Blog Archive

Thursday, May 21, 2009


There was a good article at on this issue:

I read through the entire thing. I also read IQ and the Wealth of Nations by Lynn, the Bell Curve by Murray, and Race, Evolution, and Behavior by Rushton. Lynn, Jenson, and Rushton are the premier IQ scientists in the world and once you've read their books, you're pretty much understand the entire field. These scientists are never referred to in the mainstream media however, instead they feature liars and naifs like Diamond, Gould, and Flynn. Usually they're jews, just like their now-deceased leader Boaz. These scum of the earth have been obfuscating for a full century now the most vital truth in the history of mankind: that IQ is genetic, it has a dramatic impact on every facet of human life, and varies between the races.

Here's a rundown on the situation and why this truth is somehow still being suppressed and disbelieved by the public at large. Even though Lynn, Rushton, and Jenson have made plenty good enough arguments for their position, I may as well help out by summarizing their multitude of books into a short essay form.

The first argument of anti-IQers is that IQ doesn't exist. However, everyone can tell the difference between intelligent and stupid people. Just a few minutes in their company and most people can sort out intelligence quite quickly. It's also obvious that humans are smarter than animals, and that some animals are smarter than other animals, and so on. The idea that intelligence is unquantifiable and impossible to compare between people is therefore prima facie false.

The next argument is that IQ tests are flawed and do not measure IQ accurately. Now, this is fair enough. IQ tests are pretty inaccurate taken individually. However just like all statistics, this kind of 'noise' can be accounted for by taking a wide sample. One IQ test on its own is inaccurate, but an IQ test given to 10,000 people, or 10,000,000, will provide a very accurate appraisal of the situation. IQ tests are accurate enough, especially these days, to correctly predict scholastic success, and correlates significantly to wealth, productivity, length of life, criminality, moral behavior (like temperance, fidelity, honor, and non-violence in domestic life), and a high aesthetic sense (like the ability to understand high literature, pursue philosophical questions, enjoy still-life paintings or intricate melodies, and love and appreciation of nature, a finely made work of human craftsmanship, or the beauty of higher math equations 'balancing' or 'making sense.' Also the love of discovery and a wish to learn.)

Over the last few decades IQ tests have been so perfected that we can reduce it down to culture-free reaction-speeds to when a light lights up, or Raven's progressive matrices. We have even reached the point where we can tell the difference between an intelligent and stupid person by just giving a brain scan and looking at their brains directly. Though IQ tests are currently better at establishing someone's IQ than brain scans, MRI's already correlate to IQ by .4 and with better understanding of the brain we could eventually dispense with all tests and thus any chance of error. At that time I wonder what the liars will claim: "My brain wasn't feeling well that day re-scan it?"

Once the antis have admitted IQ exists and IQ tests accurately measure IQ, it's impossible to deny IQ varies between the races. Hundreds of years of testing using huge sample sizes of hundreds of thousands of people have invariably produced the same basic results. Jews > East Asians > Whites > South Asians/Arabs/Amerindians > Blacks. They tend to deny any importance to these IQ numbers however. The general argument is that people who are rich and well educated score highly on IQ tests. They have reversed cause and effect, as in fact those with high IQ then go on to become rich and well educated. However, wealth and education can be given to people, and is thus a source of social engineering, the joy of all liberals. IQ can not be transferred from one person to another, and thus they wish to deny it any factor in causation or value, because they would no longer be able to mold the world.

The problem is their model doesn't work. Jews, for instance, have been extremely poor but in a few years or a couple generations are back to super-rich and super-educated. The same is true of Chinese and whites who came to America with nothing but the shirt on their backs, many times escaping famine and certain death in their homelands. The only people who poverty holds back are the low IQ poor. For everyone else, it's a passing state, for the low IQ, it's their permanent fate. The same with education. High IQ people can certainly be uneducated, but when given the opportunity to learn they'll quickly gain as much knowledge as the next guy. Meanwhile low IQ people, no matter how much education you attempt to drill into them, will fail to learn any of it and eventually drop out of school. This shows the flow of causation liberals so blindly deny.

Give an idiot a world-class harvard education and a million dollars a year, he'll STILL have a low IQ and lead a wretched life. Give a high-IQ person nothing at all and he'll somehow overcome and jump from success to success. At the very least he'll lead a decent life and be the pride of his peers. How is it, then, that liberals say IQ doesn't matter and all anyone needs is money and education? Supposing birth rates were ever controlled in the third world, and supposing science were allowed to increase our productivity to 100 times what it is today (not that hard, as we've already done that compared to our pre-industrial age past), we could willingly perform the liberal experiment and give every single idiot on the planet 50,000 dollars a year and let them live exactly like the middle class, and put them all in super-well-funded schools with every bell and whistle they could desire. It wouldn't matter, they'd trash their own houses, spend it all on bling, drugs, or alcohol, beat each other and cheat on each other, and end up rioting and blaming all their woes on racism.

