Here are Jason Richwine's calculations of scores from the 2003 New Immigrant Survey of the backward digit span subtest from the Wechsler IQ test. These are for the children of legal permanent resident immigrants:
White natives are at 100, with a standard deviation of 15.
European legal immigrants' kids: 99
India: 112
Northeast Asia: 106
Southeast Asia: 104
sub-Saharan Africa 89
Mexico 82
Central America/Caribbean 83
South America 86
Anyway, this is just a single subtest, but it's interesting stuff, although, as usual, not too interesting, in that it comes out about the way you'd have figured.
White natives are at 100, with a standard deviation of 15.
European legal immigrants' kids: 99
India: 112
Northeast Asia: 106
Southeast Asia: 104
sub-Saharan Africa 89
Mexico 82
Central America/Caribbean 83
South America 86
Anyway, this is just a single subtest, but it's interesting stuff, although, as usual, not too interesting, in that it comes out about the way you'd have figured.
My published articles are archived at iSteve.com -- Steve Sailer
Posts
127 comments:
European legal immigrants' kids: 99
India: 112
Northeast Asia: 106
Southeast Asia: 104
While mass immigration of lower IQ groups is not a good thing, I am not sure that allowing lots of ethnocentric high IQ groups is any better.
The kids of Canadian immigrants? Based on a sample of 3, (brother, sister, and myself), I'd say 120 average.
actually, that is a little surprising to me. it seems to indirectly contradict the census info cited here.
african immigrants in the census have higher educational attainment than any other regional group. but for reasons unknown to me, their iq doesn't appear to match their education.
maybe someone could clarify for me why that is.
According to Wikipedia, Sub-Saharan immigrants to the US are the group most likely to have a college degree and 20% even have a graduate degree.
The fact that after one generation the IQ drops to 89 tells you two things.
A) Getting a degree in Africa isn't very hard. Not surprising.
B) There's no such thing as "good" black African immigration. Even selective migration still gives you a group with an IQ in the 80s.
Not sure how the US born, white IQ averages about 100, since the component populations seem to differ. Meaning if the largest US white population groups are German, English, Irish & Italian, and their IQ scores differ, then an explanation of basic methods used might help.
For many years I've heard the average American man's height is 5'9", which sounds about right for the America of the 1960's.
However in LA, for instance, I would be surprised if the average man's height is over 5'5", due to immigration from Latin America, Asia & the Mid East.
Perhaps both average IQ scores & height for Americans are in need of a revision down.
The relative numbers for sub-Saharan Africa and Mexico are more than a little interesting. If that's not just static from working off a single sub-test, it suggests we're not getting Mexico's best and brightest, or possibly integration and bi-lingual education is going so poorly we're driving down scholastic performance. Either way, this is not promising for getting legal permanent resident immigrants' children off welfare and in to productive society.
Sample sizes?
I'm spectical about this Richwine study. All the other published authorities have shown Indian IQs to be in the low 90s. Lynn's estimates of Indians in Britain are based on ten studies going back more than forty years.
Now we get a new study that reports results very different from all previous studies. As I'm sure you know the majority of new scientific studies that report startling new results are subsequently proven to have been wrong.
Interesting.
Has Richwine taken into account ethnic differences in the short-term memory factor when calculating IQs from reverse digit span? Reverse digit span is highly g-loaded, but it also loads on short term memory. In "The g-factor" (1998), Jensen reports (p. 380) that on the WISC-R, for instance, blacks exceed whites on the short term memory factor by about 1/3 S.D. when you control for g.
Also, does he have any breakdown in the SE Asian category for ethnic Chinese vs. indigenous SE Asians. I was surprised by the high figure of IQ 104 this group. For example, Lynn (2005) reports that Vietnamese Americans score about 0.4 S.D. below white Americans on the Ravens Progressive Matrices, which is almost purely a measure of g.
Also, does he have any information on S Asian Muslim immigrants (e.g., Pakistanis) and Middle Easterners (Arabs, Iranians, Armenians, etc.) I would bet that some groups, like Iranians, Lebanese Christians, and Armenians would do considerably better than their co-ethnics back in their native countries due to differential selection.
-Philly Guy
Note that a good deal of so-called "South East Asians" are actually Chinese emigrants from SA Asia descended from immigrants into the region.
The only thing I'm surprised about on this list is South Americans having lower IQ than Africans. Are there many illegal refugees from South America? I assume that's what brings down the Mexico score.
One thing this shows is that the US gets Mexican immigrants with IQ below the Mexican average, European and NE Asians who are average, and Indians who are much higher than the Indian average.
The thing about Mexico is if you have the intelligence to do so, the parts of the education system that have competitive admissions are both good and free. From there you can have a pretty high standard of living and quality of life.
If you are a young Mexican who isn't smart enough to be a doctor, school techer, business executive, etc., then doing manual labor in the US is often your best bet.
One would suspect the "European" average does not include many Norwegians, Finns, Danes, etc., and that the supply of Russian Jewish immigrants has pretty much dried up by now (i.e. they are all already here or in Israel).
Thus the European average has probably been "regressed to the mean" by lots of Eastern Europeans (non-Jewish Russians, Ukranians, etc.) with some exotics from equally destitute parts of the continent (Albanians?) thrown in. I've seen a lot of these types in my neck of the woods and they are for the most part solidly blue collar, which is in line with these test results.
The Indian average, however, is skewed upwards by a lot of H1 Visa engineers from the various IIT's, and is hardly representative of their population as a whole.
I've always known that African immigrants to the US are smarter than both African Americans and those who stay behind in Africa. We're getting their elites. The same thing was always obvious to me about India, but not about SE Asia. I wouldn't have been able to predict such a high SE Asian number. To me that's the most surprising thing here. Yes, I do know that a minority of SE Asians are actually southern Chinese, but that's still very high.
I am a little surprised at the spread between India and East Asia, but it may have to do with the fact that it's harder to get out of India than the others. There would therefore be more selection for intelligence.
What's your source?
Didnt think that the southeast asian iq would be that high. There must be a high percentage of chinese in that group. Askenazic iq is usually listed at 112-115.
Well, it confirms that we are not getting a cross section of India as legal immigrants. And we probably are not getting a cross section of sub-Saharan Africa either. If there were a manners-and-English-diction IQ measure, I would bet the African legal immigrants would rate well above the white American average. All the African immigrants I meet in Washington seem to have gone to a mission school, they are so polite and well-spoken.
for the children of legal permanent resident immigrants
that means these numbers reflect one generation of regression towards (different) means
"Africans have the highest educational attainment rates of any immigrant group in the United States with higher levels of completion than the stereotyped Asian American model minority."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/African_immigration_to_the_United_States
Africans probably get most of their education overseas. Their average US earnings and IQ don't match their education levels.
i don't think it's exactly the way you would have figured.
except for the europeans, every group that could not get to the US by jumping the border, had above average IQs. while those groups that could simply jump the border, had below average IQs. the southeast asians were smarter than average, and the black africans were smarter than the mestizo peasants who came in from mexico.
i guess this does corroborate the idea that higher IQ europeans mostly stay in europe. not much need to leave europe for better opportunity. not much selective immigration from the EU to the US.
I would venture a guess that many of the "Southeast Asians" are ethnic Chinese.
Arthur Hu's website shows that for 1990 SAT, Hindu Americans scored at 1029, which translates to 111 IQ
This is why no one takes "race realism" seriously. Now all of a sudden its "Indians are smart!"
But then we have things like this:
http://www.vdare.com/rushton/070926_indians.htm
Policy makers and intellectuals are fully justified in treating you people as pariahs until solid, irrefutable physical evidence for "differences" are found.
Till then, these upswings undermine your movement.
India, sub-Saharan Africa and, to a lesser extent, Southeast Asia have scores noticeably above the average for their home populations. Latin America in contrast is supplying us from the left half of their bell curves. (And political spectra, too, no doubt...)
So what we're doing is improving Latin America, while destroying the rest of the Third World.
Mexican immigrants are dumber than American blacks? Wow. I bet illegals are several points smarter than this. They'd have to be!
Most of the Africans in my city are refugees, which I assume aren't included. I wonder how they compare to "children of legal permanent resident immigrants".
