Ashkenizim are influential because they are the only North-Euro admixed group on earth who still have a pre-1965 ethnocentrism, not some sinister conspiratorial scheme.

AFAIK, Ashkenazim don’t have all that much Northern European ancestry mixed in them, unless of course one considers Italian to be Northern European, which AFAIK people generally don’t. Unless you’re talking about people of mixed Ashkenazi-Northern European ancestry, of which there are plenty in the US.

I’m (relatively) smart but none of these other things appear to apply to me. And yet I still support voluntary eugenics, including for myself and for my own future descendants, in order to give them a much better hand at life. I guess that you can say that I’m a wannabe Ubermensch lol!

Both sad and uplifting to hear that hereditarianism is more shunned than even pedophilia. On the positive side, this could mean that the public could eventually be inclined to accept child sex dolls for pedophiles. Yet on the flip side, getting the public to accept hereditarianism would be even harder than this.

Hereditarianism is not the taboo. The taboo is just anything that makes whites look better than non-whites. It’s not taboo to say that Asians or Jews are smarter than whites but it *is* taboo to say that whites are smarter than non-whites. It’s quite fashionable to say that Jews/Asians are smarter than whites. You’ll get bonus points for doing so. It’s been wonderful for Jordan Peterson’s and Gregory Cochran’s careers, for example.

I.e., the taboo is not symmetric.

It’s an anti-white Christian taboo. It’s a taboo that was put in place by Jews after WWII because it reminds them of Nazism which “lead to the Holocaust.”

There actually is no logical connection between “whites are smarter than non-whites” and “therefore those non-whites must be killed” anymore than “my oldest child is smarter than my youngest child so my youngest child must die.” And the Nazis didn’t believe that. Nevertheless, through endless Jewish propaganda people have been conditioned to immediately go there mentally – “killing.”

As a general rule, I’d short any idea which people are given social incentives to say and I’d go long anything which people are ostracized, censored, fired or otherwise punished for saying. Consequently, it seems probably that Asians/Jews/blacks are less smart than is generally believed and white Christians are smarter (and more honest and moral) than is generally appreciated. That should actually be unsurprising considering that they built the greatest civilization and nations on Earth – which everybody else, including Jews, is desperate to get into.*

Given that there are tremendous incentives to cast whites as the great villains of human history and Jews/blacks as its greatest victims I suspect that the opposite is much closer to the truth.

Nathan Cofnas was recently fired, but not for saying that Jews are a high-IQ master race who deserve their massive over-representation in all positions of power and importance in Western societies (i.e., to effectively rule over the goyim). No, he was fired because he said that blacks are less smart than whites. That’s a big no-no for the Jews (and their white cuck pets) who’ve hijacked the Western establishment.

Wide publication of this idea might throw a wrench in the plans of leftist Jews (like Mayorkas) who are busily flooding the Western countries with blacks and browns. It must therefore be suppressed.

* Furthermore, recent brain imaging data from the ABCD study seems to indicate that the population with the largest brains are Europeans. (The other groups broken out being African, Amerindian, East Asian and South Asian). It’s probably not terribly surprising that the group with the biggest brains were the first to build an advanced civilization – and the population with the second largest brains (East Asians) are the closest runner-up.

See Table 11 here: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/371695470_A_Genetic_Hypothesis_for_American_RaceEthnic_Differences_in_Mean_g_A_Reply_to_Warne_2021_with_Fifteen_New_Empirical_Tests_Using_the_ABCD_Dataset

You claim that hereditarianism “beats out” anti-semitism in tabooness, but anti-semitism wasn’t a question in the survey. The only question that specifically pertains to Jews is “Whether Jews favor other Jews to increase their social power”. Not only is this not an anti-semitic belief, it is in fact a quite common belief. The ADL reports that it’s actually a majority belief. To a similar statement which asks if “Jews stick together more than other Americans”, only 13.3% of respondents said this was “mostly false”, with no option more negatory than that. That statement ranks as the most-endorsed anti-Jewish trope in America, again according to the ADL.
https://www.adl.org/resources/report/antisemitic-attitudes-america-2024

