September 18, 2010

National Merit Semifinalists by School and Surname

A reader sends me press releases from the National Merit Scholarship Corporation with the names of semifinalists sorted by high schools in California, Texas, Florida, Virginia, and Indiana.

The 16,000 semifinalists nationally scored in the top 0.5% of the PSAT test. However, minimum scores to be a semifinalist vary by state, with the highest cutoffs in Massachusetts and D.C., and the lowest in Wyoming.

Looking at the California semifinalists announced in 2009, well, holy moly, there are a lot of East Asians. You wouldn't think I'd be surprised after all these years, but I still am. For example, there are 36 semifinalists with the last name of Kim and 49 named Wang. Other Asian names: Nguyen, which is now one of the 100 most common in America (12), Chang (35), Chen or Cheng (56), Tang (8), Yang (15), and Zhang (20).

There are three Guptas and three Singhs. What other common Indian names are there?

My reader, who is Jewish, points out the decline in Jewish names from our day back in the 1970s. For example, in the entire state of California, only one semifinalist has a name beginning with "Gold...". Other common Jewish names also show up only rarely among the semifinalists: Cohen (1), Levy (1), and Kaplan (1). 

So, in the state of California, there was one Cohen who was a semifinalist, but 49 Wangs. Wow.

To give some perspective, if you search at Google News, there are 14,900 press pages currently mentioning "Cohen" (e.g., Sacha Baron-Cohen) and 14,500 currently mentioning "Wang" (e.g., Vera Wang), or about 1 to 1, not 49 to 1.

According to Wikipedia, the most common surnames in the U.S. in 2000 were, among white-black names, Adams (3 semifinalists in California), Johnson (3), Williams (3), Brown (6), Jones (7), Miller (2), Davis (1),  Wilson (2), Anderson (3), Taylor (3), Thomas (1),  However, this Wikipedia list of top 100 surnames is, for unexplained reasons, missing Smith (7).

Among highbrow WASP names, there are two Clark(e)s. (People named Clark or Clarke are descended in the male line from somebody who was a clerk -- i.e., literate -- seven centuries ago. I know it sounds ridiculous, but Nathanael Weyl found Clarks over-represented in intellectual fields in the late 20th Century.) No Huntingtons or Eliots.

Among celebrity names, I see a Munger in Palo Alto -- likely a relative of billionaire Charlie Munger, Warren Buffett's gray eminence.

Among common Hispanic names found in the top 100 most common names of all types in the country: Garcia (1 semifinalist), Rodriguez (0), Lopez (0), Martinez (0), Hernandez (1), Gonzalez (1), Perez (0), Sanchez (0), Ramirez (0), Torres (2 -- is that a Sephardic name, as in Dana Torres, the Jewish Olympic swimmer from Beverly Hills?), Flores (1), Rivera (0), Gomez (0), Diaz (0), Reyes (0), Cruz (0), Morales (0), and Ortiz (1).

In California, high schools with the most semifinalists include Troy in Fullerton (80), University High in Irvine (60), Lynbrook in San Jose (58), Mission San Jose in Fremont (55), Monte Vista in Cupertino (53), Harker School in San Jose (50), Torrey Pines in north San Diego (48), Harvard-Westlake in North Hollywood (42), Palo Alto (46), Henry M. Gunn in Palo Alto (42), Palos Verdes Penninsula (36), and Arcadia (31). Most of these are public schools, with the exception of Harker and Harvard-Westlake.

Basically, having a lot of semifinalists is now all about having the East Asians. For example, among famous LA schools, Beverly Hills H.S. has eight, Loyola of Los Angeles six, Marlborough of Los Angeles four, Milken of Stephen Wise Temple ten, and Windward in Santa Monica (zero). Those are excellent numbers (except for Windward, which is where movie stars traditionally sent their, uh, more artistic scions), but these five prominent schools add up to 25% of Troy H.S. in Fullerton. Fullerton?

The semifinalists at Harvard-Westlake on Coldwater Canyon are a little less than half East Asian, but, still ... the school's two campuses (the other is just off Sunset Boulevard) are at the historic center of what had been the largest, richest Jewish community in the world outside of NYC

It would be interesting to calculate a sort of GINI score of inequality by high school for semifinalists. Some of these public schools have more semifinalists per year than most public schools in California could be expected to have in a century at recent rates.

For example, in contrast to Troy H.S. with 80, the city of Los Angeles (not counting the San Fernando Valley) has a total of five public school semifinalists: two at LA H.S. for the Performing Arts, one at LACES (the top academic magnet public high school in LAUSD), and one each at Venice HS (at the beach) and one at Eagle Rock HS (next to Pasadena).I'd roughly estimate there are about 50,000 sixteen year olds within these boundaries (although lots are in private schools or have dropped out), so, 5 out of 50,000 ...

The San Fernando Valley is more reasonable with about 30 semifinalists in LA public schools (although it lags well behind the public schools of the more Asian San Gabriel Valley), but the inequality of the main LA Basin is remarkable.

Another interesting thing is to compare San Francisco to San Jose -- maybe four or five times more semifinalists in San Jose than in San Francisco.

299 comments:

«Oldest   ‹Older   201 – 299 of 299
Anonymous said...

"I love how hilarious your exaggeration is. So you are saying that Chinese parents talk about their children's academic prospects 100 of the time and nothing else, beginning from the age that their children are 6."

Well, let's just say that the topic is broached at every get together among mandarin speaking mothers. There is also a corollary phenomenon of Being-Chinese-in-America, "The second son syndrome." Parents self-consciously put less pressure on #2 son because #1 son, a National Merit Scholar and concert pianist, is at MIT and miserable with no social life and threatening not to talk to his parents ever again. But usually #1 son delivers the goods for mom and dad, becoming the loving son who buys them a condo, so #2 son can think about studying to become an architect instead of a thoracic surgeon.

Anonymous said...

"The imperial exam system had the effect of elevating massive numbers of high IQ Chinese men in to positions where each high IQ Chinese man could father dozens or even hundreds of children, and make sure that most of those children survived to adulthood. This had a powerful eugenic effect in China...."

whew. That's one full-blown fantasy scenario.
The vast majority of Chinese were illiterate, but since I don't have percentages either, I may not be much better than your absurd assertion. However, I have read a great deal about Chinese history, and they hardly had enough knowledge based jobs for "vast" numbers of Chinese to occupy. In the United States, only 2% of the workforce was in knowledge-based (clerical type) jobs in 1800. By the middle of the 19th century, the percentage was, I think, 20%. Then by the 20th century it was 50% or more.
China was overwhelmingly rural until very recently, and indeed, still is heavily rural. The idea that the Chinese were filtering through the mass of their population for centuries in quest of the "right stuff" for clerical work and scholarly pursuits is nonsense. No society until the late 19th century came close to that. As for the assertion that "high-iq" persons had more children because they were taxed less--this is projecting 21st century standards and birth control practices onto people living long ago in an entirely different culture. I recall a Chinese woman in her 80s recollecting how most children died in the "old days", which seems to have meant pre-WWII, after which birth control and improved hygiene and water supplies also controlled the child mortality rate.
Scotland was the first country to have mandatory school attendance, or at least literacy acquirement, dating back to the 15th century. I have read that North Carolina, heavily settled by Scots, had an unusually active school system, with mandatory attendance at a very early date in U.S. history, especially by southern standards.

Anonymous said...