The next argument the antis trot out, if they admit that IQ is real, the tests are accurate, that it clearly varies between the races, and that it largely accounts for the differences in success these races have in the modern world, is that IQ is determined by nurture and can be equalized between all the races with some program or other. This is the last stand of the antis, you'd think that after this, they would have to admit there's nothing to be done and eugenics, the selective breeding of mankind for higher intelligence, with a corresponding negative pressure on low-IQ people to keep them from breeding, is the only way forward for humanity. This would largely eliminate all the mud races on earth, and with them almost all the problems on earth. So let's try and demolish this next farce of an argument:

"IQ can be raised by children being raised in a good quality home by caring and nurturing parents."

However, this can't be true because black children of rich blacks with 2 parents and a stable home environment still score lower than white children of poor whites with an unstable home environment. A dramatic difference like that simply explodes all possible help 'cultural' factors can provide.

"IQ can be raised by intensive schooling programs like the abecedarian project."

Not really. IQ is plastic during childhood but once people reach adulthood, it narrows back down to its genetic destiny. By age 18 or so, all such programs fail to have any positive affect on people's IQs -- they still score at their racial average and the same as people who never went to such schools. The antis just cite these studies involving children where the brain is still growing and developing according to its genetic template and not finished yet, thus creating fallacious numbers.

"IQ can be raised by good nutrition."

Not really. Even specifically malnourished korean children who were adopted into Belgian/Dutch homes (I forget which) still outscored their peers in school upon adulthood. Furthermore, mixed-race children and black children were both studied in the Minnesota Trans-racial Adoption study, where these children were put into high IQ rich white homes. If genes didn't matter, why did the mixed-race kids score higher on IQ tests than the black kids, both of them raised by white parents??

"People can be taught to increase their IQ scores."

Yes but such increases are not G-loaded and do not correlate to an increased life-competency like G-loaded IQ scores do. The whole point of IQ tests is to get at the truth, teaching to the test only negates the value of the IQ test -- not the value of IQ.

"IQ has been steadily rising every decade, especially among low-IQ groups, thus genes can't possibly be doing this."

These IQ gains are not G-loaded and do not correlate to increased life-competency. The same gap between blacks and whites remains, as does the gap between whites and asians, and asians and jews. The differences between the races aren't going anywhere.

In short, there is no way to raise IQ. Every way suggested only produces an insignificant bump or a temporary increase that goes away again by adulthood.

It is true that the environment can completely determine someone's IQ. If you are never talked to in your life, thrown in a closet, starved and beaten daily, your IQ probably won't be better than a dog's. Or if someone drinks while you're in the womb, shoots up crack, smokes, has you prematurely, then neglects to nurse you, yes you'll probably end up brain dead. However, once you've crossed the first few hurdles into a manageable life -- for instance if you have people to talk to, food on the table, and a primary education -- there's nothing more to be done.

The biggest proof for the ineradicability of IQ differences is not the black-white gap. In fact, it's the jew-white gap. Jews are a full Standard Deviation smarter than whites, 15 points or so. Lamely, liberals argue this is because jews 'study hard.' As though studying has anything to do with IQ (by the way it doesn't, as IQ doesn't measure knowledge, but raw intelligence.) If 'studying hard' were all it took, why don't parents pressure their white children into studying as hard as jews? Why are we such lazy fucktards? Here we have the potential to increase all of our nation's IQ's by 15 points, and correspondingly become as rich and powerful as jews are. We could get all those fancy nobel prizes jews keep getting, become professors and write books like they do, and live like kings while donating billions to our favored causes and political parties like they do. Are we to believe that all we have to do is crack open a few books and study a few more hours a day, and whites could quickly outstrip jews at intellectual prowess and raise our average IQ worldwide from 100 to 115? Everything else between whites and jews is the same. We both have stable home environments, plenty of money, classical music playing in the background, we're both read to as children, we both attend good schools, we both don't have abusive parents or fetal alcohol syndrome. There is no 'anti-white' racism or discrimination hurting our feelings, many 100 IQ whites still live in all white nations without even the possibility of racism being practiced against them. The ONLY difference between whites and jews, environmentally speaking, is jews supposedly study more in school and work harder on their homework.

