The Unz Review • An Alternative Media Selection$
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 BlogviewJames Thompson Archive
South Africa and the Gold Standard
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information


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

It is generally agreed that the Wechsler tests are one of the best measures of intelligence, and can be considered the gold standard. That is hardly surprising, because they cover 10 subtests and take over an hour, sometimes an hour and a half, for a clinical psychologist to administer. This gives the examiner plenty of opportunity to see the fine grain of individual responses, to probe within the limits allowed by the manuals to make sure that the person has every chance to reveal what they know, and to observe the way in which the person handles objects on non-verbal tasks. Watching block design is a window into how a person thinks. The examiner can also notice when an explanation has been misunderstood and when attention is wandering, and can stop the test and continue after a break or on another occasion. The results are presented together with a written evaluation of how the person approached the individual tests, identifying strengths and weaknesses, and often suggesting areas where subsequent testing might show higher scores.

Wechsler put together the decathlon of tests on the pragmatic basis of having examined how particular tests functioned, and paid attention to the verbal versus non-verbal dichotomy, as well as complex and simple, speed versus untimed, thinking on the hoof versus testing for acquired mental skills. It does a pretty good job. More pragmatically, having 10 tests (can be up to 15 if subsidiary tests are included) gives both examiner and person something to ponder about. Originally the 5 verbal tests were added together to give a Verbal IQ, and the other 5 a Performance IQ estimate. Later that moved to 4 factors based on 2 or sometimes 3 tests each, which was less reliable, but allowed more discussion about different skills, and the supposed discrepancies between those skills. I think it is over-factored at the moment, and attempted new subtests often get dropped at the next revision.

Given that there is a lot of debate about the appropriateness of intelligence testing of Africans, it is particularly interesting to look at Wechsler results to see if their finer detail about different skills can cast light on the general pattern of African mental abilities.

A cross-cultural comparison between South African and British students on the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scales Third Edition (WAIS-III). Kate Cockcroft, Tracy Alloway, Evan Copello and Robyn Milligan. Front. Psychol., 13 March 2015 |

There is debate regarding the appropriate use of Western cognitive measures with individuals from very diverse backgrounds to that of the norm population. Given the dated research in this area and the considerable socio-economic changes that South Africa has witnessed over the past 20 years, this paper reports on the use of the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale Third Edition (WAIS-III), the most commonly used measure of intelligence, with an English second language, multilingual, low socio-economic group of black, South African university students. Their performance on the WAIS-III was compared to that of a predominantly white, British, monolingual, higher socio-economic group. A multi-group confirmatory factor analysis showed that the WAIS-III lacks measurement invariance between the two groups, suggesting that it may be tapping different constructs in each group. The UK group significantly outperformed the SA group on the knowledge-based verbal, and some non-verbal subtests, while the SA group performed significantly better on measures of Processing Speed (PS). The groups did not differ significantly on the Matrix Reasoning subtest and on those working memory subtests with minimal reliance on language, which appear to be the least culturally biased. Group differences were investigated further in a set of principal components analyses, which revealed that the WAIS-III scores loaded differently for the UK and SA groups. While the SA group appeared to treat the Processing Speed subtests differently to those measuring perceptual organization and non-verbal reasoning, the UK group seemed to approach all of these subtests similarly. These results have important implications for the cognitive assessment of individuals from culturally, linguistically, and socio-economically diverse circumstances.

The first thing to note is that the authors found that the factor structure of the WAIS results were different in the black South Africans compared to the white British. The caution is that the whites were not only white, but rich; and the black South Africans not only black, but poor. The sample sizes are rather small for factor analytic studies, but in the very strict interpretation of measurement invariance these two genetic groups should be seen by the authors as having an underlyingly different structure of intelligence. I think that the “measurement invariance” requirement is too harsh for all but large groups of subjects, and if we really apply it universally we end up being unable to discuss any group differences at all.

Also of importance is that there were few South Africans in the sample, only 107 as opposed to 349 for the British sample. Against that, far more data have been obtained on each person than is the case in group tests. There should be some bonus points for that, and for collecting Wechsler results in Africa, which are in short supply. Indeed, the authors gave 13 subtests, which is very good. However, factor studies on 107 people are not very likely to produce stable results.