Can anyone explain to me why Chinese and Japanese seem to have the same average IQ, both if you look at mainland China vs Japan and also if you look at Chinese in America vs Japanese in America?



They don't.

Anonymous said...

By the way, Jews have intermarried a lot, but they still do really well in pretty much everything even today.



It's almost like their genes are less important than are other factors ...

Polistra said...

What caught my attention was Flower Mound, Texas, with about the same number of semifinalists as all of Fort Worth. I'd never heard of Flower Mound; turns out to be a VERY new suburb near Irving, pop 50K, most of its growth since 1990, strong emphasis on environmentalist crap.

Severn said...

Could it be that the Japanese are under-performing relative to their IQ potential? Or perhaps the Japanese in California today constitute a below average sample in terms of IQ.


Or perhaps IQ is not actually as consequential as the readers here believe. Heresy!

Severn said...

Why isn't it good to have a bunch of super-smart Americans who can contribute to the economy, create jobs, work on the next big thing, and at least make those incremental advances in research that eventually lead to breakthroughs?



a) They are not Americans.

b) Their presence here has done nothing for the economy.

c) Their presence here has done nothing to create jobs in America. To the contrary.

d) America does not exist to create "breakthroughs". You are engaging in the common libertarian mistake of thinking that a country is supposed to function as much as possible like a corporation, and that the people in them can be evaluated like employees.

Severn said...

Who are the most creative people on the planet? Not white people, not asians, but blacks.


Blacks are the least creative people on the planet. It should not have needed saying, but there you go.

Anonymous said...

"Not white people, not asians, but blacks.
I don't think anyone can deny that blacks can be incredibly creative."

Really? In what ways?
I have seen "incredible creativity" in black comedians, but pretty much limited to sex and race, usually raunchy. But in these areas, they are creative, in a way. And there were some "incredibly creative" black musicians, especially during the mid-20th century. Yet they worked with instruments that owed their existence to white creativity.
Aside from that, I'm still waiting. I'll be glad when their wondrous creativity invents black action heros so we don't keep having to turn every white hero from Superman to Beethoven, into a black person, as if they SHOULD have been black if only some hack of a white hadn't beaten them to it.
Blacks incredibly more creative than every other race? One of those statements of habit that has passed into folklore with virtually nothing except impressions of oppressed jazz musicians and foul-mouthed comedians and rap "artists" to back it up.
Please list examples of their extraordinary creativity please, with analagous non-black examples which would compare poorly. Looking at the body of art, literature, etc., and the creativity necessary for even technological invention--for every deliberate and productive act begins as an idea--I'll bet the Mona Lisa and my Marriage of Figaro recording that whites are by far the most creative, but then I'm a bit biased. Europeans/whites are not, however, the most spontaneous or the most attuned to their own bodies. I'd say blacks have that advantage.

Anonymous said...

Japanese .4% of the American population (2007).

So if they are 1.2% of some pool of achievers they are 3x. I suspect the Japanese are moderately/well overrepresented. It's just hard to tell.

elvisd said...

"So from the perspective of eugenic breeding, it is quite understandable that Ashkenazi and Chinese have high IQ. But since Chinese had the benefit of eugenic breeding policies and Japanese had no such benefit, wouldn't we expect the IQ of Chinese to be higher than the IQ of Japanese?"

I'm not asian, either, but I recall this being addressed somewhere. It could be said that few societies have had such eugenic controls as feudal Japan. This was a country that considered all foreigners to be be inferior, and had a shogunate that pretty much was at leave to purge deviants, including those who might have some genetic predisposition to divergent behavior. Though it could be said that this suppressed the spread of those whose divergence might include out of the box brain wiring.
The japanese switch from rural feudalism to a modern industrial state in the Meiji period has to be one of the most unusual phenomenons in history.

Anonymous said...

"The Nobel Laureate list, however, will show something a bit different."

Nor chess grandmasters. Take a look at the list of American chess grandmasters on Wikipedia. Who is represented 3 to 1?

Svigor said...

Mitch, you claim that the Asian IQ advantage is very slight relative to whites. Obviously you haven't been paying attention to the psychometric literature. Here's one of Steve's own posts.

You haven't been paying attention to your own comments:

http://isteve.blogspot.com/2009/03/legal-immigrants-hints-of-iq-scores.html

India: 112 [national IQ no higher than 90]

Southeast Asia: 104 [this should give you pause]

sub-Saharan Africa 89 [so sub-Saharan Africans are have a higher racial IQ than...African-Americans]

The "rigor" of the HBDers is bashed by the "rigorous" Asianophiles...who pretty much never admit the likelihood of selection effects via immigration.

Svigor said...

Where would the world be without liberals and their innate sense of what other people "deep down .. really believe"?

I know what you mean. I'm talking, my lips are moving, I'm saying "we want for ourselves what Jews have for themselves in Israel," but inside I'm screaming, "death to all the Jews!"

Thank you liberals for really listening.

Anonymous said...

"Self-protecting mantra of the white HBD-sphere:

1. Asians aren't (much) smarter, they just study harder.

2. White kids are much smarter than blacks and hispanics. It's not a matter of having better study habits and middle class values. It's genes.

3. White kids are much better at sports than Asians. It's not because white kids spend more time at it."

----------------------------
You forgot to mention one other schtick that gets propagated ad nauseum by the white HBDers/ Zionist Jew HBDers/ White nationalist.

1. When NE Asians and Indians succeed in American and Western society => they are using and even exploiting the foundation, system, and institutions that my great grandfather helped create (never mind if he was simply a low IQ prole who never contributed jack squat).

2. When blacks and other NAMs fail in society => the inherently prejudice foundation, system, and institution that my great grandfather helped create and enforce once upon a time (see aforementioned point number 1) had nothing to do with their disenfranchisement. They should stop playing the blame game and study harder.

Funny how this mantra of the white man's created tenure system is only utilized when it fits the current agenda at hand and quickly dismissed when it doesn't.

Sorry, but you can't have one without the other.

Svigor said...

What's interesting is how studies show that the average East Asian American IQ is roughly similar to the average East Asian IQ

Last I heard the east Asian mean is also selected, from the urban centers of the more developed eastern regions.

Anonymous said...

"Go ahead and try getting that combo in a white girl. LOL"

There are plenty of very intelligent white women although they don't tend to be in engineering/math. Many are in law schools or humanities PhD programs but they are probably so completely off your radar because you would piss in your pants just thinking about asking one out.

Anonymous said...

re: Japanese

Yes, the Japanese are underperforming relative to East Asian Americans. That's exactly the point. Japanese-Americans have adopted slacker/surfer culture, causing them to not do as well as they could academically. However, compared to whites, who also have a slacker/surfer culture, Japanese seem about the same.

If high ability Japanese males are marrying high IQ women, then that should produce more PSAT finalists for the Japanese-surname group. Though it would lead to more variance (ie more low scores and more high scores). When assortive mating happen, you have more high-IQ and more low-IQ people (fewer middle IQ).

When I looked through the list, I didn't catch many Japanese with 2 surnames. So that doesn't suggest that half-race Japanese kids are taking on caucasian names.

By the way, Japanese didn't seriously start out marrying a lot until recently. So a lot of the mixed race Japanese are probably half Japanese, as opposed to a quarter or an eighth.


I don't think anyone is saying that Asians study 24/7. What we are saying is that Asian kids might study a couple of hours a day, on top of going to public school, and maybe go to a Chinese or cram school on the weekends. That makes a difference. If, let's say, Asians score 1/2 a SD above the white mean on standardized tests, it might only be 1/5 of a SD without the studying.