The sources of Australia's immigrants in 2007/08 were: mainly white countries 48%, south east asia 14%, north east asia 12%, India 10% - Total high-IQ countries 84%. From sub-saharan Africa excluding (South Africa) plus Latin america and Caribbean, the total was 5%. By my calculation immigration is increasing average IQ. Are there any other countries for which this is the case? (NZ a possibility)
Albertosaurus,
Indian IQ is caste dependent
I dont know what caste groups were measured in Lynns study
If I ran IQ tests in black or hispanic areas I could get 85 IQ all year long
There are IQ studies done in a middle to lower middle class, upper caste non-brahmin areas in Pune, showing an IQ of 102
The IQ blend in UK consists of
almost entirely upper level peasant castes such as Patels and Jat Sikhs and Tamil Peasant refugees, hardly any merchants or brahmins, whereas in the US, about 60% of the Indian diaspora consists of Brahmins and Merchants
The Jason Richwine study matches SAT scores of Hindu Americans from 1990 and 2002
Anon, I think most of the south east asians are vietnamese who are close to chinese IQ and selected Filipino nurses
a-c. the 3rd preference immigration is for the skilled immigrants and this is only 15% of the total
The rest is family reunification
I for one am not surprised at the spread between east asian and Indian IQ
In Singapore, the south indian labor caste diaspora has an IQ of 100
In UK, the chinese diaspora is only slightly ahead of the Indian diaspora of Jat Sikhs and Patels
( upper end north indian peasant castes )
In the US, 60% of the Indian diaspora is brahmin or merchant
It is not harder to get out of India, over 100 million can afford a plane ticket to the west
I don't know that much about UK Indians, but I'd bet that they push their kids hard at school and have a pro-education home culture.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vFL0w1ruiCM
pfcjiangshi said...
african immigrants in the census have higher educational attainment than any other regional group. but for reasons unknown to me, their iq doesn't appear to match their education.
maybe someone could clarify for me why that is.
Education standards have dropped precipitously in post-Colonial Africa, due to the idea that dumbing down the curricula would produce more African graduates. The degrees stay the same, but the content drops. South African university degrees were accepted as the equivalent of Anglo-Saxon degrees during Apartheid. Nowadays most Anglo and European countries no longer accept South African qualifications. I imagine that degrees from institutions such as the University of Harare are worthless.
Anon,
Good for you!
In South Africa, impoverished and uneducated early Indian immigrants scored well below the white mean. Today their middle class descendants are at about 0.4 SDs below the white mean, according to a recent study of school children.
I have no desire to diminish Indian achievement, but I must add that white emigration from South Africa (top 20% have emigrated) has dumbed down the white IQ average. In addition there is discriminatory intent towards whites in the education system. Generally Afrikaner kids do well in Afrikaans only schools, which is why the ruling ANC has been on a rampage to turn those schools into English schools. Of the originally 2100 Afrikaans schools, there are only about 310 left. This severly works against Afrikaans academic achievement.
these upswings undermine your movement.
This isn't a "movement", it's about scientific research, which is a self correcting enterprise.
First, you do understand that the numbers quoted are for highly selected Indian immigrants to America, while Rushton's article is on Indians in India? That said, I'm not saying Rushton is the final word by any means -- no one has done the large-scale survey of IQ in India -- he's going on the best available public data.
And those public data sources would be a LOT better if idjits like you didn't simultaneously (1) demand incredibly advanced knowledge of the molecular mechanisms of human intelligence while (2) cutting off funding for such research!
PS: I'll pit the MRIs, IQ tests, and heritability studies of the race realists any day against the constantly shifting nurturists. One day it's acting black, the next day "post-traumatic slavery disorder", and the third day it's self-esteem.
Mutually contradictory garbage studies by nurturists are constantly published in Science and Nature, e.g.:
http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/abstract/313/5791/1307
...yet you have the unmitigated gall to attack the actual scientists in this space???
"Policy makers and intellectuals are fully justified in treating you people as pariahs until solid, irrefutable physical evidence for "differences" are found. "
If you want to take an agnostic position towards HBD, the prudent thing to do is to not permanently change the ethnic makeup of Western nations and in a generation or two do away with what took evolution thousands of generations to create.
That's ignoring the fact that nobody is saying that Indians are really smart, only that a small minority of them are. Even your Rushton article concedes that.
Anon - This is why no one takes "race realism" seriously. Now all of a sudden its "Indians are smart!"
Hope you can hear me laughing from over here.
When was the first time you read this blog? This morning, yesterday?
What a jerk.
No wonder no-one is going to take you seriously.
By my calculation immigration is increasing average IQ. Are there any other countries for which this is the case?
Perhaps Canada.
First of all, to rec1man`s `vietnamese comment. Vietnamese have an almost uniformly poor achievement rate in any developed country they are present in. I highly doubt the 104 IQ number. I think what`s happening is that Chinese emigrants from SEA are being counted as SEAsians and boosting the score.
On Indians: I have read Rushton`s article and I don`t agree....I don`t see any point in considering Ìndians`as a group when the country is an ethnic mess of hundreds of different communities and ethnic groups. Parsees, southern Hindus, northern Hindus, Sikhs, descendants of Muslim invaders, etc. So who does the Lynn number correlate with. It`s like giving an average IQ of Europe and Asia combined. What`s the point.
This 112 figure seems perfectly accurate to me. There is a bias in high IQ because a lot of Indians coming to the U.S. are already smart university graduates coming here for advanced degrees. University in India is not that easy (having taught there) so America gets a pretty smart sample, which may not be true for Africa considering this IQ number of 89.
Personally I think the actual Indian IQ is somewhere in the 90s, lower for northerners, higher for southerners, if economic development rate is an indicator for IQ as I believe it is.
I would wager that the African "elites" who migrate to America work
primarily in government jobs or in academia, as beneficiaries of affirmative action.
They don't strike me as very entrepreneurial, ambitious, or hardworking.
But they are better spoken than the average black American, more agreeable, and easy going: they might do well here as salesmen.
"In Singapore, the south indian labor caste diaspora has an IQ of 100"
Probably not 100. Plus the Indian minority includes merchants who went after the workers. Also Singapore aggressively recruits high performing students from India and is open to entrepreneur immigration.
Part of the reason why Indian student performance in Singapore is so noticeably split. New immigrant children do well. Multi-gen Indian children don't do well.
Steve,
a while back, maybe several years, you had a link to a site with reasonable speculation on future US demographics taking into account differences in birthrates between various relgions. The site also had some mild survivalism, like get laser eye surgery if you're really nearsighted. Do you happen to still have that link?
albertosaurus said
I'm spectical about this Richwine study. All the other published authorities have shown Indian IQs to be in the low 90s. Lynn's estimates of Indians in Britain are based on ten studies going back more than forty years. Now we get a new study that reports results very different from all previous studies.
Is Microsoft funding Richwine's study?
Anonymous said
This is why no one takes "race realism" seriously. Now all of a sudden its "Indians are smart!"[...] these upswings undermine your movement.
This is science, not religion. No guru is proclaiming as an eternal truth "All Indians are smart!" Different studies are being looked at. Do you "justly" treat evolutionists as pariahs because Darwin has been revised? Go back to your Bible if you want simple certitudes.
"backward digit span subtest"
Is it possible that Indians have a greater capacity to memorize stuff but not necessarily higher intelligence?
Think spelling bees.
Strange feats of memorization are also an Indian thing. For instance, I have (an admittedly very bright and successful) family friend who has large sections of PG Wodehouse books memorized.
Also, growing up, I always felt the Indian kids had no problems learning stuff by heart. There was no accompanying moaning and groaning involved.
Policy makers and intellectuals are fully justified in treating you people as pariahs until solid, irrefutable physical evidence for "differences" are found.
Differences should be the assumption. Equality after thousands of years of divergent evolution should be required to be demonstrated(good luck!).
It's facts and logic vs feel-goodism.
I don't know why you are all so surprised that black people are smarter than Mexicans. When was the last time you overheard a poor black person say something cutting and hilarious, so funny that you had to tell all your friends? Probably last week. When was the last time you heard a Mexican say anything of ANY INTEREST WHATSOEVER? Perhaps none of you speak Spanish and you think they are being clever and funny, you just can't understand them? They're not.
Oh, and there's that tiny matter of globally popular music being derived from African-American culture. Can you even name a Mexican cultural contribution? Lucha libre?
Two years ago a "racial realist" world history was published. Its back cover holds the endorsements of Jensen, Rushton, and Harpending.
This book Understanding Human History by Michael H. Hart specifically states on page 273that The average IQ in India is considerably lower in India than in China or Europe.
If this Richwine data holds up. a lot of books will have to be rewritten.
Indians love P.G. Wodehouse.
It's obvious that this country is doomed without massive Indian, Asian and Jewish immigration. Doomed, I tell you.
The only reason we are now falling behind is a dramatic lack of immigration!
Why don't you get it? You are worthless incompetents who cannot compete on "the world stage" without importing a new, improved intellectual elite.
You stupid, stupid people.
Differences should be the assumption. Equality after thousands of years of divergent evolution should be required to be demonstrated(good luck!).
Nothing wrong with that. It's the obsessive focus on IQ as the measure of all things which is misplaced. If IQ was the vital factor then the world would not be as it is.
Oh, and there's that tiny matter of globally popular music being derived from African-American culture.
I agree with your general point (black Americans are smarter than they are usually given credit for) but you're wrong about the music thing. It's a myth that AA's have been the wellspring from which modern music has sprung. Rock and roll is, for all practical purposes, white peoples music.
If you can't stand Steve dropping hints about Indian's love of P.G. Wodehouse without explaining how he came to know this, don't worry.
I've googled the answer
http://www.amconmag.com/issue/2008/mar/24/
"The BBC director Bharat Nalluri, who was born in India and grew up in Newcastle, might seem like an odd choice to direct this period piece, but nobody loves Wodehousian trifles more than Indians. Back in 1992, before the World Wide Web, I was involved in starting up a Usenet discussion group, alt.fan.wodehouse. Possibly half the Wodehouse fans had Indian names."
