Tangential to this post, racial dilution is making this sort of thing harder and harder to measure and particularly who it's applied to. I'm not sure the exact number but I think it was something like 2% of American Ashkenazim outmarried 100 years ago compared to around 50% today. So the Ashkenazim of today, are they the same Ashkenazim of 100 years ago? As a genetic group, one would have to say no. Today they have far greater diversity within the group that is given that label.
Not to mention how laughably diversified "white" already is. That label at times gets indiscriminately applied to Argentines, Danes, Anglos, Russians, Poles, Italians, etc, as long as they live in the United States. Who exactly will these labels even be referring to in 50 years and how much will the group members have in common?
Returning to the present day, of what use are these statistics really? Handy heuristics I suppose? But even then there's somewhat broad differentiation at the individual level, even amongst siblings. Though it's uncommon, it still necessitates evaluating individuals on a case by case not race by race basis.
Another factor is increasing intermarriage between Jewish groups. Notable examples include Jerry Seinfeld (half Ashkenazi, half Syrian Jew) and my children (62.5% Ashkenazi, 37.5% Mountain Jew).
polygenic scores for IQ being higher for jews / asians isn't strong evidence that higher jewish / asian IQ is genetic. those polygenic scores are developed by fitting a model to predict IQ from genetic data. but measured IQ is subject to all the biases you already mentioned, and obviously ethnicity is encoded in dna -- so information about ethnicity contaminates the predictor. it's been known for years developing proxies for ethnicity is part of the way PSs get signal from genetic data
honestly before reading this, without looking much into the matter, i had given some credence to the idea that asians are smarter than whites. but if this is the best argument you can come up with in favor of that idea, i'm ready to abandon it
for jews, sure, i'm willing to believe higher IQ is partly genetic
I love these tricky questions, here you go: Why do all the smart guys go to a country founded by white men? Why does the self-proclaimed pajit represent an excessively strong hatred of white women? Why does this self-proclaimed pajit refer to incels in their speeches too often? Why does the self-proclaimed pajit really like to call white men incels? And finally, will we be able to find the real face of this pajit and verify whether he is a complete person or not? And the most important question: does the feeling of his own inferiority play a large or the only role in the activities of the self-proclaimed pajit.
Whites are the slave class. The real rulers are J. We come here because your elites stole money from rest of the world and now this is where you make money. These countries belong to the elites, not whites. Your elites allow immigration because they would rather hire an intelligent pajeet or a hardy mexican over some low-IQ, fat, low-T whitey like you.
Yes, it was the riches found in colonized shitholes that made the West what it is today and totally not the invention of modern civilization as we know it. Lol.
India has an IQ of like 70 and still haven't solved their public defecation problem.
And for that matter, the categorization of Jews is misleading.
The researcher can be forgiven, because even Jewish people lack a consistent answer to the question, “What is a Jew?”
But Ashkenazi, Sephardic, Mountain, and assorted other Jews are genetically distinct from one another. Did the researcher account for it? Perhaps it wasn’t relevant to make such a distinction?
Why is isreals IQ so low despite Ashki IQ being that high? All other Jews would have to be retards for this to be the case based on how much of Israel is Ashki.
50% of Israel is Ashkenazi. For the average IQ of Israel to be 93 the other half of Israel would need an average IQ of 76 (basically retarded), assuming an Ashkenazi score of 110. Only 21% of Israel is Arab and their IQ is well above 76 on average.
Therefore, ethnic Arabs cannot explain the difference between the often touted Ashkenazi IQ (I see 110 most often) and Israel's measured average IQ.
On a side note, what's up with the Uralians having Hi-Q? It's rather odd. Siberians are not a very high IQ population (not low IQ either albeit) and historically the Uralic nations of Scandinavia and Russia have not been particularly innovative and if anything were exceptionally primitive. And yet, I have heard that not only are the Finns and Estonians usually leading Europe in Nat'l IQ scores, but even the tribes in Western Russia are known for having good scores? The latter part was only said by Edward Dutton, I don't know if it's true or not, but I know I have usually seen Finns leading European IQ.
It also wouldn't really make sense for it to be the other defining genetic trait of Uralic peoples -- European Hunter Gatherer DNA. Slavs have this same DNA and are not more intelligent than Western Europeans, and Kirkegaard's PGS study of ancient samples would suggest Hunter Gatherer DNA should have the opposite effect.
The worst is the segment of the HBD community that denies high-JQ, I mean that is clearly one of the major factors of jewish overrepresentation if not their performance would be more modest even adjusting positive discrimination which tends to favour vastly more non-white gentiles and nepotism which at best is a secondary thing and also a byproduct of high-JQ people gaining power with his intelectual outperformance
Asians also suffer from DEI. Asians are underrepresented at elite colleges based on what their IQ and merit would suggest. And Jews are not just over represented at elite colleges, they are represented at a rate higher than their IQ (110) and merit suggests, just like blacks and Latinos.
In other words, Jews are the only high IQ ethnic group for which DEI has a positive effect.
The concentrated nature of this effect at some schools more than others also suggests nepotistic networks.
