RSS
At Our Wit’s End: Why We’re Becoming Less Intelligent and What It Means for Our Future
Edward Dutton and Michael A. Woodley of Menie
Exeter, UK: Imprint Academic, 2018
We in the West have long become accustomed to the idea that scientific and technological progress is the normal state of things, although decline—technological deterioration and loss of knowledge—is by no means uncommon across world history. The contemporary West may be declining in many ways, but what stage in our history could we point to as the summit of our scientific knowledge and technological capability if not the present? And wouldn’t it be absurd to suppose this progress has reached its completion?
Authors Dutton and Woodley, however, would note that a civilization may pass its peak long before the sum of its achievements is complete. We may look for our greatest era not when our knowledge and capabilities were most extensive, but when they were growing most rapidly. And that point, they believe, is already well behind us.
They begin their study by drawing our attention to two technological breakthroughs of the year 1969: the first flight of the Concorde supersonic passenger jet, cutting transatlantic travel time from eight to three and a half hours, and the first manned moon landing. At the time, most people assumed more such aeronautical wonders lay in store. This writer can remember the ubiquitous “artist’s impressions” of future manned flights to Mars and beyond; every little boy of that generation wanted to become an astronaut.
But a Concorde crashed due to human error in 2000, and all flights were discontinued three years later. We have not returned to the moon since 1972. The authors do not mention this, but by 2010 a NASA administrator was saying that “perhaps [the] foremost” of the space agency’s missions was to “reach out to the Muslim world … to help them feel good about their historic contribution to science, math and engineering.” We are not exactly aiming for the stars any more.
In the authors’ view, the best explanation for such regression is extremely simple: we are becoming less intelligent. Other explanations have some validity: the end of the cold war, e.g., partly accounts for the lowered ambitions of NASA, although not the end of the Concorde. But on Ockhamist principles, as the authors write, “if we can plausibly explain two separate events with one theory, that is superior to having a different theory for each event.”
Intelligence is the ability to solve problems efficiently. It has survival value because it enables organisms to face novel challenges; instincts are reliable only for recurring challenges. Intelligence is about 80% heritable, and during most of the genus Homo’s time on earth, the trait has been favored by natural selection: the earliest hominids seem not to have been notably more intelligent than today’s great apes.
Dutton and Woodley focus on the last millennium or so of European civilization. During most of this evolutionarily recent period as well, there has been positive selection for intelligence. That is because higher intelligence usually translates into socioeconomic success (correlating at 0.7), which tends to result in larger families. In A Farewell to Alms (2007), economic historian Gregory Clark has carefully documented this pattern in England from the fifteenth century (as far back as the records allow). He calls it “the survival of the richest.” Dutton and Woodley summarize:
Between the 1400s and the mid-19th century, in every generation, the richer 50% of the population had more surviving children than the poorer 50%. As economic status and intelligence are positively correlated, this led to us becoming more and more intelligent every generation.
To test this hypothesis, Clark looked to a number of proxies for intelligence, including literacy, numeracy and even interest rates (which tend to go down as intelligence rises because smarter populations display lower time preference, resulting in less demand for loans). The results confirm the hypothesis: intelligence continued to rise
until the most intelligent people—the outlier, super-clever geniuses—were so numerous and so capable that their innovations actually allowed us to take control of our environment to an unprecedented extent. Here we had the Industrial Revolution.
Even a slight upward shift in average intelligence means a substantial increase in positive outliers, and this is far more consequential than the small improvement in the great mass of the population.
Dutton and Woodley devote some of their most interesting pages to the topic of genius, previously treated in Dutton’s and Bruce Charlton’s book The Genius Famine (2016) as well. Outlier intelligence is obviously a necessary precondition of genius, but if we define the concept in terms of outstanding intellectual breakthroughs, certain personality traits appear necessary as well.
Personality studies lack the objective accuracy of intelligence studies, since they must rely on either self-assessment or peer assessment rather than direct measurement. Still, psychologists have been able to achieve considerable agreement on the existence of five basic dimensions of personality, viz.:
- Extraversion—Introversion
- Emotional Stability—Neuroticism
- Conscientiousness—Impulsiveness
- Agreeableness—Disagreeableness
- Openness/Intellect—Closedness/Instrumentalism
The first four vary independently of intelligence, while Openness/Intellect correlates weakly (0.3). Conscientiousness, Agreeableness and Emotional Stability may conveniently be grouped together as a broader Stability factor of personality, while Extraversion and Openness/Intellect make up a Plasticity factor. These two factors themselves correlate significantly, allowing us to infer (or construct?) a General Factor of Personality (GFP) analogous to the General Factor of Intelligence (g).
People with high GFP are “socially extraverted, empathic and concerned with the feelings of others, conscientious and self-disciplined in pursuit of socially-approved goals, have stable emotions, and [are] open to new ideas,” which traits might be summed up as “social effectiveness.” They tend to make more desirable mates and better employees, and to have more friends than those with low GFP.
While those with high GFP will generally be viewed as having “good” personalities, the opposite qualities can sometimes be socially useful. For example, geniuses tend not to have the most balanced personalities:
The genius is extremely high in intelligence, but moderately low in Conscientiousness and Agreeableness, which, when coupled with high creativity, is associated with the personality trait Psychoticism. This is crucial to genius because genius involves coming up with and presenting a ground-breaking and highly original idea. Frequently, it involves solving a very difficult problem and working to solve this—to the exclusion of most other things—for years on end.
Such obsessive personalities may entirely lack common human interests such as relations with the opposite sex or financial success, and they be downright incompetent in aspects of life outside their specialized fields. The authors provide a short biographical glimpse of Isaac Newton:
As a child and young man, Newton would spend nearly all of his time alone and when in company he would be silent. He had essentially no friends, formed no relationships with women, and made very little effort to conform at all. As a boy, his relationships with other boys tended to be antagonistic. He really wasn’t a very nice person.
Whatever he did, he did because he wanted to do it, he became engrossed in it and he did it brilliantly. In a year or so, he went from knowing almost no mathematics to being among the best in the world; and then went on to make some of the greatest ever mathematical discoveries. Then he all-but dropped mathematics and worked on one area of physics after another—making major discoveries, then moving on. Newton would think solidly for hour upon hour—sometimes standing lost in his own world half way down the stairs. For many years he hardly ever left his college.
Geniuses tend not to be model students. Newton’s school grades were erratic. Francis Crick “was rejected from Cambridge and went to university in London, where he failed to get a top degree. He then proceeded to drop out of a variety of PhD courses” before successfully discovering the structure of the DNA molecule with James Watson. Einstein never learned to drive a car. He “once got lost close to his home in Princeton, New Jersey. He walked into a shop and said, ‘Hi, I’m Einstein, can you take me home please?’” Bertrand Russell is said never to have mastered the art of boiling water for his tea.
The psychologist Charles Spearman, who first proposed the General Factor of Intelligence (g), also discovered an explanation for this phenomenon:
It has been shown that as people become more intelligent, the relationship between the different cognitive abilities becomes weaker, [i.e.,] they become more specialised in the nature of their intelligence. The g factor is somewhat weaker among such individuals—as specialised abilities become more autonomous, playing a bigger role in influencing cognitive performance.
Rising intelligence in England between the 1400s and the early 1800s, combined with an increase in the country’s total population, meant that geniuses and the macro-innovations for which they are responsible were becoming more common. This led to a qualitative shift in the character of the entire society: what we think of as modernization. Economic historian Gregory Clark emphasizes that this shift involved an escape from the “Malthusian Trap,” the premodern trade-off between population and living standards: England became the first society in human history to experience sustained population increase and rising standards of living simultaneously, and the same phenomenon soon spread to other Western nations. And of course, science and technology accelerated, reaching peak growth rates in the nineteenth century.
Dutton and Woodley’s review of some of the innovations this revolution involved is worth citing at length:
Someone born in 1770 would have grown up in a world little different from 1470. Transport would be via horse and almost everything had to be done by hand. Production was already beginning to mechanise, because James Hargreaves had invented the Spinning Jenny in 1764. An early steam engine had already been forged, but it hadn’t yet caught on. However, if that person had lived until just 1804, they would have seen the invention of the electric telegraph, the steam ship, the submarine, the circular saw, the steam roller, a reliable clock, the bicycle, the battery, and the steam-powered locomotive. The world of 1804 would have been dramatically different from that of 1770 or 1470.
If this person had lived until 1870, until the age of 100, they would have seen the electric light (1809), the steam train and the first photograph (1827), the electro-magnet, the typewriter (1829), the sewing machine, the electric dynamo, the calculator, the propeller, the revolver, the telegraph, rubber tyres, the washing machine, and, in 1858, the internal combustion engine. Then there was plastic and dynamite and we reach the year 1870. The extent and speed of change over a lifetime like that, compared to those for hundreds of years before, would have been astonishing.
And this new technology assisted numerous scientific breakthroughs, especially in the realm of public health and medicine. In the pre-industrial world, there was a very limited understanding of the causes of illness and, therefore, illness selected against the least healthy. But this began to change. In 1796, Edward Jenner developed the smallpox vaccine, for example. There were also many other improvements in public health, such as better sanitation. And the simplest explanation for why all this was able to happen was that, for so long, we had been selected for intelligence by the rigours of natural, sexual, and social selection.
Those who lived during this period knew that the revolution they were witnessing was of momentous importance but had no idea why it was occurring. Dutton and Woodley’s account is based almost entirely on research performed since 1900, including some that is quite recent.
It is difficult to pinpoint the zenith of European progress. In Human Accomplishment (2006), Charles Murray estimated that scientific breakthroughs peaked in about 1825. Dutton and Woodley do not see a falling off until 1873, and suggest the generation born around 1850 was the most gifted in history.
But as early as 1857, a French physician named Benedict Morel noticed a trend that did not bode well for the future: declining infant mortality meant that sicklier persons were surviving to reproduce. This meant that the partly hereditary strengths necessary for survival before the improvements in public health were made were becoming less common in the population. Furthermore, he observed that the ‘underclass’ of prostitutes, criminals, and the desperately poor seemed to have particularly high fertility. Morel predicted that these two processes—the reduction in child mortality as a check on the fertility of the ‘underclass’ and the, apparent, greater fertility of the underclass—would necessarily lead to the population of France gradually becoming less intelligent.
Eight years later, the British polymath Sir Francis Galton made similar observations:
There is a steady check in an old civilisation upon the fertility of the abler classes: the improvident and unambitious are those who chiefly keep up the breed. So the race gradually deteriorates, becoming in each successive generation less fit for a high civilisation.
Darwin voiced similar concerns in The Descent of Man (1871).
Today we can confirm that hereditary intelligence has been declining. Dutton and Woodley summarize the evidence, which includes deterioration in simple reaction times, color discrimination, the use of “difficult” words, working memory, special perception, child developmental schedules and—most critically—frequency of macro-innovations. In 2017, an Icelandic study found the first direct genetic evidence that a set of alleles predictive of g has been declining in frequency in that country’s population. More such studies can be expected in the years ahead.
According to a 2015 meta-analysis of studies conducted since 1927, IQ in the USA and the UK appears to be declining at a rate of 0.39 points per decade. Declines are also reported in Russia and a number of non-Western countries.
The authors emphasize five reasons (besides improved public health) why this is happening: 1) naturally gifted people have a tendency to trade mating and parenting opportunities for the opportunity to develop their abilities, e. g., through higher education; 2) being forward-thinking, such people are likelier to use contraception; 3) the modern welfare state taxes the more successful in order to support single mothers, who can often increase their benefits by having more children; 4) the modern movement for sexual “equality” has encouraged the brightest women to pursue careers and postpone marriage, often until it is too late; 5) finally, and most unforgivably, Western elites are now deliberately sponsoring the colonization of our nations by vast numbers of low-IQ persons from Africa, Asia and Latin America.