India looks to me like a funny country. Is it the colourful hubbub of peoples crammed together, the reigning order among absolute chaos? India for some reaosn is the funniest country in the world. Japan is second funniest. Japan is the other end of whatever spectrum it is that between them they bookmark.
I love P.G. Wodehouse, about the only fiction author that does not bore me. (Wodehouse and Michael Crichton, and perhaps Voltaire).
Don't remember the book, here is his summation of a property someone was trying to sell
"In the summer months the river was at the bottom of the garden, while in the winter months the garden was at the bottom of the river."
112 is shockingly high, we are truly getting India's best and brightest.
It's also notable that the the average sub-Saharan African immigrant scores higher than the average Mexican immigrant. We are getting Mexico's worst and dumbest.
"I agree with your general point (black Americans are smarter than they are usually given credit for) but you're wrong about the music thing."
I won't contest your claim on the origin of rock and roll, I don't know enough about it, but blacks do seem to have some special, compartmentalized mental talent for rhythm and this probably has something to do with their contemporary and historical prominence in music.
Jason Malloy on GNXP:
For the first time I've seen, Lynn also reviews tests of "MQ" or musical intelligence for black and white Americans. While blacks score lower on almost all the items, commensurate with the fact that IQ correlates with musical ability, they also do much better, on average, than whites on rhythm items - Lynn calculates a rhythm IQ for Af-Ams of 106, though no cross-cultural results are presented, this has been recognized in a number of societies through time. Since Sub-Saharan Africans have been musical innovators across a number of different countries, this topic should have more attention.
"I agree with your general point (black Americans are smarter than they are usually given credit for) but you're wrong about the music thing. It's a myth that AA's have been the wellspring from which modern music has sprung. Rock and roll is, for all practical purposes, white peoples music."
No it's not. Rock and Roll isn't the only globally popular music that blacks invented. Ever heard of Jazz, R&B, Reggae, Blues, Rap/Hip-Hop and Disco/House/Techno? Salsa y Merengue? That's basically all the music that most people in the world listen to today, and it's of all of black origin. Yes, the were some white influences in these genres, but the form of these various kinds of music that ultimately became popular was originally made by blacks in every case.
The reverse digit span sub-test reminds me of the memory tricks Kim is taught in the story of the same name. Isn't Kim Indian.
"Rock and Roll isn't the only globally popular music that blacks invented. Ever heard of Jazz, R&B, Reggae, Blues, Rap/Hip-Hop and Disco/House/Techno? Salsa y Merengue?"
Sounds like the one-drop rule creeping in. You know, that used to be considered an anti-black rule, don't you? You may be right about blues (who cares? liberals do) but those other forms are forms that sprang up among mixed-race people in cosmopolitan towns.
Haven't seen much comment on this, but IQ study in New Scientist:
"THE first images to reveal the quality of the brain's wiring show that more aspects of intelligence are inherited than previously known. The finding hints at ways to boost intelligence.
It is clear that intelligence is at least partly genetically determined. This was supported by the discovery in 2001 that the volume of the brain's grey matter, made up of "processor" cells, is heritable and correlates with certain elements of IQ (Nature Neuroscience, DOI: 10.1038/nn758). The amount of white matter, which provides the connections between these processors, has since been shown to be heritable too (Journal of Neuroscience, vol 26, p 10235).
Now it seems that the quality of these connections, which is governed by the integrity of the protective myelin sheath that encases them, is also largely genetic, and correlates with IQ."
http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg20126993.300-highspeed-brains-are-in-the-genes.html
Filipino immigrants are overwhelmingly from the top of the IQ group in their country. They provide a very high number of nurses and doctors and computer engineers and technicians. Many hospitals in New York City have a Filipina nurses population that is half of the nursing body.
I often hear that Indians are a high percentage of a country's medical school class.
Citations?
Rock and Roll isn't the only globally popular music that blacks invented.
An odd statement to make, since I'm denying that blacks did "invent" rock-n-roll. You just skipped on past and claimed they invented several other styles of music as well.
I think disco and rap pretty much disprove the theory that blacks have exceptional musical skill. If anybody else had come up with this dreck we'd laugh at them. But the notion that blacks are inately musically gifted is so entrenched that many people just assume it must be worthwhile music. Hey, they're black! They got rhythm!
Edward , regarding wodehouse, I read them when I was 13
I still remember the Empress of Blandings and PSmith
Half Sigma, 112 IQ is shockingly low for a southern brahmin
would be considered semi-retarded
Due to Affirmative action quotas
we need 135 IQ to get into engineering college and 155 IQ to get into Medical college
and in the IIT entrance exams, the entry level for all non-Dalits is 150
While the US is getting a fairly high grade Indian diaspora, it is far from the cream
The US diaspora is about 25% brahmin, 35% merchant, 35% peasant and 5% others
In my high school class in India, mostly southern brahmin, I was competing among the top 4 ranks out of 30. The other 3 stayed back in India
Meaning 75% of the cream is still in India
Whereas when I did my MSEE at North Carolina in a 7 member class with 6 Euros, I scored 98% and the rest scored between 57% and 62%
You may be right about blues (who cares? liberals do) but those other forms are forms that sprang up among mixed-race people in cosmopolitan towns.
Regarding rap/hip-hop in particular, the first song with rapped vocals was recorded in 1973 by Mickey Hart, drummer for the Grateful Dead, and a lifelong devotee of world rhythms.
It proves, rather definitively (download), that just as white men can't jump, they (we) can't rap either.
Andy Fyfe:
"It wasn't until record companies found a way of selling hip hop to a white audience ... that the phenomenon took off. When producer Rick Rubin found a way of keeping both the original power of the drumming and its swing, he made the Beastie Boys famous. In 1986 the opening track of their album Licensed to Ill, "Rhymin' & Stealin'," did just that, beginning with the unmistakable opening drums [recorded in a stairwell] from [Zeppelin's] 'When the Levee Breaks.' The song, and the album, turned hip hop on its head, finally opening up the genre to a massive white audience and creating the bedrock for all subsequent acts that followed in the Beastie Boys' footsteps. The simple fact is that without [Zeppelin drummer John] Bonham and 'When the Levee Breaks,' there would be no hip hop as we know it. Since then Bonham's drum track has become one of the two most sampled in history, along with 'Funky Drummer' by James Brown."
"Asked in Q magazine what Led Zeppelin thought of the beat being so widely used, Plant was philosophical: 'We were flabbergasted and impressed when people started using 'When the Levee Breaks.' When Jimmy and I talked about it, we figured nothing was sacred, as we'd been nicking old blues stuff since the beginning of time. It got a bit preposterous when Michael Jackson did 'Bad'--which is the riff to 'Heartbreaker' [from Led Zeppelin II] with one note changed and as far as we're concerned is a nick."
Eminem? A mere latecomer, compared with the hippies, whites and Jews who have defined the genre at each of its critical points.
Policy makers and intellectuals are fully justified in treating you people as pariahs until solid, irrefutable physical evidence for "differences" are found.
Till then, these upswings undermine your movement.
Your commitment to science is palpable.
When the Communists took control of South Vietnam, they seized the businesses of the market dominant ethnic Chinese minority. While the first wave of Vietnamese immigration consisted of the well educated professional elite, the second wave primarily were from this Chinese business class.
I've quite a few Chinese-Vietnamese on the West coast and it seems like they're pretty ambitious and successful people. Recently I read a good article about a really prosperous Vietnamese-American family that had gone from peniless refugees to wealthy bakery entrapanuers in just generation.
One study of ethnic Viets and ethnic Chinese-Vietnamese in a major metro area found that a substanial fraction of the Chinese were self-employed entrapanuers. None of the ethnic Viets were self-employed. Another study found that ethnic Chinese were more likely to leave their ethnic enclaves for more affluent suburban neighborhoods than the ethnic Viets.
It seems like there's a significant amount of bimodality amongst Vietnamese-Americans. Lots of kids end up dropping out of school and the labor force, with a very high rate of incarceration. Plenty end up doing pretty well for themselves too though, with an overrepresentation in the technical and medical fields. So I wonder if this reflects a split between ethnic Chinese refugees(successful) and ethnic Viets (unsuccessful like the racially similar Lao and Cambodians).
In the Little Manila in Daley City, California (a Filipino enclave), the largest Filipino grocery store and bakery are owned by ethnic Chinese Filipinos.
"savvygoper said...
Many hospitals in New York City have a Filipina nurses population that is half of the nursing body."
And if the hospital should have an unfortunate malpractice case brewing, a phillapina nurse can conveniently disappear back to the old country on a family emergency (indefinitely) before the plaintiff's attorneys can depose her.
Add that to the lower wage she gets (and the lower wage american nurses can get as a result), and she's a real bargain.