50% of Israel is Ashkenazi. For the average IQ of Israel to be 93 the other half of Israel would need an average IQ of 76 (basically retarded), assuming an Ashkenazi score of 110. Only 21% of Israel is Arab and their IQ is well above 76 on average.
Therefore, ethnic Arabs cannot explain the difference between the often touted Ashkenazi IQ (I see 110 most often) and Israel's measured average IQ. SebJenson didn't seem to address this in full.
These numbers should be easy for you to verify with a google search.
Conclusion: Ashkenazi almost certainly have high IQ, but its not that high.
Merit is defined as being good at achieving some objective.
The goals of the ivies aren’t necessarily something Asians are good at. Are Asians naturally good at law, media, government, etc.
Who’s more likely to become a Supreme Court justice? A Jew or an Asian? Or even a Catholic vs an Asian? Even with the blacks their ethnic clout makes it more likely. Having the Supreme Court is worth a lot more to the ivies than another mid level Asian programmer grad.
For STEM Asians are a bit better, but that’s why more stem focused places like Stanford or MIT are more Asian friendly. It would be perfectly legitimate to argue that the northeast ivies should be weighting stem talent more than other talents, but it’s a debate to be had.
Now, the trend of replacing whites and Asians with increasingly mediocre and resentful brown people is a bad move by the ivies, but the general rule of thumb is “don’t let Asians become more then 20% or they will take over and change your institutions culture” is an entirely different question. Iq alone can’t answer that question, you need to understand what the goals of the institution are.
Asia is naturally full of Asians. It’s a pleasant enough place, but they haven’t really built compelling elite societies. GDP/capita is low for the oecd despite very high working hours. Total fertility rates are abysmal. Suicide is high. The rate of elite innovation per capita doesn’t match the iqs.
In other words, it takes more than iq to be elite. Culture, norms, and non-iq but perhaps still genetic psychological and social traits matter.
There is a lot of iq fetishism because it’s a pretty good metric and it also explains why the blacks and browns are so bad at everything, but it’s not the one ring to rule them all.
Tangential to this post, racial dilution is making this sort of thing harder and harder to measure and particularly who it's applied to. I'm not sure the exact number but I think it was something like 2% of American Ashkenazim outmarried 100 years ago compared to around 50% today. So the Ashkenazim of today, are they the same Ashkenazim of 100 years ago? As a genetic group, one would have to say no. Today they have far greater diversity within the group that is given that label.
Not to mention how laughably diversified "white" already is. That label at times gets indiscriminately applied to Argentines, Danes, Anglos, Russians, Poles, Italians, etc, as long as they live in the United States. Who exactly will these labels even be referring to in 50 years and how much will the group members have in common?
Returning to the present day, of what use are these statistics really? Handy heuristics I suppose? But even then there's somewhat broad differentiation at the individual level, even amongst siblings. Though it's uncommon, it still necessitates evaluating individuals on a case by case not race by race basis.
Another factor is increasing intermarriage between Jewish groups. Notable examples include Jerry Seinfeld (half Ashkenazi, half Syrian Jew) and my children (62.5% Ashkenazi, 37.5% Mountain Jew).
polygenic scores for IQ being higher for jews / asians isn't strong evidence that higher jewish / asian IQ is genetic. those polygenic scores are developed by fitting a model to predict IQ from genetic data. but measured IQ is subject to all the biases you already mentioned, and obviously ethnicity is encoded in dna -- so information about ethnicity contaminates the predictor. it's been known for years developing proxies for ethnicity is part of the way PSs get signal from genetic data
honestly before reading this, without looking much into the matter, i had given some credence to the idea that asians are smarter than whites. but if this is the best argument you can come up with in favor of that idea, i'm ready to abandon it
for jews, sure, i'm willing to believe higher IQ is partly genetic
Jews, Asians and Pajeets are much much more intelligent than white men. White women are completely retarded.
I love these tricky questions, here you go: Why do all the smart guys go to a country founded by white men? Why does the self-proclaimed pajit represent an excessively strong hatred of white women? Why does this self-proclaimed pajit refer to incels in their speeches too often? Why does the self-proclaimed pajit really like to call white men incels? And finally, will we be able to find the real face of this pajit and verify whether he is a complete person or not? And the most important question: does the feeling of his own inferiority play a large or the only role in the activities of the self-proclaimed pajit.
Whites are the slave class. The real rulers are J. We come here because your elites stole money from rest of the world and now this is where you make money. These countries belong to the elites, not whites. Your elites allow immigration because they would rather hire an intelligent pajeet or a hardy mexican over some low-IQ, fat, low-T whitey like you.
Yes, it was the riches found in colonized shitholes that made the West what it is today and totally not the invention of modern civilization as we know it. Lol.
India has an IQ of like 70 and still haven't solved their public defecation problem.
I hope you're a parody account.
I’ll just leave this here.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iRHRcZ9V26s
This is like those videos where someone puts their OC in a show with the main characters and acts like it is a normal ass episode
On the JQ,
The report on intelligence given was conducted in 1972.
Does this means our most recent measurements of IQ are all 50+ years old?
That’s too old.