The Africans were not rich:

All of the SA participants came from low socio-economic circumstances. The majority (82%) resided in rural areas, in a basic brick house with running water and electricity. Hardly any (98%) had washing machines, microwave ovens, or tumble-dryers. Less than 1% of families owned a motor vehicle or personal computer.

However, those conditions were similar to British life in the 1950s, at which time intelligence test scores were roughly IQ 100. On the other hand, educational provision then was probably much better than current day South Africa.

There is a 0.44 effect size on Performance IQ and a massive 1.53 effect size on Verbal IQ. These are big differences, given that both samples are university students. Another approach is to look at the results and list the South African subtest scores from strong to weak:

Matrix Reasoning 10.68
Information 10.19
Digit Symbol Coding 9.75
Symbol Search 9.71
Digit Span 9.35
Letter-Number Sequencing 9.17
Comprehension 8.99
Vocabulary 8.92
Block Design 8.67
Arithmetic 8.66
Similarities 8.12
Picture Completion 8.05

This is an interesting hierarchy, in that the very culture-loaded “Information” subtest (composed of very general, general knowledge questions) is a strength, not a weakness. Amusingly, in the US context it used to be considered too culture-loaded to be included in measures of group differences.

Continuing with the discussion about the results the authors say:

There was no evidence of cultural biases in the Matrix Reasoning subtest or in the WM subtests that had minimal reliance on language. (2) All of the verbal and most non-verbal subtests, as well as the PS subtests, showed evidence of cross-cultural differences. (3) The SA and UK samples’ scores revealed different factor structures.

My comment is that it would be more accurate to say that there are differences between the British and South African test-takers, which could be due to both genetic and environmental factors. There is no difference on Matrix reasoning in these two samples. This implies that once you match Europeans and Africans for university attendance, then they do not differ on ability as tested by Matrices. This strongly suggests that Matrices are a good cross-cultural test, and that we should accept Matrices scores as a valid measure of African intelligence.

So, what did Rushton and Jensen (2005) (not quoted by the authors of this paper) say about university intelligence test results in South Africa:

Black university students in South Africa also show relatively low mean test scores. Sixty-three undergraduates at the all-Black universities of Fort Hare, Zululand, the North, and the Medical University of South Africa had a full-scale IQ of 77 on the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale—Revised (Avenant, 1988,cited in Nell, 2000, pp. 26 –28). In a study at the University of Venda in South Africa’s Northern Province by Grieve and Viljoen (2000), 30 students in 4th-year law and commerce averaged a score of 37 out of 60 on the Standard Progressive Matrices, equivalent to an IQ of 78 on U.S. norms. A study at South Africa’s University of the North by Zaaiman, van der Flier, and Thijs (2001) found the highest scoring African sample to that date—147 first-year mathematics and science students who scored 52 out of 60 on the Standard Progressive Matrices, which is equivalent to an IQ of 100. This higher score may reflect the fact that they were mathematics and science students, specially selected for admission to the university from a pool of 700 applicants on the basis of a math-science selection test. At the University of the Witwatersrand in Johannesburg, South Africa, Rushton, Skuy, and colleagues gave the Raven’s Progressive Matrices in four separate studies under optimal testing conditions. Rushton and Skuy (2000) found 173 African 1st-year psychology students averaged an IQ equivalent of 84. Skuy et al. (2002) tested another 70 psychology students who averaged an IQ equivalent of 83. After receiving training on how to solve Matrices-type items, their mean score rose to an IQ equivalent of 96. Rushton, Skuy, and Fridjhon (2002, 2003) gave nearly 200 African 1st-year engineering students both the Standard and the Advanced version of the Raven’s test and found they averaged an IQ of 97 on the Standard and 103 on the Advanced, making them the highest scoring African sample on record. (The White university students in these four studies had IQs from 105 to 117; East Indian students had intermediate IQs, from 102 to 106.) Many critics claim that Western-developed IQ tests are not valid for groups as culturally different as sub-Saharan Africans (e.g., Nell, 2000). The main evidence to support a claim of external bias would be if the test failed to predict performance for Africans. Even if tests only under predicted performance for Africans compared with non-Africans, it would suggest that their test scores underestimated their “true” IQ scores. However, a review by Kendall, Verster,and von Mollendorf (1988) showed that test scores for Africans have about equal predictive validity as those for non-Africans (e.g., 0.20 to 0.50 for students’ school grades and for employees’ job performance). The review also showed that many of the factors that influence scores in Africans are the same as those for Whites (e.g., coming from an urban vs. a rural environment; being a science rather than an arts student; having had practice on the tests; and the well-documented curvilinear relationship with age). Similarly, Sternberg et al.’s (2001) study of Kenyan 12- to 15-year-olds found that IQ scores predicted school grades, with a mean r .40 (p .001; after controlling for age and socioeconomic status [SES], r .28,p .01). In Rushton et al.’s (2003) study of African and non-African engineering students at the University of the Witwatersrand, scores on the Advanced Progressive Matrices correlated with scores on the Standard Progressive Matrices measured 3 months earlier (.60 for Africans; .70 for non-Africans) and with end-of-year exam marks measured 3 months later (.34 for Africans; .28for non-Africans).
The only reliable example of bias so far discovered in this extensive literature is the rather obvious internal bias on the Vocabulary components of tests such as the Wechsler for groups that do not have English as their first language (e.g., Skuy et al., 2001). Even here, the language factor only accounts for about 0.5 of a standard deviation, out of the overall 2.0 standard deviation difference, between Africans and Whites.