There is a difference between saying Asians/Indians aren't that bright and saying Asians/Indians are bright & study a lot. For example, Indian-Americans are a pretty bright group, but they pretty much own the Spelling Bees. Does that indicate that most of the high verbal IQ elite of America are going to be Indian? Or does does it imply Indians got decent verbal skills, but then hit the books hard?

How about this? If studying doesn't make a difference, why all the cram schools and Chinese schools in any predominately AA area?

Professor Flynn compiled a lot of IQ studies on the middle class children of pre-WWII, non-selected Chinese and Japanese immigrants. He didn't find any Asian IQ advantage, but he did find Asians did better in school and on tests than the whites or other groups. This suggests that even if Asians exceed white or NAM performance, IQ is not the sole factor.

Some white ethnic groups (rednecks, Italians, Portugese) do have very little interest in education. If you hang out with them and conclude their lack of education interest implies laziness, you might not be entirely wrong.

B Lode said...

I think that all of these excuses reflect the fact that people in the HBD sphere would sooner bite off their own arms than admit that East Asians are smarter than whites.

I think your lie and your anonymity reflect each other. Together they reveal the wedge you seek to drive between the various victims of the affirmative action state you so cherish.

B Lode said...

But since Chinese had the benefit of eugenic breeding policies and Japanese had no such benefit, wouldn't we expect the IQ of Chinese to be higher than the IQ of Japanese?

A fair question. I'm not Asian either, and I can only speculate.

Poetry was a serious noble virtue in Japan. A young man would be in a better position to marry if he was brave, controlled, and poetic. The upper classes valued literacy, but the middle classes did too, and they had a sophisticated phonetic alphabet usable by those who didn't have the time to learn Chinese-iinfluenced kanji. So the middle classes could swap novels to prove their literacy while the nobles were practicing calligraphy and debating Confucian classics.

I don't know much about "negative eugenics", but samurai-on-peasant violence is often described as pretty harsh, which may add up to the same thing. Also, I don't know if a real lunkhead could be kicked out of the upper class for being illiterate, but I suspect even if he retained his rank he would be such an embarrassment that his parents would want to hide him, certainly not try to introduce him to the parents of eligible young ladies.

As to where the famed STEM abilities came from in particular, I don't know.

Anonymous said...

Modern cities, everywhere in the world look like western cities looked earlier. Militaries everywhere in the world do not look like shogen or nija but like western militaries. Walk into a hospital anyehre that they have enough money to make a real hospital and it looks like the hospital invented in the west. The modern world is not created in any meaningful way in the orient.

Anonymous said...

Regarding East Asians in science, the poster who mentioned there will be an increase in the number of East Asian Nobelists is almost certainly right. Just this decade 11 East Asians have won either the Physics or Chemistry prize. This is roughly half the number that have won one of the three Nobel science prizes in total, plus two more won it in the late 90's, giving a total of 13 from 1997-2009. Additionally, the Japanese inventor of high brightness LED's as been in the US since 2000 teaching at UCSB, and the Chinese American who invented Molecular Beam Epitaxy is overdue for a Nobel Prize as well.

Anonymous said...

Indian vs South Asian, 2008 Data
-

College rate / Median Family Income

Indian = 70% / $90K

Pakistani = 54% / $60K
Bangladeshi = 49% / $49K

Indian immigrants tend to match jews, whereas muslim south asians are usually slightly below white

--

Razib is a Bangladeshi outlier
His grandmother was a brahmin
Most Bangladeshis are converts from low caste Hindus such as Namasudra and Chandal

--

South Asian muslims mostly marry withing their caste
South Asian muslims have 3 main castes - Ashraf or High caste, Ajlaf or low caste and Razil or Untouchable

--

In UK, Indian students perform above whites , whereas Pakistanis and Bangladeshis perform at Afro-caribbean levels

--

No Pakistani or Bangladeshi has ever won a Spelling bee, Geographic bee, or Intel Science Award or won a seat on the US Math Olympiad, like many Indians have done and this is not likely to change in the future

Reason is the caste groups that converted to islam, were not the high IQ groups ahd Islam discourages free thinking
and Islam discourages higher education for women

--

From Arthur Hu's data on 1990 SAT scores, based on old test

Verbal + Math ,
Jews = 1030
Asian Hindus = 1029
Asian muslims = 923 ( below the average white )
-

From Pew 2008 Religion report

http://religions.pewforum.org/pdf/table-education-by-tradition.pdf

Post graduates among Hindus = 48%

Post graduates among Muslims = 10%

Severn said...

As to where the famed STEM abilities came from in particular, I don't know.


East Asians do not have any particular STEM abilities. But in any collection of 1.4 billion people you are going to find some who are reasonably intelligent. And they don't speak English very well, so when they come to the West they gravitate towards fields where a command of English is not that vital - science and technology.

Anonymous said...

@Steve, one of the key reasons for Indians staying away from Republican party, is that they face religious hostility, a-la Nikki Haley, from the Republican party, whereas the Democrats dont bring such baggage

Anonymous said...

Well according to a published study done recently by chinese govt, the central east coast of china around zhejiang, jiangsu, and shanghai province have the highest IQ in china. With avg of 114, 109, 112. Shandong is also known to have high iq as well based on the chinese college entrance exam. Although iq for this province wasnt published. The combine total population of the 3 provinces exceed 150 million. which is greater than the total population of Japan. If you add in Shandong it swells to 250 million. This area had been historically settled by madarins of china who were fleeing the barbarian invasions from the north during various times in the ancient past. So in effect a sort of eugenics effect did occur in this area of china. Thus today this area of china is known to have the best and brightest minds of china. The majority of Chinese immigrants that have usually gone overseas are not of this region. They are from southern chinese province of guangdong and fujian, which only scored iq in the 101-103 range. So in effect the testing done on chinese americans werent representatives of all of mainland china. These immigrants are from the lowest scoring provinces of china. Please look at a blog by steve hsu who did work on asian sd based of the timms and pisa data test. infoproc.blogspot.com/.../asian-white-iq-variance-from-pisa.html
Note that china is still a developing country therefore it stands to reason that as it becomes more prosperous the iq will increase as well. The average for this region is already about 6 points higher than the iq scores of japan and korea. Hence the gap will be even bigger once they becoming fully developed. When chiang kai shek fled to taiwan it was the people of this region of china that created modern taiwan. Note all the taiwanese people that have founded the companies listed by a poster above. They are most likely descended from people who hail from this region.

keypusher said...

So this is a 200-comment post. Wouldn't have guessed -- Steve, what about you? Were you surprised?

Anonymous said...

All over Europe, fathers with a lot of money had the power to choose a husband for each of his daughters.

This was true of Christians as well as Jews.

As far as I know, there was no place in Europe in which daughters had much influence in the selection of a husband until around 200 years ago.

There are thousands of pages of documentation that Jewish fathers with money would select the young men with the highest verbal IQ for their daughters to marry. Jewish fathers would almost universally choose a short unattractive unathletic male with very high IQ if such a male was available.

Has anyone documented the eugenic or dysgeic choices of Christian fathers? I would imagine that in Prussia the fathers would choose oung men based on their success in the military to marry their daugters, and thus Prussians evolved to have lower IQ than German Jews.

Can anyone document the criteria that Christian fathers in all the nations of Europe used in selecting husbands for their daughters?