Race-mixing and civilizational dysgenics change the character of peoples too rapidly for such antiquated data to remain valuable.
There is newer studies with better methodology, which the Collins's mentioned. Maybe SebJenson has his reasons for ignoring these.
And for that matter, the categorization of Jews is misleading.
The researcher can be forgiven, because even Jewish people lack a consistent answer to the question, “What is a Jew?”
But Ashkenazi, Sephardic, Mountain, and assorted other Jews are genetically distinct from one another. Did the researcher account for it? Perhaps it wasn’t relevant to make such a distinction?
Why is isreals IQ so low despite Ashki IQ being that high? All other Jews would have to be retards for this to be the case based on how much of Israel is Ashki.
The ethnic Arabs living in Israel drag the IQ down.
50% of Israel is Ashkenazi. For the average IQ of Israel to be 93 the other half of Israel would need an average IQ of 76 (basically retarded), assuming an Ashkenazi score of 110. Only 21% of Israel is Arab and their IQ is well above 76 on average.
Therefore, ethnic Arabs cannot explain the difference between the often touted Ashkenazi IQ (I see 110 most often) and Israel's measured average IQ.
On a side note, what's up with the Uralians having Hi-Q? It's rather odd. Siberians are not a very high IQ population (not low IQ either albeit) and historically the Uralic nations of Scandinavia and Russia have not been particularly innovative and if anything were exceptionally primitive. And yet, I have heard that not only are the Finns and Estonians usually leading Europe in Nat'l IQ scores, but even the tribes in Western Russia are known for having good scores? The latter part was only said by Edward Dutton, I don't know if it's true or not, but I know I have usually seen Finns leading European IQ.
It also wouldn't really make sense for it to be the other defining genetic trait of Uralic peoples -- European Hunter Gatherer DNA. Slavs have this same DNA and are not more intelligent than Western Europeans, and Kirkegaard's PGS study of ancient samples would suggest Hunter Gatherer DNA should have the opposite effect.
Even if they’re “smart” it’s not a blank check to have unabated influence across all institutions lol
This thumbnail needs to be in the louvre
I just happen to have this video in my watch later- never watched it though. But go to Joseph bronski’s video on the ubersoy/LAC controversy
The worst is the segment of the HBD community that denies high-JQ, I mean that is clearly one of the major factors of jewish overrepresentation if not their performance would be more modest even adjusting positive discrimination which tends to favour vastly more non-white gentiles and nepotism which at best is a secondary thing and also a byproduct of high-JQ people gaining power with his intelectual outperformance
Asians also suffer from DEI. Asians are underrepresented at elite colleges based on what their IQ and merit would suggest. And Jews are not just over represented at elite colleges, they are represented at a rate higher than their IQ (110) and merit suggests, just like blacks and Latinos.
In other words, Jews are the only high IQ ethnic group for which DEI has a positive effect.
The concentrated nature of this effect at some schools more than others also suggests nepotistic networks.
Source:
https://www.unz.com/runz/the-myth-of-american-meritocracy/
50% of Israel is Ashkenazi. For the average IQ of Israel to be 93 the other half of Israel would need an average IQ of 76 (basically retarded), assuming an Ashkenazi score of 110. Only 21% of Israel is Arab and their IQ is well above 76 on average.
Therefore, ethnic Arabs cannot explain the difference between the often touted Ashkenazi IQ (I see 110 most often) and Israel's measured average IQ. SebJenson didn't seem to address this in full.
These numbers should be easy for you to verify with a google search.
Conclusion: Ashkenazi almost certainly have high IQ, but its not that high.
“Merit”
Merit is defined as being good at achieving some objective.
The goals of the ivies aren’t necessarily something Asians are good at. Are Asians naturally good at law, media, government, etc.
Who’s more likely to become a Supreme Court justice? A Jew or an Asian? Or even a Catholic vs an Asian? Even with the blacks their ethnic clout makes it more likely. Having the Supreme Court is worth a lot more to the ivies than another mid level Asian programmer grad.
For STEM Asians are a bit better, but that’s why more stem focused places like Stanford or MIT are more Asian friendly. It would be perfectly legitimate to argue that the northeast ivies should be weighting stem talent more than other talents, but it’s a debate to be had.
Now, the trend of replacing whites and Asians with increasingly mediocre and resentful brown people is a bad move by the ivies, but the general rule of thumb is “don’t let Asians become more then 20% or they will take over and change your institutions culture” is an entirely different question. Iq alone can’t answer that question, you need to understand what the goals of the institution are.
Asia is naturally full of Asians. It’s a pleasant enough place, but they haven’t really built compelling elite societies. GDP/capita is low for the oecd despite very high working hours. Total fertility rates are abysmal. Suicide is high. The rate of elite innovation per capita doesn’t match the iqs.
In other words, it takes more than iq to be elite. Culture, norms, and non-iq but perhaps still genetic psychological and social traits matter.
There is a lot of iq fetishism because it’s a pretty good metric and it also explains why the blacks and browns are so bad at everything, but it’s not the one ring to rule them all.
This post would have to be less terse if the goal is to persuade anyone taking the collins' side.