The high score for Maths and Science South African university students is IQ 100. Such students in Britain, together with Engineering students, are usually brighter than the average run of undergraduates. Giving practice and training with matrices lifts the average from the 83 to 96, a very big gain, though it defeats some of the purpose of the test, which is that you come across puzzles for the first time, and have to use your wits to work out how to deal with them.

Of course, the main interest in the intelligence of university students is that they represent the brightest in the population. What ever they score, they are probably one to two standard deviations above the local mean, depending on what percentage of the young population get into university. So, the model is fairly simple: find the intelligence level of the undergraduates, and then impute the actual population intelligence level from which they were drawn.

If South African undergraduates in 2015 have an IQ of 93 what is South African intelligence as a whole? Crudely, if you assume a standard deviation of 15, and that being one standard deviation above the mean is enough to get you into university, then a local intelligence level of 78 is indicated. If you say that only those above 1.5 sd should go to university, then the underlying level will be IQ 70.

A problem with the findings of this paper is that the British results are so low as to make one question which universities they attended. Furthermore, many students are older than the usual university entrance age, which may have slowed their processing speeds though, as the authors note, that should have been coped with by the age related standardization scores. In 1992 all technical colleges were given university status, so the term is now far less meaningful than before. Equally, the extension of this generous categorisation of university status to include half of the student age population means that some students of IQ 100 are spending three years taking university courses. The overall result in this university sample of Full Scale IQ 106.95 sd 12.9 means that some students have been admitted with IQs of 94 or below, which is absurd. Only those who are one standard deviation above the mean of this sample would have a chance of getting into a well-rated UK university with an IQ of 120. So, in terms which most would understand it, only 35 of the 349 students in this study might have been considered university students at the Russell Group level. The standard deviation of 12.9 is also highly informative. Any strict entry criteria should reduce the standard deviation of the accepted candidates. It would be very interesting to know which universities these students attended, and what their entry criteria were.

The South African sample is of student age, and efforts were taken to recruit students who had attended poorer schools. Tertiary education in South Africa is only extended to a minority, roughly 5% of the student age of the population, and should be considered an elite, certainly as compared to Britain offering tertiary education to 50%. 5% tertiary education rates were the norm in Britain in the sixties, made up of 2% at universities, and the rest at technical and educational colleges. The Full scale IQ of black South Africans is 93.27 sd 8.94. The tighter standard deviation suggests more consistent entry requirements, but the overall level is very low for tertiary education. This is borne out by relatively low completion rates:

Breaking Stellenbosch University’s findings down by race, the completion rate for white students was vastly higher, at 71.6%. Black students had a 53.5% completion rate and coloured students a 53.8% completion rate. Asian students came in at 62.1%.