Returning to the question: “Whether Jews favor other Jews to increase their social power”. To even describe this as anti-semitism is grossly inaccurate, and it puts you in the same camp as the ADL. If Kirkegaard and his friends had set out to test anti-semitism, they would have done so, but they didn’t, because their concern is hereditarianism. I will further say that it is technically inaccurate to describe hereditarianism as the “greatest taboo in America”, since only 29 possible taboos were ranked here, but I suppose it’s true enough anyway.

Regardless, it’s a great little study. I do share your feelings about the apparent decline in hereditarian belief, but I’m inclined to disbelieve it unless it’s replicated outside that one dataset.

Actually only a very small subset of Asians are more intelligent than non-Hispanic whites, and its not a very significant gap, only about 3 points if you take the middle of the highest and lowest reported Asian score and the middle of the highest and lowest lowest reported white score (which is not limited to non-Hispanic whites).

There are a cohort of East Asian groups that exhibit this divergence – one is the nation you’d expect which is Japan, and the other are the 1% wealthy elite in China’s largest cities. In other words, the “studies” are rigged. And even this rigging produces only a value of 104. Whereas non-Hispanic whites average around 103. However, the story doesn’t end with the propaganda – since the bulk of the Asian population is NOT wealthy elites , the data suggests they actually have IQs lower than the average white, since the average white is much higher in living standards, childhood nutrition, educational time and investment, etc…the very metrics distorted by the propaganda study which was focused on children only in one city in one province – Jintan, in Jiangshu province. This is a highly industrialized and technically robust area that would be equivalent to either Silicon Valley or Silicon Alley in the US, where we find self-selection has produced a cohort of people with higher than average intelligence due to the nature of the prevailing industries, cost of living (proxy for high SES and parental investment), and higher per-pupil spending than the national average.

If it is true we are living in last days, like Sodom , only flesh.

I will further say that it is technically inaccurate to describe hereditarianism as the “greatest taboo in America”, since only 29 possible taboos were ranked here, but I suppose it’s true enough anyway.

Even if the respondents are assumed to have been honest (i) with themselves and then (ii) with the online form, the survey shows only what people think they’re not supposed to question. A man must at least have already pondered, and perhaps be sympathetic to, a heterodoxy if he sees it as “taboo,” i.e., something he’s not allowed to question. The ideas that have been the most successfully squelched haven’t even crossed his mind, or Mr. Kirkegaard’s.

There seems to be a circularity inherent in the exercise. And what value’s been added here by Mr. Stark? The survey could just as well have been shared in Newslinks.

I am in China at the moment. And I can say that China is and has been highly urbanised for a long time. China is on a different scale, a small town in China is the equivalent to a state capital in the midwest of America. People from China, will say they are a full a small town or village and then you go and see and it is larger than many American cities.

my point is urbanisation gets you more better education, not just formal schooling but trades, skills etc- and a long history of urbanisation creates a more worldly population, and China has been like this for a long time. Jintan isn’t special, China is on another scale, Jintans are all over the place.

I also don’t see it as a great disgrace for the white race to be three or less IQ points than a people who have been taking exams for centuries, it is the Jews that are the enemy, and not because they have a higher IQ allegedly, but because of their antisocial behaviour.

What really matters is that the Jews are maintaining low IQ elites in power so they can continue being parasites, while China puts high IQ leadership in power. If you want your nation to prosper put the high IQ into power and remove the parasites. Simple as

Ashkenizim are influential because they are the only North-Euro admixed group on earth who still have a pre-1965 ethnocentrism, not some sinister conspiratorial scheme

Nice load of false and unbacked assertions.