This minor difference, where Schlomo cracks open a book while Jack goes out to play some catch in the yard, is apparently worth 15 IQ points and is just as important as all the differences between blacks and whites combined. Don't patronize me. Don't make my race out to be fools. We aren't a bunch of lazy fucktards who could, with the flick of our wrists, just 'apply ourselves' and start winning all the chess tournaments, nobel prizes, fields medals and billions of dollars whenever we wanted, but just don't out of spite. We try very hard and study about as much as can possibly avail us. We learn all we can, work as hard as we can, think as much as we can, and treat our children as well as we can. We strive for every advantage and opportunity we can give ourselves, but we still fall short and average out at 100 IQ. To say otherwise is an insult to every white mother and every white father on earth, as though they don't care about their children and intentionally sabotage their IQ by 15 points by dicking around and playing catch with them outside. It's also an insult to every white child on earth, who on top of all the homework and strain they're put under, have to be slapped in the face and told they're lazy because they aren't as smart as jews or east asians. What do you know about those children? How do you know how hard they work? How do you know they didn't spend hours writing that essay, just like the jews do, but still can only write it half as well? Did you ever think of that? Don't you dare blame us for that 15 point gap.

That gap was given to us by God, by evolution in action, and there's nothing any of us can do about it. We have already done everything that is humanly possible to improve our environment, and yet we're still as far away from the jewish top as blacks are from becoming whites. It is like losing a horse race to Secretariat and being told this was because we weren't trying hard during the race.


Furthermore, test after test has shown a correlation between brain size, something we can't possibly affect, and intelligence. Other tests have shown, across hundreds of thousands of samples, that east asians have the largest brains, followed by whites, and that blacks have the smallest brains, well below the rest of us. With such pea-brains, blacks can never be our equals. It's obvious on the face of it. Even if black and white environments were somehow made completely equal, brain size is entirely genetic. ((after all brain size of whites is larger than blacks even as FETUSES before either has been subjected to any environment at all.)) Therefore 40% of IQ is entirely genetic via brain size alone, and brain size can never be equalized, and thus our IQ's will always be higher than theirs. Just like they always have been. This is also just as good a place to point out that men have larger brains (and yes this is all proportional to body size) than women and we generally are 5 IQ points smarter than women. This has also always been the case and the reason men run society and produce all the great accomplishments. It is also why we used such phrases as "don't worry your pretty little head about it." And "women and politics mix like oil and water." The mistake of assuming racial equality between blacks and whites is three times as bad as the mistake of assuming gender equality between women and men (15 points as opposed to 5), but since blacks are only 13% of the US's population and women are 50%, the larger error was giving women the vote, not blacks. But we can deal with that another time, for now suffice to say IQ matters just as much between the sexes as it does between the races, and when IQ science is eventually admitted to be the truth, we will have to tackle the implications in terms of the relationship between the sexes as well as that between the races. Again brain size is impossible to change so there's no way to equalize men and women's IQ either. We are fated with this gap just like we are fated with the gaps between the races. Women need to stop blaming men for their failures and demanding affirmative action to get jobs they don't merit or honors they can't earn. Don't blame us, blame yourselves or God. Everything is due to IQ and the inherent differences in ability completely explain the differences in outcome. Between the races, and between the sexes.

All the science is on our side. The opposition tends to cite isolated studies that are outliers and contradict the massive numbers of studies that point the other way. This is bad science. They then trumpet their one study that shows whatever they want to believe and prove either that environment is 100% of IQ, or that the question needs 'more study' and 'more debate', thus playing a stalling game until it is too late for whites to learn the truth. If these phony scientists, by cherry picking and distorting numbers to keep giving 'vague' and 'it's still in the air we need more time' results, can simply stop us from learning the truth for another 100 years, it won't matter anymore. Because by then, whites will all be dead and their goal will be achieved. We cannot wait until we have 100% satisfactory proof where we know every single detail about intelligence possible. By then, immigration and high birth rates will have replaced the entire white western world with 3rd world mud people and the world will have fallen into a dark age. We've already researched this issue for a century, the science is already in (just like evolution, and yet creationists continuously demand more and more evidence as though another 200 years will be necessary to figure out the truth of the matter.) What we need to do now is not more and more scientific studies on IQ, what we need to do is apply what we already know. We need to stop immigration, implement eugenics, abolish affirmative action, rewrite our history books to reflect the truth, increase the white birth rate, kick out all our minorities or retreat from them all and secede, while we still can. We can continue our IQ research safely from a white nationalist haven, with as much leisurely debate as we please from there. But as things stand, the information will be entirely useless to us, by the time everyone will 'agree' with it. I see far too many sites like Gates of Vienna arguing 'we just don't know whether genes or environment cause IQ, we must wait patiently until all the science is in and meanwhile we are going to accept as a working premise that it is environment and base our philosophy and politics off of that.' You can bet 300 years from now Gates of Vienna still 'won't be sure' if it's genes or environment, and 'to be on the safe side' will base all their thinking on the environmental side, while calling anyone else a Nazi who has long ago realized it's genes. This type of conservatism isn't any different from liberalism. They are simply cowards unwilling to face the truth, just like creationists, and their intellectual cowardice translates to a political cowardice, a complete paralysis that makes them incapable of any positive change. Like I keep saying, what we need is fanaticism, fanaticism, fanaticism. A few people can change the world. A fanatical few, who are neither intellectual nor moral cowards, can cause more real change than an endless mass of vacillators and self-deceivers. God I wish I could somehow flush all of them down some toilet where they belong. I have no use for moderates when the world is going up in flames as we speak!,, the Occidental Observer and a few others 'get it.' As for the rest, they never will.