Soon, being a doctor or nurse will be one of those "jobs americans just won't do".
albertosaurus,
Please at least get the topic correct. Key word is "immigrants". Very few people on this blog, including Steve Sailer, doubt that Indian-American IQ is higher than average. Most people believe this is due to high IQ selection from the native population. Given that we have imperfect data on Indian IQ, the questions are how much and what degree of selection; and how much native Indian IQ is depressed by environmental factors.
The whole black music thing...
The belief that modern popular music is dependent on black innovation is pretty much a given. But it relies on PC sleight-of-hand.
Lets take that popular music and take some of the white contributions out.
No MP3s, internet, PCs, TV, radio. No, DVDs, CDs, cassettes, tapes, vinyl. No recording studios, no electric guitars, synthesizers, microphones, electric amplification, in fact no electricity. No printed music, musical notation.
Hows that vital black contribution holding up now?
The sleight-of-hand is of course the assumption that these various technologies are somehow just there. Like the weather or the river Nile, they are deemed to be discoveries rather than innovations insofar as they are acknowledged to be man made at all.
Of course its true that blacks have helped shape music, but no whites - no popular music as we know it at all.
In fact this applies in other fields too. Not long back I saw an Indian chauvinist explaining how Indians were vital to the internet. The impression one got was that inept whites somehow stumbled upon it but only wise Indians could really make it work.
Oh yeah?
Three of the four doctors in the building I go to are unrelated Indians from different parts of India.
"You may be right about blues (who cares? liberals do) but those other forms are forms that sprang up among mixed-race people in cosmopolitan towns."
Is there REALLY any such thing as a mixed race person?
Think about it for a second, there are basically four races of people in this world:
1) Black
2) White
3) Rich
4) Other
Am I wrong?
Oh, and all popular American music is an amalgam of white technical craft and, for lack of a better term, black "funk" If you have to ask what that means you'll never know.
Even blues would not have been invented if the sharecroppers didn't have "the man" stealing from them and beating the shit out of them, so you can all take pride in it!
Three of the four doctors in the building I go to are unrelated Indians from different parts of India.
I did a procedure on a patient today and when I introduced myself as "Dr. Patel", he said that I was the third Dr. Patel he had met on this hospitalization.
It's not unusual for patients at the large, well-respected teaching hospital where I train to only see Indian-American docs during their stay. The liver internal medicine guy is a a Christian from South India, the transplant surgeon is a Jain, the interventional radiology attending is a Patel, as is the resident, and the fellow is a Shah.
I'd estimate that Indian-Americans represent 15-20% of all residents and fellows at my medical center.
Soon, being a doctor or nurse will be one of those "jobs americans just won't do".
Isn't it already? I know of hospitals and clinics in my area (a well-educated cosmopolitan area with a relatively low concentration of minorities) seeking to get H1 qualification for doctors because they "can't find anyone."
And the matter is worse in places like Britain, where doctor's wages have been depressed by the government health service.
As a complete hypothetical, I think destroying the independent physician and turning him into an underpaid government employee will help to destroy the entrepeneurial class in this country. How? Well a field like medicine is a good placeholder for members of smart families who lack an entrepenurial drive. But the business experience they develop and the modest amount of wealth they accumulate they are often able to pass on to their children who may have that drive.
Aside from that, the downside of industrialization is that it destroyed the independent businessman - the self-employed person who can do and say what he wants without fear of repercussion at the office. Get rid of doctors and that's another 700,000 people who have to answer to someone other than themselves.
I don't doubt Indians are overrepresented in UK/US medical schools but some people give precise numbers like 12%.
Citation?
In America, Indian doctors are really overrepresented in lower paying VA hospitals and economically depressed rural/inner city communities. A lot of them are in specialties like family medicine, which are declining in popularity.
On net, I think America is better off due to the presence of Indian doctors.
I would also say a group like 2nd IAs is high enough in IQ, ambition, and work ethic to do well in any field. Better they do honest work in hospitals than flock to Wall Street and turn into Bernie Madoff clones.....
It seems like there's a significant amount of bimodality amongst Vietnamese-Americans. Lots of kids end up dropping out of school and the labor force, with a very high rate of incarceration. Plenty end up doing pretty well for themselves too though, with an overrepresentation in the technical and medical fields. So I wonder if this reflects a split between ethnic Chinese refugees(successful) and ethnic Viets (unsuccessful like the racially similar Lao and Cambodians)."
There's also the issue of considerable levels of intermarriage between Vietnamese Chinese and Vietnamese, both after and prior to emmigration. I know of a lot of Vietnamese-looking Vietnamese who speak fluent Cantonese, usually because they have a Chinese father.
"In the Little Manila in Daley City, California (a Filipino enclave), the largest Filipino grocery store and bakery are owned by ethnic Chinese Filipinos."
Filipino Chinese in the Philippines are pretty much a text-book market-dominant minority. Although they are often much envied and resented by the general population, it does seem that they have suffered from far less ill-treatment or outright persecution than the Chinese in other Austronesian countries of South-East Asia (Indonesia and Malaysia, who both happen to be Islamic).
Looking at those black African statistics reminded me of seeing this article.
Really, importing a population that is as genetically bad as the American black underclass in comparable numbers into Europe should be all that we are talking about. Why is Steve writing movie reviews and wondering about the IQ of black point guards?
PLEASE let the global economy collapse and maybe some sanity come from the chaos.
IQ isn't everything. I can join the band of egoists here who proudly flout their scores and say I'm in the low 140s, and when I've taken verbal tests I'm in the 99.87th percentile. What does it mean? It means that whenever I counter some ethnocentric historical assertion by a Jewish guy at this blog with an equally abrasive historical assertion regarding my own people, or whenever I make some crack about the irony of certain high IQ Asiatics coming from their own malfunctioning lands to ones my oh-so-stupid ancestors built, or whenever I point out the total genocide/destruction of the best of the Europeans over the 80+ year period from the American Civil War, the delete button is pressed.
IQ hasn't yet allowed me to figure out the arcane formulation Sailer utilizes in his acceptance of comments here at my third favorite blog - so what's it worth?
I don't doubt Indians are overrepresented in UK/US medical schools but some people give precise numbers like 12%.
One way to approximate is to check the list of newly approved full medical licenses for various states. For May 2008, when most of the new licenses are approved after various "match"es, here's the list from Massachusetts (which is obviously no slouch when it comes to high end health care):
http://www.massmedboard.org/physician/pdf/2008_05_07_licslastmeeting.pdf (pdf)
I did a rough count based on names, and tried to be conservative when I could tell the ethnicity with Muslim names. For the full licenses, I got 22 out of 183, which is exactly 12%.
As I said, this is a conservative estimate (if anyone wants to try a more accurate estimate).
The belief that modern popular music is dependent on black innovation is pretty much a given. But it relies on PC sleight-of-hand.
Lets take that popular music and take some of the white contributions out.
No MP3s, internet, PCs, TV, radio. No, DVDs, CDs, cassettes, tapes, vinyl. No recording studios, no electric guitars, synthesizers, microphones, electric amplification, in fact no electricity. No printed music, musical notation.
----------------------------
Oh! Oh! I can top you!
No Africans, No Europeans. See African diaspora circa 50,000 years ago.
"On net, I think America is better off due to the presence of Indian doctors."
I think India is better off with to the presence of Indian doctors.
I think America is better off with to the presence of American doctors -- who speak English without an accent and who have an implicit "family feeling" towards our own citizens who they grew up with and have particular affection for. Hard to quantify, but I believe it's true.
I also believe the patients, especially elderly, have more implicit trust in an American doctor. When one is sick, a familiar face is a comfort.
The cost of high tech healthcare has become so outrageous, the Greater Depression upon us will mean many Americans will simply have to forego the fantastically expensive treatments for mere pain-relief and the comfort that the Doctor/ Patient relationship brings.
And scream racism all day, but the PATIENT has a RIGHT to take his body to the doctor he feels the most trust in, provided he can pay. Which is why socialized healthcare is an abomination.
Policy makers and intellectuals are fully justified in treating you people as pariahs until solid, irrefutable physical evidence for "differences" are found.
Pariahs? That's kind of harsh. Are these policymakers and intellectuals going to complain about being treated as pariahs once solid irrefutable evidence for HBD is found? I doubt it. They'll probably just say the evidence doesn't count - whether they believe it or not.
But I don't really care. Take away genetics, and the main influence on people's brains is their culture, and people create their own culture. You can't blame people for their genes, but you can blame blacks for not breast-feeding, for feeding their kids diets lacking micronutrients, for child abuse, and for not supporting the schools (which they have controlled since the Voting Rights Act) in keeping discipline and maintaining standards.
You want to abandon a non-blaming explanation for black IQ deficits and replace it with one that calls black culture the greatest cognitive villain in North American history? Be my guest. See how many people call you "liberal" after that.
Antoine. Could you give an estimate on the percentage of ethnic Chinese in the Vietnamese-American population? I've heard about a third.
I think the Chinese were the market dominant minority pretty much everywhere in SE Asia - Phillipines, Malaysia, Indonesia, Vietnam, Cambodia, Laos. I recall reading about a large Asian supermarket in Paris (supposedly the largest in the EU) that received 10,000 customers a day and was run by a Laotian immigrant. Turns out he was a Laotian-Chinese.