Can we explain some ethnic traits based on the breeding models followed?

ATBOTL said...

"Why isn't it good to have a bunch of super-smart Americans who can contribute to the economy, create jobs, work on the next big thing, and at least make those incremental advances in research that eventually lead to breakthroughs? And you're talking about pretty assimilable groups with exogamy rates close to 40% here."

Because they are displacing whites from the country whites built.

Curvaceous Carbon-based Life Form said...

"Funny how this mantra of the white man's created tenure system is only utilized when it fits the current agenda at hand and quickly dismissed when it doesn't.

Sorry, but you can't have one without the other."

What's that? Sorry, but I couldn't hear you over the dull roar of all those non-White feet beating a path out of their own non-White-built countries into America.

Anonymous said...

"Besides the obvious observation that they're much, much, lower than the white numbers, why are the scores higher in the Midwest and South?"

Re the South, I suspect a large number of the Hispanic high performers are white Cubans descended from the middle and upper class refugees from Castro's regime. Re the Midwest, I don't know. Perhaps more selective migration?

Curvaceous Carbon-based Life Form said...

"Some white ethnic groups (rednecks, Italians, Portugese) do have very little interest in education. If you hang out with them and conclude their lack of education interest implies laziness, you might not be entirely wrong."

Or you MIGHT find, if you ever actually stopped looking down your nose with sniffing contempt and hung out with any rednecks, that since they get on-the job training to make $$$$$$$ working their arses off as oil field directional drillers, miners, ranchers and crab fishermen, that they're smart enough to recognize that spending 4 years in university can be a money-losing proposition.

Anonymous said...

"Well according to a published study done recently by chinese govt, the central east coast of china around zhejiang, jiangsu, and shanghai province have the highest IQ in china. With avg of 114, 109, 112..."

If you're talking about the study I think you are (based on the regions and numbers you mentioned), the study was used to assess differences by region, urban/rural living conditions, and nutritional status (looking at the effects of things such as iodine deficiency) and the IQs you mention for zhejiang, jiangsu, and shanghai are for well nourished urban children from those regions compared to a mean for all chinese set at 100. The IQ numbers you're citing aren't the same as Lynn and Vanhannen's "Greenwich mean IQs" in terms of either mean or S.D. and hence not comparable to the results of Raven's or other test normings for Japan and Korea. The numbers only reference China internally and the mean was set at 100 for all of the children in the study. There were also regions in China and undernourished children in the sample that did abbysmally compared to the regions you cite.

Another problem generally when assessing East Asian IQ is that many of the studies that Lynn and Rushton cite are not necessarily terribly representative. As Charles Murray said in his ISIR talk in 2009, we need better data. There are some large, well sampled norming studies for first world East Asian countries like Japan, Korea and the Tiger Republics on tests like the Raven's or for test batteries like the Wechsler or Kaufman tests. These generally yield results somewhat higher than for white populations (in the range of 101-104), but lower than some of higher results reported by Lynn or Rushton (105-110), which often come from unrepresentative cities that are political or commercial centers (how do you think the average white from DC or Manhattan or the average German from Bonn or Frankfurt would do compared to the overall average for their country?) or even just one school. The comparison or China is even more problematic because there is even less good data and much of the country is not well sampled. I think there is enough data to indicate that urban Chinese from the prosperous coastal cities do as well or better than whites, but we don't know how the rural masses would do. I wouldn't be surprised if a nationwide Ravens norming for China found a mean IQ substantially below 100. However, if China generally had first world living conditions, I'd expect their results to be similar to East Asian countries that are currently 1st world.

Anonymous said...

"Well according to a published study done recently by chinese govt, the central east coast of china around zhejiang, jiangsu, and shanghai province have the highest IQ in china. With avg of 114, 109, 112..."

If you're talking about the study I think you are (based on the regions and numbers you mentioned), the study was used to assess differences by region, urban/rural living conditions, and nutritional status (looking at the effects of things such as iodine deficiency) and the IQs you mention for zhejiang, jiangsu, and shanghai are for well nourished urban children from those regions compared to a mean for all chinese set at 100. The IQ numbers you're citing aren't the same as Lynn and Vanhannen's "Greenwich mean IQs" in terms of either mean or S.D. and hence not comparable to the results of Raven's or other test normings for Japan and Korea. The numbers only reference China internally and the mean was set at 100 for all of the children in the study. There were also regions in China and undernourished children in the sample that did abbysmally compared to the regions you cite.

Another problem generally when assessing East Asian IQ is that many of the studies that Lynn and Rushton cite are not necessarily terribly representative. As Charles Murray said in his ISIR talk in 2009, we need better data. There are some large, well sampled norming studies for first world East Asian countries like Japan, Korea and the Tiger Republics on tests like the Raven's or for test batteries like the Wechsler or Kaufman tests. These generally yield results somewhat higher than for white populations (in the range of 101-104), but lower than some of higher results reported by Lynn or Rushton (105-110), which often come from unrepresentative cities that are political or commercial centers (how do you think the average white from DC or Manhattan or the average German from Bonn or Frankfurt would do compared to the overall average for their country?) or even just one school. The comparison or China is even more problematic because there is even less good data and much of the country is not well sampled. I think there is enough data to indicate that urban Chinese from the prosperous coastal cities do as well or better than whites, but we don't know how the rural masses would do. I wouldn't be surprised if a nationwide Ravens norming for China found a mean IQ substantially below 100. However, if China generally had first world living conditions, I'd expect their results to be similar to East Asian countries that are currently 1st world.

Anonymous said...

Re: Chinese IQs

The study cited above was a 2005 government-sponsored health study using Ravens. The original motivation was to track iodine deficiency, so coverage of rural areas was essential.

Scores are listed separately for both rural and urban populations. There is an almost 1 SD variation between different parts of China: Zhejiang and Beijing average around 114 while the Guandong average is only 103.

Historical immigration to the US from China has come from lower IQ provinces such as Guandong (this may explain Flynn's earlier results). Recent immigrants coming to the US for graduate school or on H1Bs probably tap into the higher IQ pool. The higher scoring regions like Zhejiang province (well known for producing the largest number of successful exam candidates) were not sources of large scale emigration.

It's a joke to think that Lynn and Vanhannen's work is more accurate than these results. Do you think Charles Murray was aware of these government surveys? He's hardly a China specialist.

Anonymous said...

In Silicon Valley, Cupertino, Monta Vista High, 15% Indian, 45% North East Asian, 40% white,

There are 53 semi finalists of which,
30 are north east Asian
17 are Hindu
6 are White

No South Asian muslims made it

Severn said...

What's interesting is how studies show that the average East Asian American IQ is roughly similar to the average East Asian IQ



Can you cite some studies which show this? Or are you just using "roughly" in a rough sense?

Severn said...

"Well according to a published study done recently by chinese govt, the central east coast of china around zhejiang, jiangsu, and shanghai province have the highest IQ in china. With avg of 114, 109, 112..."


And according to studies done by the Soviet Union, the glorious Communist farmers grew wheat at triple the rate of their running-dog capitalist counterparts in the US!

There's no fool quite as gullible as a HBD-fool.

Anonymous said...

"Apparently, East Asians are also vastly over-represented amongst finalists and semi-finalists for the Intel Talent Science Search. Is that the result of working hard too? Or for that matter, is black and Hispanic under-performance relative to whites the result of whites working a lot harder?"

Don't know, don't care (much).