Declining general intelligence has been masked during the Twentieth Century by the so-called Flynn effect, an improvement in specialized mental skills independent of g. This may be one factor which made possible the continued technological progress of the twentieth century. But there is good evidence that the Flynn effect has now done about all it can do, and lower genotypic intelligence will increasingly make itself felt.
In the last four chapters of their study, Dutton and Woodley leave the relatively safe realm of psychometry to consider the possible long-term significance of Western decline. Here their predecessors are philosophers and scholars of comparative history rather than scientists. As they note, there are three basic ways historical development has been conceived, although they can be combined in various ways: decline, progress, and cycles.
Inherited, pre-reflective conceptions of history tend to follow either a cyclical pattern, as in Hinduism and Norse paganism, or a narrative of decline, as in the story of Adam’s fall and Hesiod’s account of successive ages of gold, silver, bronze and clay. Progressive interpretations of history are less common before the modern era (but cf. Part I of Robert Nisbet’s History of the Idea of Progress (1975)).
Dutton and Woodley identify the Greek historian Polybius (second century BC) as “the first to advocate, albeit implicitly, a cyclical philosophy of the rise and fall of civilisations wherein there was no metaphysical dimension.” He observed a pattern recurring in the rise and fall of Greek cities which Rome as well seemed to be following. Early societies
are religious, have a deep reverence for the past and for older generations, are prepared to engage in noble acts of self-sacrifice, and follow clear moral rules. These qualities ensure that they have a sense of superiority, a sense of their own destiny, that they are a cohesive community, and that they can be motivated to defend their society, even unto death.
These qualities make for success, but the resulting power and prosperity lead to religious skepticism, loss of reverence for the past, individual self-seeking, moral corruption and a tendency for the leading members of the society to stop having children. Decline sets in precisely as a consequence of previous success.
Later thinkers such as Ibn-Khaldun, Vico, and Spengler developed similar theories.
Dutton and Woodley suggest that many of the phenomena upon which such men constructed their theories of history can be explained by phases of positive and negative selection for general intelligence. Young societies have relatively low average g and are under extreme conditions of group selection, being unstable, dangerous, stressful places to live. Stress is associated with fertility, as producing lots of children hedges against the fact that relatively few may survive. It is also associated with religiousness, which “is about 40% heritable, so it seems to be an evolved disposition, one of the purposes of which is to help us cope with stress.”
Religiousness is also positively associated with ethnocentrism: positive perceptions of one’s own group and a willingness to sacrifice oneself for it, along with negative perceptions of out-groups. Ethnocentrism has been shown by computer modelling, if not by history itself, to beat other possible strategies such as universal altruism, individual selfishness, and (perhaps most obviously) universal treason, in which individuals cooperate only with those outside their group. By encouraging ethnocentrism, religion has evolutionary survival value: when two similar groups are in conflict, the more religious one will, ceteris paribus, triumph.
In the early stages of civilization, society has a sense of divine purpose, is strongly united, it is under intense selection pressure, and it is becoming ever more intelligent, as only the richest pass on their genes. Assuming the selection intensity for g is strong enough, the society will develop into a civilisation—of great intellectual ability—and become highly urbanised.
As the standard of living increases, people shift their focus to private interests and neglect religion. Skepticism becomes widespread, and the society loses its sense of purpose. The elite take to contraception and cease reproducing, while there is money available to subsidize the poor and idle—and their children. As a result, natural selection goes into reverse.
As g declines, society will stop working as well, levels of crime will increase, levels of trust will collapse, and democracy will be debased. The society will stop innovating and will eventually start to go backwards, becoming less rational and more religious as levels of stress begin to increase. This is likely to continue until it returns to pre-modern levels of selection for g. From this it will—in some form—rise from the ashes.
Deserving of special mention is the authors’ perceptive description of changing attitudes toward intellectual pursuit under conditions of civilizational decline:
One consequence of declining intelligence is a decrease in the degree to which people in general venerate “intellectual” pursuits. Intelligence is correlated with a trait known as “Intellect”: being open to new ideas and being fascinated by intellectual pursuit. Until the 1950s, this kind of attitude underpinned the British university. Academics were under no pressure to regularly publish or obtain grants. They were expected to teach and were given vast amounts of time to think and do research based on the hope that some would produce works of genius.
Charles Murray has observed that, in the 19th century, religion was also part of the reason that universities were created along these lines. Their purpose was to reach a greater understanding of God’s creation. If this academic system involved frittering away money—with most academics not publishing anything—this didn’t matter. Some things are more important than money, such as the glory of God.
Since the 1960s, universities have become bureaucratic businesses. This reflects the anti-intellectual, anti-religious attitude that their purpose is to make money. Academics contribute to this by getting funding, publishing frequently, and attending conferences.
Such institutions do not grant appointments to men like Isaac Newton:
They will appoint what [Edward] Dutton and [Bruce] Charlton [in their book, Genius Famine] call the “head girl” (at UK schools)—quite intelligent, socially skilled, conscientious, but absolutely not a genius. This person will be excellent at playing the academic game and will make a great colleague. But they won’t innovate; won’t rock the boat.
Once this stage is reached, academic conformity to an ideological model is easily imposed.
The authors devote a chapter to arguing that the histories of Roman, Islamic, and Chinese civilization can be plausibly interpreted by means of their model of rising and then declining general intelligence. Another chapter applies the model to European civilization since the Dark Ages.
The book closes with some reflections on the choices open to us in the face of civilizational decline. One possible response, of course, is to refuse to accept declining intelligence and advocate intervention to stop and reverse it. Sir Francis Galton, e.g., proposed financial incentives for the most intelligent to have large families. But this obviously cannot be contemplated as long as the current elite remains in power.
Direct genetic enhancement may become possible in the future. But whether it is a vestige of Christianity or a natural instinct, many persons in the West feel a visceral distaste for “meddling with human nature.” Dutton and Woodley suggest an even more serious objection might be “the uses to which the increasingly distant and unaccountable globalist elites may put such technologies.” A purely self-interested elite—or, as the authors do not point out, one particular ethnic component of that elite—might focus exclusively on enhancing the relative success of its own offspring, e.g., through selection for ruthlessness.
Another possibility might be the systematic identification and encouragement of genius, although this would require a radical reversal of the educational trends described above. Still another strategy might be some sort of religious revival, though such an event may not be possible to control.
The authors are most hopeful about the possibilities of long-term knowledge storage to ensure that the next wave of rising general intelligence does not have to rediscover everything for itself:
Eventually, the winter will give way to spring and then summer. Perhaps, with a gift of knowledge from the present to the future, because we have come so far this time, the next Renaissance will take those who are to come even further.
Of course, the next “revival of learning” will be a long time coming indeed if the declining West gets overrun by an exploding population of Africans and South- and Southwest Asians. A renewed ethnocentrism—assuming it is possible at this late date—might increase the odds that the next renaissance will be the work of our own descendants. But the authors do not cover this topic.
In any case, we will long be gone before any such renaissance begins. Is there anything we can do for our immediatedescendants? Dutton and Woodley suggest that civilizations, like individuals, can get through the winter less painfully if they accept that it is coming and prepare for it in advance. In the not-so-distant future,
we won’t be able to safely fly aeroplanes, or maintain a lavish system of social security, or keep the electricity on all of the time, or maintain law and order everywhere, or organise democratic government or have widespread use of the internet. Life is going to become more harsh, more dangerous, and simpler. To give an obvious example, many houses are now entirely reliant on electricity: no fireplace, no gas. What are these people supposed to do when electricity becomes unreliable? Many people now commute into London from 70 miles away or even more. How are they going to get work as trains become more and more sporadic? They need to live closer to work, just as we all once did. If we start planning for this—rather than kid ourselves that “things can only get better”—then things will run far more smoothly when the time comes.
English
Arabic
Chinese (Simplified)
Dutch
French
German
Hebrew
Hindi
Italian
Japanese
Korean
Persian
Polish
Portuguese
Russian
Spanish
Swedish
Turkish
Vietnamese
A futuristic movie was made about this: Idiocracy
Video Link
The Concorde & moon shots were instances, like many others, of ingenious but ultimately worthless tech development;the Concorde was an environmental disaster & the moon landing a propagandist photo opp. : leaving them behind is actually a sign of greater intelligence rather than lesser – higher intelligence eschews technological determinism.
Video Link
“Civilizations grow because they have an instrument of expansion, a military, religious, political, or economic organization that accumulates surplus and invests it in productive innovations.
“Civilizations decline when they stop the application of surplus to new ways of doing things. In modern terms we say that the rate of investment decreases.
“This happens because the social groups controlling the surplus have a vested interest in using it for non-productive but ego-satisfying purposes which distribute the surpluses to consumption but do not provide more effective methods of production.”
–Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of the World Order.
Western elites are now deliberately sponsoring the colonization of our nations by vast numbers of low-IQ persons from Africa, Asia and Latin America
Not content with dumbing the nation down via Third World immigration, Britain’s elites also abolished the country’s best state schools, the grammar schools. Peter Hitchens wrote in 2016:
‘There is a simple and proven way to make the best use of the nation’s talents: restore the 1,000 fine state grammar schools in England and Wales madly destroyed in an idiotic frenzy between 1965 and 1990, and their equivalents in Scotland. Then build more of them. And reopen the best independent schools to the children of poor homes by reintroducing the direct grant system, which gave a free, first-class education to thousands of talented children from state primaries [infant schools], the late Alan Rickman being a good example.’
The authors should study the transition of South Africa from the 1980s to today. A lot of what they mentioned……looking ONLY at the variable of intellignce (neglecting all the other socio-economic- political issues) has already taken place here in my home country.
I think we are about 30 years down this part, it would be good to model what happens in the next 50 to 100 years and use this as a benchmark for the rest of the world.
Regards
KPF
But will the next wave of rising general intelligence be human?
Here we have the hard kernel of truth: “being forward-thinking, such people are likelier to use contraception;” All other factors depend on this one thing, especially the fact that intelligent women are the ones using birth control and promoting abortion. Newton and Tesla might have avoided women, but their female relatives undoubtedly churned out many bright children. Birth control and small families were sold to brighter women, as a status marker, while we farmed out childbirth to the lower classes. Cut to today, and we are told that bringing in lower-IQ immigrants is necessary for the economy.
Add special education in public schools in order to to pathologize high IQ white children, especially boys. How would Isaac Newton have done in a modern public school? Any number of diagnoses spring to mind. I had dinner with a group of high IQ white people recently, and every single one of them were discussing their own autism and ADHD diagnoses, and all, all of their children had been diagnosed with autism. All. Of. Them. These are people able to look you in the eye and carry on a normal convo. Using longer words is now seen as stilted speech, and another symptom of Asberger’s.
Just finished a book Wright Brothers, Wrong Story; Wilbur Wright fits the description of genius set forth in this article perfectly. He was a social misanthrope, but had incredible powers of concentration. He had an especially daunting task in that what most most scientists thought they knew about aeronautics was wrong–his wind tunnel proved that an essential aeronautical calculation was quite different from the accepted value. Not only did Wilbur Wright think brilliantly, he was willing to take to the air to prove his theories–an inherently dangerous activity that had killed many previous aviators. Yet he never had a serious crash. Sadly, he died at the age of 45 in 1912 of typhoid fever.
Not really relevant to the article, I know, but Wilbur Wright deserves to rank with Sir Isaac Newton, James Watt, and Albert Einstein as a genuine genius.
