters. They also loved his consistency, unlike some pols who have different opinions and policies depending on the audience in front of them. Indeed, what Trump-supporters are most critical about his performance thus far has been the inconsistency between the clear message that he sent during the campaign compared to what has been accomplished.
> Unfortunately, the bulk of this important article is not online.
PDF of “I.Q.”, Herrnstein 1971:
http://dropcanvas.com/y40r0
https://www.dropbox.com/s/2a2755c0go5yif0/1971-herrnstein.pdf
Drucker touches on the topic of Eisenhower in ‘Managing Oneself’
He claims that Ike was verbally incompetent because he was used to receiving all his information in written memos from staff officers, and from dispatching orders in the same fashion. Or rather, the was a person set up to communicate via the written, rather than the spoken word.
I think it was probably a mix of your theory and Drucker’s.
That looks like a list of Steve Sailer articles.
I didn’t vote for him, but Bill Clinton always struck me as extremely intelligent.
Meanwhile, what multiple of median income has Chomsky been paid at MIT all these years? 3x?
4x? 5x? Chomsky, with a reputed net worth in excess of $2 million, believes decent people don’t care about money. Meaning Chomsky is…indecent?
It’s always folks like Chomsky, having already “made it,” claiming most people don’t care about money. The evidence for this lack of care is always absent.
That was something. The whole bit about African leaders (both in their home countries and at the UN) was total crimethink.
Your experience in urban planning was similar to mine, although I saw enough of it to skip the enrolling part. What seemed to be a very engaging, productive, beneficial activity was undermined and subverted by the true believers with their our-way-or-the-highway demonization and hectoring. That was one of my earlier experiences with the hardcore PC, pronto-SJW crowd so at least I should be grateful for the free tuition.
Via Google: http://www.princeton.edu/president/eisgruber/pre-read/
But Obama was very articulate reading a Teleprompter.
FIFY.
Thanks.
The MSM seems like the pre-Reformation Church, with only its priests allowed to interpret the defined Scripture for the masses. Comes now Luther Sailerberg Gutenberg and the horde of unwashed to see and interpret the evidence for themselves.
One of the key tactics in life is to go right to the source. After all, it is hiding in plain sight everywhere around us. Have faith in your ability to see, read, reason and live instead of letting someone else interpret your experiences for you.
Thanks!
Whites living in the cities – which means mostly liberal voting upscale whites will go extinct if the free money stops flowing. They think they’re protected by virtue of zip codes, housing prices and zoning laws. They aren’t.
Anyone with a lick of sense knows the cities are powder kegs waiting to go off and has gotten out of there.
The whites living there are fools. Look if the EBT cards stop working the police are going to run. There is not enough of them to deal with the millions of enraged parasites. They will let the rich whites swing in the wind. The police will not take bullets for them.
My brother who is friends with some CA Sheriffs told him as much, they are so outnumbered it’s not even funny and in the event of serious monetary collapse they plan on leaving LA when it goes down. As it is most don’t even live in the city proper but on rural and suburban areas outside of LA for safety reasons.
I wonder what Nixon would make of our current era of mass immigration.
I was skimming through it and when I got to this I thought that they were talking about Kevin MacDonald and I got really interested:
But Heather is still good.
http://isteve.blogspot.com/2008/04/mccains-reported-iq.html
Dunno. Trump needs to know what elite Jews are thinking….
No doubt they will find a good use for him in The Old Negro Space Program.
It was not that easy of a defeat. And 115 is not dumb. The problem is there is no quantifiable data to estimate his IQ.
DPM is the only Democrat I ever voted for in a federal or statewide election.
OT
Florida Memorial University is located in Miami Gardens, FL with an enrollment of about 1500, three-fourths black. Incoming freshmen need a high school GPA of 2.4, however applicants who rank in the top 20% of their high school class will be admitted automatically.
The Bachelor of Science in Aeronautical Science offers two concentrations – air traffic control and flight education. Apparently FMU’s graduates have had difficulty gaining employment as air traffic controllers.
http://www.fmuniv.edu/academics/school-of-arts-and-sciences/departments/department-of-aviation-safety/degree-programs/
Perhaps. On the other hand, though, Nixon (an excellent judge of such things) frequently talked about Ike’s complex and devious mind……
And Eisenhower was a very well-informed fellow. He read eight newspapers a day.And if something caught his eye in one of those newspapers, he would start researching it on his own. If it was, say, a snippet from a speech in Congress, he would pour through The Congressional Record to get the full context. And he was very knowledgeable about the Graeco-Roman classics and military history.Thing to remember about Eisenhower is that he didn’t mind people underestimating his intellect:
” But Obama was very articulate whereas Trump is not a good speaker at all. ”
Obama stuttered enough so that even his supporters had to spin it as an ‘intellectual stammer’ where his brain was running ahead of his mouth, but I think it’s the opposite. His ‘if if if if….okie doke’ performance would’ve been played around a thousand times if it came from Trump.
And Trump is a pretty good speaker, the criticism on his speaking skills has focused on how he sounds in print.
https://english.stackexchange.com/questions/311381/donald-trumps-run-on-sentences
Triumph104:
Thanks a lot for that.
It’s disgusting that knowing what he did Moynihan toed the orthodox liberal line and voted likewise in his four terms as Senator.
You can buy a teleprompter yourself these days. The professional ones are still expensive but you can get one that houses a tablet. Then you can get a footswitch to advance it. Not very expensive at all. The most expensive part is the tablet.
Here are some captions on the final selection, “What is Populism?”
http://www.upenn.edu/pennpress/book/15615.html
Could the President of Princeton have chosen a more biased take on Populism? What a miserable hack this man is.
John Judis, a Democrat, wrote a book, The Populist Explosion, which I’ve read. While it was very negative on Trump, it displayed some understanding of the roots of the phenomenon, and was sympathetic to the concerns driving it.
Could the President of Princeton have chosen such book?
Of course not. Populism must be extirpated as heresy, and all its proponents cast out as heretics.
Again, what a miserable, irrational hack.
Another selection worth noting is that of Claude Steele’s book on stereotypes and stereotype threat.
Obviously, there is no crisis in social psychology at Princeton, where politically agreeable results can never be refuted by mere fact.
The British historian Paul Johnson is good on the topic of Eisenhower’s deviousness. Ike’s Secretary of State lamented the fact that the president was too old fashioned to comfortably converse over the telephone with world leaders, an impression which Eisenhower had encouraged. Ike would then stay up into the early hours of the morning conferring with European leaders, without the Secretary’s presence or knowledge.
When the U-2 was shot down, one of Eisenhower’s aides asked him what he would say to the press. Ike responded with something along the lines of, “I’ll utter a few incoherent statements, and they’ll give up in frustration.” Which is exactly what he went on to do.
It would of course be all the more important under socialism. That is, if you want it to work. You can always call the ones who starve to death kulaks and pretend everything’s okay.
But surely Shitavious makes the grade!
Populism is anti-democratic, because what could a system based on majority rule possibly have in common with ordinary people? Despite the fact that a majority of people are ordinary.
Real democracy is a technocratic elite doing political science behind the PR front of elected officials. God forbid a majority of people ever get to decide anything.
Unless they happen to want what the technocratic elite want. In which case: power to the people!
Well, the MSM is part of “the Cathedral,” as the Dark Enlightenment calls it.
I came across this one a while ago of Nixon talking about Archie Bunker and gay propaganda. Ol’ Dick lays down some real talk.
You’re the man!
The introduction notes that the Coleman Report documented the black-white gap increases with age. This is consistent with the familiar black-white-asian ordering of physical, including brain, development.
The intro also describes the extreme reaction to Jensen’s 1969 article on the black-white IQ difference, including threats, protests, and semi-censorship by the publisher. [I decided to look up his bio and learned, despite his Danish name, Jensen is 1/4 Ashkenazi and 1/4 German]
The article itself has a nice summary of the history of IQ, from Galton, Binet, Spearman, Terman, to twin-studies, to the then-present. On the Terman study, we see an instance showing that IQ is correlated with basically all positive human traits: his subjects tended to be taller, heavier, more broad-shouldered, stronger in hand grip, larger in lung capacity, and earlier in sexual maturity. While the differences were not large, they counter the stereotype of the high IQ types as fragile bookworms.
Maybe not so “bizarrely,” if you don’t even mention it by name or tell us its findings in a post bemoaning people’s ignorance of it.
Blacks aren’t doomed, by the way. They were better off generations ago, and conceivably could be again. It’s just that there’s an upper limit, and no magic school dirt is going to make them as prosperous as certain other groups.
Did anyone turn in a paper entitled “Ethnic Cleansing?”
Here’s probably the single classic work on race and IQ.
Rushton and Jensen, Thirty Years of Research on Race Differences in Cognitive Ability
https://www1.udel.edu/educ/gottfredson/30years/Rushton-Jensen30years.pdf
Steve’s New York magazine article claimed HBD was “refuted” but in fact the evidence is overwhelming and well collected in the above article.