The point is that there are two major possibilities for the academic disparity between Asian- and European-Americans: genetically determined differences in IQ, or work ethic.

The PSAT results do not, based on what we know, seem explicable by IQ disparity alone.

If the disparity is genetic then there's not a damn thing anyone can do about it. If the disparity is due to work ethic then there is something that can be done about it: work harder.

As they say, do all you can and leave the rest to God.

In case you haven't noticed, the culture today is filth. White Americans seem to get far more absorbed in the filth than Asians ever do. What does that culture teach? Certainly it teaches very few lessons about patience, restraint, hard work, or much of anything good.

Anonymous said...

"White kids are much smarter than blacks and hispanics. It's not a matter of having better study habits and middle class values. It's genes."

A graduated from medical school. B was too stupid to finish high school. The difference between A and B's income can be explained by intelligence.

C also graduated from medical school. C went into radiology after a 5 year residency. A went into family practice, because he didn't want to spend more time in residency.

One difference is explained by native intelligence and one is explained by work ethic/presonal preference. Is that really all that hard to fathom?

Anonymous said...

Steve's article make a lot of white guys and especially Indian feel uncomfortable.

Anonymous said...

"On the one hand, most of the world's top WN academic intellectuals, such as Phil Rushton and Richard Lynn, not only fully accept that East Asians are (on average) considerably smarter than white Europeans, but have actually made it an important centerpiece of their various published books and other research. "

E Asians are somewhat smarter than whites -- less than a third of a standard deviation, in fact. This is also the difference between blacks and Mexicans -- and the economic, intellectual, and societal outcomes between them are barely discernible. However, there are big cultural differences between E Asian immigrants to the US and native born white Americans which amplifies the effects of a small IQ advantage. White Americans respect book-learning, however their attitude toward it is somewhat breezy: they tend to believe native wit is what counts. Asians are under no such delusions and seek out every little advantage, believing you have to work the system to get ahead.

Anonymous said...

"One of its main conclusions is that intelligence is controlled by a network of thousands of genes with each making just a small contribution to overall intelligence, rather than the handful of powerful genes that scientists once predicted."

Which would explain why children tend to have an IQ midway between their smarter and dumber parent. (Mine happens to be exactly the average of both.)

It also explains why Mexicans, who have 50% S. European white genes (IQ 95) and 50% Central American genes (IQ 80) have an average IQ of 87.

Anonymous said...

"As I've stated before, many studies have shown that SAT/PSAT scores can only be minimally boosted through the effects of coaching."

Yeah, but the studies are all conducted by ETS. I know two classmates who boosted their SAT scores 200-300 points between the Fall of sophomore year and the spring of their junior year. Sure, they studied flat out after being academic sluggards, but holy shit, anybody who says you can't study for the PSAT/SAT is full of just that! It's more likely you can't study for the Wonderlic which asks you to solve a bunch of really simple questions really fast. Or change your odd-man-out reaction time scores.

Anonymous said...

"and genetically they are related to low IQ Middle Easterners (suggesting their high IQ's don't come from genes)"

Catperson,
Middle Eastern ancestry is only part of the Ashkenazi genome, and possibly not even a clear majority depending on which of the recent autosomal studies one reads. Moreover, at least one study did find some evidence for selection among the Jewish neurologic diseases, although it tried to minimize that finding.

Matt said...

As for me, I'm not Asian myself but it's been totally obvious to me since about the age of nine that Asians were (on average!) smarter than whites.

No one debates that as a group they have defacto greater measured IQ, what's debated is

a) the causes - this area isn't as well established as B-W difference or Jewish-European difference and it's not clear what exactly the selective mechanism behind this is supposed to be - an agricultural peasant is an agricultural peasant is an agricultural peasant.

b) whether it actually translates into meaningful applications or even the advancement of knowledge to the same degree as in Western populations. The whole "Japan is not strong on basic research" chestnut and the whole "Though Asians do better on IQ, they perform identically on measures of scientific reasoning" things. I think it's likely that they both do and will, but that's not a bad question to ask.

stari_momak said...

Sorry, but you can't have one without the other.

Yes, we can. Here's why. Blacks in the US are wealthier than blacks anywhere, including the micro-states of the Caribbean. So no matter how awful my great grandfather was to blacks, any black in America has still benefited by being in a society created, overwhelmingly by white men -- including the 'proles' that killed the Indians, built the highways and the railroads (dude, who do you think built the Eastern Sections through the Rockies, Kwai Chang Caine?) farmed the prairies, and like my own people, won the goddam Cold War.

Likewise,every single Asian at UCI or UC Berkeley benefits from the whole land grant university program , set up by us Caspers, paid for by proles with their taxes, etc etc.

Frankly, I look forward to increasing dominance of Asian countries -- maybe Asians will stop flooding into our countries then.

eh said...

234 comments (and counting) about Asians -- as shown by surnames -- doing well on standardized tests. Why is that a surprise? Why is that so interesting?

RKU said...

a) the causes - this area isn't as well established as B-W difference or Jewish-European difference and it's not clear what exactly the selective mechanism behind this is supposed to be - an agricultural peasant is an agricultural peasant is an agricultural peasant.

Actually, I think I worked out a pretty plausible theory of the selective mechanism for higher Chinese intelligence just over 30 years ago (some of us are not Johnny-come-latelies to HBD!). Unfortunately, since EvBio isn't my actual field, I never got around to putting it into remotely publishable form. But now that HBD is now much more in fashion, perhaps I should try to do so.

On the other hand, it doesn't explain higher Japanese intelligence, which has always puzzled me, so perhaps it's at best only partially correct.

The Asian of Reason said...

White middle-class values pale in comparison to Asian values. Whites need to start adopting Asian values if they are to compete academically in the US and economically in the world.

Severn said...

"As for me, I'm not Asian myself but it's been totally obvious to me since about the age of nine that Asians were (on average!) smarter than whites."

No one debates that as a group they have defacto greater measured IQ




That is actually highly debatable. What people mean is "Asians in the US sure are smart". Perhaps, but that says nothing about the intelligence of Asians as a group.

The same apples to Jews, incidentally.

Anonymous said...

The Asian chauvinism that's come to light in this thread is worrying (also a little bit comical).

Judging by the college classes I teach, in a field in which the testing is quite objective, I wouldn't have any reason to doubt that the East Asian average IQ is higher than the white average IQ. I have almost never had an Asian student do badly.

But I would also say that it's routine for Asian students to outscore white students who actually have an equal or better grasp of the material. The good white students just aren't as driven -- they'll be content with a 92 while the Asian student goes for a 98. That 98 is definitely something to be proud of, but it doesn't entitle one to lord it over students who are just as smart but have other priorities.

Anonymous said...

"Steve's article make a lot of white guys and especially Indian feel uncomfortable."

Why? Nothing I've seen even in this data indicates that the degree of over-representation of N.E.Asians is higher than that of Indians.

Anonymous said...

There is an almost 1 SD variation between different parts of China: Zhejiang and Beijing average around 114 while the Guandong average is only 103.

I think it's possible that Guangdong Chinese are more entrepreneurial, this would mesh well with the long tradition of trade on China's south east coast, while the Chinese around Zhejiang are better at pure scholarly pursuits. On the other hand, the two Fields Medal winners are both of Guangdong ancestry ...

Anonymous said...

Nor chess grandmasters. Take a look at the list of American chess grandmasters on Wikipedia. Who is represented 3 to 1?