A lot of the discoveries of the ancients died when the civilizations that nurtured them collapsed. There was very little in the written record of what they achieved, therefore, little for later civilizations to build on. We don’t have that problem now unless some nuclear war destroys everything and reduces the world to stone age conditions.
That the moon landing is some kind of peak in aeronautical development is ridiculous. The space shuttle was thousands of times more complex. Your phone-watch has more computing power than the whole Apollo command module and lunar lander combined. Probably even more than Mission Control in Houston.
The population getting dumber in general is not a problem that will result in less technological advancement. The big impediment will be the laws of physics. The problem with a dumber population will always be political. The dumber will be easier to manipulate by people who want power for themselves. They can do more damage in one day than years of the degradation of society due to lower intelligence.
As long as we have a DVD player or USB device attached to a computer with a PDF reader and monitor, we shall be … reasonably safe.
OK, maybe we will need the internet too, since that’s how we actually get those files nowadays. Good news, the internet was built to survive a nuclear war, at least in theory.
Nice,
two people with zero serious technological and serious scientific (“environmental” science is not a science) backgrounds wax philosophical about things they have no clue about. A sheer idiocy by amateurs proclaiming Concorde an achievement against the background of nuclear technologies and weapons which changed history–sheer idiocy. Evidently these two have no clue or even vague reference point between supersonic (most combat planes are supersonic including massive bombers, from B-58 Hustler to TU-22 and TU-160) flight and what it takes to develop nuclear weapons and energy infrastructure. Indeed, wits are being lost, militant ignorance rules.
I still have my copy of Halliday and Resnick. I still have my copy of Computer Systems Architecture as well as Knuth’s “The Art of Computer Programming” and “Fundamental Algorithms”. We don’t need the internet.
There is agreement that we are now some way into dysgenic birth trend territory. This raises the question of when eugenic trend in births peaked. Stated another way, in which birth-cohort is genotypic IQ highest [for a given region/nation] [say, Britain; or the USA; or NW Europe]?
Due to various uncertainties, it may be most useful to think in terms of quarters of a century: Is the genotypic-IQ-peak for births: 19th Century Q1, Q2, or Q3? One of these seems the most likely, from what we have heard.
For a macro-level civilizational decline discussion, if a “b.19thCen.Q2 eugenic peak” is agreed upon, then the genotypic-IQ peak for the living adult population is roughly the late 19th century, maybe into the early 20th at latest. The fall-off is not sharp, of course, and this (dating the ‘peak’) is largely an academic question.
But after a century and a half, it really may be starting to bite:
The b.2017 cohort will definitely be subject to a noticeable little genotypic-IQ hit vs. a b.1847 ethnocultural-ceteris-paribus comparison stock (I choose 1847 because it is Thomas Edison’s birth year): 170 years’ worth of some degree of dysgenic trend.
If we are at or about “peak +175 years” and are losing a modest 0.33 genotypic-IQ points per decade, the b.2020s White cohort will be as much as 6 genotypic IQ points below the b.1840s White cohort. At a more modest -0.25 loss/decade, it’s closer to 4 genotypic IQ points lost. I believe I have seen Dr. Richard Lynn propose something in this range (-0.25 to -0.33).
I have their famous original green one (1962 IIRC) and mid 2000s version in PDF. I still have Elena Ventzel’s 1961 Theory of Operations.
For REAL education? Absolutely. Agree. But it is good to have computers with modern interactive graphics. Helps a lot in physics and math.
This, in turn, brings up a fascinating, theoretically testable IQ question with relevance in the present, namely Average recent-ancestor age at reproduction and present-day IQ.
Given that IQ is hugely heritable and that we receive ~1/16th of it from each of our 16 great-great grandparents (a decent sample size, and for most of the living today dating back to roughly the mid 19th century period in question), might a correlation between ancestor stock (at +4 generations)’s average year of birth and genotypic-IQ be found?
The closer the ancestor-stock at +4 generations’ average birth year is to the genotypic-IQ-peak birth cohort (perhaps 19th Century Q2), the higher the descendants’ genotypic IQ today would be predicted to be (and, in today’s West, certainly phenotypic IQ as well). Obviously, we must speak of aggregates and not necessarily individuals here.
Example:
Mr. Apple: 100%-NW-European White U.S. high school student, b.2004, whose recent ancestors have been relatively early marryers and early reproducers, of whom the average age at birth of child is 21. His 16 great-great grandparents are b.1920 (avg.), something like eighty years past the proposed genotypic-IQ-peak birth cohorts.
Mr. Berry: 100%-NW-European White U.S. young professional, b.1980, whose recent ancestors have been relatively late marryers and late reproducers, of whom average the age at birth of child is 32.5. His 16 great-great grandparents are b.1850 (avg.), just after (if not right at) the proposed genotypic-IQ-peak birth cohorts.
(Both Mr. Apple and Mr. Berry are meant to represent hypothetical ethnocultural-ceteris-paribus aggregates differing by birth year and avg. ancestral age at reproduction.)
In principle, and in aggregate, a pool of “Berrys” will have a higher genotypic IQ than the “Apples” by as many as several points, given that the great-great-grandparent pool of the Berrys (avg. b.1850) is so much earlier than that of the Apples (avg. b.1920), given that birth-cohort genotypic IQ peaked in 19th Century Q2.
How the numbers exactly fall depends on exactly how sharp the dysgenic trend is, that is to say, on how big the genotypic-IQ-loss-per-decade figure is: If it is at ~0.4 loss/decade, as I think I have seen proposed, it would amount to a ca. 3 IQ point genotypic IQ edge for the Berrys living today.
Suppose this means the Berrys are at IQ 103 and the Apples are at IQ 100. At the ‘genius’ range, say IQ145+, this starts to become significant: 0.26% of the Berrys woul be predicted to be geniuses based on inferred ancestral genotypic-IQ, to 0.13% of the Apples: Half the number of geniuses-per-capita in the Apple pool as in the Berry pool, and that is for presently living people, not some abstract attempted comparison between b.1840ers and b.2010ers.
__________________
The above does seem to be a way to possibly unite genealogy (determining average birth-year of ancestors at x generations) with IQ testing to find corroboration for genotypic IQ decline.
But not necessarily in the same place. In Baghdad, the Islamic Golden Age ended with the Mongol invasion. The region never recovered from this blow, and the eventual renaissance took place not in the Arab world but in Europe. Likewise, Greece, Rome, Persia, and Egypt have never recovered their lost glory.
When Europe succumbs to idiocracy and mass immigration, the focus of world development is likely to shift to China.
Sir John Glubb, in his pamphlet “The Fate Of Empires”, had a different point of view. In a declining civilisation, the cultivation of the intellect is over-valued, but it tends to be combined with a loss of moral values and purpose. I suspect that the devil is in the detail: we can have ten times as many people earning university degrees, but we do not get ten times as many Newtons or Einsteins. For many people, the motive for higher education is not cultivation of the intellect, but keeping up with the Joneses who sent their kids to University. There are numerous institutions whose sole purpose is to teach pseudo-intellectual subjects to students of average intelligence.
as far as dysgenic IQ developments go,
the 1914-45 World War outdoes all others:
50,000,00 White Europeans slaughtered each other,
while Blacks and Browns stood aside and watched.
Now the Jews are using the fecund Blacks, Browns (and Yellows)
to finish off the Whites altogether.
If (((they))) succeed,
there will be no civilizational recovery.
% of World population that is white:
1900: 30%
2000: 8%
2100: extinct
It ended with Al-Ghazali and triumph of Asharites in Sunni Islam. Well before Mongol invasion. The rest are details of the downward spiral which are for debate, while the ultimate result is not.
Great intellects in civilizations prior to ours faced the same difficulty with the same foresight and apprehension. They too knew that at some point it would become vital to make a record of what they had achieved and put it in such a form that it would be transmissible through the tough times looming on the horizon. They gathered together and cast about for a solution.
One suggested that they train a special cadre of enlightened intellects, house them in sanctuaries so that they would be protected from the buffeting winds of fate that lay ahead. This seemed like a good idea until one countered that such a group was prone to corruption from within as well as destruction from without. So that was laid aside as too risky.
Another proposed that they write all they knew down and deposit the accumulated wisdom in some secret place. That met with wide approval. Until someone pointed out that with time, all the original members who knew the whereabouts of the horde would die off and that the location of the secret hiding place would be forgotten and all the wisdom lost. So that wasn’t a sure thing either.
Finally, one said the following: Fate is fickle. Humans are an uncertain vessel, even the best of them can be corrupted. Virtue degrades, good intentions falter. We cannot rely upon human goodness to preserve our knowledge, it is too fragile. But vice is always among us. It is consistently reliable. Whereas virtue can wither and die, vice is hardy and pervasive. So lets hide our wisdom in vice.
And so the deck of cards has 52 cards for the 52 weeks in a year.
The sum of the spots on all the cards (Aces counting as one) equals 364 plus 1 for the joker equal 365, the number of days in the year.
There are four suits and four seasons.
There are thirteen cards in each suit and (nearly) thirteen lunar months in the year.
Of course, in olden times, cards were used for divination, tied in with the Tarot and Astrology, the cycle of the seasons. There was probably more to this fable, with the significance of royalty and such, Kings, Queens and Jacks. We are probably missing the esoteric meaning of those, a lost art, but the numbers are still sorta interesting. So I guess it didn’t work out after all. But what the heck.
Couldn’t be any other explanation, of course. Other than the one you want, that is.
Couldn’t be that intelligence is threatened, suppressed, shamed, dispossessed, outlawed and eventually killed. No, couldn’t be that. Has to be what you said.
Hey! Over on the other entry, they informed us that wealth correlates strongly with — get this — LOW IQ!
So this rag likes to contradict itself. I agree with the other entry. Rich people are stupid. Everyone knows this who isn’t dumb.
To where actually the West has risen and from What ?
Great quote Godfrey. Interestingly, the implied cause of decline is personality not intelligence. The term “evil genius” often reflects reality….
“The problem with a dumber population will always be political. ”
Absolutely.
The “problem” with genius now is social/political, not biological. In short, the Western world becomes more fearful by the day. We are “risk adverse” — we demand safety at any cost….even if that cost is the loss of democracy, of freedom, of even free thought. “Genius”, like any form of “deviation” is scary, upsetting & threatening. Crime is deviation. Deviation is criminal. Therefore a genius is a kind of criminal …?
Political Correctness, a philosophy for nasty, neurotic children, will always reject genius (perhaps Genius might suvive if it is without any obvious political/social significance…?)
I couldn’t be further from concurring with that.
What we won’t be able to do is write classical music, humanistic philosophy and the other humanities (including political science, theoretical science,…), make art, on the same level with the best that the West came up with. We have already been unable to for awhile.
That’s what demands genius.
As long the rest, competently running an ever more machine-based, automatic, currency-stuffed and finance-centered, culturally-homogenized civilization, there’s going to be an overabundance of IQ >= 135 finely fit to do right that (and apparently nothing else, one would add). The more intelligent swaths of mankind are transitioning to machines (see among several things the strength of their disinclination to beget offspring; for another, how automatic skills and duties are treasured over subtlety, creativity, and all what, if coalescing in a single mind, constitutes genius. ) — and while there is no way machines have genius, machines may be thought of lack all but not efficiency.
It’s culture that is going lost, not civilization. Technological acceleration will indeed fortify civilization, making it to run it an easier task.
There has been a long time trend among wealthy families to have their children diagnosed with ADHD/Asbergers as a competitive edge for college admissions, more time on tests like the SAT. Here’s an except from a 2006 article:
Have you ever spent a lot of time with ADHD “patients.”
They can’t “focus” but are able to play some online game for 18 hours straight.
When I took the SAT in the early 70’s there were zero accommodations for anything.