With regard to the black white NE asian gap, it describes the following evidence of a genetic component
1. worldwide IQ test scores reflect race differences, even when controlled for other factors like income
2. g factor/correlation of all mental tests
3. IQ results reflect relative racial admixture in mixed individuals
4. the IQs of children regress to the means of their parents’ race
5. adoption studies
6. brain size differences
7. genetic IQ differences are consistent with human evolution requiring higher IQs to plan for survival in cold winter environments
8. studies hypothesizing strong culture and environmental factors have been unsuccessful
9. the NE Asian-White-Black racial IQ ordering reflects a large number of related racial differences (impulsiveness, maturation speed, level of sex hormones, sexual dimorphism, rate of myopia, reaction time scores, rate of twin births)(“the average age for first walking is 13 months in Asian, 12 in whites, 11 in blacks”)
He can just listen to his daughter.
Thanks for the tip. You learn something new every day. Very valuable because I just didn’t have the patience to listen to 1/2 hour of this stuff.
I think Grant was also a person who sounded better in writing than he did in person, for the exact same reason. Heading a large army at war is a formidable task that requires formidable and rare skills and these should not be underestimated. If you meet a victorious general and he seems like a buffoon to you, you are probably missing something.
Whoa! I assumed you were much older, based on your commenting style.
Trump’s off-the-cuff insults were quite entertaining, sometimes brutal. This helped him win by publicly deflating his stunned opponents in media and politics.
I don’t really see what is so socially dangerous about admitting racial differences in intelligence. Even though people with down’s syndrome have lows IQs, people don’t persecute them just because they have low intelligence. Similarly, if the elites are genuinely concerned about this issue, they could run social experiments, like seeing if black kids get worse exam results when taught by racially conservative white teachers versus socially liberal ones.
Admitting to racial differences in anti-social behaviour is arguably the most problematic area, since this an issue that a lot of people get very emotional about. If elites acknowledge, for example, that blacks are more likely to engage in impulsive violence, then more whites might treat blacks badly.
Having listened to the whole thing – Nixon, horrible climber that he was, is, quite obviously, trying to get into the good graces of Moynihan, by saying what he thinks Moynihan wants to hear.
Moynihan, no fool, humors Nixon, and steers the conversation around to what really interests him.
You’re missing huge generational distinctions. Commentary, in Nixon’s day, and for many years thereafter, was amazing.
Neo-conservatism didn’t make sense as a coherent political idea. It consisted of the brilliant cronies of Irving Kristol, and to a lesser degree, Norman Podhoretz.
Those cronies included people Daniel Patrick Moynihan and Nathan Glazer, neither of whom was any kind of conservative. And they were bursting with ideas and knowledge. Some of them challenged the welfare state (not Moynihan), but did not seek to destroy it.
For the past 20-odd years, neo-conservatism has been a brat pack affair, with the likes of John Podhoretz, William Kristol, and David Brooks at the head of the class. These mooks are courtiers with very little in ideas or knowledge. They do not challenge the welfare state.
Brooks has some intellectual curiosity, but is terrified of using the knowledge he’s learned. When I used to read him, he tried to sound “interesting,” without delving deeply into any ideas, and worked on stabbing Republicans in the back, and sucking up to the Obamas.
Slightly off-topic, but I’ve been looking at a few of these Antifa news stories recently, and many of them are deeply odd looking people: https://www.reddit.com/r/The_Donald/comments/68s0u4/antifa_arrests_were_made_in_portland_oregon_today/
No wonder they want to cover their faces. Half of them look like the banjo player in Deliverance. I feel I could tell instinctively which people were Antifa in a crowd. If, as Steve mentioned a few days ago, IQs are plummeting for graduates, then it makes sense that we will see plenty more of these odd types.
That’s what I always end up telling people: yes, you want your President to have a certain IQ, but there *are* more important qualities. Some of the brightest guys I’ve known, in terms of sheer intellectual horsepower, completely lacked common sense, leadership qualities, or an ability to intuitively understand social interactions and other people. Any of the three would be disastrous in a President. Nixon is a classic example of the last one.
For that matter, neither is being a paragon of morality or upstanding qualities outside the office necessarily related to Presidential performance, either. Herbert Hoover (who literally prevented millions of people from starving in Belgium after WWI), Jimmy Carter and George W. Bush should stand as examples of that.
You, Sir, deserve a cookie. Thank you very much for the article. This is going into my crimethought folder.
Very good. Thank you for this. This is why I read as many of the comments as I can.
Very. Eisenhower was a far more involved operator in his Administration than common consensus at the time presumed-and far more of a cold manipulator, too. Eisenhower knew that there were advantages to be had in hiding his intellectual firepower. Playing the “slow old man” to catch gullible Senators and Congressmen off guard was surprisingly effective. You underestimated him at your peril.
(He wasn’t the only one: FDR and Ronald Reagan were also quite fond of that trick, and quite masterly in employing it. Reagan, for that matter, was another example of an oft-thought “amiable dunce” who, in reality, could be quite the calculating operator.)
Curiously, if I remember correctly, Moynihan was against work requirements in Clinton’s 1994 welfare reform act.
If you were entertained by that, I’d recommend as a follow-up the tape recording of Nixon and Kissinger discussing their (mutually very low) opinion of Idi Amin Dada in September 1972. It ends up spilling into an entire discussion about Africa and the State Department, which, then as much as now, is filled with people that should be on the NYT editorial board (our modern day secular priests) rather than actually defending the interests of the United States, and to an extent, the world.
(Besides Western interests, Africans would probably have far better lives if we emphasized curbing birthrates and paid everyone willing to get sterilized a sum of money.)
Here’s a link.
Slightly O/T, but I hope one of Steve’s upcoming topics is the issue of positive and negative ethnocentric, as recently discussed on VDare:
http://www.vdare.com/articles/its-official-europeans-such-as-macrons-voters-in-france-have-a-genetic-death-wish
This idea of positive and negative ethnocentrism may help to explain a puzzling aspect of black behaviour in the US. For example, blacks in the US seem to pretty liberal on interracial marriage (and were already liberal on the issue before white opinion changed in the late 1960s) but are very quick to defend their race from the slightest criticism or perceived mistreatment. This suggests they are very high on positive ethnocentrism but not particularly high on negative ethnocentrism. In contrast, some other groups, such as the contemporary Japanese, are pretty high on negative ethnocentrism but quite low on positive ethnocentrism.
Yeah, and if you look, you can see a lot.
Yogi Berra lives on.
In his 2008 book The Broken American Male: And How to Fix Him, Rabbi Boteach called Donald Trump “the most broken man in America” and “the court jester of American business.” The rabbi described Trump “mired in an abyss of self-absorbed darkness so thick that it blights any ray of hope.” I could go on.
hard to know how smart Trump is because little is known about his private life, especially his youth. You cannot judge someone’s intellect by their public persona. I would guess an IQ of around 115.
115? You have to be kidding. Making money is difficult. It’s a game played by a majority of men, and every single businessman. Competition is fierce. You might read Charles Murray on the subject – this is foundational iSteve material.
https://mh19871004.files.wordpress.com/2014/09/income-inequality-and-iq-charles-murray-1998.pdf
If you think that Trump managed to turn a loan of a million dollars into several billion, operating in NYC of all places against very, very savvy people, all with a 115 point IQ, there is something wrong with your reckoning. That this same person managed to star with excellent ratings in a hit TV show and then beat a field of 16 other candidates and a Republican and Democrat political dynasty, against a very hostile media as a political neophyte to become POTUS. He switched out his campaign manager 3 times, with the perfect person for the job each time. He hammered the issues most likely to win him the election, in a country with more non-white voters than ever before in history and so most likely to oppose a Republican candidate.
115 IQ? GTFO.
130+ without question. I think likely 145-160+.
For all his intelligence Moynihan was a failure as an elected official. I say this more in sorrow than anything else since many of his relatives are buried in the same Irish churchyard as my own family.
The only thing he is remembered about from his Senate career was his attempt to transform New York City’s General Post Office into a new Penn Station. Some decades later the transformation has yet to be achieved.
14:15-14:21 Gives a shoutout of the all-non-white starting nine of the World Series-winning Pirates. That should count for something.
Nixon was forced out because he thought he could blackmail the CIA into taking the blame for the Watergate break-in (of which he had no advance knowledge, and which as a White House/John Dean operation almost certainly was interfering with an on-going CIA psy-op to wiretap the Dems and the call-girls at the Columbia Plaza Apartments). (That’s why the CIA’s McCord made sure the break-in was “discovered”).
It was plain as day: Nixon mused that if the FBI investigated E. Howard Hunt’s involvement in the break-in it would “uncover a hell of a lot of things. You open that scab and there’s a hell of a lot of things . . . The problem is that this will open the whole, the whole Bay of Pigs thing . . .”
So, after some token complaining, in fact the CIA did tell the FBI to back off the Watergate investigation.
It turns out that Nixon’s threat had teeth: the CIA was terrified that something, the “whole Bay of Pigs thing” really might be uncovered if the FBI honestly and thoroughly investigated E. Howard Hunt.
When Richard Helms was questioned later by the Senate as to WHY he allowed the CIA to take the blame for the break-in, he lamely implied that maybe Richard Nixon somehow knew the details of something about which he, Helms, had no knowledge.
Bullshit.
Richard Helms knew the intimate details of every CIA covert op when he was Deputy Director of Plans under Dulles.
Helms knew that Nixon knew just what Hunt was implicated in with the mysterious “whole Bay of Pigs thing”.
Few in the American public knew then or now what Nixon’s phrase meant.
But some of us do.
“Can you get me Mr. Moynihan. He is either at the UN or at Harvard.”