It’s a silly discussion. Intelligence up to this date has had nothing to do with development, the first attempts in that direction are beginning, but the most powerful try to make that fail to continue robbing the defenseless.

Because until now, greater intelligence has had nothing to do with the surprising development of the white race; White people simply took over the world, killing and stealing like bandits, and they have continued as leaders of the world because they have continued killing and stealing.

And for example, to steal the territory of the United States, some 250 million indigenous people had to be murdered over several centuries. And that is crime and not intelligence.

Gregory Cochran’s careers, for example.

Cochran has been quite outspoken about his belief that the hereditarian hypothesis in regards to average white-black intelligence gaps is likely true on his blog West Hunter.

Weird. Some of the smartest people in the world are antiSemites.

Hereditarian thinking tends to appeal to the very intelligent

Human cognitive facilities that accurately perceive truth and openly avow it are less advantageous than adaptation for zeroing in on what it is evolutionarily useful to say you believe (and the best way to convincingly utter an untruth is to believe it). Hereditarian thinking tends to appeal to those who are socially naïve and lacking in self-deception..

Hereditarian thinking tends to appeal to the very intelligent while anti-Semitism seems to appeal disproportionately to those with lower IQs…

Umm… yeah. It’s the trailer trashers, all right. Definitely.

Voltaire, Martin Luther, Ezra Pound, TS Eliot, Charles Lindbergh, Henry Ford, Richard Wagner, Fyodor Dostoevsky, Charles Dickens, Gabrielle Chanel, Winston Churchill (before he sold his soul), Corneliu Condreanu, Immanuel Kant, Julius Evola, Arthur Schopenhauer, Malcom X, Thomas Edison, Bobby Fischer, Revilo Oliver…

Hereditarian thinking tends to appeal to the very intelligent while anti-Semitism seems to appeal disproportionately to those with lower IQs, though there are exceptions. This is because anti-Semitism offers a simplistic good vs evil narrative

Is there any more “simplistic” a narrative than the Jewish Hollywood narrative of WWII? I.e., the “evil Nazis” and the “innocent noble Jews” – which has occupied popular consciousness to the bigoted exclusion of all nuance and alternative? Indeed, it’s also taken over academic historiography mostly due to the prolific lobbying and agitation by Jewish “academics” who see to it that all heterodox academics and narratives are purged.

Is there any more “simplistic” a narrative than that of Jews having been “always and everywhere completely innocent victims” but, nevertheless, getting expelled from 109 countries over 1000 times? They never did anything wrong to provoke the outrage of their neighbors and hosts? Really? “Jews dindu nuffin wrong anywhere eva”?

Jews sound remarkably like ghetto blacks when rationalizing their “tragic” history: “We dindu nuffin anywhere eva and you’z all just jealous cuz we so smart and we built the pyramids!”

Obviously this narrative stretches credulity but Jews still say it with a straight face. Should anyone challenge this narrative and say “well surely if you were fired from 109 jobs, or evicted from 109 residences or expelled from 109 schools you did something wrong at some point, no?” he’ll be tarred as a “Jew hater” – you know, for pointing out the obvious. Gentiles are literally expected to believe that Jews never ever did anything wrong and they will argue and pilpul their interlocutor until they’re blue in the face should he bring up examples of Jewish misdeeds. (Or, just accuse him of being an anti-Semite and endeavor to get him fired from his job.)

It seems to me that the real Connoisseurs of simplistic self-serving black-and-white narratives are the Jews. In that department they have nothing on ghetto black “dindus” and “anti-Semites.” Similar to children, Jews like their cartoon heroes and villains flat and simple. Don’t confuse Jews’ fairy tale telling of history with inconvenient “anti-Semitic” hate-facts or they’ll call you an anti-Semite.

Jews have, perhaps,the most child-like palate for simplistic self-serving narratives of any group of which I can think.

And, indeed, if Robert Stark’s formulation that people with “lower IQs” are those who are the most prone to buy into “simplistic good vs evil” narratives, then I dare say that this implies that Jews are the lowest IQ population on the planet.