South African students who are one standard deviation above the South African university student mean are IQ 102. The crème de la crème who are at two standard deviations above the university mean (98th percentile, hence only 2 students) are IQ 111.15 and few of them would be likely to get into highly rated British universities.

In summary, this is an interesting study, in that Wechsler tests are considered the gold standard for intelligence testing, and university samples reflect the cognitive elite. The Matrices Reasoning subtest shows no difference between British university students (top 50% of the British population) and South African students (top 5% of the South African population). The implication of this sample is that if in South Africa university students are 1.5 standard deviations higher than the general population, then they are drawn from a population of IQ 70.

The latest Becker dataset 1.3.3 estimates South African intelligence (mostly on the basis of the Matrices test) at 69.80

It would seem we have an independent confirmation of the Becker estimate.

• Category: Science • Tags: Africans, IQ, South Africa 
Hide 28 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
  1. Svevlad says:

    So that means that South Africa needs a bit of a trimming to make that percentage bigger

  2. Aft says:


    And so what we can see is that the black-white gaps are the largest on block design and picture completion. Blacks do relatively much better on cancellation, which is where you are told to quickly cross out certain shapes on a page.

    But when you step back for a moment, think about the proposal that for whites and blacks must have precisely identical cognitive profiles when IQ is matched. Why would we assume this? Why would we assume that all of the different cognitive skills would just so happen to line up with populations that have spent tens of thousands of years evolving apart, when they don’t even have the same brain size and shape or the same overall IQ scores?

    The point being that the whole structure of intelligence between blacks and whites is significantly different, full-scale IQ is only part of the story, and blacks and whites with the same overall IQ will have very different cognitive abilities

    • Replies: @res
  3. Aft says:

    The charts don’t always link well, but the South African TIMSS and PISA scores are also near the dead-bottom of the list. A lot of data points line up with that IQ estimate.

    • Replies: @res
  4. res says:

    Interesting paper. The detailed data is good, but the samples look too non-representative to draw too many conclusions.

    The Processing Speed Index (and its components Digit Symbol-Coding and Symbol Search) results are striking (I wish they had used a signed Cohen’s d in the table so this was more obvious, though it is mentioned in the text you quoted). Your age idea is intriguing. How do the PSI numbers here compare to typically observed age trajectories and racial differences?

    You mentioned that the SA students were poor, but I think the following observation makes the sample less useful for making an apples to apples “university students” comparison (though perhaps the dramatically low PIQ for the UK sample means the comparison is more apt than I realize?): (emphasis mine)

    Since the quality of primary and secondary education ranges vastly in post-apartheid South Africa and has been shown to affect performance on cognitive tests (Shuttleworth-Edwards et al., 2013), students who had attended schools in the lowest three quintiles of the South African government school system, which represent the poorest schools, were recruited through advertisements on the university campus (Department of Education, 2008).

    P.S. What did you think of this statement? Emphasis mine.

    The ethnic distribution of this group (71% white, 1% black, and 18% other, i.e., Asian, Indian, and international students) was broadly similar to that of the UK WAIS-III norm sample (94% white, 3.36% black, and 2.44% other; Wechsler, 1997). Ten percent of the UK sample did not indicate an ethnic group on their biographical questionnaire.

    If that is similar, what would different look like?

    P.P.S. Your summary of how the WAIS is factored was helpful, but for those who aren’t as familiar with that (like me) I thought this graphic would be useful (note how the factor structure is preserved in the table ordering):

    Can anyone elaborate on how the tests/indices/IQ measures are weighted? Looking at POI/PSI/PIQ it is clear they are not simple averages. And how is it that the SA PIQ is lower than both the POI and PSI?

  5. res says:

    Thanks for that link! It makes a good comparison for the data in Dr. Thompson’s paper.

    First, a question. Are WAIS-III and WAIS-IV subtest results comparable absolutely? I assume they are relatively after Z scoring (e.g. for Cohen’s d). How about the index and IQ results?