Wow. Does this bring back the old times. Where was he at the UN or Harvard? Or whether he was at either location? Doesn’t matter. In the old days, important men used to continually call into their secretaries, informing them of their present location so that they could be contacted in case of an important call. No more important than that of the POTUS.
Wherever Moynihan was, his secretary knew where to reach him, pronto. They didn’t need no stinkin’ cell phones in the old days.
OT
The American Right is being used by ??? to be seen as the crippler of the incoming president of France.
Steve’s questions about where Macron came from seem poised to be revealed, but at any rate, the American Right is being set up to take the blame.
Whoever did this, both does not want Le Pen to be president AND wants the next president of France to be crippled.
I know someone who tested 119 in high school. Six years later, under controlled conditions, the person took a Stanford Binet to see how far away Mensa membership was, and scored, 138. Quite a surprise.
119 does seem low for someone with as quick a wit as he had; he was also a speed reader. JFK had very bad health in his teens. Maybe it was a bad day for him. Maybe IQ testing just has to be done on a regular basis to be accurate.
It’s a trap!!! Taking advantage of delusional rightists that Le Pen can be elected.. but the time for releasing election-sinking info was well over a week ago.
In whose best interest is it to destabilize France while pinning the blame on the American Right? I’m hearing that some of this stuff would have ensured Macron’s downfall *if only released earlier*.
This is awesome.
‘Course, there’s lotsa people who guess Grant’s memoirs were ghostwritten.
This may be somewhat OT, but JFK’s children both said that they enjoyed their visit to the Nixon White House about 1971 when they were 13 and 10 years old. The awkwardness of most of the adults around them, given the recent history, was irrelevant; the children just liked being in the WH again, and Caroline said Nixon was especially attentive to her and her brother, and made them feel very welcome. From what I’ve heard they were repulsed by LBJ.
Sotomayor and Kagen did not get their SCOTUS appointments on legal merit. The whole thing is political because the Court is now an institution of politics, not law.
I did fairly average academically in most fields but when I discovered the LSAT I was suddenly a top performer. In law school also. It is not a particularly intellectual undertaking.
What law requires is abstraction of significant “elements” from the Hodgepodge of experience. The rule may be ” battery is an unprivileged offensive touching of another”. The classic law school examination will lard up a factual situation with emotional incidentals. A man is getting on a crowded subway car and, in his hurry, brushes firmly up against the breasts of a women near the door. She confronts him and slaps him. Analyse the causes of action each party may have. There is a lot of emotion here but very straight facts. Do you “feel” for the guy or for the woman? Not relevant to the legal analysis.
(Please do not say no one would make a legal case out of a subway incident, you are thinking in particulars again. The issue is did a battery occur under the legal standards, not should/would someone sue, and there is a fairly clear and certain answer under law, which is one of its charms.)
Indeed. The author of the articulation, “Military Industrial Complex” and whom saw his way out addressing it, could only have been an uncommonly sharp and perceptive mind.
Unfortunately, even when we are being molded by those around us, we truly believe that we are making our own decisions and coming to our own conclusions. That is why, I believe, with age comes wisdom. By the time you reach your 70s you have seen fashions in clothes and everything else (including politics) come and go and you finally realize how much you were affected by the zeitgeist of the past.
In some respects, we’re not living in a high IQ meritocracy.
Since the article in the Atlantic was published, the USA has elected only two non-incumbent Presidents with IQs above 140: Carter and Clinton.
Steve’s New York magazine article claimed HBD was “refuted” but in fact the evidence is overwhelming and well collected in the above article
It was ‘goulded’, just like the work of Morton.
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/14/science/14skull.html
To gould: Using pseudo-science with backing of establishment media to smear real science as ‘pseudo-science’.
Blaming it on the American Right? Maybe they are but I thought they might also be referring to the Russians.
It’s funny how all the pundits condemning Charles Murray in 2017 are largely ignorant today of what Nixon knew 46 years ago by reading state of the art social science.
True, but they are probably more like Nixon than we are.
Nixon KNEW but he repeatedly tells Moynihan why America cannot say this or say that. It just goes against the spirit of what America is all about.
So, it’s possible that those condemning Murray KNOW, just like Nixon knew. But the gentleman’s agreement among them is it can’t be said publicly.
Know, yea.
Say, no.
I’m not much younger than you, and appreciate more now the concept of nothing new under the sun. Another aspect of accumulated experience, and occasional wisdom, is the ability to cut through the setup manipulation and obfuscation to the chase.
Nixon asked Moynihan how long his ‘retention’ time was. What did he mean by that?
How does Mr. Chomsky believe low IQ populationscountries would create any wealth to BE distributed?
Could you flesh out in detail the economic and political motives to deny all of this?
OT/ So Noah Smith tries to debunk the idea that diversity destroys social trust. He kinda bores me so i skimmed it. I gotta commend him for giving it a try, but i think he makes a couple of mistakes. He says that after controlling for socioeconomic status social trust is the same regardless of diversity. Okay, but isn’t the low socioeconomic status the result of diversity (i.e. poor brown/black people). So that doesn’t really undermine the case for immigration controls also. Additionally, he doesn’t mention Putnam’s study which seems like the most notable survey of this kind. Am i getting things wrong? Personally, i kinda like indian food, mexican food etc., so i guess diversity isn’t all bad, but the idea that diversity undermines social trust seems pretty plausible to me.
http://noahpinionblog.blogspot.com/2017/04/the-siren-song-of-homogeneity.html
So, my father and Moynihan had a cigarette and a whiskey…true story…oh, well….late…..suffice it to say that both he and his son are dead…and I miss all of them dearly, incl my farther. I really, have a weakness for funny and kind people…the kinda’ people who really made you think about things.
she’s gonna win…a woman will win, this year, in something…or we are all farting in the wrong direction.
I get Nixon was “smart”. So what?
He pushed a bunch of programs that hurt White people.
And he pushed silly detente with communists instead of calling them evil and defeating them as Reagan did.
So who cares if he was smart. That just makes him worse.
What is the intersectionality between Jews in the West and non-whites around the world?
Generally, they don’t like each other. So, why the alliance?
They want entry into the West, and Jews want them for Diversity to play divide-and-rule.
Since Jews support open borders, they offer tickets to the non-whites around the world. Even Muslims who dislike Jews will choose the ticket and alliance with Jews. The entry into the West is that important to them.
Non-whites don’t like Jews around the world. And they don’t like Jews in the US. But to the extent that Jews do most to offer them the Ticket, they will work with Jews to weaken White Power.
Even if non-whites don’t hate white people, they want entry into white nations. So, if anything, they like white stuff. But whites are less likely to offer them the Ticket. Jewish power is more likely to offer it to them. So, non-whites side with Jews.
Take Muslims. They don’t like Jews and Homos. But they make common cause with both groups just because they value the Ticket that much.
Even when Jewish Power showers the Muslim World with the rockets, Muslims work with Jews for more tickets.
http://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/muslim-and-lgbt-communities-to-mark-ramadan-with-pride-meal-a3529636.html
Mike Thernovich cracking thkullth?
Lol
– http://isteve.blogspot.com/2013/05/father-andrew-greeley-rip.html
– https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andrew_Greeley#Interpreting_American_Catholicism
– https://www.unz.com/article/the-reality-of-red-subversion/#comment-1697822
– http://www.population-security.org/09-CH1.html
Mr. Hayes,
– https://www.unz.com/isteve/african-overpopulation-is-your-fault-because-climate-change/#comment-1696396
The Macron leak today is world historic and, incidentally, in accordance with Steve’s recent, and perspicacious, piece on the end of secrecy in our time.
How come we aren’t talking, and better yet, doing something about this? Nothing else matters guys, infowars is on for a a day or so here.
We’ve all been there, done that in the “recent unpleasantness”, aka the 2016 election. Might pay some attention/effort to our French brethren in their struggles.
Macron may be just as unelectable as Hillary, just nobody knows it yet. That was my thought after the runoff.
Cernovich might have a higher-pitched voice than Spencer.
Most research on the matter, e.g., Heckman’s, finds that differences in school quality explain only a minor portion of the variation in test scores across individuals. Heckman looked at the differences across ethnic groups and concluded that the differences are already there at ages 3-4, but he refuses to concede a major role to genetics. He thus has advocated universal pre-school (which has no long term effect on test scores).
the IQs of children regress to the means of their parents’ race
If that was true standard deviation would be shrinking providing there are no mutations. There is lots of misinterpretations of the breeder’s equation among the IQers.
Nixon brought us affirmative action and a ton of programs that took money from Whites and gave it to non-Whites.
Nixon also pushed the goofy idea of detente because he couldn’t imagine transcending communism or the Left in general.
If the USA survives it will only do so if Whites are allowed to survive. And Nixon didn’t help with that.
1. worldwide IQ test scores reflect race differences, even when controlled for other factors like income
Show me the studies where income was controlled, say, between Ethiopians and Norwegians.
2. g factor/correlation of all mental tests
g factor is a mathematical construct that hasn’t proved anything yet. There is no value added in their concept. Yapping about g is just a rhetorical device that sometimes may work on mathematically challenged.
3. IQ results reflect relative racial admixture in mixed individuals
Show me the studies.
4. the IQs of children regress to the means of their parents’ race
Like most IQers you misinterpret the meaning of the breeder’s equation. If what you have stated was true, the standard deviation of IQ would have shrunk by now to zero providing absent mutations.