My girlfriend arrived to pick me up about 10 minutes after we started the math portion which was after the english portion of the test. At around 12 minutes she started honking the horn! At 15 minutes I had completed the test and got up to hand it to the test monitor. She asked me “Aren’t you going to take the test?” I said “Take it, lady, I’m finished with it.” And then walked out which, fortunately stopped the insane honking of the car horn.
2 weeks later we got the results in math class, and the teacher, Mrs. Farr, was disappointed in the results of the class, but she did smile when she said one student had a near perfect result. Then she handed my results and told everyone I had scored a 790 out of 800. “Fig” Newton, our school’s star running back exclaimed, “And he did it in 15 minutes!” Mrs. Farr called “Fig” out, “Nobody could do it in 15 minutes, “Fig,” nobody.” “Well he sure did!” he replied, “Teresa was blowing her horn and he had to get out of there quick, so it wouldn’t drive the rest of us crazy, you do remember that horn don’t you Mrs. Farr?” “Yes, “Fig,” I do remember a horn, but it stopped after a few minutes.”
“I rest my case” said the smiling “Fig.”
I don’t see how that follows. The European countries which turned majority Protestant during the Reformation didn’t lose their sense of purpose, even though their populations became “atheistic” towards the saints that their ancestors had believed in and prayed to for generations. The early Protestants might still have believed that these biblical or early Christian figures existed historically, led exemplary lives and wound up in heaven after they died; but they stopped believing that these long-dead people could hear prayers and answer them through supernatural powers.
Unlikely, in the conventional sense. Might be very similar to stat polygenic scores. Will be impossible to interprete outcomes.
Our guess, most individuals will become irrelevant in the larger sense. The fishing systematically for outliers, and it’s neglect, makes for the human hardwired failure.
“5) finally, and most unforgivably, Western elites are now deliberately sponsoring the colonization of our nations by vast numbers of low-IQ persons from Africa, Asia and Latin America.”
I’m surprised the authors were able to mention this in the UK of all places. Or were willing.
We (Catholics) pray to the saints to pray to the Lord for us just as we ask Joe across the street to pray for us when we are sick, etc. “Pray” means petition, just as it does in the legal world. (“Prayer for relief.”) It is not the same thing as worship, which belongs only to the Lord.
chess strategy
Noting that both John von Neumann and Bertrand Russell advocated a nuclear strike, or the threat of one, to prevent the Soviets acquiring the atomic bomb, Nick Bostrom says the relatively unlimited means of superintelligence might make for its analysis moving along different lines to the evolved “diminishing returns” assessments that in humans confer a basic aversion to risk
Unless IQ changes are stratified by race, this does not mean much . Obviously, low-IQ immigration will lower national IQ, much in the same way an average IQ person will lower the average IQ of a Mensa meet-up. Does not mean that the smart people are getting dumber or that the world is getting dumber.
>They begin their study by drawing our attention to two technological breakthroughs of the year 1969: the first flight of the Concorde supersonic passenger jet, cutting transatlantic travel time from eight to three and a half hours, and the first manned moon landing. At the time, most people assumed more such aeronautical wonders lay in store. This writer can remember the ubiquitous “artist’s impressions” of future manned flights to Mars and beyond; every little boy of that generation wanted to become an astronaut.
>But a Concorde crashed due to human error in 2000, and all flights were discontinued three years later. We have not returned to the moon since 1972. The authors do not mention this, but by 2010 a NASA administrator was saying that “perhaps [the] foremost” of the space agency’s missions was to “reach out to the Muslim world … to help them feel good about their historic contribution to science, math and engineering.” We are not exactly aiming for the stars any more.
private companies such as Space-X are taking over that role
You must be the richest man in the world!
This seems fatuous.
Firstly. even given mild dysgenic trends the absolute number of very smart people must have been increasing steadily for centuries along with rising absolute population. The dumb ones that are proliferating are superfluous to ‘genius’ achievements. It’s not like we take an ‘average’ of global IQ to determine the level of achievement in higher math. Perhaps devising ways to have the masses not revolt via various kabuki theaters is a drain on the intellect of the smart, but not that much!
Secondly, related to the above – the selection mechanisms for channeling smart people into higher professions have surely gotten better over the last few centuries – for better or worse (for the health of society) -kids are endlessly tested and those with aptitude funneled into elite universities and large corporations as never before (see Charles Murray).
Thirdly much of science has been bureaucratized because of the now extreme division of labor in science which is a sign of the success of science not its failure.
Fourthly, science seems to be doing just fine, unlike everything else. See breakthroughs in medicine (CRISPR), artificial intelligence, genetic archaeology, etc.
None of this is to say civilization won’t collapse – see Joseph Tainter – but that has nothing to do with declining IQ; it’s systemic and institutional not anything to do with individual brains.
And funneling these kids into “elite universities” (where are those again?) and large corporations is somehow an unmitigated good, or any good at all?
Your point is taken. We probably will not see the coming. That is none of us, no cluster, will scale to the difference of speed assessing more variables, thus better decisions. As is, as an example, the humanoid is bluffing and playing stone age war games, while mostly un-aware, that these obsolete maneuvers only concern positioning in a systemically dumb concept of our restricted reality, where we happen to make out, where things are made up, where reality fits not. Even our concepts of being obsolete, becoming irrelevant, becoming extinct are grounded in pre modern human psychological concepts. Thinking rationally has been a deadly mutation.
Clusters of humans, indeed scale badly, no cabling yet, to take advantage of assimilating more variables to better draft scenarios. Big data, a necessary pillar of better analysis is such a delusion, not because intrinsic value not being up to the promise, but caduque algorithmic searches and pre-poned questions, as to what to look for by human operators.
The certainty that the humanoid needs refactoring or bust, beats the anguish about AI ever materializing learning capacity. There is another “promising” factor at play, it is computerized analysis, processing power, and only that, what can give us a workable understanding of ourselves. DNA and the universe around it, and if that leads to manipulation of our nature, could be a path out.
No matter what takes the laurels, no drastic change beyond our comprehension stands for “drowning” in a matter of generations. Our tools, though brainless, have already mastered us. Imagine, imagine, we cannot.
Thanks for your interchange.
Our human “emotional” preference: genetic manipulation, and live to fight another round.
Always glad to see new articles by F. Roger Devlin. This seems like an adaptation of his earlier work, and that of Amneus’ The Garbage Generation.
As an aside, I remind everyone of “Moravec’s Paradox:” we are ALL geniuses when it comes to things like walking and recognizing objects by looking at them and ‘common sense.’ Computationally, these tasks are far more difficult than solving calculus problems or playing chess at the grandmaster level. It’s just that these tasks are what our brains are designed for, and so they seem easy – but fundamentally, they are hard.
So genius may not be that the brain is fundamentally more powerful. Genius is skill at tasks that do not have immediate personal survival value.
Perhaps it was not genetics that spawned the industrial revolution, but that we started to acquire enough wealth that brilliant but narrow eccentrics could survive and indulge their passions.
I suspect that in classical China, there were any number of brilliant eccentrics. But with most of them chronically malnourished and crushed into the mud, so what.
Complexity != improvement. The Shuttle, as a budgetary (look up “Proxmire”) and political (look up “Morton Thiokol” and “Jake Garn”) compromise, was inferior in many ways to the expendable boosters it was supposed to replace. Look at what replaced it as a satellite launcher: expendables!
” Yeah; so there I waz, it waz th’ early 70’s or somethin’ like dat an’ I thought I’d just take this “SAT” thing, y’know, for a lark ‘cos my girl Teresa waz takin’ it an’ so there I go to take it and I get to this math part an’ Teresa is out in the school parkin’ lot sittin’ in her Dodge Dart an’ leanin’ on the horn an’ everyone’s lookin’ at me an’ I know I gotta finish this thing, like, pronto or there’s gonna be problems so I knock the answers out in like fifteen minutes an’ I’m out th’ door an’ two weeks later old lady Farr is p.o.’ed ‘cos almost everyone stunk on this test, see, but she’s all smilin’ ‘cos ONE student practically ACED th’ thing an’ that was me an’ she said “he got 790 outta 800” an “Fig” the running back and “Fudge” the wide receiver they’re all whistlin’ an’ sayin’ “DAAAAAAAAAAMN” ‘cos you’ gotta study for this test see an’ I did th’ math in FIFTEEN-freakin’-minutes an’ old lady Farr is goin’ “No that’s impossible ‘Fig’ an’ ‘Fudge’ ” an’ “Fig” or “Fudge” stands up an’ says “NO Miss Farr I HEARD th’ horn that Teresa was hittin’ an’ SAW AWM skidoosh in like FIFTEEN MINUTES. You was there…didn’t you hear the horn?” Well, there was like this pause an good ol’ Farr she just smiles, shakes her grey-bun crowned head an’ squints through th’ lenses of her cats-eye granny glasses an’ says with a little ol’ lady chuckle “You’re right ‘Fig’/’Fudge’…you’re right…”
An’ that’s why I’ma genius I tell’s ya, I’ma genius, see, ‘cos humble-braggin’ B.S is what genius’ do on pages like this.
Seriously…
Talent is hitting targets that others can’t hit. Genius is hitting targets that others can’t see.
Hahah that was good. You’re probably right, this dude just writes long paragraphs of nonsense.
Regards
Intelligent is not the IQ test score. Guilty of conflation, primitive reductionism and reification.
“Intelligence is about 80% heritable” – Not true. The consensus is that the twin studies show 50% and DNA studies can’t even get above 15%.
“higher intelligence usually translates into socioeconomic success (correlating at 0.7)” – after dubious corrections for the restricted range and attenuation.
“It has been shown that as people become more intelligent, the relationship between the different cognitive abilities becomes weaker…” – This clearly contradicts what the fabulous g factor was supposed to be according to Spearman. Broad diverse battery tests can’t b reduced to one factor as Spearman postulated and multivariate model must be accepted.
Theory is mostly useless. Learn to swim.
While working as a ferryman, Nasreddin has as passenger, a scholar who wants to discuss the details of grammar and linguistics with him.
When Nasreddin confesses he has no use for these tools, the scholar informs him he has wasted half his life.
“Have you ever learned to swim?” asks Nasrudin.
“No!” the scholar scoffs, “I have immersed myself in thinking.”
“In that case,” Nasreddin replies, “you’ve wasted all your life. The boat is sinking.”
1.
This is the result of foundation funded research supervised by committees and all five of their traits correlate directly for or against being an obedient robot.
2. The critical factor in progress / innovation is how smart the outliers out at the +2-3 standard deviations are. Given the poor state of the science correlating genetic markers and IQ it might be impossible to make less of these outliers if you had totalitarian Godlike powers to try and do so.
Although I do agree the trend for smart people not having children is not positive.
But then we have the case of Phil Rivers of San Diego CA whose wife is having their ninth child!
https://www.chargers.com/news/a-family-affair-a-look-at-philip-rivers-through-the-eyes-of-his-children
A friend of mine from a family of eleven children reported that her mother didn’t really like children but she seemed to enjoy being pregnant.
This suggests that the intellectual elite have to be validated and have their intellectual freedom protected by the rest of society. If the elite of America’s Space Agency (mostly white – check the photos) feel social pressure to “reach out to the Muslim world” then their protective shield has failed.
Which is only more evidence of the current occupation of academia by Cultural Marxist religious type activists.
For example, Nobel prize winner James Watson being terminated by his laboratory for valid but non-PC opinions:
It’s true that at the start of the West’s scientific golden age, Galileo could still run into problems with the PC of his time (Catholicism) but by the early 18th century Newton was free to pursue pure science in his religiously founded college (also free to spend time on alchemy and occultism).