It seems like the entire SE Asian Chinese diaspora (HK, Singapore, and Taiwan included) are from Canton and Fujian. These people genetically group with with the SE Asians, but perform more like the Japanese and Koreans. I wonder if the southeastern coast of China, historically being a mercanile region, was under some unique selective pressures.
Well, I'm glad we now have a stat to put our minds at ease. Before, whenever we would mention the low IQ of blacks, an anti-racist would bring up African immigrants, their educational attainment, and their earnings. They would also mention that as universities became more selective, their black populations became less native.
Well now we have something that allows us to feel good about ourselves. Africans are not smart. They're flukes. Now whenever someone talks about 1st and 2nd generation African immigrant educational attainment, I'll just refer to this IQ test and feel great about racial realism.
I'm not pathetic.
>> Edward , regarding wodehouse, I read them when I was 13
I still remember the Empress of Blandings and PSmith
Yes, excellent material for boosting your child's vocabulary!
Wodehouse was particularly brilliant though because he was able to bring romantic comedy to a male readership in a hilarious but respectful way that abused no party. The comedy was in the timing and innocent confusion of love.
Wodehouse's love triangles, if not quadrangles, show a curious, distant-yet-respectful appreciation of the fairer sex. Now, come to think of it, I wonder if there is something of this charming approach to male-female relationships in the successful Bollywood films?
Do Indians like Wodehouse because they like the clean romantic comedy?
I read Wodehouse slightly later than you, 15-16*, although had I known of them, I would have read them earlier. They do, I agree, deserve a status above Children's Book, though.
*I began with the Jeeves and Wooster books. I didn't need to buy them, I raided my grandparents 60s first editions. They had pretty much everything.
Mr. Anon said
"savvygoper said...
Many hospitals in New York City have a Filipina nurses population that is half of the nursing body."
And if the hospital should have an unfortunate malpractice case brewing, a phillapina nurse can conveniently disappear back to the old country[...] Add that to the lower wage she gets (and the lower wage american nurses can get as a result), and she's a real bargain. Soon, being a doctor or nurse will be one of those "jobs americans just won't do".
In 2004 I worked at a major hospital in North Florida. Nurses were freelancers, hopping from hospital to hospital, making about $50 per hour.
One of the hospital administration (he was in "Risk Management" officially) spent most of his time arranging cheap living accomodations for Filipina nurses that the hospital was bringing here by the boatload. Their pay? $9 per hour.
We employees were urged to donate canned food and funds to help these nurses make the adjustment to working in America. Many did not speak a word of English.
The push to replace real nurses with years of experience with cut-rate bedpan-cleaners was heavily couched in multicultural/Christian/charitable pieties. The emails charting the progress of this wonderful "initiative" could have been written by Sally Struthers - or Abe Foxman.
Thus passes the glory of American healthcare.
I don't believe the hospital administrators offered to cut their own salaries.
The "Risk Management" dude who sweated copiously and nervously while working so hard and long on this initiative was vocally PC. I will not reveal his surname - in order to avoid the charge of you know what...
inductivist: "Indian American IQ? Not to get into all the specifics, Steve Sailer reported a study that put the mean IQ of young, recent Indian American (IA) immigrants at 112. I calculated it for the GSS's 20 IA's born in the United States. It is 95.2 (!), nowhere close to this other figure that, by the way, was calculated using a backward digit span test. Chinese Americans born here, by contrast, averaged an IQ of 105.0, according to GSS data.
Update: The GSS estimate of IA's match up with Rushton's summary."
http://inductivist.blogspot.com/2009/03/indian-american-iq-not-to-get-into-all.html
Well, actually I'm surprised the average for Indians is so low given that most adult Indian immigrants are college educated with technical backgrounds, and from the top castes? If the Indian kids have IQs similar to their parents, I would have expected their average be at least 120? Asian immigrants tend to be a much more socioeconomically mixed bunch, so an average IQ of 105 is just about what I would expect for the broader Asian population. However, the average for Mexican immigrant kids is a shocker -- I always thought the average Mexican IQ was about 87, but given that Mexico is largely dumping the left half of their bell curve into our country perhaps I shouldn't be surprised.
African immigration is *significantly* granular.
Ethiopian and Kenyan-Americans generally do well here. I've met enough quite intelligent Ethiopians at university particularly to believe that it's a trend. No explanation for why this is so.
The Sudanese, Cameroonians, other groups don't do as well.
Nigerian-Americans do well enough in the United States - supposedly they are the most highly educated of any ethnic group. Perhaps some of the racial chauvinists here can legitimately cast aspersions on the education of Nigerian northerners, whose schools are increasingly encroached on by the influence of radical Islam and corrupt officials, but Southern universities still possess much of the quality and rigor instilled under British Colonialism - for the example the University of Lagos and Ile-Ife. Shipping off kids to study in England universities like Oxbridge and LSE is still popular.
Of the 3 major ethnic groups in Africa's most populated nation, the Igbo are generally regarded as the more entrepreneurial, while the Yoruba are more academic (Soyinka?). But anyone looking closely will see that many black commentators across the erudite blogosphere are strikingly Nigerian. At elite universities, outside of the exotic mulatto mixes you often find at the top of the minority heap, I'd venture upwards of 50% of blacks who score at the median SAT of those institutions are NAs. Of course, no one delves deeply into this because in general statistics about black Americans are generally depressing, with perhaps 70 or so scoring over 1450 in any given year. It would also highlight the internal hypocrisies of affirmative action as its implemented.
I wish I had more scholarship at my disposal to investigate why this is so. I think perhaps I've found one data point, maybe. If you look at the website "Black Mathematicians of the African Diaspora", notice the large percentage of those who are Yoruba Nigerian-American in origin. Abiola Lapite on the web is a blogger with a fondness for mathematics. I think that subtest verbal IQ is substantially higher than the black median, but not necessarily at European levels.
PS: I really don't understand intrinsically why so many here feel the need to crow about white, Western, Christian cultural global domination or what have you. Malloy and albertosaurus, both great resources, state "this, this, that and see here". The morons moan and whine in the language of victimization the left is so acquainted with. PC is a pervasive, maybe even dangerous problem, but some of you just want to go back to the stupid racism of the segregation era. Some centuries ago perhaps this all would have mattered, that I need somehow defend my kin-group to ensure survival. As someone lucky enough to be born into a world wealthy enough to earn and prosper in an individualist manner, and enamored with America and what she represents, presenting the dispassionate facts about group differences doesn't bother me no matter how incisive your language. It just strikes me as incredibly pathetic that a few people that live in a nation which by any objective measure dominates the world (decaying though it is), feel so insecure as to masturbate the feeling of an increasingly irrelevant measure of being "chosen".
The 10-12% figure for Indians in medical schools is frequently cited. In the UK, Indians also form 12% of medical students (and 2% of the whole population).
Check out a list of Rhodes Scholars: http://www.rhodesscholar.org/
Lots of Indian names.
I'm going to quote a study:
In their analyses of all freshman students enrolled in the eight University of California campuses in 1984, Sue and Abe (1988) reported on both the high school GPAs and SAT scores of different subethnic groups of Asian Americans. With high school GPA, they found East Indians/Pakistanis had the highest GPAs (3.8) followed by Japanese (3.75) and Chinese (3.73), and Filipinos the lowest (3.56). All subethnic groups had higher mean GPAs than whites (3.59) with the exception of Filipinos (3.56). With SAT verbal and math scores, East Indians/Pakistanis had the highest verbal scores (520.0), followed by the Japanese (510.8) and Chinese (473.4), and Koreans the lowest (417.8), whereas the Chinese had the highest math scores (611.8) followed by East Indians/Pakistanis (605.8), Japanese (603.8), and Koreans (594.0). Only the East Indians/Pakistanis had higher verbal SAT scores than whites (512.4), whereas all the subethnic groups had higher math SAT scores than whites (576.9) with the exception of Filipinos (519.5) and Other Asian Americans (555
Indians are overrepresented at the elite end of the IQ/performance bell curve.
"It would also highlight the internal hypocrisies of affirmative action as its implemented....
The morons moan and whine in the language of victimization the left is so acquainted with." - Soul Searcher
Interesting that you chose such the word "hypocrisy" to describe how affirmative action is a blunt instrument. Some might just say it's poisoned by its own tendency to lump African-Americans in with African tribes, yet you chose a traditional leftist term of abuse. Interesting.
"East Indians/Pakistanis had the highest verbal scores (520.0), followed by the Japanese (510.8)"
Thanks on that data. Also sheds some light on whether there is an East Asian verbal gap.