5. adoption studies
Which adoption studies? They show vastly different estimates of heritability. There are no good adoption studies. Perhaps they measure the variance of environment.
6. brain size differences
So what? Male/female brain size differences are much larger than their IQ differences.
7. genetic IQ differences are consistent with human evolution requiring higher IQs to plan for survival in cold winter environments
It is just-so story. It feels good but it can’t be proven or disproven. Go back to Rudyard Kipling.
8. studies hypothesizing strong culture and environmental factors have been unsuccessful
Show me studies
9. the NE Asian-White-Black racial IQ ordering reflects a large number of related racial differences (impulsiveness, maturation speed, level of sex hormones, sexual dimorphism, rate of myopia, reaction time scores, rate of twin births)(“the average age for first walking is 13 months in Asian, 12 in whites, 11 in blacks”)
Probably correct on several items.
Google “project follow through”
Nixon sounds like a politically incorrect Jean Shepherd.
These Macron leaks were not designed to help elect Le Pen.
They were a complete surprise to Wikileaks. They were dropped shortly before the French election black out. If a populist were trying to influence the election, he would have made sure Wikileaks had plenty of time to sift through the data; he would have started leaking probably before the first round of voting, but definitely immediately after, at the latest.
I’ve seen people speculate that perhaps they were just found. This seems woefully naive.
Then there’s the curious case of where these leaks showed up: An American far right website by someone who spoke English. Now, the next part is critically important and here, I’m not sure of what’s going on: are these also being given directly to journalists like Chuck Johnson and Jack Posobiec? Or are they just fishing them out of Pol? The latter would point to a very sophisticated operation (and likely narrow down the entity behind this).
Is the American populist right just a convenient scapegoat, means of deflection, or are they also trying to be harmed?
Julian Assange has a far better understanding of the world players than I ever could. He has listed four possibilities for his readers to pick from: Ukraine, China, hackers, Russia.
It’s very unlikely, but given where these leaks showed up, I’ll throw in another possibility: American Deep State.
The next French president will be a lefty from the banking elite, perhaps the ADS just isn’t that into him, and in their ratcheting up for WWIII, he can afford to be knocked around. Like I said, far-fetched and crazy, but they haven’t inspired a whole lot of confidence in their sanity lately: the fake Golden Showers dossier and everything else thrown at Trump to get him to bend the knee should put any doubts about their hysteria to rest.
27 Charles Pewitt > According to the internet, all 16 of Nixon’s great-great-grandparents were American-born. Most of Nixon’s ancestors sailed to America on wooden ships into ports in the mid-Atlantic colonies. All four of Nixon’s grandparent lines ended up in Ohio by the mid-1800s.
Ohio boy Nixon deliberately attacked the Southerners by swamping the public schools in the South with Blacks. Nixon was a weasel coward Ohio asshole
So, you’re saying that electing a Historically Native White president, doesn’t work out very well?
Nixon is rationalising. He was simply afraid to speak the truth about this taboo because of the social repercussions.
74 syonredux > Trump needs to know what elite Jews are thinking….
The elite Jews are not reading _Commentary_.
The elite Jews are reading their homework assignments at IDF Officers School.
Quite a coward. Nixon was smart. He certainly could have foreseen the consequences for the nation of keeping quite on the issue.
39 Anon > go for the kids.
Edina is not where their _building_ is, but it’s where they collect donations. Who is “they”?
Agamim Classical Academy. Public charter school which puts the kids into uniforms, is full of murals of American Revolutionary heroes, teaches them Greek & Latin Grammar, and…. an hour of Modern Hebrew every single day.
from http://www.agamim.org –
” We offer tuition-free, public education in a school culture that is more like a private academy: orderly, intellectual, committed, and joyful.
What children read, write about, memorize, and speak about matters. We use excellent, challenging, and inspiring content across the sciences and humanities because we know we are cultivating appetites for excellence.
Learning oratory, logic, grammar, and virtue turns students into scholars—regardless of their chosen profession as adults.
Classically trained thinkers have strong minds and great hearts. They are ready for leadership, scholarship, and citizenship.
Classical languages train the mind to think logically. We have selected a classical language that can be spoken today.
Virtues are habits. We are helping your children develop habits for fortitude, gratitude, joyfulness, temperance, and wisdom.
The founders of the United States were classically trained thinkers who created a nation grounded in the ideal of ensuring “liberty and justice for all.”
Our students and staff dress up for learning. Uniforms help us create a formal environment that shows respect for learning and respect for each other.
Classical education teachers are dynamic and caring content experts and are not facilitators who function as “guides on the side” for exploratory-style learning.”
PS: “agamim” is Hebrew for “lakes”
the FBI had been warning politicians not to mess with it. In hindsight Nixon should have never brought in outsiders to head the agency. Needed people who knew what they knew.
You’re falling victim to Sailer’s Butterknife: charitably assuming benign notions when there are none.
In other words, he’s lying.
It is a heavy burden being about 10,000 times more interesting, per capia, than India.
Hacking takes time. Hillary was running for years as the favorite. Macron only like 5 months.
I think he meant for your ears only.
Moynihan was the architect for the proposed Guaranteed Annual Income ( a pre-cursor to the Supplemental Security Income program).
Moynihan knew from his own research of Labor Dept. data that even as the unemployment rate dropped, more people were joining the welfare roles – mostly people from single-parent households.
Aid For Families With Dependent Children (AFDC) stipulated that mom could only collect welfare if (dad) wasn’t in the house. Moynihan properly pointed out this was a recipe for illegitimacy.
He was right.
But even within the Nixon administration, Moynihan’s solution (GAI) met fierce resistance from Nixon’s chief Economic Advisor (and future chairman of The Fed) Arthur F. Burns.
Oh, if only we had those clashes on tape (or do we?)
Cellmate: “Hiya pal. I guess we’re just two white-collar criminals.”
Mr. Burns: “Oh thank god. I thought you might be a hardened tattooed criminal.”
Cellmate: “Nah, they don’t turn out too many of those at Dartmouth.”
Mr. Burns: “Dartmouth? Guard, get me away from this brute this instant!”
Cellmate: “Got my Master’s at Virginia, the public ivy.”
Mr. Burns: “Guard, guard!”
https://youtu.be/_Q4zafwr-to
Nixon to China scared the Russians. That and just time (as Kenan suggested) also played a part.
That’s right. All men are created equal. This is a problem. It’s why other countries, especially in Asia, have a big advantage in intelligence-related research and social planning.
IIRC, a Chinese politician once opined that it was too soon to know if the French Revolution was a good thing. In a world of cheap/fast intercontinental travel the Enlightenment may end up destroying the West.
From what I read, the leaker tried to shop the story to the media, who refused to do anything with it. (That does seem familiar somehow.) Then he gave up and handed it to the more reliable exposers of misdeeds.
“Personally, i kinda like indian food, mexican food etc., so i guess diversity isn’t all bad”
That (literal) mess of pottage looks mighty good, doesn’t it?
We might call this the Esau Cowen gambit.
These were or are the most powerful destroyers of white European civilization: Tony Blair, Angela Merkel, Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, Justin Trudeau, (soon) Emmanuel Macron, Pope Francis, the leaders of the mainstream Protestant denominations. None is Jewish. So while, as you correctly pointed out, many Jews are complicit in the destruction of the West, singling out only the Jews lets the worst villains off the hook.
Oh dear, I do hope you’re not implying the ability to prepare these foods correctly is in some way biological in origin? That is, of course, a ‘racist’ argument. 😉
Close the borders and open the recipe books!
As I recall, Nixon was talking about maybe reading to Moynihan a speech Nixon was working on. My guess was that Nixon was referring to Moynihan’s ability to “retain” the whole speech as he heard it read and then give Nixon feedback on it.
Nixon’s needless prolongation of the War in Vietnam probably killed at least 22,000 Americans
If I cook (or maybe even eat – I’m not sure) a taco or a vindaloo then I am culturally appropriating Mexican and Indian culture, just as sure as if I was making Mexican gang signs or wearing a sari. Even wearing the hair style of another culture is enough to get you beaten up. http://reason.com/blog/2017/03/20/student-allegedly-attacked-female-basket
Cooking a taco might get you killed. (N0n-whites don’t have to worry because only whites can be guilty of cultural appropriation.)
No, I’m sorry, you will have to stick to bangers and mash from now on. Those are the new rules and you will just have to get used to them.
In any case, the total destruction of your nation is a small price to pay for a kick-ass chicken enchilada.
It’s really a waste of time to argue with an anti-Semite. No matter how much evidence you show him, it will still be the Joos fault. All of those leaders are just puppets of hidden Jooish power, you see. John Hay said of his friend Henry Adams that when Adams saw Vesuvius reddening he would search the horizon for the Jew that was stoking the fire.
I wonder what Nixon would have made of Judeo-Christ?
https://infogalactic.com/info/Judeo-Christ
It’s funny how the “We need a woman to be president!” types in the US are so conspicuously silent (or negative) about Le Pen. Here’s an example from the UK: http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/jn-paquet/marine-le-pen_b_14251672.html
There are lots of schools that try to teach kids Mandarin so why not Hebrew? One of the Bush dynasty’s ancestors was a professor of Hebrew in the 19th century. Anything that requires intellectual rigor and effort is better than teaching kids mush.
So I assume you are talking about “Direct Instruction”?
http://darkwing.uoregon.edu/~adiep/ft/grossen.htm
Why are you talking about this so indirectly?