Nothing is ever simple, and often high IQ people are the larger forces for evil than low IQ. For instance, high IQ people have killed more whites than low IQ people -- when the jews took over and destroyed Russia, they killed tens of millions of whites, moreso than any amount of drunk driver Mexicans or black home invaders. High IQ people have also become selfish and cruel like the french aristocracy pre-french-revolution, causing famines among their own people by stealing all the wealth for themselves. High IQ people have also encouraged low-IQ immigration into our countries and are the chief financiers and propagandists for the genocide of the white race. From this point of view, it's a little senseless to be so harsh on dumb people while praising high IQ as the end-all be-all. However, there is a difference. Whereas high intelligence can be good or evil, depending on how it is used, low intelligence can only be evil. Dumb people are simply worthless trash, they can never lead a good life or be any use to the world. They lead wretched lives, leech off of others, abandon their children and rape innocent women. There are reasons to live around other smart people, or even people smarter than ourselves. There is no reason to live around dumb people. They are a purely negative force on this earth. While the relationship between IQ and the Good can be debated, the solution to dumb people is clear cut. As Queen Amedala said: Our people are dying Chancellor, we must do something quickly.


Brad said...

If Jews and East Asians are the most intelligent, then how have Whites been able to accomplish so much in such a short time?

Diamed said...

Once you reach 120-140 IQ, IQ doesn't seem to affect your ability to excel in difficult subjects. After that culture takes over, and whites of the 1300's to 1800's had the best culture on Earth. Even with a lower base IQ, there will be more whites with 120-140 IQ than Jews due to our relative population sizes. As for East Asians most of them still live in stunted cultural environments that hold them back. But as far as Taiwan, South Korea and Japan are concerned, as well as East Asians living in Australia or America, my bet is on them achieving more 'human accomplishments' than whites. The anime industry of Japan alone is worth more than anything we've been producing for ages.

Brad said...

Thank you for your prompt response. I have to concur with you on Japan's animation/manga culture. It's really fantastic! I've become a big fan of psychological thriller and post apocalyptic manga such as Akira and Berserk. Anyway,I have one more question. There's a term that exists in the black community known as "colorism." Many, or maybe I should say most, blacks believe that all non white races suffer from this. In other words the lighter the skin the better you are treated... Many dark skinned people seem to feel that they are being discriminated against because of their skin color. I never heard of this term (or even realized that this even existed!) until about a year ago, and I can't help but wonder if it has any relation to IQ? It does seem as if countries with darker people seem to be far less productive/successful then those with lighter skin.

Ridiculous question, I know but it's something that I've been researching the past couple of months. I'd appreciate your thoughts.

Diamed said...

It's just common sense. Lighter skin implies more white admixture and thus higher IQ (and other behavioral/personality traits like more self control, less impulsiveness, more consideration for others, etc.) It's a rough approximation of how white (or I guess Asian) you are and thus how much you've moved up to the average white IQ as opposed to the average black IQ.

It's not that we're prejudiced, it's just that people with lighter skin behave better and thus are more rewarded as a fair response. Actually, the effect could be twice as strong as expected. In order for a black to bag a white girl, they would have to be extraordinary (like Obama's dad), so even though the admixture is only half white, it would also indicate that the black partner was also above the black average, so for every additional white tint of the skin, it's likely both parents were better than normal, which of course will genetically pass down to the kid.