Reconciling the 112IQ of the Digit Span Survey and the 95IQ of the GSS
1. Even the lower 95IQ of the GSS is much above the 85 touted by Rushton
2. In UK, using 2nd generation, regression to mean, Lynn did an IQ test of Patels and Jat Sikhs and came up with 97
I expect the Jat Sikhs and Patel kids in the US to also have 97 IQ due to regression to the mean
3. 40% of the US Indian diaspora consist of Jat Sikhs and Patels
The GSS survey consists of just 20 Indians and could have mostly Patels or Jat Sikhs
Whereas the Digit Span survey consists of several hundred kids
4. Very crudely the Indian american diaspora has 2 segments
The left half of the IQ curve consisting of Jat Sikhs, Patels and similar castes, at 97 IQ, comprising about 40% of the total
With 97IQ and good family culture, and the bell curve, you will still get thousands of Patels at over 125IQ and getting MDs
6. The other right half of the bell curve of the US diaspora consisting of brahmins and merchant castes with millenia of literacy tradition and the evolution of higher IQ
These are about 60% of the total
7. The average Indian diaspora IQ of the second generation is 112
The right half IQ stand alone =
( 112 - 0.4 x 97 ) / 0.6 = 122 IQ
8. If you look at the 2009 Intel talent search finalists out of the 40, there are 6 brahmins and 2 merchants
"Indians are overrepresented at the elite end of the IQ/performance bell curve."
Where does India stand on the standard of living bell curve?
"It just strikes me as incredibly pathetic that a few people that live in a nation which by any objective measure dominates the world (decaying though it is), feel so insecure as to masturbate the feeling of an increasingly irrelevant measure of being "chosen".
Wow: I didn't remember writing that but It was so similar to my beliefs that I had to double-check the moniker to be sure!
"Indians are overrepresented at the elite end of the IQ/performance bell curve."
Considering how ordinary Japanese immigrants to the U.S. were yet their descendants perform at the same level as the cream of the cream from India, I can't agree.
Oh! Oh! I can top you!
No Africans, No Europeans. See African diaspora circa 50,000 years ago. - Hacienda
Oh I see what you did there. You made the assumption that Europeans are descended from the current population of Africa. Whereas I believe that both modern groups have a common ancestor. So nice try, but no cigar.
Btw ever noticed that our liberal friends are always keen to promote the 'out of Africa' meme (hence we are all really black Africans) but in popular culture primitive people (cavemen) are always portrayed as white. Whats that about then?
Which parts of the Indian diaspora actually win academic awards
These only constitute about 50% of the US Indian diaspora
1. Brahmins
2. Jains
3. Kayasthas
4. Syrian Xtians
5. Sri Lankan Tamil Velalas
6. Khatris
7. Bania castes
Items 2 thru 6 are merchant castes
These castes are mostly absent in UK, Canada, Caribbean, Fiji, etc
Where ever these castes are missing, you will find usually only mediocre performance
Crosscheck
Spelling bee winners
6 brahmins and 1 Jain and 1 Syrian Xtian
Geographic bee winners
1 brahmin, 1 Jain
US math olympiad team 2007
1 brahmin
US math olympiad team 2008
2 brahmins
Intel Talent winner 2008
Khatri
Intel Talent Finalists 2009
6 brahmins, 1 Jain, 1 Sri Lankan Tamil Velala
Indian 1974 Nuke blast team
9 brahmins, 3 Khatris
Teen Jeopardy winners
2 brahmins
176 IQ kid
brahmin
Only 12 year old with perfect SAT
brahmin
Youngest spelling bee finalist ( age 7 )
brahmin
US Indians in critical jobs
Neel Kashkari - brahmin
Vikram Pandit - brahmin
Shiva Subramaya - brahmin ( star wars in charge )
Vinod Khosla, Sabeer Bhatia, Kanwal Rekhi - Khatri
Indian science Nobels
2 brahmins , 1 khatri
Indian literature and economy Nobels
- 3 brahmins
Europeans include a number of very different populations, see www.v-weiss.de/calibration.html
It strikes me as incredibly pathetic that a member of the race with notably high self-esteem, affirmative action benefits, an organized Congressional Caucus looking out constantly for its interests, and an extremely low-rate of being victimized by interracial crime, would feel the need to talk about his race is victimized.
My family has been in the United States for 350 years, but maybe it's time we emigrate. Oceania is too boring. I've been thinking maybe Argentina. Any suggestions?
Some centuries ago perhaps this all would have mattered, that I need somehow defend my kin-group to ensure survival.
Fascinating. I did not know that people this naive existed. FYI, your continued existence as an "individual" is entirely contingent on the continued existence of your kin-group.
Well, that could be because "cavemen" as we know them are based on populations that were found in Europe (France or Spain, IIRC.)
But if you've never seen portrayals of primitive Africans (or other non-European populations) in popular culture, you aren't exactly looking to hard.
Lucille - Well, that could be because "cavemen" as we know them are based on populations that were found in Europe (France or Spain, IIRC.)
But if you've never seen portrayals of primitive Africans (or other non-European populations) in popular culture, you aren't exactly looking to hard.
Lets try google image search as a rough proxy for cavemen in popular culture:
Caveman
Cavemen
Caveman cartoon
Odd then that you believe cavemen are in fact often depicted as black. Often isnt the word I would choose.
Seems to me that caveman is used as a popular shorthand for primitive human. You are implying that cavemen are only depicted as just that, European cave dwellers. Somewhere else (where exactly?) there is a large body of work in the popular domain that depicts more general primitive humans and not as whites. That may be true in more academic works, but in popular culture...?
If these caveman representations are, as you say, only about the cave dwellers of Europe then that seems an unconscious acceptance of their particular status as our ancestors and an unconscious dismissal of any emotional attachment to out-of-Africa - however true that might actually be.
Otoh it could be PC at work, depicting blacks as primitive is dangerous territory that most dont want to move in to, much safer to show whites that way instead. Crime stop!
Me, I think it might be a bit of both.
[S]o many here feel the need to crow [...] morons moan and whine [...] language of victimization the left[...] stupid racism [...] segregation era [...] incredibly pathetic [...] insecure [...] masturbate [...]
Wow, that's some "objective" comment you got there pard. Crowing, moaning, whining, stupid, racist, pathetic, insecure, masturbating white folks. Man we're low. We probably all have bad teeth, bad hygiene, low foreheads, crossed eyes, bandy legs, stunty arms, uni-brows, slack jaws, and hairy backs too.
People who claim to be objective are almost always liars. I prefer honesty to professions of objectivity.
My my, how dare we want to live apart from someone. How dare we claim for ourselves the rights of, well, everyone not-white. The nerve!
Self-Determination, and the Freedom of Association, are rights all men possess IMO. I don't see how the right to choose one's mate is essentially different from the right to choose one's neighbor or associate.
If you're white, you're an Uncle Tom. Whether you're white or not, you're a racist, or at least a cheerleader for racism. Hows that? Well, you're lending rhetorical aid and comfort to the side abrogating the rights of peoples of European descent (and only peoples of European descent). Wouldn't be surprised if you're the kind of guy who (without a hint of irony) likes to "root for the underdog" too. (not saying you are, just saying it wouldn't surprise me)
enamored with America and what she represents
Stopped to consider that, whatever you think America represents, is actually the brainchild of a pack of knuckle-dragging racists? Just wondering. That said, I think it's safe to assume we have different ideas about what America represents.
earn and prosper in an individualist manner
Okay, so you think individualism's peachy; maybe you can help me with something. I never get a straight answer to this one. Ceteris paribus, which is more adaptive, collectivism or individualism? Who comes out on top in a population of 200, where 100 are collectivist cotribalists, and 100 are individualist of any tribe other than the former? Who comes out on if the numbers are 50 and 150, respectively? 25 and 175? 10 and 190?
There are more questions no one seems to ever want to answer, like, how do groups monitor one another? How do they know outgroups have collectively disarmed and become individualists? And how do they do this while being smothered by PC? And since you gave PC a kick in the rear, you might explain to me how to dismantle it. How does a mass of individualists demolish something like PC, when it's so beneficial to collectivist groups? How does individualism survive the invasion of the collectivists? Is individualism a "white thing"? If not, if it's all about environment, where do we mine the pixie dust to turn collectivist cultures into individualist ones?
How is your advice not a blueprint for collective white suicide? How do you justify it, when it so clearly screws white people over?
(Who are these people who want to return to segregation? Or, where you just being a sneaky little $#!^ (i.e., literal) when you wrote, "some of you just want to go back to the stupid racism of the segregation era" (i.e., you just wanted to create an association between "some" of "us" and segregation, while leaving yourself a backdoor by not actually accusing us of wanting to bring back segregation)?
While I'm at it, I'd like to know why you quoted no one. So you could smear everyone (except Albertosaurus and Malloy), but have another backdoor by "not" smearing everyone?)
Why must all white people, everywhere, have their living spaces invaded by non-whites? Why is no one else subject to this commandment? Why is there no opt out for those of us who DON'T WANT TO LIVE THE WAY YOU DO? Why must I even ask these questions? Pathetic indeed.
Fascinating. I did not know that people this naive existed. FYI, your continued existence as an "individual" is entirely contingent on the continued existence of your kin-group.
Indeed. One day I'd like to see a study comparing birthrates of couples who live near their extended families to birthrates of people who don't, controlled for educational attainment, income, etc. I have a hunch the former will significantly outreproduce the latter. Having extended family nearby makes childrearing substantially easier. Absent that, being a member of a tighknot religious group where people feel some obligation to each other helps.