Here is the wikipedia page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Direct_instruction
This quote from the wiki might be illuminating:
I was hoping educationrealist had blogged on this, but the closest I found was https://educationrealist.wordpress.com/2014/02/19/math-instruction-philosophies-instructivist-and-constructivist/
which seems to be talking about something different.
This looks like a good page about DI: http://www.jefflindsay.com/EducData.shtml
It seems to have achieved some success in charter schools (which is exactly the reason I like the idea of charter schools, the possibility of trying ideas at small scale voluntarily by students/parents). I think that page makes clear why the education establishment dislikes DI.
Could you say more about DI?
Gregory Cochran, and others, make the point that this indicates that a part of IQ differences are due to genetic load. Many less intelligent people just have a lot of little negative things mucking about in their genome that lower their overall fitness.
I was also a Merit semifinalist just a little before Hillary. It seemed to me that everyone I knew was also a Merit semifinalist. I went to Washington-Lee high in Arlington, Virginia graduating in 1960.
We had dozens and dozens of Merit semifinalists. Supposedly we were second only to some restricted admittance high school in New York in number of Merit Scholars. BTW W&L was totally white. When I transferred in (from Catholic military high school) I had to personally meet a ‘race review’ panel. They looked at me and I decided that I was white enough.
I always used to say an IQ 130 for the Merit but I read 128 somewhere and I adopted it so as not to overstate the case. I don’t have a reference. I’ll accept 130 if you say so. I don’t keep up much anymore.
On my laptop the video is a Nixon one. But on my phone is a video of Macron singing with a TV presenter?
very true…most of the pundits and politicians know the truth, and since there is more confirmed evidence concerning HBD today and thus they work even harder to discredit and destroy those who attempt to speak truth to power.
This is like Pauline Kael saying that she didn’t know how Nixon could have been elected since she didn’t know ANYONE who had voted for her. This was more a function of the circles that you traveled in than the frequency of Merit semifinalists. As the previous links have shown, they set the level at the top 1/2% of scorers so that means that 99.5% of the population are NOT Merit semifinalists.
Obviously such finalists get concentrated at certain elite high schools (in my daughter’s year, 1/6th of the kids in her class were semi-finalists, so 30x the frequency in the general population, but it was a small private prep school. OTOH, I have mentioned before that before they stopped releasing the results, the Philadelphia school system had zero semifinalists out of the ~10,000 seniors in all of its general enrollment neighborhood high schools (though a couple of magnet schools did reasonably well). Near where I live there is a large public high school that gets dozens every year (about 1/2 Asians), which is about as good as it gets for a non-magnet public school, but still they get only 33/500 = 6.6%.
The PSAT score that makes you a semi-finalist varies by state (and is sort of a proxy for the concentration of smart people in your state WHO TAKE THE PSAT – therefore a lot of the Great Plains states where the ACT rules have low cutoffs – Wyoming, Montana, the Dakotas, but also W. Virginia because of lack of smart people period). OTOH, coastal states with lots of smart people (MA, VA, NJ, CA) have high cutoffs:
https://prepexpert.com/national-merit-psat-cutoff-scores-class-2018/
The range is from about 1340 on the low end (670 on each section ) to 1480 (740 per section). SAT scores are designed so that 100 pts on each section is 1 SD so this is a .7 SD variance. Going by 1 SD = 15 IQ pts we can guesstimate that W. Virginia avg. IQ is about 10 pts lower than Mass – say W. Va. = 95 and Mass equal to 105 (despite the fact that Mass has a lot more non-whites). Comparing whites in Mass vs. W. Va the gap would be even bigger. In Mass you have lots of professor’s kids, doctor/lawyer/banker kids, etc. In W. Va not so much.
This is one of the most important things that Terman did. Before Terman, the stereotype was that being intelligent somehow sapped your body and made you mentally and physically imbalanced, so it was not a thing devoutly to be wished for your kids. William Sidis was the poster boy for child prodigies and was portrayed very negatively. Nowadays geeks rule but in the past being an “egghead” was regarded with suspicion.
They’re wrong.
The idea that China is the “old” civilization is BS. The way Chinese live today has basically been constructed in the last 40 years – much newer than any Western system. The Cultural Revolution brought China to the Year Zero and gave them a unique opportunity to start over. This is not something that I recommend – it’s like burning your house and all its contents to the ground so that you can build a new one, but you do end up with a shiny new house that way.
Within races this may be true, but not between races. There are many blacks who are as strong as oxen and as swift as deer, but they have the brains to match. Their overall fitness is just fine, it is just not weighted toward living in an advanced technological civilization.
Dunno. All of the Jewish academics that I know read Commentary
Noah’s article was uninteresting. He concludes: “Whether diversity is good or bad depends on the populations involved.” Well no kidding.
Also, his point that conflict can occur in homogeneous societies is beside the point. There are many causes of large-scale human conflict. That there are others beside proximity of diversity doesn’t negate the fact that diversity is often one of said causes.
Maybe 1/2 of these were in his 1st year in office – you could hardly have expected him to stop the war in 1 day. After 1969, American casualties dropped off swiftly so they were down to basically none by the end of his 1st term.
The N. Vietnamese feared Nixon and knew that if they tried to overthrow the S. Vietnamese regime while he was still in office that he would go nuts on them with aerial bombing. So they didn’t even try, but the minute Nixon was out they felt they had an open field to overthrow the Saigon regime and they were right. If Nixon had stayed in office, then S. Vietnam would have been another S. Korea and we’d be driving Vietnamese cars by now. But America 1975 was much decayed from America 1955 so the Communists were able to win in Vietnam.
It’s only thought of that way because it’s true.
“Hacking” was proven not to be true. It was invented by HRC and company after the election as yet another way to explain her loss as due to anything except herself. Even the Dems officially admitted it. Yet it lingers like limburger cheese that’s been in the frig for two years. Lesson: say something often enough, even when it is factually untrue and the is acknowledged even by the perpetrators, it will still be in the air.
People “like” Cernovich. But not actually Cernovich. Spencer has exposed himself to a lot more danger (and retribution) than Cernovich has.
When speaking at these little getting-your-mind-right seminars, the incoming freshman should start by saying: I didn’t read the book you recommended. Instead I read this book (fill in appropriate thought-crime book here); here’s what I think about it……..
If you’re not Jewish, the main motivation for learning Hebrew would be if you are a scholar, probably at the graduate level. At the HS level, it’s hard enough to get kids to study Latin, much less Greek or Hebrew. There is also a huge infrastructure of competitions for Latin (Junior Classical League). IOW, there is a ton of opportunities to collect awards at the regional, state, and national levels if you study Latin (and to a lesser extent Greek). For Hebrew, there’s a measly SAT Subject Test offered once a year. IIRC it’s the least popular of all the Subject Tests.
Mandarin at the HS level doesn’t have anything approaching the organizational competition infrastructure of Latin, but it is the primary language of like 800 people in China, so it’s got that going for it, which is nice. Most HS Mandarin instruction is extremely basic and practical-minded kids would typically be better off learning Spanish. Clueless American parents just have no idea about the level of time commitment required to learn a non-IndoEuropean language well.
Jack D covered things well and in more detail, but one thing I would like to emphasize is that my 130 number was for the 98th percentile, not NMSF. Mensa is nominally 98th percentile so the discussion here (their cutoff is 132) might help: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mensa_International
The NMSF cutoff is closer to 140 than 130. It would be 139 if the states were all the same, but they are not so it is subject to Jack’s caveats. I think the cutoff for the higher scoring states (like VA) would be >140. I usually say 140, but might want to reconsider since I also don’t like overstatement.
Thanks for the personal experiences. A very different time.
P.S. Not a terrible thing to understate it as you do in casual references, but I think it’s good to have better estimates when having serious conversations.
Rαce, Birthrates, WWII
OT (nature vs. nature) :
I knew it!
F*ck You…Bambi!
I am a natural contrarian then, because I have never been anything other than repulsed by the zeitgeist, at least the one I grew up surrounded by.
As for the zeitgeist a hundred years before I was born on the other hand, now that did influence me.
Well IQ139 is around the 99.5 percentile but the PSAT taker pool is not representative of the entire population but is already a selected group. So if we make a assumption that they are drawing from only half the population (too narrow but you’ll see in a minute why it makes little difference) then top 1/2% of PSAT takers = top 1% of the general population. But the 99th percentile represents IQ135 so there is not a big shift (the “tails” are pretty skinny – at IQ 100, each IQ point represents over 2.5 percentage points but at 135 each IQ point only shifts your percentile up by .1 ). And in fact more than 1/2 of the age cohort takes the PSAT so the real # is somewhere between 135 and 139. Let’s say 137 and call it a day.
There is a certain truth to what you say, but it was not universal – it was more frequent among the lower than the upper classes. The educated viewed the “whole man” as the desirable outcome of a proper education, as exemplified popularly by a book like “Frank Merriweather at Yale”. The ideal was the sportsman who was also a fine scholar.
This was even truer in England: the members of the lost generation of World War One were universally mourned as men with superb minds in superb bodies. I am speaking of course of the products of the public schools and Oxbridge: the lower ranks of English society were far less healthy, in either mind or body, than those of the USA or Anglo-Saxon colonies like Australia.
Terman proved that the ideal was no myth, and more power to him for that.
“…we’d be driving Vietnamese cars by now.”