Charles Darwin (himself religious) was encouraged by a British Victorian society to publish his ultimate religion destroying research in “The Origin of Species”.
I earned some money working for a supposed elite Ivy League university on a contract. I had a chance to read a lot of student statements and descriptions of how they live due to the work.
These kids are considered the top minds of the college hordes- Mathletes and High IQSuper Stars- but they have zero moral or emotional intelligence. Sleeping in vomit from drunken nights out, roommates complaining about others not bathing for weeks.
Not Animal House hijinks- but students sh*tting their beds from drinking and just covering it with a towel and eating pizza on it.
Girls getting so wasted they have sex with boys they do not know- and then consider it a promising start if he texts her for another booty call after he f*cked her bloody without so much as a Big Mac before.
But they are all “woke”- worried about treatment of Muslims in Burma but not about their roommate gagging from their filthy funk or pregnancy or lonely people on their dorm floor. It was one of the most depressing anthropological insights I ever had.
You don’t want these little savages in charge of you if weak, old or sick.
I had personal experience of this.
A selective school with a fine family feeling, excellent results, and a caring and respectable headmaster and staff was destroyed overnight, and turned into a doctrinaire Marxist-socialist dump (Comprehensive) . I remember being described in front of the rest of the pupils as a “class enemy” by a fashion leftist art teacher who received a minimal slap on the wrist for his excessive zealotry.
I agree 100%. I read the same story in Tom Crouch’s “The Bishop’s Boys: A Life of Wilbur and Orville Wright” https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/039330695X/ref=nosim/librarythin06-20
Apart from being geniuses they had persistence, strong family ties and complete integrity.
In grad school I developed a saying “education is a bureaucracy; learning is a biological activity.”
Copyright, patents, and licensing have contributed in great measure to the loss of impact of genius in our society. I noted early in my work career, that the truly smart person avoided institutions of higher learning, hence cannot get a license in today’s society, because such institutions were boring, the true genius preferred to learn by experience.. and often became the leader in her/is field after a few years. But licensing, laws, and elevated costs, have limited access to education, and corporate directed government has stymied the OJT experience avenue, so the advances produced by the genius have been eliminated (by bureaucracy, rule of law, and the principles of economic zionism, <=which confines and eliminates all competition by whatever means necessary). Uncontrolled persons are considered potentially disruptive competition.
Undiscovered, independent genius is not allowed to contribute in societies that confine competition. Competition is the source of discovery, opportunity is its means ..
The laws of copyright, patent and privatization of government subordinates to private EZ owned enterprises all productive elements of success. EZ has served the wealthy well because it has squashed and eliminated many otherwise likely disruptive discoveries. The open source.. an example of the progress that unlicensed unpaid persons can make. Linux was one product.. and as soon as that product emerged, the EZ tool of government and its bureaucracy was brought to bear to eliminate open source as a competitor in mainstream society. The open source patented the products their ideas produced, and donated them to the public domain, meaning the EZ owned corporations could not buy it, so they had to get government to stop it..
Johnny Rottenborough@5 Your simple and proven way.. is accurate.. but why?
Because learning is a biological activity and that activity is a function of experience, and because high quality instruction is an intervention process. Instruction directs and improves the learners’ data extraction capacity from engagement with experience and instruction directs the transfer of that data into formats or algorithms that produce knowledge that can be stored in retrieval forms. Teaching inserts procedures almost in check list form, that enhance the detection and organization of collecting detailed data provided by experience and enhance the usefulness of the data; the experience produced. Instruction assists learners to develop data acquisition and processing procedures that integrate the knowledge prior experience produced into relevant formats that can be useful for needs later.
Since Economic Zionism has taken charge of the USA, the USA has tried its best to dumb down the Americans it governs. The USA does this by fixing learning at federally controlled and accredited schools, hipping IQ and using IQ test to eliminate access to learning institutions, elevating the price of education and text books out of reach of the masses, licensing instructors and credentialing learning materials.. and by placing all good post-study::entry-jobs under the watchful eye of EZ controlled government or owned corporations making selection for a job after schooling a privately controlled political process of sorts and the same is true of admission to high quality professional schools. The learning experience (of good entry jobs or good grad school appointments) are open only(rare exception) to those educated at a high cost, approved place or to those that serve a military or economic purpose.
These machines will disappear fast.
PDF is a bad format which may include BLOBs and code and obfuscation, but a subset is actually listed here, amazing:
http://www.naa.gov.au/information-management/managing-information-and-records/preserving/long-term-file-formats.aspx
No, that was another network that has nothing to do with the Internet. The Internet was built to connect low-security campus machine to one another using leased lines through which you do packet exchange. And nowadays it’s still shit horrible in security and resilience. If you nuke the NSA hooverpoint of AT&T in San Francisco, you can bet there won’t be Porn for you anymore.
How does rapid growth, where those in charge of the government decided Russia’s space success, had to be out done. forcing activities and implementing ideas before sufficient knowledge and science could be put in place to make implementation fool proof . prove a single determinate of intelligence one way or the other.. ?
These errors were forced by the Zionism in the government to respond to a 1958 Russian space spectacular Sputnik,
I cannot agree “Intelligence is the ability to solve problems efficiently…” intelligence depends on ability but it also depends on knowledge, timing, circumstance, understanding and recognition of context, sensory input, and a myriad of other environmental enablements and constraints. how that intelligence is applied: whether to solve problems or to steal from folks is neither here nor there.
“the best explanation for such regression [of society] is extremely simple: we are becoming less intelligent.” if anything the Concorde, NASA, explain how the top down external control of the Armed rule making structures (nation states) forces the humanity it governs to substitute greed for intelligence..
Who said “higher intelligence usually translates into socioeconomic success (many alternative explanations are possible) maybe the correlation is the inverse [socioeconomic success translates to enhanced emergence of intelligent self driven projects that find both funding and support..) Clarks’ Why we Fared well (2007) documents only that control of the awesome powers of ARMS (the govt), in the wrong hands, transfers all wealth from the masses to the few..
I am ok with “..economic status and intelligence are positively correlated”, but I do not accept the conclusion that [the relationship improved intelligence, it may have improved the distribution of education, but not intelligence] and led to us become[e]ing more and more intelligent every generation.” “The results confirm the hypothesis: intelligence continued to rise” <=what the rise might prove is the more highly educated the masses are, the more the performance in happiness comes to all people [the entire mass of humanity] is enhanced until someone wants to keep it all to themselves or transfer it their children?
"Still, psychologists have been able to achieve considerable agreement on the existence of five basic dimensions of personality, viz.: Extraversion—IntroversionEmotional Stability—NeuroticismConscientiousness—ImpulsivenessAgreeableness—Disagreeableness
Openness/Intellect—Closedness/Instrumentalism” These dimensions are team member selection factors.. < which deal out individuals who commitment their lives to discovery and better science, and certainly your tmsfs are not indicators of intelligence?
Yet Why we Fared well [Clark] thesis more rich Aristocrats and fewer educated members of the herd accounts for … I AM NOT ARGUING WITH THE STATISTICS, ONLY WITH THE CONCLUSIONS . The America's response to the the false flag event known as Pearl Harbor, the response of the Syrian population to outside insult, the response of the Yemeni to denial of their right to self determination, and others have demonstrated that challenge to survival produces genius after genius..its just that the results of such genius is not made public [see MarkinLA @10 above) ]but when the need is great enough.. discovery occurs which BTW is follows in line with the theory of Evolution. It would be interesting to see if offspring of those under threat of survival are more intelligent than their progeny..
" Decline sets in precisely as a consequence of previous success." <= maybe?,, I interpret the statistics to mean decline sets in because wealth accumulation is an achievement that increases one's access to the power and that power brings move achievements, but the children of the wealth enabled achiever cannot hold a candle to the ability of deceased wealth achiever, so societies fail because "the-masses-are-forced by the wealth handed down sibling generations, who are in control of the government, to allow the rich hand me down dunces, crooks and greedy bastards to lead them(the masses). Meaning if everyone were treated equally, and wealth were taxed at death to zero, and access to positions of power were limited to actual performance and all wealth produced were redistributed to equally to all, societies would continue to flourish.
The head girl in the class is typical outcome.. innovation is not about intelligence, its about taking advantage of circumstance ..by applying imagination, supported sometimes by intelligence.. to a envisioned environment.. what has caused the confusion in this line of wishful thinking is that the hand me down wealthy try to capture someone else's imagineering by hiring the imagineer into a wealth controlled structure (the corporation) where the structure can strip the products of imaginative and creative people and transfer them to the possession of the controlled structure. My thesis from your data is that the rise of a society that allows highly skewed, concentrations of wealth, especially hand me down wealth, explains the failure and fall of once successful societies. (see above).
Protestants have a negative empty anticatholic identity , now that catholicism is dying protestants are dying too .
Regarding your “atheists ” of course they believe in god , they are their own gods , they put themselves in the place of God , tremendous hubris that will lead to a terrible nemesis , as we see in the excellent article about the dementiation of the west .
Quos Jupiter vult perdere dementat prius .
The five reasons they present are all good and fine, but there are others. The one that stands out for me is our obsession with safety for kids who should be allowed to roam freely and be subject to the laws of natural selection. Part of me weeps when I see a youth wearing a bicycle helmet or not being allowed to go outside and play.
Somewhat older people, e.g. teens or twenties, falling off cliffs or walking into trains while taking selfies is Mother Nature’s attempt to reassert her ways by tugging at the baser instincts of the less able that were left untapped in a simpler, more dangerous era where the broader society did not prevent the natural cull.
Just a suggestion – instead of positing a decline in general intelligence, perhaps the opposite has occurred: that is, general intelligence has remained roughly stable, however, the intellectual problems it needs to solve have increased to the point where our intelligence has started to run out of torque, that the slope of intellectual advance is becoming too steep.
There is nothing inherently illogical or irrational in asking whether human intelligence has real limits. Perhaps we are reaching those limits…. or perhaps not ? Perhaps, between A.I & genetic modification of the brain this means there are no real limits…?
This is a stream-of-consciousness effort to put forth some kind of philosophy of history & predict future. The authors reviewed come from a very known milieu, IQ studies & psychometry. Well, without naming big names- there are no laws of history & no one can predict future. Sure, titbits can be guessed about, but nothing really big can be predicted.
More, we don’t know most important events from the past: how did such extremely complex processes like rice cultivation & smelting happen at all?
As for the near future, stop importing people who are different & inimical to your kind of people. It’s that simple.
I would suggest “The Marching Morons”, a 1951 fiction by Cyril Kornbluth. It is somewhat bizarre and imaginative but an early peek as to where we humans are heading as collective cognitive ability declines. Mr. Kornbluth was way ahead of the curve with the premise of ‘dumbing down’ of the population. It’s a short read and entertaining.
This one is easy to answer. Conveniences of everyday’s living, society is providing to individual are now at such extent that are eliminating all chalenges, Without chalenges people are becomming dumb.
Amazing and relentless advances in technology seem equally accompanied by a loss of spiritual development. Modern man thinks he created himself and uses only self-gratification as his standard for purpose in life, a sure recipe with predictable results: violence, drug abuse, high rates of suicide.
A great book on the devolution of modern man is Joseph Pearce’s “Soul In Exile”, an excellent short bio on Solzhenitsyn.
Totally absolutely brilliant article,(and humorous also.)
https://russia-insider.com/en/politics/war-terror-loses-focus-us-empire-now-picking-fights-everyone/ri26646
YetAnotherAnon disagrees with the blindingly obvious but can’t muster up the words to say why.
Ha-ha-ha! Sean said: “But will the next wave of rising general intelligence be human?”
Above, a question.