"Why must all white people, everywhere, have their living spaces invaded by non-whites?
Their Spaces? You mean like Australia, New Zealand, Canada, Argentina, Chile, and the United States?
Why is no one else subject to this commandment?
No one? You mean no one like the Incas, the Aztecs, The Luo, the Hutu, the Cherokee, the Maori, the aborigines, the Navajo, the Eskimos, the Ethiopians, the Persians...
Well, Indian immigrants to the US do seem to have bright children, so the immigrants are either unrealistically smart, or they regress to a high subpopulation mean, implying that similar Indians in India are also intelligent.
The smart Brahmins seem to have quite a bit of disdain for their fellow Indians, if the ones who post here are representative. One might wonder if the smarties hold a similar disdain for the indigenous populations in the nations to which they immigrate.
Much of India has living standards similar to Africa. Perhaps we can look at India as an extreme version of South Africa, where a small, smart caste won't or can't, or both, raise the standard of living to anything approaching first world standards for the vast majority.
When we discuss high IQ immigration, we do need to keep in mind that it is possible for a high IQ group to have interests that are not those of the natives. Additionally, most/all of the increase in GDP from smart immigrants will accrue to the immigrants, not the natives. South Africa illustrates the effect. Though it is possible that Black Africans took increased productivity as population increases instead of standard of living increases.
If India's upper castes have such high verbal IQ's, it is a point against the smart faction theory. Though that theory seems to be a good curve fit because East Asian countries have higher IQ and lower per capita income than white countries.
rec1man said:
"2. In UK, using 2nd generation, regression to mean, Lynn did an IQ test of Patels and Jat Sikhs and came up with 97 I expect the Jat Sikhs and Patel kids in the US to also have 97 IQ due to regression to the mean"
Just to be nitpicky, can you give me a citation on that? I was not aware that Lynn ever did such a study. He does however cite (Lynn 2006, 2008) a 1985 study by Makintosh and Mascie-Taylor which showed that Indian children who had attended UK schools for at least 4 years had an average IQ of 97 relative to a white British mean of 100. The same study found Pakistani children who had attended UK schools for at least 4 years average IQ 96. They found that new arrivals from India and Pakistan did much worse, scoring 83 and 93, respectively. Subsequent tests conducted in the 1990s have found that Indian (Hindu), Pakistani, and Bangladeshi children, most of whom were born in the UK, do not do quite as well (average around IQ 92-93). Arthur Jensen mentions this in "The g-Factor" (1998) and thinks it may have to do with declining quality of later immigrants to the UK from the subcontinent.
Most of the people from India and China who have emigrated to this region are medical doctors and college professors in the science or business fields. I would imagine those are also a large proportion of immigrants in other parts of the United States. Their children are likely to be brighter than average, which would explain an IQ of 112 for the children of immigrants from India.
At the opposite end, we're getting poorly educated migrant workers and laborers emigrating from Mexico and elsewhere in South America and Central America. There are a large number of Somalis, refugees from a war, now in eastern North Dakota, Minnesota and Wisconsin and a number of other Africans here are from war-torn countries. The Hmong, a group from Laos who came here as refugees after the Vietnam War, are a large group in Minnesota and Wisconsin. They come from a pre-literate culture and have a custom of marrying young teenage girls to much older men. There's a lot of prostitution and gang activity among the Hmong in the Twin Cities. If you test the IQs of the children of any of the above groups, you're probably going to see lower IQ scores than is the supposed average for other Asians and southeast Asians. IQ can be depressed by environment and the culture a person comes from.
Likewise, you'll probably see differences in IQ between ethnic groups and different classes among whites.
Their Spaces? You mean like Australia, New Zealand, Canada, Argentina, Chile, and the United States?
No one? You mean no one like the Incas, the Aztecs, The Luo, the Hutu, the Cherokee, the Maori, the aborigines, the Navajo, the Eskimos, the Ethiopians, the Persians...
If anyone other than Truth (i.e., someone with an established handle, or in lieu, an argument) finds this persuasive, please speak up and I'll respond. Otherwise I won't bother.
Unfortunately my friend, ignoring the 600 pound gorilla only hastens your getting pulverized.
"If anyone other than Truth (i.e., someone with an established handle, or in lieu, an argument) finds this persuasive, please speak up and I'll respond. Otherwise I won't bother."
Whites should not be blamed for the actions committed by some whites centuries ago. However, if you want people to consider your point, you must consider theirs. What is false about Truth's assertion? Were not the Americas, New Zealand, and Australia originally non-white lands that were invaded by whites? Were not many of the natives displaced?
"What is false about Truth's assertion?"
Strawman. Truth is just going back to an artificial frame of reference. He probably believes that Southern Africa is Bantu territory, not Afrikaner, Bushman, or British territory.
The order of peoples who dominated were, 1. Bushmen, 2. Bantus, 3. Boers, 4. British. Lots of people ask the Afrikaners and Anglos to leave. Nobody asks the Bantus to leave. The proper frame of reference begins at 2, because the people who look most like the Bantus are angriest lobby.
In Britain, of course, the Celts were the angriest lobby until the guilt-driven importation of the sons of Allah. The order of colonization: 1. Beaker people and/or proto-Basques. 2. Celts. 3. Romans 4. Anglo-Saxons. 5. Normans. 6. Asian Muslims. The left has dictated that 1 never happened, 2 and 6 are fine 'n' dandy, and 4 and 5 are something we should all cry ourselves to sleep about. (I think 3 is bad except when it is the subject of a screenplay.)
And how do we know which group of people were first in North America? No copping out by saying "the Indians" - I'm talking about an ethnic group here, a tribe. Not a weird category made up by people in order to trap children in "political incorrectness". Which tribe was here first? Are you sure they weren't wiped out in the 20,000 years? If you are sure, is it because - just going out on a limb here - you consider "the Indians" to have been noble savages who would never hurt a flea? If so, there is no hope for you learning anything about history.
How about we convince the Bantus to leave South Africa, the Arabs to leave North Africa, the Japanese to leave Japan, and the Muslims to leave Indonesia? And then there will be getting everyone with a name from leaving Britain (for surely every name dates only back to Celtic times, or more recently!) Then we can start getting down to the business of getting whitey out of the territory he stole from the red man, who fashioned war clubs out of hickory, was a nonviolent vegetarian, hunted buffalo with his bare hands which held only a spear, and read Martin Luther King speeches dawn to dusk.
Some people believe those born in a place have a right to live there in peace. Those people are called non-leftists.
"And how do we know which group of people were first in North America?"
Speaking of straw, I think it's coming out of your neck here. Please re-adjust yourself before you respond.
Certainly, Indian tribes killed each other, as did "white" tribes and "black" tribes; it's human nature, but those tribes are part of a bigger sub-group know as "race". For example, I've read this site, Amren, Castefootball, and Stormfront for years, but I've never heard anyone advocate exterminating/forcefully removing all of the Spaniards from England as they do Muslims and especially blacks. Why, because they are all part of the same "race" which makes your Cherokee vs Mohawk and Bantu vs Bushmen stuff silly.
Re: Bushmen and Bantu, there has never been a mass grave found ANYWHERE in Africa pre-colonization. Look it up. this means that the bushmen were probably not violently supplanted, but interbred for the most part, and some, being hunter gatherers, just decided to leave or were wiped out by natural conditions. There was no written language, but if you'll do your research you'll see that this is the generally excepted view of 21st century anthropologists. On the other hand, there is written language about what happened when Columbus came to the Caribbean:
For this he chose 200 foot soldiers and 20 cavalry, with many crossbows and small cannon, lances, and swords, and a still more terrible weapon against the Indians, in addition to the horses: this was 20 hunting dogs, who were turned loose and immediately tore the Indians apart." Naturally, the Spanish won. According to Kirkpatrick Sale, who quotes Ferdinand Columbus's biography of his father: "The soldiers mowed down dozens with point-blank volleys, loosed the dogs to rip open limbs and bellies, chased fleeing Indians into the bush to skewer them on sword and pike, and 'with God's aid soon gained a complete victory, killing many Indians and capturing others who were also killed.' "
Having as yet found no fields of gold, Columbus had to return some kind of dividend to Spain. In 1495 the Spanish on Haiti initiated a great slave raid. They rounded up 1,500 Arawaks, then selected the 500 best specimens (of whom 200 would die en route to Spain). Another 500 were chosen as slaves for the Spaniards staying on the island. The rest were released. A Spanish eyewitness described the event: "Among them were many women who had infants at the breast. They, in order the better to escape us, since they were afraid we would turn to catch them again, left their infants anywhere on the ground and started to flee like desperate people; and some fled so far that they were removed from our settlement of Isabela seven or eight days beyond mountains and across huge rivers; wherefore from now on scarcely any will be had." Columbus was excited. "In the name of the Holy Trinity, we can send from here all the slaves and brazil-wood which could be sold," he wrote to Ferdinand and Isabella in 1496. "In Castile, Portugal, Aragon,.. . and the Canary Islands they need many slaves, and I do not think they get enough from Guinea." He viewed the Indian death rate optimistically: "Although they die now, they will not always die. The Negroes and Canary Islanders died at first."