Probably just a few decades difference, and if you drive a scooter or motorbike…
“Vietnam Automobile Industry 2014-2018 Market Research Report”,ReportsnReports.com (online market research reports library):
VIETNAM AUTOMOBILE MANUFACTURERS’ ASSOCIATION (VAMA)
While the future of Vietnamese auto exports seems murkey (a lot of what happens in that area seems to be politics, government industrial policy, and the economic calculations of multi-national companyies), Vietnam might do well in motorscooters and motorbikes:
“Honda to double Vietnam bike exports to 100,000 units: report”:
“Easy Riding – Investment Opportunities in Vietnam’s Motorcycle Industry”, January 7, 2016:
The “well rounded” ideal was intelligent but not super intelligent. The general thinking was that being super intelligent like Einstein made you eccentric – the “absent minded professor” and was not an unalloyed good.
Broken link (fixed):
“Vietnam Automobile Industry 2014-2018 Market Research Report”.
Did you feel influenced by the zeitgeist of your parents’ generation? Mine grew up in the Dust Bowl 1930s and I felt a type of displaced kinship with people from that era.
That’s because LBJ was repulsive.
Margaret Thatcher didn’t get any support from feminists either.
But Nixon still wanted to use the knowledge to guide policy. Whoever makes policy now, whether they know or not, doesn’t.
Easter Offensive.
（◔ฺ_◔ฺ）
This isn’t really right.
If those who took the PSAT were randomly selected across the age cohort, scoring in the top 1/2% would still indicate that one was in the top 1/2% of the population. This would be true no matter what proportion of the cohort took the PSAT — again, so long as its effectively random who is selected to take it.
In fact, though, the students who take it aren’t random in the relevant dimension: they are already self-selected for ability. Typically, only those who seek to go to college will take it. Likely, only about 1/2 of the age cohort is in this category. If only the top 1/2 of the population takes the PSAT, then the top 1/2% of those who take the PSAT represent the top 1/4% of the general population.
So, FWIW, getting in the top 1/2% on the PSAT is more like an IQ of about 142. (Personally, I don’t like to think of this tail of the bell curve for cognitive ability being measured by IQ, because IQ tests themselves are so inadequate to measuring it — the SAT, at least in its old style — probably did a better job, though limited because of the ceiling effects)
Nor is it, but I suspect that something other than a high intellect leads to that particular syndrome. Leibnitz rejoiced in a robustly normal personality, while Newton did not. Bach and Handel were normal as well; Schumann and Wagner emphatically not. Intelligence was not the decisive factor.
But I do agree with you that the New World countries tilted in the direction you indicate, and here I think the equality obsession played a role. An “eccentric” is anybody who doesn’t fit in and makes the common man feel uncomfortable. Concerned parents did not want their children to be in that position.
In England, the elite set the tone in all things, and they were unbothered by eccentricity. The eccentric Oxbridge professor (and their were quite a few) was fêted, not avoided.
My impression is that Ford was much more of a dove, foreign policy-wise, than Nixon. He could have backed South Vietnam with air support during the North Vietnamese invasion. He did not. His disaster-ridden and half-assed retaliation against the Khmer Rouge for the Mayaguez incident was too little, too late. He called off airstrikes against the Khmer Rouge while Marines were still under attack. And his approval rating actually rose after the incident. We are fortunate that he lost the election. Carter’s victory paved the way for Reagan.
– https://www.unz.com/jthompson/the-secret-in-your-eyes/#comment-1820124
No, I was influenced simply by my own solitary character and my reading habits. I liked the world of 1850 (or 1750) far more than that of 1950.
My parents were both admirable figures, even to their son, but it was their parents who entranced me, not them.
I’m not much of a Woody Allen fan, but his movie Midnight in Paris was enjoyable in part for the inter-generational themes. I learned about the movie from my kids, and they watched it after a trip to Paris.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Midnight_in_Paris
I was in my early 30s when Nixon was forced out. I grew up
In a hard, hard left home that hated McCarthy and Nixon because Nixon as a congress critter in the late 40s exposed many Russian spies in the federal government .and worked with president Truman to get rid of them
That’s why the left went after him. It was nothing but revenge for his working with Truman and exposing Russian spied on government in the late 40s.
Nixon was anti White. Nixon, not LBJ was the affirmative action president.
I think Watergate boils down to Nixon got caught in a shifting political landscape and he pissed off Mark Felt. Hoover and the rest of the FBI realized that black bag jobs weren’t going to be covered up, but Nixon didn’t, and went ahead with some CIA assets.
– http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/nelson-rockefeller-biography/
– https://www.unz.com/article/the-battles-of-berkeley-someone-is-going-to-get-killed-where-is-trump/#comment-1840339
– https://www.unz.com/jpetras/judeo-centrism-myths-and-mania/#comment-1851744
– https://www.unz.com/isteve/nixon-and-moynihan-talk-iq-and-race/#comment-1862306
– https://www.unz.com/jthompson/tomster-on-marriage/#comment-1839462
– https://www.unz.com/jpetras/judeo-centrism-myths-and-mania/#comment-1849540
You are right to make a correction (thanks), but isn’t it in the opposite direction? Most top students will be taking college entrance exams (but see ACT comment below).
In an earlier comment you mentioned ACT dominated states. I don’t understand well enough how PSAT coverage works in those states to judge what proportion of top students there take it, but that counters my argument a bit.
Colloquy (online IQ society with 140 cutoff, one of the iSteve commenters has mentioned being a member) has equivalency tables for a wide variety of tests with IQs from 140-159 (that covers their 0-99th percentile members): http://colloquysociety.org/col83eqv.htm (see link there for 150-159)
If we believe that, a PSAT of 221 (about the NMSF cutoff in a highly competitive state) is IQ 145. IQ 140 is a PSAT of 210 which is in the range for NMSF cutoff in a less competitive state.
After thinking about this more, I think I’m just going to call it 140 and note the variation by state.
P.S. Colloquoy publishes their membership percentiles by IQ. Although there is probably selection bias, that seems like a decent sample for estimating the statistical characteristics of a real world IQ thresholded group (e.g. notice how the group mean is only 5 points above the threshold).
It is interesting to compare their distribution with a thresholded normal distribution. Doing so predicts a mean around 144.7 (0.2 points below the observed value). The predicted SD is 0.5 (> 10%!) lower than the 4.8 observed. Some R code:
Sotomayer and Kagan are affirmative action attorneys. Nixon and Taft werr merit selection attorneys, big difference.
Old folkways persist:
Anyone who was accepted and graduated from Wharton Business school has high math skills
Yes, I got it exactly backward – top 1/2% of SAT pool is say top 1/4% of general population – half, not double. So that would shift it up say 2 or 3 points, not down. Not that 2 points either way means anything. Also nowadays they give the PSAT to every dog and its brother so it’s more than 1/2 the cohort anyway.
That’s right. All men are created equal. This is a problem. It’s why other countries, especially in Asia, have a big advantage in intelligence-related research and social planning.
They are not doing a good job. China is pollution-hell, and they wanna move to Anglo-nations.
Japan is nicer, but most Japanese are very unhappy.
IIRC, a Chinese politician once opined that it was too soon to know if the French Revolution was a good thing.
Zhou En-Lai said that, but he was just being evasive, especially as saying anything might get you in trouble in Mao’s China. When he said it, China was undergoing ultra-egalitarian madness.
The Cultural Revolution brought China to the Year Zero and gave them a unique opportunity to start over.
No. Taiwan, Singapore, and Hong Kong were spared the Cultural Revolution, but they LED in starting over. And post-Maoist China followed the model of overseas Chinese, especially Singapore.
I think Sputnik was a real turning point – suddenly being a “rocket scientist” was a good thing. Before that newsreels of wacky inventors whose planes broke up while jumping off a pier were a joke, not a matter of national honor.
I remember it, and the reaction, and you are perfectly correct.
Maybe JFK wasn’t all that smart.
Easter Offensive:
If you want to see most of the important studies on IQ, don’t expect to see them for free on the Internet. You’ll have to either buy the books and access user-pays databases, or enroll in a university course. Despite the hype over Wikipedia, the tertiary education sector doesn’t give away much serious content for free. In fact, the price of knowledge is getting more, not less expensive. Twenty years ago (at least in Australia) most academic books and articles could be accessed for free by walking into your nearest university library. Now you have to have an access code that you can only get if you are a fee-paying student or university staff member.
Considering the tertiary education sector is still heavily subsidised by the general taxpayer this is pretty outrageous.
LOL
(((Gabriel))) M
Read the article and then get back to me.
The antifas in Berkeley are more likely to be going to the local community colleges or SF State than UC Berkeley.
I actually think being friendlier to an Asian communist country over a salvageable White one (Russia) wasn’t such a hot idea.
The fact liberals praise Nixon for going to China should be a clue it maybe wasn’t.
It’s a slippery slope thing. The more differences you admit to, the easier it is for Evil Racists to win arguments.
The left is so power-mad, so unwilling to give up any of the ground they’ve won since the civil rights movement, that they’ve actually convince themselves that admitting race matters biologically (as opposed to environmentally) is tantamount to ordering people to the gas chamber. They’re wrong, of course, but you see this sort of thing throughout history. Race Realism is blasphemous.