    Friby and Beaujean (2015) looks like a good comparison for this study. Here are the B/W gaps they observed by WAIS-IV subtest (I wish they had included the higher level indices and IQs for comparison as well!).

    That data is from the Corrected ES column of Table 3. Where ES is Hedges’ effect size (similar to Cohen’s d):

    Focusing on the Processing Speed Index components of Symbol Search and Coding we see B/W gaps of 0.8 (unless these are somehow negative? surely they would have noted that?) while in Dr. Thompson’s table we see gaps of -0.78 and -0.55. That is a huge difference. But then if we look at Similarities and Vocabulary in Dr. Thompson’s table we see gaps of 2.58 and 2.39 which are much higher than any of the gaps seen here.

    Something strange is going on with these samples. Probably some of that is English as a second language in the SA group, but it also looks to me like they somehow chose a UK sample which is high verbal but low performance IQ. Any thoughts on that?

    Are all of the WAIS-III subtests normed to 10 as a mean? If so, you can see this trend in the subtests, but it is even more apparent in the indices. The UK sample has a VCI of 120.12 and a PSI of 88.99. That is a huge tilt. Compare that to the SA sample with 94.81 and 98.18 respectively. And presumably these tests were normed for a “broadly similar” UK sample?! What is going on here?

    P.S. Here is some information on WAIS-III age adjustment:

  6. res says:

    Worth noting that South Africa does not have true PISA scores.

    As I think you were alluding to, typically a mapping from TIMSS is used. This paper discusses that:
    Struggling to Make the Grade:A Review of the Causes and Consequences of the Weak Outcomes of South Africa’s Education System

    TIMSS only covers math and science. Does anyone know of similar PISA-like data for reading? It would be interesting to take a look at relative ability tilts using data like this.

  7. Lot says:

    Thank you for this excellent write-up.

    Depressing that relatively rich and urban SA still has IQ scores about 12 points below likely genotypical potential based on US blacks’ 80% SSA ancestry.

    I wonder how much SA black scores are depressed by the higher g blacks having “colored” rather than black descendants. I’d guess about 1 point total over several generations.

    • Replies: @Pheasant
  8. @res

    PISA-like data for reading

    PIAAC does literacy, numeracy, and ‘problem solving in technology-rich environments’. It only covers the OECD, and only includes people over 16. Sample size is 165,000 (5k-8k per country).

    The results are predictably horrifying. Only 2 Anglophone countries generate scores at the median that exceed the cutoff considered adequate to navigate life in a modern technological society; less than 5% of those tested score at a level I would consider as being equivalent to a bright 11th grader. I’ve done the PIAAC test. I did it because the reportedresults were so bad that I thought the test must be artificially hard: it wasn’t. My results aligned with my university results, and my tested IQ as a kiddie (inside the top percentile, but outside the top 0.1%). Only us ‘Level V’s should get to vote (and most would abstain, as evidenced by the political leanings of Triple9ers).

    Good first link…

    • Replies: @res
  9. @res

    Great link to that PISA infographic, by the way.

    Watch Australia’s position plummet in future as Kiwi flight is encouraged by the actions of the fuckwit ex-(corrupt)-cop in charge of the local Sicherheitsdienst… who has just antagonised China for good measure.

    Ao Tea Roa is where I figured it would be in the rankings: in line with the Swiss, the Dutch, the Krauts, the Danes, and the Norwegians. Fine people, all, but pale in comparison to the Finns.

    And (of course) better than Australia (just like in Rugby, political freedom indices, and indices of government corruption).

    I’m thoroughly basking in HBD-driven reflected glory… as a Kiwi whose white bits are Finnish, Danish, Irish (Protestant) and German (ditto). (There’s some Spanish in there, but that’s 4 generations before me on Dad’s Mum’s side…so that taint will have been diluted out by Mum’s Mum, who was a Finno-Danish hybrid).

    Maybe HBDers who blather on about the Ice People are on to something. (I kid! It’s nonsense).

    • Replies: @anon
    , @sb
    , @Wizard of Oz
  10. dearieme says:

    May I quibble? Anent the UK you remark “some students of IQ 100 are spending three years taking university courses”. I wonder whether it might be more accurate to say some students of IQ 100 are spending three years taking courses at university.