Not sure if you're talking solely about Americans, but there are few East Asian grandmasters because they play their own equivalents of Chess: Go, Xiangqi, and Shogi. Even still, the current top American grandmaster is Hikaru Nakamura.

elvisd said...

"Besides the obvious observation that they're much, much, lower than the white numbers, why are the scores higher in the Midwest and South?"

"Re the South, I suspect a large number of the Hispanic high performers are white Cubans descended from the middle and upper class refugees from Castro's regime. Re the Midwest, I don't know. Perhaps more selective migration?"

I don't know the numbers, but I'm told there's a lot of middle-class Venezuelans who've fled Chavismo in Atlanta.

But almost all the "Latinos" I've seen in MS,AL, north GA, and east TN are poorer Mexicans and Guatemalans. I suspect that their numbers still aren't concentrated enough even in Dalton, Chattanooga, Gadsden, etc to where they take on a barrio mentality.

Anonymous said...

@Steve, one of the key reasons for Indians staying away from Republican party, is that they face religious hostility, a-la Nikki Haley, from the Republican party, whereas the Democrats dont bring such baggage

Nikki Haley is Methodist and she's going to be the next governor of South Carolina thanks in large part to the evangelical vote.

Who are the Democratic Indian-American office holders?

Anonymous said...

eh said...
234 comments (and counting) about Asians -- as shown by surnames -- doing well on standardized tests. Why is that a surprise? Why is that so interesting?
___

dear "eh" thanks for your question.

It is all about who / whom.

This thread gets to the very heart of two worldviews.... Two memes that are in bare-knuckle competition here on isteve.

We are having a debate on this blog that can not take place any where else. The mainstream media won't admit that Northeast Asian genes give the average Northeast Asian in the USA a higher IQ than the average white.

I am white and I own a business. I hire whichever workers I can get who have highest possible IQ along with reliability and self discipline. This of course means that in the interest of serving my clients and building the success of my business that on the margin i will hire an American citizen of Northeast Asian ancestry instead of an American citizen of white European ancestry.

Simple as that. Half the people on this blog like the fact that America has plenty of super high IQ Northeast Asians earning high incomes and paying high taxes. Citizens of Northeast Asian ancestry generally stay out of jail more than white citizens and also pay more in taxes than the average white citizen.

So half the people on this blog are ok stepping back and letting employers like me choose to hire citizens of Northeast Asian ancestry.

Other people here feel that since the USA was founded by whites that the good high paying jobs should almost all be allocated to WHITE citizens instead of to citizens of Northeast Asian ancestry.

In general, white business owners like me want to have the freedom to hire whatever color citizen we think will be best for the business.

In general, unemployed and underemployed whites want business owners to show preference to white citizens when it comes to hiring.

There is nothing wrong with the view I have, nothing wrong with the view of the unemployed and underemployed whites.


Now, when an unemployed or underemployed white sees the national merit scholar data, it is demoralizing since this data certainly supports the idea that in a pure meritocracy plenty of whites will be unemployed while plenty of Northeast Asians will be employed in high paying jobs.

Plenty of good people on this blog want to live in a society where whites have all the good high paying jobs. I think that the national merit data shows that society can ONLY exist in a place in which Northeast Asians do not live. Yes, in Idaho you can have a very strict meritocracy and have whites in all the best jobs. So in Idaho there can be a coalition between meritocrats and white survivalists.

But in Palo Alto, any distribution of jobs on the basis of merit will leave plenty of whites at the bottom of the food chain looking up at Northeast Asians who are superior to them in the pecking order.

So why are you surprised? This data serves to violently separate the people that believe in meritocracy from the "white survivalists" - it cleaeves the readership of Isteve in two.

If anything I am surprised this thread is not longer

Matt said...

As an aside (I bet this'll never happen) it would be interesting to see if the lineage of Confucius descendants have anything special going on with IQ, since la wik has this to say on them

"Confucius' descendants were repeatedly identified and honored by successive imperial governments with titles of nobility and official posts. They were honored with the rank of a marquis thirty-five times since Gaozu of the Han Dynasty, and they were promoted to the rank of duke forty-two times from the Tang Dynasty to the Qing Dynasty. Emperor Xuanzong of Tang first bestowed the title of "Duke Wenxuan" on Kong Suizhi of the 35th generation. In 1055, Emperor Renzong of Song first bestowed the title of "Duke Yansheng" on Kong Zongyuan of the 46th generation.
Despite repeated dynastic change in China, the title of Duke Yansheng was bestowed upon successive generations of descendants until it was abolished by the Nationalist Government in 1935. The last holder of the title, Kung Te-cheng (a holder of multiple professorships) of the 77th generation, was appointed Sacrificial Official to Confucius."
&c.

Probably impossible to talk about meaningfully however.

Jim O said...

Steve, has this post broken your record for number (and maybe even average length) of comments? This one has really struck a nerve.

Anonymous said...

@Stari

Asians are hardly "flooding into" the United States today. There are something like 3.6 million Chinese Americans total, versus 1334 million Chinese living in China. And the number of Japanese and Korean Americans combined is roughly equal to the number of Chinese Americans.

Furthermore, there are remarkably few Indian Americans, less than 3 million, relative to the total Indian population of over 1.1 billion.

I'm not really sure where you got the idea that these people were "flooding into America". Most likely, because of their vast academic over-representation and dominance, you overestimated the number of Asians living in the United States.

Severn said...

In general, white business owners like me want to have the freedom to hire whatever color citizen we think will be best for the business.


No, "white business owners" like you want to have the freedom to hire people from anywhere in the world and make them American citizens.

In doing this, you are parasitic on the country you live in.



In general, unemployed and underemployed whites want business owners to show preference to white citizens when it comes to hiring.


They're called "Americans", anonymous. Not "white citizens".

stari_momak said...

@Business owner

You want to hire Asians, why no emigrate to Asia? Why do you live on the social capital, in the social system, created by EuroAmericans?

Anonymous said...

Severn says:

"" In general, unemployed and underemployed whites want business owners to show preference to white citizens when it comes to hiring.


They're called "Americans", anonymous. Not "white citizens". """

My response:

It seems that Severn forgets the Japanese and Chinese people that moved to the USA 100 years go. Is he suggesting that after living in the USA for 100 years those families shouldn't count as citizens.

And what exactly is it that gives Severn a right to job preferences ahead of Chinese and Japanese people that have been living here 100 years?

That's the debate isn't it. Severn wants the high paying jobs reserved for whites. Not everyone on this blog agrees with him

CC-bLF said...

"It seems that Severn forgets the Japanese and Chinese people that moved to the USA 100 years go. Is he suggesting that after living in the USA for 100 years those families shouldn't count as citizens."

So, you're telling us that when you interview a smart Asian guy, you require him to provide a copy of his great-grandparents' immigration card, proving that his family has been here 100 years?

Anonymous said...

I looked at muslim names vs Hindu names on the National merit semi-finalist list

Muslim names include Indian muslims, Pakistani muslims, Bangladeshi muslims and middle east muslims

No such thing as South Asian, muslims are almost NAM in performance

Virginia - Total = 395
Muslims = 5
Hindus = 21 ( 5% )

Indiana = 257
Muslim = 1
Hindu = 11 ( 4% )

Florida = 800
Muslim = 10
Hindu = 34 ( 4% )

Texas = 1303
Muslim = 20
Hindu = 89 ( 7% )

This Hindu cohort was born in 1993, and at that time, Hindu American % was about 0.2%, now 0.5%
Very few Patels among the Hindu semi-finalists, though they are 20% of the US Indian diaspora

Anonymous said...