EU and US have different dynamics, but I must say it is amusing to see the rise of Zionist-Muslim alliance in the US.
http://www.haaretz.com/world-news/u-s-election-2016/1.753161
I find this curious. Trump, sincere or not, condemned Bush’s WMD lies and Iraq War. He condemned Obama and Hillary as destroyers of Libya and enablers of ISIS. He said he would work for greater stability and peace in the region. In other words, less Invade, less Intervention.
In contrast, Hillary was threatening WWIII with Russia over Syria, which means Middle East will blow up more.
Now, you’d think most Muslims would side with Trump over Hillary. And I think they would have…. if not for the issue of immigration.
Suppose US has been zero-immigration forever and took in no one. Then, Muslims have no hope of entering the US. Under those circumstances, I think most Muslims in their own world would have preferred Trump over Hillary. They would have agreed with the position of the Alt-Right and Paleo-Con types who call for no more wars. They would have reviled Neocons, Zionists, and Liberal Interventionists.
So, why do so many Muslims(there and here) side with the very Americans(Neocons, Liberal Zionists, Democracy-pushers, hawks, New-Cold-Warriors, etc) who are most hellbent on wreaking more havoc in the Muslim World? Why do they fear America First more than America Thirst(for oil and domination)?
Even though Alt-Right, Paleocons, and America-Firsters are more likely to be for peace and non-intervention, they are also likely to be more anti-immigration.
For Muslims, entry into the West is like a drug. They want it and crave it, indeed so much so that they will side with the very people who are doing most to destroy the Muslim World.
In a way, America/West has a narco-drug effect on all the world. These non-white folks seeking access to the West will join with ANY SIDE that plays the role of pusher-of-the-‘dream’. It’s like an addict will neglect his own house, family, and kids to get another fix of that smack or crack from the dealer.
Desire to go where the mammoths are(white wealth is mammoth meat to the world) distorts all values. It was the desire to go to America that made Fabrizio betray Michael in THE GODFATHER. He didn’t personally hate Michael or his bride. But he wanted to go to America so badly that he was willing to betray the very people who’d hired him.
This craving for the Invite-Smack makes even Muslims form an alliance with Zionists and Neocon War-mongers. Also, despite their noises about Islam and Middle Eastern pride, they prefer white rule over rule under their own cousin-humping tardo-kind.
People do care about tribe and culture, but they are still organisms and prefer the Good Life, the place where the mammoths are. This is true of anyone. Suppose one had to choose between one’s homeland where it’s hot, dry, and requires lots of work to get by AND another land where the temperature is nice and fruits grow in abundance on trees. One’s cultural sense might cling to the homeland out of loyalty and heritage, but one’s organismic self will want to go to the land of mangoes. This is true of animals in the wild. They go where the plants, game, and water are. Among humans, it’s somewhat different because humans don’t just live off on nature like their primitive ancestors did. Humans build own economies, and it just so happens that whites have proven most adept at creating the best economies and most functional systems. (Even if non-whites face discrimination, they still live in a stable and orderly world where whites do things right. So, even left-overs and crumbs from whites are more than what they get in their own homelands where they are not subject to discrimination but still have little since everyone does a crappy job of running things.) Indeed, it’s amusing that so many Third Worlders head to Sweden, a cold dark part of the world with long winters(much of it in total darkness). So, why go there? Cuz whites build, manage, and run good economies there that non-whites cannot manage even in nicer parts with more natural resources, good climate, and etc.
Because white hav the midas-touch, they were drawn to worlds with nothing in the Age of Empire. Whites could go to South America, Australia, New Zealand, Africa, Asia, and etc and build something from nothing. Even the great Chinese civilization was amazed by what the British could do with Hong Kong almost overnight. Turn a muddy island into a booming city overnight.
But the Age of Empire eventually came to an end. And whites were forced to go back to Europe from many parts of the world. And for a time, non-whites believed they could do just as well as whites by building up their own nations… but only a few nations succeeded in this. And so, lacking the midas touch, the ONLY way they could have the good life was by going to white nations. So, we are now in the Age of Demographic Empire. Reverse-imperialism, this time the migration of people without the midas touch heading to the lands of people with the midas touch.
The notable exception has been Israel. If post-war migration has mostly been about non-whites trying to go to white nations, Israel was a concerted effort among Jews to favor cultural obligations over organismic wants. Materially, any Jew is better off in Europe or US than in hot and dry tiny Israel. But the call of culture inspired many Jews to settle in the Holy Land and defend it. But then, Jews, like white gentiles, are another people with the midas touch, able to turn nothing into something. Jews know this, and Jews know others want what they got, so they erect barriers to keep their mammoths to themselves. But Jews in America fear that their mammoth might be taken by white gentiles one day. So, Jews welcome more immigrants so that diverse gentiles will squabble over the white mammoth meat than salivate after the Jewish mammoth meat.
Things were much simpler right after WWII. Back then, neither the US nor Europe allowed immigration from the Third World. So, people in the Third World thought in terms of ‘kick out imperialists’ and ‘do whatever boosts our power and sovereignty’. But ever since the West opened its door to immigration, the priority of so many in the non-West is going to the West than fixing and building their own nations.
It’s like how the slave trade distorted the economies of West Africa. While slave trade had always been a fixture among black Africans, the tremendous amount of wealth to be made from the Atlantic Slave Trade made so many blacks drop everything to capture other blacks to sell to whites. Things got so bad that the Africans sacrificed humans to crocodile gods to stall the decline.
It’s also like any gold rush. People hear about get-rich-quick opportunity and drop everything to look for gold. All these non-whites are addicted to White Rush. White lands are where the mammoths are, and it is the quickest and easiest way for them to attain anything in life. It might take a lifetime or many generations(or never) for many parts of the non-West to achieve western levels of success. But if you go to the West, they offer you sanctuary, benefits, favors, protection, housing, welfare, and etc. Also, there are lots of self-hugging white holier-than-thouers who will defend you and even elevate to saint status.
In the US, Jewish power is undeniable. Jewish power may be less powerful in EU, but Holocaust Worship is much stronger there than here. Also, EU nations are essentially servant-states of the US, and their intellectuals and bureaucrats take cues from ideas emanating from Harvard and Yale and US media.
Anyway, all this highfalutin talk of ‘liberty’, ‘inclusion’, ‘diversity’, ‘proposition’, and etc. is all BS. It is hunger for mammoth meat. It is organismic. After all, why such emphasis on the West to live up to such higher ideals? Because they got the mammoth. If all of the US was one giant Detroit, would Jews or Muslims or any other people care if US was a ‘proposition nation’ or not?
His son failed the NY bar the first two times he took it The LSAT is basically an IQ test, and based on data compiled of bar passage by LSAT score, this indicates an IQ around 120.
Obama’s personal “narrative” is well and truly shot, and people like Soros and most of Obama’s other backers are keenly aware of it, to say nothing of his Democrat enemies such as the Clintons.
Any attempt to put Obama into any public office, even as neighborhood dog catcher in DC, would invariably reignite scrutiny of his fake birth certificate and fake resume – this time with a huge number of observers, e.g. readers of UNZ.COM, who will NOT shy away from asking real questions, and insisting on real answers.
The resulting damage to the Left’s overall “narrative” would be incalculable. This is why Obama will be kept well away from any visible role.
Obama’s more cynical backers must have conducted in-depth research long ago as to how long Obama will be more valuable to them than a manageable, shapeable post-Obama myth. Think JFK and Bobby Kennedy.
One thing to remember (if I understand correctly) is that Trump was at Wharton as an undergrad (BS Economics). That is not the same as the MBA program which is what I (and most people?) usually think of when I hear Wharton.
More on Trump and Wharton: http://www.thedp.com/article/2017/02/trump-academics-at-wharton
Apparently not a great student, but it sounds like he was focused on his real estate business even then.
All of that said, I tend to agree with you.
Fucking white people, at it again.
And again
Neo-conservatism is now and, under its various guises has been since 1927 an attempt to reverse the decision of the 14th party congress that kicked Trotsky to the curb and put Stalin in charge of the USSR.
Trotsky was voted out in Oct. ’26. ( Interestingly, the last of the invaders of the USSR after WWI, the Japanese only removed themselves from Russian soil in 1925).
In Golf terms, Neo-cons want the biggest Mulligan ever. They want the Trotskyite wing of the American Communists to take control of Russia. Israel is a Jewish state; the USSR was supposed to have been the first Jewish controlled state.
The world is missing a few Ramón Mercaders.
John F. Kennedy graduated 65th out of a class of 110 at Choate.
His college application and high school records are at this link to the Kennedy Library archives.
https://www.jfklibrary.org/Asset-Viewer/Archives/JFKPP-002-002.aspx
An extract of those records that requires fewer clicks to read is at
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/answer-sheet/wp/2013/11/20/jfks-harvard-application-with-essay-and-other-school-records/.
Who knows. His favorite book was “The Red and the Black”, a 19th century “psychological novel” by Stendhal, about ambition. His thinking was dynamic in the sense it changed and evolved in a way no politician at that level can allow. They are hired to be predictable. Nixon did strike one as extremely intelligent, but much easier to understand. He once said he wanted to be president more than anything but would not kill for it. I didn’t realize until this past election what an evil business electing presidents can be. At least they took Nixon out without killing him.
otoh, his daughter Caroline passed it on her first try. Jr. was never considered a great intellect, but his magazine featured some genuinely investigative journalism you don’t get in MSM 20 years later. He knew how to pick talent and ask questions rather than accept the received wisdom on current events. He was particularly interested in the assassination of Rabin.