Will the next wave of Sean’s missing intelligence be artificial?
Video Link
Unfortunatley it’s not white people with low IQ’s and large birth rates.
Had to quit this one after first few sentences as the author still hasn’t figured out he along with the rest of the world was duped in 1969 by Never A Straight Answer. If one cannot after see through this greatest of lies after 50 years, I don’t believe they have any business writing on the subject of declining intelligence.
Video Link
“a propagandist photo opp”
More exactly the moon landings never happened. They were faked. We still don’t have the technology to land men safely on the moon and bring them back safely to earth and may never have it.
I’m always puzzled why Americans so often list American “firsts” which are no such thing. Thus: Morse didn’t invent the telegraph, nor Fulton the steamboat, nor Ford the production line, nor Edison the light bulb.
But Wright – you are bang on; in a history of technology, once you are past the men who made the industrial revolution, then Wright is worth a top spot on anyone’s list. And yet Americans seem often to omit him from their lists of “genius” American inventors. It baffles me.
They, the reptilian swamp creatures of Cheney lineage, are openly subversive and proud of that: https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2019-03-30/guaido-set-enact-uprising-rooted-us-regime-change-operations-manual
Well the solution is blindingly obvious, and I for one will welcome our new robot overlords.
Don`t forget the war of the sexes fostered by the System , the massive incorporation of women to paid work , to University , the gender laws …… a divided house can not stand , can not last .
Neither the authorities nor the SJWs have any idea that these discussions are taking place.
They only focus on colour and movement, e.g sending people like Count Dankula to prison.
So long as they think we are irrelevant, we can talk freely.
It is speculative if anything can be done to change these degenerate types of behavior. I think a basically healthy society can, at least, try. It is difficult to tell whether American society (which segment?) is redeemable at all.
Or perhaps these creatures are good for guillotine only & there is no way they can change their “values” & behavior. Blood-letting is the only cure.
The result of generation of surplus.
Which the authors claim was a product of eugenic winnowing over hundreds of years.
And we’re back at genetics again.
Why not both?
The relatives of those geniuses might have pumped out more kids to make up for their high-IQ kin’s lack of fecundity, but back in Tesla’s day, more of those kids died before age 5. And so did more of their mothers, dying in childbirth whether or not the intellectually enhanced gene pool meant a high IQ for all childbearing-aged kin.
One of Ann Coulter’s recent articles points out something interesting: when two high-IQ people have kids, the chances are higher for some of those kids to have lower IQs than their parents. It is nature’s way of reverting to the mean.
But you are so right about the over-defining of children.
Rather than just accepting the fact that individuals have different temperaments that don’t say much about their academic or life achievements, professionals and armchair analysts alike are over-labeling them, with some of the diagnoses being trendy, a signifier of high intelligence that will ensure the little darlings of dual-high-earner parents a slot in the narrowing middle class if not the upper middle class, which is really now an affluent, semi-leisure class due to 1) the wealth concentration from assortative mating, 2) above-firing jobs for above-criticism working parents who take a ton of time off for lengthy and frequent global vacations and 3) computer software that does more of even the higher-level work.
The mental acuity of children, no less than adults, should be gauged by the quality of their work.
A kid with a personality type that does not fit the typical mold is not automatically a border-line budding genius, independent of any evidence of superior work for that age group. Nor should the kid be psychologically scrutinized to the endth degree due to eccentric personality quirks. Nor should adults who are not demonstratively high IQ beyond what their work reflects. Their IQ quotients alone do not constitute scientific or other achievements that will stand the test of time.
No wonder, the West is not turning out as many people who invent novel things or who add to the body of knowledge, crafting anything in a breakthrough way. The emphasis is no longer on what you actually produce.
Westerners now value symbols of intellectual superiority and other types of innate, aristocratic designations more than actual, stand-out accomplishments. They value the inborn prospect of greatness more than actual performance except in the most hero-worshipped arena in America: athletics. It is possible that sports is becoming more of an obsession, the more the game is rigged in other areas of life—rigged by opportunistic dual-earner parents, seeking to carve out airtight slots for their offspring in a society with static social mobility.
At the bottom rungs of the economic ladder, it is not a status thing, but one more opportunity for womb-productivity-related side-gig income. A diagnosis of ADHD often gets the parent(s) a rent-covering SSI check, adding unearned income to inadequate wages from temp / churn jobs in a labor market where the average “employed” person works part time and where wages have fallen for 40 years straight—an economy where rent has increased by 72% since 1995.
People at the bottom are rewarded in multiple ways for reproduction in a single-breadwinner household, getting free food, housing assistance, electricity assistance, monthly cash assistance and a max refundable child tax credit of $6,431. Reproduction is a career path that pays more than full-time work at the bottom. Single-breadwinner parents in the bottom 80% cannot work full time; they go over the earned-income limits when they do. They can work higher-paying temp jobs, skipping the welfare during months when they go over the earned-income limits.
This is the childrearing setup in the USA. It is not working from the standpoint of producing more high-IQ achievements, and with a 300% increase in the frequency of mass shootings, it is not working to combat the most fundamental moral problems, either.
Since two high-IQ parents often do not produce high-IQ kids, is it possible that there is too much pressure on assortative mates to get all of their progeny into the upper reaches of the economy via the route of IQ-related professions? Is that even good for advancing those professions?
Since the mating of two high-IQ parents guarantees nothing in terms of high-IQ reproduction, is it possible that previous generations might have produced more high-IQ achievers because of something else, like the stay-at-home mothers who were often super-refined—intellectual even—but did the work of raising their own kids, rather than pushing that work off onto elderly grandparents, daycare workers with rock-bottom wages or NannyCam-supervised babysitters?
Is it possible that the proliferation of high-IQ achievements in past eras was made possible by the stable home life, provided by women who did not work in the paid laborforce?
Before fake-feminist social ideals dictated that every MD must be married to at least a lawyer, those wives of bonafide geniuses might (and might not) have been exact IQ matches for their spouses. But those stay-at-home spouses provided an essential element for the generation of top-flight works, not just for their high-achieving, high-IQ husbands but for a few of their high-IQ children.
Many of the high achievements of yesteryear’s high-IQ set may have been due to a man who could could work his can off, spending countless, un-family-friendly hours in the effort to perfect some impossible task, with few worries about his children or the functioning of his household due to a capable, stay-at-home spouse who was superior in crucial ways, not always due to an equal IQ or a job of equal stature.
Due to the reversion-to-the-mean thing, stretched out over the whole population of possible high achievers, more high-IQ kids might have been produced under that system. Those kids also had character & work habits optimized for high intellectual production under that older, time-honored set of social mores.
It is not at all clear that the old mores prevented the true, intellectual crème de la crème of the female population from achieving great things, even the moms. Marie Curie had a kid. It did not hinder her measurable scientific achievement any more than the sexism of her day. But back then, society was not bending over backwards, providing everything from endless excused time off for above-firing working parents to company-provided daycare and child tax credits, to ensure that every mother could “have it all.” Accomdating every mom to work in the paid labor force was not a key social priority.
“The (womb-productive) talent” must work, even if they are absentee many mornings, days, afternoons and whole weeks beyond PTO and pregnancy leave—all for kids (so they say). “The talent” is not needed very much in many workplaces, proving that, even though “needs-the-job” parents are almost universally above-firing, they are not essential in many workplaces, whether or not they have high IQs.
Women must “have it all,” according to fake feminists. Government and every other facet of society must accomodate them in having it all, including all of the fawning, “retired” grandparents who provide groveling babysitting services for the every vacationing whim of dual-high-earner parents, in addition to raising their grandchildren while both parents work.
Yet, no human has it all, especially the few, true geniuses who managed to churn out truly great work. They made sacrifices for it, including the sacrifice of time spent in leisure and time with their families. In many cases, there was a backdrop for this, and it wasn’t usually the grandparent babysitter or the low-wage daycare worker or babysitter, unable to afford a one-room apartment on her pay for raising the little genius so that both parents could work.
Many biographies of high-achieving historical figures credit their stay-at-home mothers for providing a home environment that fostered creative, scientific or other high-level thought. Superior character training also plays a role in some types of high-IQ achievement. Dual-earner parents should kid themselves not: low-wage daycare workers do not care about their kids’ moral and intellectual development like them, nor will the low-wage workers be blamed or credited with the moral or intellectual results of raising the high-IQ, average-IQ or low-IQ kids of dual-earner parents.
Set aside the issue of how assortative mating has halved the size of the college-educated middle class, increasing Barbie-princess palace size and global vacations for the dual-high-earner parents, but decreasing the independent household formation that is essential to quality of life for individuals and for new family formation.
Society’s accommodation of the two-earner households across the whole population has probably reduced the number of high achievers with high IQs. Government facilitates this, too, with things like non-refundable child tax credits that provide more vacation money for dual-earner parents. It’s extra pocket money for the people taking two household-supporting jobs with benefits out of an economy with mass underemployment of citizens.
The accommodation of daycare-raised kids is even more extensive in single-breadwinner households, where moms have an elaborate set of financial incentives from Mr. .Gov—their low-IQ husband substitute who accommodates them in letting less interested parties raise their children. I am not sure that all of the high-IQ super-achievers of past eras, when Western society was advancing rather than declining, were spawned (or raised) in affluent or even educated households. Consider Abe Lincoln, Leonardo DaVinci and Issac Newton, three of the all-time intellectual greats.
None of them were from posh households, like the gentrified households of today’s dual-high-earner parents. Some of them even had single mothers, but not in an era when single motherhood was the social norm, and not in an era when mothers were not expected to raise their own children.
In past eras, mothers had high social expectations on them to raise quality offspring, unlike today when .Gov and employers are the ones with social expectations to accomodate parenthood to the max, rather than emphasizing the quality of the work. That is not a society that values hard work or high achievement. The value structure broke down somewhere along the path to wokeness.
The USA has a lot of dismal statistics suggesting that—despite all of the coddling of womb-productive female “talent”—the quality of work is sliding as much as the quality of childrearing. We’ve never had so many mass shootings, even by people barely out of their teens—people who are very much recent products of their home life.
We’ve never had more women in the labor force, more men and women with undergrad & graduate degrees. We’ve never had more libertine absenteeism privileges for working parents, but things like life expectancy are going down. Life expectancy figures reflect on the efficacy of the high-IQ workforce—a workforce that values family-friendly hours, even though they do not raise their own children or maybe because of that.
The stewardship of the economy is in the hands of high-IQ men and women, mothers & fathers in top professions that have never been so highly paid, not even in the days before feminists arranged for family-friendly hours that put working parents above firing.
With all of this diverse “talent,” why are so many corporations, as well as the US government, swimming in so much zombie-grade debt? Where are all the math people, working long hours to clean up this mess, with high social expectations to avoid corruption inculcated by the stay-at-home parent who raised them, rather than by the $10-per-hour daycare worker who was just getting through the day, waiting for the moment when she could again play on her phone?
The low-wage daycare worker doesn’t care about the lifelong repercussions for raising children poorly, nor does she care about imparting the kind of intellectual and other values that can lead some high-IQ kids to produce historic-level work. She cares about her boyfriend and the next beach trip to Florida with him, financed by her own, heaping, refundable child tax credit.
Her beach trips are also made possible by major monthly bills covered by Uncle Sam and her low-wage job that keeps her under the earned-income limits for welfare by raising someone else’s kids. It wouldn’t be so easy to create more kids in beach hotels, financed by a child tax credit for “poor” single moms, if she had to negotiate every financial transaction with a husband or with the parents she was living with, rather than living in the subsidized housing that sets up single moms in “independent” households.