Anon wrote - Nikki Haley is Methodist and she's going to be the next governor of South Carolina thanks in large part to the evangelical vote.

Who are the Democratic Indian-American office holders?
--

Precisely my point
Republicans are not racially hostile to Indians, they are religiously hostile to Hindus and Sikhs
Neither Nikki Haley nor Jindal could have won without apostasy

There is no Republican Hindu office holder

There are plenty of Democratic Hindu office holders such as Satveer Chaudhury of MN, and Swati Dandekar of Iowa who both got attacked by their Republican opponents for their religion.

Other Democratic party Indian office holders include Kumar Barve, Upendra Chivkula

In addition, plenty of white Democrats show up at Hindu American functions, you will never find a white Republican show up at Hindu American functions

Anonymous said...

I'm not sure I understand the point that our esteemed commentator is making.

Patels vs other Hindus.

Is he saying that the average Patel in America has a lower IQ than the average Hindu that is NOT a Patel?

If so can he please clarify how big the gap is.

Also, I am not sure I understand the point that the folks who don't want to see Chinese and Japanese get hired for jobs. Chinese and Japanese born in the USA seem to wind up in Prison much less often than whites born in the USA. This blog discusses the whites that live in South Boston. And this blog discusses the whites depicted in winter's bone. Isn't it logical for some whites to prefer to have as neighbors Chinese and Japanese born in America instead of the whites in winter's bone and in southie?

Anonymous said...

Anon wrote - Patels vs other Hindus.

Is he saying that the average Patel in America has a lower IQ than the average Hindu that is NOT a Patel?

If so can he please clarify how big the gap is.
--

In the UK, with a large Patel contingent, the Indian immigrant IQ was measured at 97

In the USA, Princeton Immigrant Children Reverse Digit Span IQ test, Indian IQ came in at 112

So a 15 point or 1 SD difference between IQ of Patels and IQ of Indian Immigrant to USA

In the overall scheme of Hindu society, Patels are midway in the caste heirarchy - farmers , petty traders and I expect their IQ to be in the middle of the Hindu IQ range

Below them in IQ and caste rank, are Backward Castes, Untouchables, Forest Tribals

The US Indian immigrant is skewed towards upper castes and upper IQ segment and yes, in the US Indian diaspora, Patels are below average IQ, but overall among Indian Hindus, about the median IQ

Anonymous said...

The *overwhelming* majority of Asians in the US are immigrants or descendants of post-1965 immigrants.

Anonymous said...

2000 California Census

Asian Indian 314,819 0.9
Chinese 980,642 2.9
Korean 345,882 1.0

There are 4 times as many North east Asians as Indians, and at Monta Vista, Cupertino, CA, out of 53 Semi Finalists, there were 30 North east Asians and 17 Hindus

Anonymous said...

Isn't it logical for some whites to prefer to have as neighbors Chinese and Japanese born in America instead of the whites in winter's bone and in southie?


No. (Unless by "some whites" you mean Jewish whites)

Severn said...

And what exactly is it that gives Severn a right to job preferences ahead of Chinese and Japanese people that have been living here 100 years?


First of all, you wannabe genius, learn how to give yourself some name.

Secondly, the number of American-Asian citizens whose parents came here 100 years ago could fit in a phone booth. You'll have to come up with a slightly less nonsensical justification for your bigotry.

Anonymous said...

"This Hindu cohort was born in 1993, and at that time, Hindu American % was about 0.2%, now 0.5%
Very few Patels among the Hindu semi-finalists, though they are 20% of the US Indian diaspora"

According to the 2007 American Community Survey (US Census) .92% of the population is Indian. So unless half of Indians in this country are Muslims, your numbers don't make sense.

Anonymous said...

"Because they are displacing whites from the country whites built."

You could say that about anyone who is not Anglo-Saxon.

corvinus said...

I think the Japanese seem underrepresented because the number of JA women who intermarried with whites significantly outstripped JA men who did, and since it's the men who pass on the Japanese surname, you don't see it in the children.

Also, Japanese, according to the 2000 census, had the highest average age, with a large number of elderly. The number of JA high-schoolers of only Japanese ancestry is comparably low.

The only way to find out for sure would be to interview all the Eurasians with European surnames.

Anonymous said...

According to the 2007 American Community Survey (US Census) .92% of the population is Indian. So unless half of Indians in this country are Muslims, your numbers don't make sense.
--

The H1Bs started coming over only in late 90s, and the 2000 Census, shows that the Indian pop nearly doubled over 1990

Anonymous said...

Thirty years ago, the U.S. Census Bureau counted 361,544 Indian Americans living in the United States. This number was one-sixth of one percent of 226.5 million U.S. population in 1980. The Indian community predominantly comprised of those who migrated from India and adopted the U.S. as their new homeland. Ten years later, according to the 1990 census, the number of Indian Americans rose to 815,447, more than double the previous count. By then the community also included a large number of those who were born and raised in the United States. In 2000, the census count of Indian Americans – immigrants, citizens, visitors from India, H-1B visa holders, officials of Indian Embassy and Consulates, Indian employees of other non-governmental Indian agencies, such as banks, etc. – was 1.67 million, slightly more than double the 1990 census count.

--

By 1993, the Indian Americans would be about 1 million out of 3 million or 0.3 %
The cohort born in 1993 took the 2007 PSAT

Anonymous said...

"In the USA, Princeton Immigrant Children Reverse Digit Span IQ test, Indian IQ came in at 112"

Since people are quoting the results from the Princeton New Immigrant Survey, I think I should point out that the reverse digit span test is not an IQ test, but part of some IQ test batteries such as the Wechsler tests. The g-loading on reverse digit span is slightly greater than 0.4. In contrast, the g-loading for the Ravens or for the combined results of good battery tests like the Wechsler series is generally greater than 0.8. In other words, reverse digit span is a moderately g-loaded task, but it is nowhere near as good a measure of g as a full battery IQ test or the Raven's. In fact, the wordsum (a 10 item vocabulary test given by the GSS is more g-loaded than the reverse digit span test).

Jack said...

When I was a kid I noticed that the Jewish students were much more academically ambitious than the white Gentile students in my school. This includes white Gentile students of similarly high IQ's - they just weren't as obsessed with getting into an Ivy League school. I think it has a lot to do with parental pressure. And in the end, the Jewish kids acheived more academically. I believe the situation with Asian kids is similar now - parents and students much more focused on academic achievement, while whites (and now even Jews) more focused on being well-rounded, and not study machines.

Severn said...

When I was a kid I noticed that the Jewish students were much more academically ambitious than the white Gentile students in my school. This includes white Gentile students of similarly high IQ's - they just weren't as obsessed with getting into an Ivy League school.




Whites who are not familiar with Jews (which is most whites) cannot comprehend just how status obsessed Jews are. Having your child go to a prestigious university casts glory on the entire family.

And a brilliant academic performance is not always necessary on Juniors part in order to get into that prestigious university. One big reason why Jews are so over-represented in the Ivies - they are able and willing to pay the full cost (plus, in some cases, a little extra) for a degree from those institutions.

Anonymous said...

All hail over East Asian overlords!

Anonymous said...

I meant to say in my previous post

All hail our East Asian overlords!

elvisd said...