The fact that I personally know someone who scored 119 at age 17, and under equally controlled conditions, scored 138 at age 24, does make me skeptical of IQ taken during the teens.
what a failure Moynihan turned out to be. Accomplished nothing as a Senator. Did the little coward ever defend Nixon?
Steve Richter:
I doubt that Moynihan ever defended Nixon since it would be so out of character (and beside the fact that he had no character).
189 syonredux > All of the Jewish academics that I know
well, they’re the rent-seekers, not the elites. How many of them called the 2016 election correctly?
To mangle the late, great William Buckley Jr….. if you hung out less with Jewish-American academics, and more with random Israeli kids selling overpriced Dead Sea Soap at the malls, you’d get less fleas.
Typo-fix about an interesting factoid that shows how much of a proxy Cold War battlefield the war in Vietnam was:
Easter Offensive:
Ha ha, that was pretty good.
Some wear them as badges of honor, or at least badges of simplified test taking, but I tend to view syndromes like dyslexia, ADD, possibly aspergers and so on, as non-critical but concrete manifestations of reduced IQ.
I seem to recall that Congress kept him from doing anything.
Given the “one drop rule” in America, half black children are counted as black, so blacks increase their numbers through intermarriage, while whites lose out. Stanley Dunham was a white woman who didn’t have any white children.
There is some speculation that JFK Jr. was not his son but rather Gianni Agnelli’s. He certainly didn’t look like the rest of the Kennedys.
Zhou En Lai’s legendary comment (seemingly) on the French Revolution of 1789 was almost certainly the result of a translation failure.
He was very likely reflecting on the May chaos in Paris in 1968 – in other words, it really was “too soon to tell.”
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/May_1968_events_in_France
Are there any other adoption studies besides that one (FREQUENTLY cited) Minnesota transracial adoption?
This was the genesis of a Phil Hartman sketch on SNL.
Generally speaking everyone takes the PSAT.
Everyone here should be following Nixon on Twitter.
Correct. Congress cut off all US aid to South Vietnam in late 1974 after the Congressional elections that year.
Both Ford and Kissinger had wanted to continue Nixon’s policy of financial support of South Vietnam but no longer had the authority to do so.
115 is not the kind of IQ we expect from billionaires or even major politicians. Trump isn’t particularly facile with words but his mind is obviously on and working.
An IQ of 115 is about the IQ of a High School graduate. I don’t think much of the IQ estimates of celebrities or of people in partisan politics. Democrats always think they hold their views because they are smarter than Republicans but objective measures don’t support such self flattering opinions.
Recently the news media is filled with amateur psychiatrists telling us that Trump is insane. I don’t think much of those opinions either. There is an easy way to determine a person’s IQ – you give them a test. Almost everyone in public life has had their IQ measures but most don’t want to reveal it publicly. We got the IQ scores on Bush, Kerry and Gore but that was a decade or more ago. Today most politicians starting with Obama conceal their scores.
We will probably never learn the IQ of Maxine Waters.
It’s way too late to add to this thread, but I have to say this recording is amazing to listen to.
Nixon could have been a commenter here, a very well-informed one.
Nice find by Steve.
Disturbing is the concept of “The king needs to know the truth, but he cannot allow his subjects to know it, or to know that he knows it.” Not sure if Nixon meant that exactly, but it’s too bad he felt he had to keep quiet.
How many of them called the 2016 election correctly?
Dunno. Some of them are pretty prominent (university presidents, etc).
How many people of any stripe called the election correctly? I voted for Trump, but I was not confident of victory….
Dunno. Wouldn’t it be better to hang out with Soros? If you want to know the score, talk to the puppeteer….
No, it’s not:
It’s more than the IQ of the average college graduate….
http://anepigone.blogspot.com/
I tend to think that From Russia, With Love was JFK’s favorite book…..
Always interesting to note that, out of the first first four presidents (Washington, John Adams, Thomas Jefferson, and James Madison), Washington almost certainly had the lowest IQ. Of course, he had other qualities that compensated: physical courage, fortitude, etc. What the Victorians would have called manliness.
Here’s Daniel Patrick Moynihan on CBS Reports circa 1965 talking about the negro family:
Here it is 50 years later and the black man is still being held to a higher standard. Take for example the following news item where it took DNA evidence to exonerate a black man wrongly accused of a crime he clearly didn’t commit. SMWH.
Hang out with some people from the Less Wrong world and you may see some high IQers with a few diagnoses, Aspie and ADD among them.
In retrospect Reagan’s “winning” of the Cold War has been a disaster. A world with only a single superpower is a very very unhealthy situation. And the United States has turned out to be a greater threat to civilisation than the Soviet Union ever was.
Nixon pushed detente because he knew it was smart and he was right.
We do need to address the issue of white-on-white hatred. Why do white gentile elites hate white people so much? More importantly, why do a majority of white gentiles want to destroy their own civilisation? How to explain the determination of the Swedes, the Germans, the French, to destroy themselves?
In fact there is an explanation. It has nothing whatever to do with race. What we’re seeing is pure class hatred. The hatred of upper-class and middle-class urban whites for working-class and rural whites.
Sure, my point being their IQs would be even higher without those.
Though to be honest the LessWrong community makes me smirk. But for the sake of argument.
Don’t worry; China is rapidly correcting the problem….
O Flip, not that robo-canard again. Same wording seems to pop up on threads mentioning the family of that unfortunate young man. Not all of them have big front teeth you know; when I see him in pics with his cousins as young men, they look more alike than most first cousins. In looking at a closeup pic of a 20 year old, close-mouthed, very thin, lanky JFK Sr., I was struck by the extraordinary resemblance to Jr. People who actually met both men in person were similarly impressed. Unmistakable likeness in the bone structure, jawline, shape of the head, hair form, body type. We all have two parents, so looks are mixed. Jr. sure got the best each had to offer.
I was on a cold-hearted forum about 2 years ago, whose participants did not subscribe to a positive view of JFK. Indeed, they seemed to be descendants of some formidable enemies. Eventually that rumor was brought up with the usual wording, and a commenter admitted who had started it in the early 60s. She seemed embarrassed both by the rumor and by the vicious sniping about entirely unrelated current events, on display. She said it “was not worthy of them” whoever they were. Most seemed almost as smarmy and ready to howl at the moon, as Trump enemies. Party-affiliation seemed secondary. Something weirder and deeper was afoot.
So flip, considering the evidence, the argument that JFK Jr. inherited a less than brilliant intellect from JFK Sr., is viable if one thinks that JFK Sr. was less than intellectually brilliant.
JFK Jr. was very gracious to people who swooned over him in elevators. He knew that 45 seconds of his time would be good for 45 minutes of the other person telling all his or her friends about how you won’t believe who I met in the elevator. He was pretty conscientious about his main duty as America’s prince: be nice to the commoners.
Do tell.
Which is actually very good news. A world with two superpowers is a much safer place than a world with only one.
The collapse of communism was a good thing. Russia being strong is another issue. But communism was brutal, inhumane and dangerous. Nixon wanted to, in effect, help prop it up.
In the long term it’s rather less dangerous than liberalism.
The biggest problem with the hypothesis that JFK Jr. was the illegitimate son of Gianni Agnelli is that Jackie Kennedy first met Agnelli in 1962 and spent a couple of weeks as his guest that summer, leading to rumors of an affair, but JFK Jr. was born in 1960.
Yeah, I’ve always thought Herbert Hoover was a great American who had the grave misfortune to have been elected president.
It took me many years to understand that. But ninety percent (estimate) of what people say or write doesn’t check out. We are surfeited in what is technically known as bullshit.
Sitting in schools for a decade or two, striving for gold stars by absorbing other people’s opinions -weakens- the mind in certain ways just as much as it strengthens it in other ways.
Schopenhauer has a provocative passage to the effect that reading to excess destroys cognitive ability. It was so provocative that I would rather avoid quoting it here because that would involve having to re-read it….
Anyone who ever put together a thought worth a damn did so by his own observation and effort.
The explanation is post-WW2 brainwashing and a contrived economic system, riding on a dash of perennial (inextirpable) left side/right side (Bell Curve) hostility.
We whites have had our troubles before, but the recent troubles are down to that IMO.
Jordan Peterson on Trump’s intelligence:
Nixon was also considered a buffoon in his day – poor speaker, awkward, socially clueless, a guy who wore wingtips to the beach (in a famous photo), etc.
The IQ’s of the Nuremberg defendants were measured by US Army psychologists and averaged about 129 I recall. Probably few people at Trump’s level in a modern society have IQ’s below 120.
What is most astonishing about this discussion is to see the stark difference in how democrats react to scientific studies and fact-based analysis. Moynihan, a democrat, agrees with Nixon that welfare programs do not benefit citizens and that there were proven differences in ability and predictability of outcome 5 decades ago.
Today’s democrats simply refuse to accept the reality that their views and policies and their refusal to deal with the facts at hand have done nothing but accelerate economic disparity (“inequality”) in America.
Additional, 1 million paid subs pales towards the 65 million subscribers of Netflix and the 20 million subscribers at Spotify.
There was an amazing article in the British magazine,
the Economist, a couple of weeks ago pointing out the explosively increasing economic ties between the two, saying that more than ten million people
on mainland China now work for companies owned by Taiwanese people.
The pool has a protecting electrical cover.
Gustavia is often known as a yachters paradise.