Maybe, it is time to stop incentivizing single parenthood and dual-earner parenthood with things like child tax credits based on a working mom and layered monthly welfare, based on a part-time-working single mom, that undercuts the wages of non-welfare-eligible citizens while allowing single moms to bypass all of the social pressures that everyone else faces. Maybe, we should again have orphanages so that parents are incentivized to do everything they can to keep their kids out of orphanages.
After the monthly welfare is eliminated, if any child tax credit is awarded, it should only go to the households with a stay-at-home parent who actually does the work of raising the kids, with the tax credit based on the income of the other parent, but serving to make up for the lost income from ceding a paid job to someone else so that s/he can do the unpaid work of childrearing. It will sometimes be a he since a few women marry lower-earning men.
This would free up jobs for 95 million out-of-the-laborforce citizens between the ages of 16 and 65, most of whom do not have the responsibility of raising their children.
If any tax credit is given to a single mom, maybe, it should be given to the parents that she lives with, with the credit based on their income. It will be a lot harder for her to spend child tax credit money on beach trips with boyfriends or $800 tattoos when living under her momma’s roof. Her parents will do audits on her mom-pampering, with no need for a costly government program to conduct half-****** compliance surveillance on their welfare-state favorites. It will also be a lot harder to have kid after kid when she cannot afford one, when government is not in the business of accommodating her and her low-wage, part-time employer.
The decline of the west is directly the result of the application of The Protocols of Zion and anyone who reads the Protocols will see the zionist agenda for a satanic demonic NWO at work!
but we do not get ten times as many Newtons or Einsteins.
——————————————————————-
With technology what it is today, you don’t need ten times as many of them.
https://www.elperiodico.com/es/internacional/20190330/apagon-caracas-23-estados-venezuela-7381620
yesterday there was another electric black out in Venezuela courtesy from Guarrido & friends . They are damaging normal people who will end up very angry against Guarrido & US friends .
Will the american sabotage tactics backfire ?? , Maduro is militarizing the country , is creating a 2 million men militia , the chinese have offered help to maintain the electric grid and to buy venezuelan oil , The russians are sending arms to Maduro S-300 and Sujois . The cubans are helping Maduro . The USA is ” retaining ” ( trying to steal ? ) 30 billion venezuelan dollars deposited in US banks , and venezuelans know that , and don`t like it .
In my opinion the US would obtain better results with a more friendly and cooperative approach towards Venezuela , towards the country and its people , regardless of the regime .
I am affraid that the US arrogant obstination with the big stick will end up being counterproductive , unfortunately people like Plumpeo , Bolt-on , and Pence do not seem very sharp , the intelectual decline of the West ? .
“The Culture of Critique” has the most reasonable analysis regarding the decline of the west.
But you won’t find it on Amazon.
Video Link
The hostile elite took over of the West and denatured the Western Civilization.
There are some deep problems in this advance here.
But I will only introduce one, for now. The record indicates that the intelligence of the planet as well as the conditions, technologically are on the rise. The reason the planet as a whole has been on the rise has been the result of educational access (at least what we consider education) to an increasingly lager population. In other words, we have not provided a platform by which to identify and develop intelligent people in previous periods of our global history as we are today. And technology has been a primary contributor to that end.
Whether one needs high intelligence to advance is questionable. In all of te examples of supposed high IQ, was the emphasis of hard work in attending to any problem of issue. Neither Edison, Write, Von Braun or Einstein or Boer, Ralph Armattoe, Curie etc. By extending more and more platforms by which intelligence is provided venue as the real marker of change regarding intelligence.
But what is obvious, if one rests on the examples — hard work and persistence seems to have been the consistent factor/variables.
Access to established knowledge to more people breeds . . . a more educated populace and that is what may be the primary avenue to survival along with the will and ability to fight against extinction
said:
“but we do not get ten times as many Newtons or Einsteins …”
There he is again, the fake, but highly promoted icon of alleged Jew genius, Einstein. The man was a fraud, a charlatan, a run-of-the-mill hustler.
Jew IQ is largely a myth established by marketing and media control, starting with the Einstein brand. The myth is necessary to justify and conceal Jew tribal nepotism as the main factor establishing dominance of a hostile elite in host nations.
Exposing the Real Albert Einstein : https://principia-scientific.org/exposing-the-real-albert-einstein
Albert Einstein was a Fraud : http://coconutrevival.com/?p=5656
Einstein, plagiarist of the century: https://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/esp_einstein.htm
and
It’s ironic the author is using the fake moon landings to illustrate how people are getting dumber.
Great comment
“Hey! Over on the other entry, they informed us that wealth correlates strongly with — get this — LOW IQ!”
I certain instances that is correct. Look at all the basketball and football players making millions of dollars per year. Most of these players(chasing different types of balls ) have IQ ‘s somewhere around 80.
Obwandiyag you are so smart to notice.
‘stop importing people who are different & inimical to your kind of people. It’s that simple.’
No that will not do it. Legal immigration will still result in a White minority rather soon. What we really need are deportations. Mentioning people who are different and inimical to our people Bardon…
The fake moon landings make it appear that regression has occured, which is not the case.
Because he was a bicycle mechanic. Not one of the intelligencia.
They are right. We are. For now. But. Victory is a fleeting event. Just ask the leaders of the Soviet Union.
Einstein was no Newton or Kepler.
Also, eccentric genius types are being pushed out of western academia for being too anti-social and making women feel uncomfortable, or something. Not good for scientific breakthroughs.
Those online games require short bursts of attention, not the sustained attention needed to pursue an idea to its limits.
The US has a secret space program that has in been in operation for decades, if interested look up these names, Gary McKinnon, Col. Phillip Corso, Bob Lazar, Preston Nichols, Al Bielek, Laura Eisenhower, Richard C. Hoagland, David Adair, etc., etc..
You know, the Soviet Union was quite interested in our space program, and watched the rockets and the capsules and whatnot. Wouldn’t the Venona Documents and other Soviet documents contain evidence that moon landings were faked, if indeed they were?
Here is the key point. You either reverse a dysgenic breeding policy or you go down the tubes.
That Western governments implement dysgenic breeding policies combined with mass replacement immigration confirms that we have a treasonous elite which, with the aid of a complicit media and an education system that has been transformed into an institution of brainwashing, labels patriots as far-right-wing extremist, racist, anti-Semites against the genocide of their own race and nation.
The objective is clear: to create a mongrelized, culturally degenerate helot race to be used, abused or eliminated at the will of a globalist Money Power, the task to be accomplished by the likes of Justin Trudeau (“Canada is the world’s first post-national state”), Tony Blair, the Clintons, Bushes, Merkels and Microns.
Peter Thiel should set up a Banned University for all of these selected men. Pretty soon everyone will want to be with the Banned, as in the island in Brave New World.
The treason class don’t want no breakthroughs, they want to re-institute the feudal system on a global basis.
He even plagiarised his goy wife who was the real brains behind the maths and physics of the theories he published in his name. An absolutely despicable character.
A truly ridiculous statement offered by, I must assume, a provincial putz.
As one example of many, take this Incidental Music by Felix Mendelssohn:
Actually, it would be rather cheap to pay most immigrants to the Euro nations to return home. These people are mostly economic migrants, not particularly well qualified to succeed in Western society. Give them the means to return whence they came and buy an acre or two or start a business, and a surprising number will jump at the opportunity, and thank you for it.
Trump, however, will do nothing of the kind. As he’s said repeatedly, he wants the people to come in. Trump and his friends are business people heavily reliant for their incomes on cheap labor — from chamber maids and dry wall installers, coffee servers and store clerks.
Whites will survive the end of the Anglo-American empire.
Hard times make strong men.
Western civilization is dead and quite frankly, I think that’s a good thing. It has devolved into a corrupt, decadent, depraved, degenerate, obsessive, materialistic, superficial, authoritarian, excuse my French, ‘shit hole’.
Any society that gives women positions of authority, the overwhelming majority, who are emotionally unstable, capricious, selfish, materialistic fools, easily controlled by (((you know who))) is on its way down Marx’s abyss.
We can also add the rise of the depraved, the homosexual and their freedom to marry within a church whose religion promotes the exact opposite, condemning mano-mano relationships as sinful is also destined to fall out an aeroplane without a parachute.
Add to that, mass immigration, rights for the minority over the majority, citizenship to aliens thus destroying nation and nationality, promotion of celebrity culture which is nothing more than the pursuit of money, that society is, literally, the dodo looking down the barrel of a musket.
The Jew has won. And they knew they would win because essentially the non Jew are easily influenced and corruptible people . Give them sports, music and film and the belief that they actually have a say in who controls them and they’ll do whatever you want of them.
People expecting the 11th hour fightback are seriously deluded. The 11th hour passed a long time ago. The western civilization is singing its swan song and there’s no way forward for it.
There were times when I actually wanted a different story for the people, but quite frankly, when I go into a bar today and see people engrossed at the football match on the TV, not even local teams but some deadheads from South America or another country in Europe, along with others tapping away on their mobile phones, I just thought why bother?
If people aren’t even willing to help themselves why on earth should you? You’ll only be ridiculed for doing so.
Whites, today, are weak. This is simply the case of it all. The men are all too eager, rushing after the women to get their end away, failing to see that they are all homosexuals in their hedonistic behaviour as no offspring comes of the event. The women, are all too busy covering themselves in tattoos, piercings, fake body parts, along with gorging as many sugary drinks as they can, in-between filling up their plus sized figures in their wanton pursuit of greed and gluttony. Added to that, their utter lack of love and respect for their culture, traditions and history, they are all nothing but mindless, incredibly indoctrinated, dead-in-the-head, automatons who haven’t a clue what’s going on, outside their box-existence, in the globalist west.
Anyone thinking they can salvage anything from the dross that exists today, is living in cloud cuckoo land. Western culture, as stated, is debased, depraved and degenerate, lacking all morals and ethics, where the worship of the self is first and foremost priority for the morons who live within.
IT doesn’t matter if your nation has the strongest military. It depends on WHO controls it.
Those with the Power use the US military to destroy or threaten enemies of Israel or Jewish Power.
It is never used to defend American borders as the Newcomers serve Jewish Power against the white majority.
Civilizations grow by who controls them. In the last two hundred years the Jews have gained complete control of all monetary, social, media, and telecommunications of the world. This is not a “free market” of ideas. The world is now seen only through the Jewish lens. It’s a 24 hour Jew-A-Thon. And anyone who doesn’t agree with them is completely ostracized and destroyed from any field including science just like Watson.
The Jews have destroyed our education system with lunacy and Marxist ideologies. They have been behind everything from all people and civilizations are all equal to the sick women’s movements. They have declared a 24 hour assault on whites and Western Civilization and they don’t even try to hide it. Meanwhile, whites cower before their “Jewish False Gods of Multiculturalism” and allow their civilization to be destroyed.
I would suggest environmental toxins as an alternative hypothesis to declining intelligence (and fertility rates and now life expectancy). Vaccines and their adjuvants, electrosmog , pesticides (Lead/arsenic-DDT-glyphosate), fluoride, etc can all have harmful impacts on neurodevelopment and health and thus impact intelligence.
A dumber population is easier to control as they are more susceptible to lies. Its basically Loony Tunes out there today with people swallowing one lie after another and asking for more.
Agree, and for proof of this read the book , The Secret Team by Col. L. Fletcher Prouty, can be had on Amazon, or just read the customer comments.
Hell, the gov is spraying toxic chemicals over us day in and day out and has been for over 30 years aka chemtrails, see geoengineeringwatch.org.
I agree that Western civilization is dead, at this point the only thing is if any white people can survive the coming nightmare world.
Imperialism hates nationalism.