    I speak, of course, as someone in fair round belly, with eyes severe and beard of formal cut, but I can’t imagine anyone of IQ 100 remotely coping with the university courses I took.

    • Replies: @res
    , @Kratoklastes
  11. res says:

    Thanks for the link. I was unable to find data for that variable for either the UK or South Africa looking at all years. I used the query tool at

    Can you offer any tips for using their data?

    P.S. What is up with them defaulting to years 1990, 2000, and 2055 and later? Really odd choice for a default.

  12. res says:

    I think it makes more sense once you see that their verbal comprehension index is 120 and their verbal IQ is 112. Even so I suspect it is still hard to imagine them “remotely coping with the university courses I (you) took.”

    It makes even more sense if you assume they are majoring in non-rigorous humanities.

    Have you heard the saying “college is the new high school”?

    Once that mindset takes over college has to become easy enough for almost anyone to complete. Which rather defeats the point IMO.

    P.S. I think the issues the researchers saw with measurement invariance is as much (or more) due to the non-representativeness of their samples as it is to any intrinsic difference between the UK and SA populations. It is rather tautological to complain about different ability tilts when you selected an unusually tilted sample in the first place.

  13. @dearieme

    I’ll quibble your quibble…

    some students of IQ 100 are spending three years taking courses at university

    ought to be

    some people of IQ~100 are spending three years taking “courses” at “university”

    Things in scare-quotes are simulacra (in the pejorative sense) of the thing.

    Student and attendee are different things; the student (L student: “applying oneself to“) is an attendee who studies (fr L studium: “painstaking application“).

    I make the same mistake all the time when referring to high school attendees outside the top decile as ‘students’. It took me until a year ago to stop conflating compulsory attendance, with compulsory education (the latter being almost impossible).

    • Replies: @dearieme
    , @dearieme
    , @Pyrrhus
  14. Renoman says:

    That’s a whole lot of work to tell us what we already know and have known for centuries.

    • Replies: @Dieter Kief
  15. dearieme says:

    I’ve no quibbles with your quibbled quibble.

  16. dearieme says:

    On second thoughts, perhaps we could have a shared quibble about “taking”. Perhaps neglecting might do?

  17. @Renoman

    That’s a whole lot of work to tell us what we already know and have known for centuries.

    In this case, I’d like to recommend to you to go directly to JW v Goethe’s Maxims and Reflections or to the Marquis de Vauvenargues’ and Denis Diderot’s and Joseph Joubert’s and hm, Nicholas Chamfort’s, Georg Christoph Lichtenberg’s and and  – – – Francois de la Rochefoucauld’s – – – –  aphorisms. William Makepeace Thackeray’s Barry Lyndon might serve you too. I mean, those men – ah, not to forget: Marie von Ebner-Eschenbach – very playful and concise at the same time – those writers knew as much as we do about the human nature, and they did not bother with this counting and measuring business at all, which is now known as scientific psychology.

    On the other hand: Are those writers and modern psychology mutually exclusive? – I’d prefer rather not to agree upon this statement.

    • Agree: utu
  18. anon[211] • Disclaimer says:

    Kiwis haven’t contributed much to Australia, and now they’re crying about being deported after release from prison?
    Aussie quality of life and standard of living would rise immeasurably if Peter Dutton deported the entire N.Z. Diaspora.

    • Replies: @Pheasant
  19. Alfred says:

    In 1992 all technical colleges were given university status, so the term is now far less meaningful than before

    Thank you for pointing out that the term “university” has been greatly devalued in the UK – by politicians eager to please voting parents.

    It is a clear example where so-called democracy is a failure. But then the same thing applies to lots of other things – Renewable Energy, Global Warming, 9/11, MH17, Skripals, 07/07/05, veganism and many other things – where only those with appropriate technical qualifications should be involved in making important decisions and informing the public.

    The Chinese seem to have grasped this and they only allow suitably qualified people to present their advice on important technical matters.

  20. I am amazed that country hasn’t collapsed yet.

    South Africa is a strong automotive exporter, and all the major mining companies are owned by either whites or jews. Naspers, one of the world’s biggest tech investors, is South African (though they are now in the process of changing their name and partly relocating out to Amsterdam).