In the words of Hans Koning, "There now began a reign of terror in Hispaniola." Spaniards hunted Indians for sport and murdered them for dog food. Columbus, upset because he could not locate the gold he was certain was on the island, set up a tribute system. Ferdinand Columbus described how it worked: "[The Indians] all promised to pay tribute to the Catholic Sovereigns every three months, as follows: In the Cibao, where the gold mines were, every person of 14 years of age or upward was to pay a large hawk's bell of gold dust; all others were each to pay 25 pounds of cotton. Whenever an Indian delivered his tribute, he was to receive a brass or copper token which he must wear about his neck as proof that he had made his payment. Any Indian found without such a token was to be punished." With a fresh token, an Indian was safe for three months, much of which time would be devoted to collecting more gold. Columbus's son neglected to mention how the Spanish punished those whose tokens had expired: they cut off their hands.
All of these gruesome facts are available in primary source material- letters by Columbus and by other members of his expeditions-and in the work of Las Casas, the first great historian of the Americas...
Attribution here
No one? You mean no one like the Incas, the Aztecs, The Luo, the Hutu, the Cherokee, the Maori, the aborigines, the Navajo, the Eskimos, the Ethiopians, the Persians...
Odd, there's an ongoing crime that would fit into this category, an especially salient one, and it isn't there...
I wonder why?
You'll have to be a little more specific than that, Sparky. Please keep in mind the racial IQ gap.
"Truth's argument was that whites were not the first group in America or New Zealand. A non-white group (or groups) existed in the Americas long before whites. Are you really going to argue that it was not so? Are you really going to argue that non-white Aborigines were not in Australia prior to whites?
Truth's point was not to suggest that whites are unique in invasion or that whites be forced to leave the aforesaid areas. All land was stolen land at least one time in history. He was merely responding to Svigor's pathos..."
And my point, as was obvious, was that white people should not have to suffer in the present and future for crimes that all groups committed in the past. This point will be lost if the concepts past, present, and future are deleted, as they usually are.
And Truth's point was not to prevent anything from being obfuscated, but rather to vilify white people, as he has done consistently on this point. No one calls him "sparky" or a "pantywaist" or a participant in a "circle jerk". Whites have had every call for better law enforcement or immigration control met with the same biased view of history, based on artificial frames of reference.
Whites either do or don't have the same rights to physical security that other peoples do. Which is it?
(And yes, I am a proud liberal.)
I heard somewhere that its possible that there was an earlier (ultimately failed) colonization of North America by people who might, horror of horrors, have been European in origin.
What if that turned out to be true!? A whole class of PC victimology destroyed.
Looks like my replies are getting censored, or at least approved WAY out of order. No matter - this ground has all been covered a hundred times anyway.
"And my point, as was obvious, was that white people should not have to suffer in the present and future for crimes that all groups committed in the past."
I agree, sport...errrr...Shaka; no one should have to suffer for anything someone else has done in the past. And no one does. Every man frames his own suffering.
"Whites have had every call for better law enforcement or immigration control met with the same biased view of history, based on artificial frames of reference."
And that, once again, makes my point: I'm sure the Cherokee, the Luo, the Maori, et all called for better immigration control...once the whites started wiping them out. It didn't work out for them and it's not working out for "you"; life is like a great wheel, perfect yet somehow repetitive.
"Whites either do or don't have the same rights to physical security that other peoples do. Which is it?"
They not only the same right, but are given much more. Please read the article I posted above on the Caribbean "discovery" and you will understand.
"What if that turned out to be true!? A whole class of PC victimology destroyed."
Sir; if ifs and buts were candy and nuts every day would be Christmas.
And thanks for the help DAJ, it gets a little lonely being General Custer around here; even when I deserve it.
Looks like my replies are getting censored, or at least approved WAY out of order. No matter - this ground has all been covered a hundred times anyway.
Indeed, but that doesn't stop the usual suspects for crapping in threads as though it hasn't; global selective amnesia.
Ah well, I've resigned myself to the fact that for whatever reason, Steve seems to be keeping "Truth" around as his pet liar.
Truth's idea that the Bantus spread into South Africa by "marrying" the Khoisan women is funny. Y'know, cause we all know west and central Africans are so against pre-marital sex ... and rape....
"11. I hypothesise, that the 150 IQ Atharvans soon realised that the celtic nobles who probably resembled Conan the Barbarian, could be easily manipulated and they soon set themselves up as Royal advisors,
and king makers or lets say Druids
12. I also hypothesise, that using Atharvan brains and Celtic brawn, the celts got an edge and were able to diplomatically, politically and militarily out maneouvre their Indo-European neighbors and expand all the way from south russia to ireland, north of the alps. The atharvan druids, may have been able to win victories even before war by using magic to over-awe the non-celts, spread dissension among the non-celts and exploit any fault lines among the non-celts
13. Genghis Khan has left behind millions of descendants, which proves that a high status individual would have access to plenty of women
14. The 150 IQ Atharvan druids ,probably in a similar manner, left behind a fair number of high IQ descendants, which may explain the fat right hand high IQ tail among white europeans."
More gems from Rec1man...
How dare anyone question the integrity of work done by Richard Lynn or Philippe Rushton when the only opposition is someone who thinks Dravidian Indians migrated all the way to Ireland and gave everyone skewed bell curves.
And this comes from the same swarthy crowd that bemoans Steve for allowing supposedly less intelligent White commenters vent.
Rec1man is really on par with Afrocentric nonsense about Black Athenians.
To Takahata's comment,
Chinese aren't counted under Southeast Asian. Also, according to Rushton and Benson, Vietnamese and Thai groups adopted into American families score higher than whites in IQ tests.
Some idiot explained African immigrant's educational attainment in America by stating that it was because of the nature of African education. Well I taught in Nigerian, Ghanian, and Liberian and American universities. One thing that is obvious is that University students in Anglophone Africa are better intellectually than average American students. BS degrees in any Anglophone university require thesis and defense unlike the weak credit hour system in America. It was a white man n America (John Logan, NY university) who researched African immigrants educational statistics hoping to find some negative aspect to trump out but was shocked of the contrary evidence to his original illusions. Finally, to the one who said African immigrants are not smart, you must live too much in your whiteman’s illusory planet. Check the facts fool!! The Whiteman’s history is littered with invasion, robbery, wars, savagery and any worst forms of heinousness one can think off. In fact, there is really nothing known to be originally of white civilization. Not mathematics, not science, not philosophy nor religion. Christianity that you so claim doesn’t even have roots in Europe. You can design and pass all your IQ tests based on your environment and knowledge but one thing will ever remain clear. The Whiteman is the last animal on the planet to be civilized if at all you want to make these claims and comparison. I often get infuriated by this Whiteman’s pretence of being the most intelligent of all but look around a little bit more and you find telling statistics to the contrary, the foremost being that most of the wonders of the ancient world are outside the Caucasian domain. The white man from time immemorial is a copier, forger, plagiarist and thief. Their general ancient migration as that of today was to seek better knowledge and opportunities in foreign lands. Need I say more? Be careful when you throw stones, because someone is going to answer or retaliate. Remember too that whites are minority on the planet and sooner or later someone is going to find a way to retaliate for all white cruelty.
This is a late post, but important. Both of my parents immigrated to America from Nigeria in the 80s. They left because they want an education. If you look at statistics, most Africans who come to America or the UK go on student VISA, not work VISA.
I disagree with the guy who said it is easy to get a degree in Africa. There is simply not enough room for all Africans to get educated in Africa. Which is good for Africans, because they can get a better, and more superior education across the boarder. Most African immigrants receive their education in America or the UK. Right now African immigrants and their children make up 40% of the blacks in Ivy Leagues and Top schools.
We may not have the best IQ, but we have the motivation and support from our family. That's most important.
Native Vietnamese routinely rank very high on International Mathematic Olympiad, many oversea Vietnamese achievements are stellar. Statistics shown on greatschool.com and other reliable sources show Vietnamese kids in Orange County, CA (high population of Vietnamese) consistently out perform all others. Just try to google "Dr. Nguyen" or "Dr. Pham" out of less than 1 million Vnmse residing in the U.S. and see if you can count them all! A more developed Vietnam will likely to boost their national iq by some more.
"Naturally, so is income. Vietnamese in France outperform the native white French in education. Median family income has overtaken that of whites prolly since 2004, and still rising relative to whites."
I need to add:
1. The French Colonized Vietnam and plundered for 100 years causing one famine after another, which wiped out even millions of people at times when the total population was no more than 8, 10, 14, 22 million, etc.
2. That Vietnamese have higher median family income than the whites refers to the US census data.
3. Asians make 65 cents on the dollar compared to whites, when one adjust for education.
Africa is an entire continent. Various tribes have emerged over time, while Nigerians have an average IQ around the 80s, a sub group the Igbo tribe seem to have the highest academic success of any racial group in both the UK and US. They also have higher rates of athleticism then their closest academic rivals
Post a Comment