"Secondly, the number of American-Asian citizens whose parents came here 100 years ago could fit in a phone booth."

There were enough Chinese who came to work the cotton plantations in our area during Reconstruction to warrant a 3-way segregated school system for whites, blacks, and for Chinese by the early 1900's. They dropped this by the late 30's and let the Chinese attend the white schools. Most of them had become Baptists by then.

Truth said...

271 Responses!?

Wow, a Bruva never knows what he's going to miss on vacation. A couple of random thoughts:

"So no matter how awful my great grandfather was to blacks, any black in America has still benefited by being in a society created, overwhelmingly by white men --"

Black Americans helped create and build American society every step of the way from the pirate ships, to the western expansion to the cotton trade to the manufacturing revolution. Silly assertion.

I would not describe the Japanese I have met as "studious" (I was engaged to one). I think that the Japanese are highly intelligent, generally speaking, yet extremely well-roiunded. Probably the most well rounded people on the planet. The many of the smart ones tend to go into filmmaking, entrepreneurship, fashion design, etc. Most of the Chinese that I have met tend to pick up whatever culture surrounds them.

I wouldn't count Sailer as a WN or a pure HBD'er (if that animal does actually exist). His views seem to alter a bit depending upon which side of the bed he wakes up on. Peole who see him as one or the other are probably projecting, as he seems to get nearly as many "Sailer, you yeller/ Jew lovin' anti-white sellout" responses as "Sailer, you racist" ones.

I think that Steve's feelings about blacks are fairly well set, and about every other group are somewhat mutable (although that may just be projection on my part?)

Truth said...

One more thing:

Is the mumber of commies posting on this site growing, seemingly daily, or is it just me?

Claverhouse said...

An Anonymous said:

There are thousands of pages of documentation that Jewish fathers with money would select the young men with the highest verbal IQ for their daughters to marry. Jewish fathers would almost universally choose a short unattractive unathletic male with very high IQ if such a male was available.

Has anyone documented the eugenic or dysgeic choices of Christian fathers? I would imagine that in Prussia the fathers would choose oung men based on their success in the military to marry their daugters, and thus Prussians evolved to have lower IQ than German Jews.


But much better fighting abilities, which was a more important value in defending what one had whether it be one's land or one's civilisation, in that period.

Of course only a pathological idiot would suggest Prussians haven't been one of the more intelligent groups of the human race; but even were that correct, being rather good at war and diplomacy probably honed their intelligence fully as much as being able to babble futile dogma and disputation from the Talmud; or the Koran; or the Bible.

Other than Harry Heine there aren't many world-class jewish poets, ( nor painters, nor sculptors; and but a couple of composers ) --- and he was writing in a German milieu --- so that pseudo-scholasticism of 'ascetic priests', whilst undoubtedly cute, didn't advance the arts that much either...

Svigor said...

It seems that Severn forgets the Japanese and Chinese people that moved to the USA 100 years go. Is he suggesting that after living in the USA for 100 years those families shouldn't count as citizens.

And what exactly is it that gives Severn a right to job preferences ahead of Chinese and Japanese people that have been living here 100 years?

That's the debate isn't it. Severn wants the high paying jobs reserved for whites. Not everyone on this blog agrees with him


This fellow wants to use race when it suits him, but not otherwise.

Well, I want to keep race in the discussion, to a point that will make him uncomfortable.

E.g., Asians were illegitimately allowed to immigrate in the first place, since their homelands did not reciprocate; they colonized us, but prevented us from colonizing them. Some crimes are not subject to the statute of limitations.

Why should we treat Asians as equals when Asians do not treat us as equals? Why should we let them onto our playing fields, when they don't let us onto theirs? And further, why should we even want such a false reciprocity anyway? Offering us immigration to their overcrowded, authoritarian dump (relatively speaking) in return for immigration to our wide open, libertarian paradise (relatively speaking) is a crappy deal.

Meritocrats, like libertards and liberals, all carry (and advocate) the seed of their own destruction; open the gates to China and you'll wind up living there in the long run. Same goes for Africa, South America, or anywhere else you choose to mention.

"Meritocracy" here is just more poison-pill moralizing from the usual suspects; get whitey to think protecting himself (THE WAY THE CHINESE, THE JEWS, AND EVERYONE ELSE BUT WHITEY PROTECTS HIMSELF) is "immoral," "anti-meritocratic," whatever.

Templar said...

You could say that about anyone who is not Anglo-Saxon.

Only if one chooses to define "White" à la Benjamin Franklin.

Also, Steve really needs to ban anonymous commenters...

Anonymous said...

California, Total semi-finalists = 2080

Muslims = 14

Hindus = 136 ( 7% )

Anonymous said...

Harker School in San Jose is an elite private school in Silicon valley
I dont know the ethnic makeup of this school

There are 50 semi-finalists of which
North east asian = 24
Hindu = 12
Jewish = 7
Muslim = 1
Gentile = 6

Chris said...

A big part of political influence is simply who wants to grab the bullhorn most, and Indians want to a lot more than Chinese or Koreans or Filipinos.

Have you heard about the Indian involvement in the emerging Jesse Jackson Jr. scandal? I think I prefer our traditional "model minorities" by a long shot.

Anonymous said...

>My kids' tuition and enrichment class bills top $50K/year. I submit that the above commenter does not know what the hell he is talking about!<

I respectfully submit that you're a nut.

If your kid is half-white and half-Asian, keep him away from low IQ types of all races, love him, get him a standard education, and relax. He will do just fine.

Anonymous said...

>Anonymous said...

>Steve's article make a lot of white guys and especially Indian feel uncomfortable.<

It's "makes" and "Indians." If you're going to speak our language, speak it correctly, genius.

Anonymous said...

Gunn High Schoo, Palo Alto, CA, another elite school

42 National merit semifinalists

of which

28 are east asian ( 29% of enrolment ) and 3 and India ( 4% of enrolment )

jody said...

i can speak with some authority on indiana. carmel high school, the high school with the most semifinalists in indiana, is the place in the midwest where i spent 3 years working with athletes and coaches. i also worked with people from surrounding high schools and know about them but to a lesser degree.

i've been trying to avoid wall of text posts though.

Anonymous said...

Otherwise HBD-believing-Whites like to ask "If Asians are smarter than us, then how come they haven't advanced society, invented things, etc. . like Europeans have?"

Well, two can play at that game. I can come up with a whole list of non-HBD reasons why the Chinese, as the best example, have been surpassed by Europeans in the last half-millenium and only now started to catch up:

1. China has been a large unified nation for most of its existence, while Europe was divided into small competing states. This competition fostered a lot of their advances, while China became overbloated and passive.

2. Confucianism has hindered China. While good for law and order, its focus on the greater good of society and lack of focus on individuality has hurt China's creativity.

3. The Chinese written language is more difficult to learn and unwieldy for use in printing and commerce, far more so than the written European languages.

And that's just the Chinese. The Japanese and Koreans historical lack of participation in the world's advances can be explained by their geographic isolation. Japan only came onto the world scene 150 years ago, and one would say they've done a pretty good job of catching up.

Chen Chen said...

East Asians = Borgs

East Asians' haughty nature won't allow them to admit their insane overrepresentation as PSAT National Merit Semifinalists is due to their slave-like studying for it.

Anonymous said...

Mission San Jose in Fremont has 65 not 55 National Merit Semifinalists

«Oldest ‹Older   201 – 299 of 299   Newer› Newest»