    You have this thin layer of extremely competitive businesses run by whites and then a huge third world population. But this is slowly coming to an end. Their per capita GDP has been declining for five years straight, debt is ramping up and skilled emigration is unrelenting.

    The only thing that is saving them are cucked whites who are wedded to race-blind liberalism. Same disease as elsewhere in the West.

  21. sb says:

    Better hurry up – I’ve heard that the open border arrangements between Australia and New Zealand are much discussed in Canberra and most likely will be further tightened in the near future .

    Truth is that they are a bad deal for Australia which has no trouble atracting people for all levels of the economy . Many New Zealanders would have trouble getting through Border Control if they were treated the same as everyone else

    Immigration is a sleeper issue in Australia and further restrictions on New Zealanders would do no harm economically or politically

    The two countries were once close but much less so as time goes on

  22. @Kratoklastes

    I understand that the Ice People argument is that , in contrast to the large number of Africans whose ancestors never left Africa there were some very small bands of survivors on the Eurasian continent who had to learn to survive and multiply in a much more challenging environment, or series of environments, which were at least arguably capable of selecting for cognitive ability and maybe some desirable temperamental or personality characteristics. It has always struck me on my visits to tropical, especially equatorial locations that life is very easy for the locals with fruit and fish obtainable with almost no effort and no need ever to worry about cold or excessive heat. Indeed in West Africa it would appear that it was so easy for women to provide food for the growing family that men’s role inevitably was to grow strong and violent enough to win the battles to impregnate. And being selected strongly to resist tropical diseases would not be a plus for IQ.

  23. @Thulean Friend

    The collapse and ensuing race war is just around the corner. By race war I mean the inevitable conflict between various black tribal groups as the blame game escalates into outright war. I give it a decade.

  24. IQ was originally defined as: “The ability to solve problems you have never seen before”
    … and since this is the same thing as CREATIVITY (the ability to create something new), since “problem you have never seen before” are something NEW to you, so, so must be your solution to them.

    But that definition was corrupted over the years, by academics adding their own specialty (learning) to it. And such a definition is what Thompson always uses.

    In his article today about Africans in UK, for example, his long list of abilities tested, the only ones relevant to the original definition of IQ (creativity) are
    Matrix Reasoning, Digit Symbol Coding, Symbol Search, Letter-Number Sequencing. And in each case the Afros outscored the Euros!

    In other words, the Euros academics have to load the dice to appear to beat the Afros, and Thompson is in on it!

  25. Pheasant says:

    Coloured in South Africa means people with mixed Dutch/Indonesian/Khosian ancestry (along with small amount of sub-saharan ancestry) going back several hundred years. They are much more like black African Americans and have a similar IQ profile.

    In South Africa blacks who are mixed with Whites do not go into the Coloured group they stay in the black gene pool.

  26. Pheasant says:


    Do elaborate.

    I have been told that New Zealand lacks Australia’s large underclass (bogans) but I also know from people who have lived there it is quite rough (maoris being toughter than aboriginies).

  27. Pyrrhus says:

    That is no niggling quibble! I suggest “Some students of IQ 100 are wasting 3 years attending University level courses.”

  28. “That’s a whole lot of work to tell us what we already know and have known for centuries.”

    Negroes tend to be stupid. That this obvious, self-evident truth is denied the way it is, is absurd.

    You have a population that worldwide, is essentially failing to assimilate to civilization. Everywhere on Earth they go, whether it’s Haiti, Houston, Hamburg, or any other soon to be “shithole,” negritude brings with it a societal collapse; you simply cannot plan, work, invent, develop, and thrive, in the presence of a large number of negroes. If it were only the females, the condition would be different. The males are the problem, because they’re the spearhead of black dysfunction. Yes, the baby mamas love thugs, but it’s the thugs themselves who actually cause the problems.

Current Commenter

Leave a Reply -

 Remember My InformationWhy?
 Email Replies to my Comment
Submitted comments have been licensed to The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Commenting Disabled While in Translation Mode
Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS Subscribe to All James Thompson Comments via RSS