To say that one race is more or less intelligent than another is not eugenics. That is racialism. I agree that each has implications for the other, but they are not the same thing.

Also, many people believe that “eugenics means killing people.” I’ve heard them. People are stupid, which is one of the top reasons we need eugenics.

“I do share your feelings about the apparent decline in hereditarian belief, but I’m inclined to disbelieve it unless it’s replicated outside that one dataset.”

The highly respected General Social Survey conducted by the National Opinion Research Center every three years has found the same thing (although I do not have a link), and it is hard to get a better sample than that. So: replicated!

“There are a cohort of East Asian groups that exhibit this divergence – one is the nation you’d expect which is Japan, and the other are the 1% wealthy elite in China’s largest cities. In other words, the “studies” are rigged.”

Probably not rigged, because we see the same difference among Japanese, Korean, and Chinese immigrants to the US, and their offspring. Most of these immigrants are not from elite families. Note however that most Asian immigrants to the US are not from these three high IQ ethnic groups.

One immigrant group that is elite are those from India, a mostly highly educated bunch who have been reported to have an IQ of 118. However, that will change if we start “importing” more run of the mill Indians.

“And even this rigging produces only a value of 104. Whereas non-Hispanic whites average around 103.”

Since the test is (usually) NORMED on the non-Hispanic white population, then by definition the non-Hispanic white population is 100, and everyone else is scored in relation to that.

Furthermore, the “Asian-American” population includes a mix of higher and lower IQ groups, so the combined score will understate the score for some Asian groups and overstate it for others.

On rare occasions, I have seen results normed on the total US population, but in that case both whites and Asians will be quite a bit higher.

Also, US national IQ score was reported as 98 in the 1990s. Based on changes in racial composition alone, it cannot be higher than 96 now, although the old number continues to be quoted in the press and other sources.

By the way, here are some hereditarians and confirmed eugenicists, but I don’t know how many were “antisemites:” Helen Keller, Theodore Roosevelt, Prime Minister Lloyd George, Alexander Graham Bell, Linus Pauling, John Maynard Keynes, Irving Fisher (greatest US born economist), Charles Darwin, Francis Galton, Karl Pearson, Luther Burbank, William Shockley, John Harvey Kellogg (Cornflakes), Margaret Sanger, Adolf Hitler, David Starr Jordan (president of Stanford University), Garrett Hardin, Ellsworth Huntington, Oliver Wendell Holmes, Edward Thorndike (of dictionary fame), George Bernard Shaw, Victoria Woodhull, Lewis Terman, Leta Hollingworth, HG Wells, Francis Crick, Aldous Huxley, Bertrand Russell, Sydney and Beatrice Webb, Thomas Edison, JP Morgan, Woodrow Wilson (president of Princeton University and later of the United States), Lawrence Lowell (president of Harvard University) Alexis Carrel (Nobel prize in medicine, an atheist who converted to Catholicism after witnessing a miracle at Lourdes, but he remained a eugenicist), Nikola Tesla, most of the great geneticists (even the two Commie ones), the list is long. Oh, and let’s not forget Plato!

Some psychologists posit a trade-off exists between status seeking and truth seeking. An individual can prioritize his own fitness at the expense of his “tribe” by sacrificing truth seeking for status seeking. However, his society is made better off when its members prioritize truth seeking over status seeking, because ultimately, reality matters.

Most people probably try to strike some kind of balance between seeking truth and seeking status, but some, typically altruistic, individuals will be extreme truth seekers who are willing to sacrifice status, whereas at the opposite tail will be extreme status seekers who will if it is useful parrot lies without remorse if it advances them personally. These tradeoffs also exist for some other psychological traits, such as psychopathy and narcissism which allow the individual to benefit his own genes at the expense of the group.

GSS is what I was referring to. I haven’t seen anything else.