Jewish imperialism hates white nationalism that wants liberation from Jewish Supremacism and hates Palestinian nationalism that wants liberation from Zionist Occupation.
Whites = Palestinians. First, there was Nakba. Now, there is White Nakba.
https://ratical.org/ratville/JFK/ST/ST.html
Thanks, but I have the book.
But times are not hard. Times are soft: welfare, ad lib porn, endless CNN pap, junk food, legalized pot. Hard times? You gotta be kidding. Meantime these “strong men” you envisage seem unable to impregnate enough women to keep the race going. When your fertility rate falls below the replacement rate and keeps heading on down, you’re kind are headed for extinction — extinction faced by many, apparently, with total complacency.
What you describe is not a civilization but a degenerate society in disintegration. That’s not Western civilization. It’s mainly a toxic byproduct of the American commercial system. Key aspects of Western civilization were:
1. It was rooted in Christianity
2. It regarded Islam as a mortal foe
3. It considered pride in race natural and it would have regarded today’s globalist multiculti, immigrationists as the worst kind of traitor.
4. It was rooted in rationality and would have regarded America’s modern university as a lunatic asylum, fit only to be immediately closed and the inmates carefully watched.
5. Western civilization attained its zenith under a free market capitalist system, now replaced by global monopolies and oligopolies that have sucked the vitality out of Western economies.
I don’t think so. And quite frankly, it’s a case of the strong survive and the weak perish. The white man has allowed itself to be manipulated, to lose all value in life, to follow sports, celebrity and other nonsense while his society burns. Good riddance quite frankly. The world doesn’t need this kind of weakness. The Jew survives because it does what’s needed to be done in order to. Sure it doesn’t play by the rules, but it survives. Sure, it manipulates, becomes a fifth column in every society and works to successfully control and undermine that civilization. If people are quite happy to be so easily controlled and manipulated they deserve not to continue existing.
If western man had any balls, it would have destroyed the Jewish people and their faith, a LONG time ago. It hasn’t and as a result it’s now effectively in death spasms.
Real knowledge must remain hidden. It is not for the masses. Any time real knowledge makes it to the public sphere it is quickly corrupted and makes things worse
Well, I don’t know…..
And this is a good thing? While neither Christian or Pagan, do you really think that the Jew would have the control it does, were, say for example, Sweden, Norway, Denmark were under the Viking Pantheon? The same also for other western nations? Christianity, from what I can clearly see, was the glue that bound all of the western nation into one, the beginning of bringing about total subjugation of its people.
Islam would not be a threat to the west were it not under the control of Judaism, which came about through the weakness of a Christian society easily infiltrated, manipulated to accept Judaism as part of their faith, to be forgiven as Christ preached.
I agree.
I would also agree.
I will agree with that also.
However, it’s semantics. What is the west today is still the western civilization. It’s now a CORRUPT civilization that has easily allowed itself to get that way, predominantly in the last 150 years. Weak people leads to a weak society. The whites are now a shadow of their former selves and unless they have a drastic change of heart and alter direction, then they’re going to go over the cliff.
So who did invent the telegraph the steam boat and the light bulb? The assembly line production was invented in the early 1800s by American gun manufacturers.
Shouldn’t you find a support group so you can discuss all your family, emotional and social problems in a nurturing, supportive setting with others who have the same problems?
The brilliant Hans Hoppe has some related insights on this, which ironically conflict with standard (classical) liberal accounts:
https://mises-media.s3.amazonaws.com/A%20Short%20History%20of%20Man%20—%20Progress%20and%20Decline.pdf
I stopped reading here.
The fact that the author believes NASA put men on the moon in the first place destroys the whole premise of the book.
Think about it.
GMOs. When the artificiality of food was introduced brains began to shrink, strokes increased. The criminally insane run planet earth like it is the Matrix movie. Matter of time and then a new world order alright. Blubbering piles of protoplasm ready or not.
Where did you get that from?
The world credits Ransom E. Olds for inventing it in 1901…..for his horseless carriages… Oldsmobiles . Then Ford followed his lead.
The globalists are betting on lady power big time…
Nikki Haley, Karma Harris, Tulsi Gabbard
Jacindia Ardern….
http://tapnewswire.com/2019/03/say-what-you-like-about-jacinda-ardern-you-cant-say-she-hasnt-got-balls-at-the-very-least-that-bulge-makes-it-look-like-she-has/
Based on the article during a negative shift in a civilizations trend to decline. Survivability of any group is best achieved by having more offspring. The choice by those with a higher IQ to have fewer children rates to comfort and security during stable periods (assuming that is the case). But when said civilization comes under threat some existential decline, the strategy forward that yields survivabilty is more offspring.
Is it that the “intelligent” grow suicidal?
Why would they affirmatively act to abort themselves out of existence? Why would they affirmatively encourage mass immigration from tribal countries which will inevitably overwhelm the existing society? Why would they affirmatively instigate social welfare programs, taking away all incentive for growth in intelligence? Why would they affirmatively encourage hostility toward religion? Why would they affirmatively propagate social theories that belie and suffocate intellect? Why would they try to affirmatively destroy a middle class where “intelligence” is most likely to be spring up?
The intelligentsia has acted in very affirmative and blatant ways to dumb down all of society, including themselves.
Doesn’t sound very intelligent to me.
You missed two of the main culprits –
1. Teresa May, of the UK, currently shitting on the UK population by not giving them Brexit, that they voted for.
2. Angela Merkel, whom you know has single handedly destroyed Germany.
And as for Jacindia Ahern, yes, I saw that video a couple of days back, which certainly looks odd. Either a transsexual, or a colostomy bag. My bet’s on the former.
Regarding Ahern though, I saw this incredibly informative video the other day on her past. Freemason connection throughout and organizations pushing progressivism. If ever there was a prize for the best Manchurian candidate, then she’s it!
Jacinda Ardern Exposed! (in 7 minutes or less) PLEASE SHARE!
I was defining Western Civilization, not evaluating it.
That’s like saying that Caligula’s Rome was still the civilization of Republican Rome, which it was not. What we have today is rule by plutocratic globalist conspiracy, which is engaged in the wholesale destruction of the tradition of Western Civilization.
The definition of civilization can be taken as a stage of a certain society that has advanced the most. So in your reply you would be correct. However, it can also mean a particular way of life in a certain area. So in my reply I am also correct. We are therefore both correct.
This I will certainly agree with. It is not just the ‘tradition’ of western civilization that they seek to destroy but western civilization completely, along with the white race.
I am an anarchist and fully believe it to be the only true way of life on this earth. We are not slaves and certainly do not consent to the control of ourselves by others. It is somewhat, ironic, that the oligarchical elite, who are in charge, controlling all the weatlh, the corporations, the msm, governments and politics, academia, the film industries etc. are, in fact, anarchists also. That is, although they control 99% of the population, they answer to no one, are under no lawful jurisdiction and have complete carte blanche over everyone within their lives.
Yes I watch that Jacinda expose’ too.
What about ms Patel ?
https://www.globalresearch.ca/ms-patel-interim-pm-boris-chancellor-uk-foreign-policy-trump-netanyahu/5672047
Disturbing, very, very disturbing.
This is what the Jews do. It’s either be under the control of the globalist Jews and stay in the EU or be under the control of the Zionist nationalist Jews. What a great choice!
Conservative, Socialist, Liberal….‘same destination, different driver’ is all it is
Awful woman, but then no man should ever allow any woman authority over him, regardless. No one should allow ANYONE authority over them, but remain as sovereign individuals for their whole life.
Voted 30 years ago when I was 18, once and once only. I saw the charade that politics was. I keep myself informed of it, only purely by understanding Tsun Tsu’s valuable teachings – “Know thy enemy, know thyself.”
Even I couldn’t’ve put it better!
They also corrupt professions by subordinating them to societal nicities (eg. values like truth, tradition, confidentiality, integrity, honesty, curiosity, loyalty (to race, ancestors)). Nietzsche says a lot about how they put ephemeral twee morals above all.
Are you satirising yourself Pft ?
I’ve been asking you ,
Why do you swear by the likes of Bloomberg,’
AP, Reuter, NYT, CNN, ….swallowing all their unsubstantiated talking point on China ???
The assembly line production was first introduced in ancient China during Qin dynasty in the 3rd century BC at the latest. Here is what Wikipedia says about assembly line: Division of labor was practiced in China where state run monopolies mass-produced metal agricultural implements, china, armor, and weapons centuries BEFORE it appeared in Europe on the eve of the Industrial Revolution.[2]
In my experience Aspergic people will not look you in the eye. Either you get the blank autistic stare as they say nothing and not acknowledge having heard anything you say or they will look at a distant point slightly off to one side as though across your ear.
I think there is also plenty of challenge to the idea that our choice to forgoe moon landings in order to tackle more mundane issues on the planet is a sign of humanity’s dwindling intelligence. We went to the moon several times. it was great and exciting and then we learned something.
1. minus the tales of alien bases and hoaxes, it’s a pretty barren rock. And
2. we learned that regardless of how much potential water and minerals there are beneath the moon’s surface, we don’t have the technology to efficiently and cost effectively get at it or return it to Earth
3. we are a long way from efficient space travel, lots investment, small if any real return on investment.
Just because there is a lag in development in any particular field requiring technogical expertise does not mean a diminished intelligence.
Furthermore, there are plenty of very tough issues to tackle on the planet.
water desalination – what to do with the residue
water and food distribution
Farming the oceans without depleting the ocean resources and supply
a return to super sonic and high speed rail transport
managing weather to improve rainfall to
reducing illnesses: cancers, heart disease, mental illness
improving human prosthetics
There’s a long list of issues here on the planet in desperate need of imaginative intelligent people who will solve them. In the mean time, the moon, mars, and the other celestial bodies will in all likelihood still be there waiting. After all it took several thousand years to go from the wheel (record at 3500 BC or earlier) to the Space Shuttle to Mars landers.
“We can also add the rise of the depraved, the homosexual and their freedom to marry within a church whose religion promotes the exact opposite, condemning mano-mano relationships as sinful is also destined to fall out an aeroplane without a parachute.”
Ohh you are too kind.
All of the most damaging policies and practices visited on the west were not brought to the fore by us “knuckle draggers.” No same relational marriage legality, ‘free love’, legalizing drugs, regime change wars, hedge funds, GDP analysis, dumping the gold standard, MBS security modeling (derivities out to infinity with actual ties to property), sexual continuums, transgender and transhumanism, all brought to the country by the intelligentsia
and the all time genius analysis that rated people as property for the ultimate purpose of avoiding labor and labor costs and eventually justifying the murder of children in the womb.
All the products of the “best and the brightest”.
It takes the intelligent to mangle human reality out of sensible meaning via the utter abuse of language.
We could use some down home intelligence to to tackle the infrastructure issues long over due for fresh looks and fresh long term answers.
https://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/what-happened-to-trumps-promise-to-rebuild-america-midwest-flooding/
Go back to 1500 and whites were probably 8%. Whites had their demographic bubble earlier. P
He’s probably referring to the use of “interchangeable parts,” which was referred to as the “American system” in the early 1800s.
Thanks for the link, I watched and shared the video.
On the contrary, the amount of Europeans and European diaspora has never been larger. The percentage decrease is not a result of the yet to be realized decreases in European fertility, but rather a result of the currently realizing gains of various non-European groups, much of whose fertility has been funded by Europeans.
Weren’t all the videos, records, etc destroyed or ‘lost’ ? If we can’t do it with today’s technology, how could they do it back then? It’s like 9-11…. so many obvious ‘ anomalies’.
A person essentially lend a hand to make significantly
posts I would state. This is the first time I frequented your website page and so far?
I amazed with the research you made to make this particular put up amazing.
Wonderful activity!