A Possible Explanation for the Flynn Effect
Richard D. Fuerle
The Flynn Effect, discovered by Richard Lynn (Lynn, 1977) and documented and named for James R. Flynn (Flynn, 1984, 1987), is a world-wide increase in IQ scores of about 3 IQ points per decade. That is, people today score higher on an old IQ test than people the same age did who took the same test decades earlier.
By suggesting the malleability of intelligence and the possibility that tweaking the environment might increase it, the Flynn Effect has raised the hopes of egalitarians, who believe that “all the races are equal in intelligence” (United Nations, 1950; also Flynn, 1999) and fervently want to erase the black-white IQ gap. Unfortunately, the cause of the Flynn Effect has not yet been pinpointed and, until it is, a program cannot be designed that will put the cause of the Flynn Effect to work increasing black intelligence. Moreover, as many experts suspect, the Flynn Effect may be only an increase in IQ scores, not an increase in real intelligence (i.e., the genetic potential for high intelligence), which may actually be declining (Lynn, 1996).
A possible explanation for the increase in IQ scores is that children today mature sooner, both physically and mentally, than children did decades ago (Sarich, 1999). Today’s children score higher, not because their real intelligence has increased, but because their brains are more mature. A 10 year old today has a brain that has grown faster and has more neural connections than the brain of a 10 year old who lived, say, 50 years ago. Because today’s 10 year olds have brains that, perhaps, 12 year olds had 50 years ago, they do better on an IQ test taken by 10 year olds 50 years ago. Psychologists think they are comparing identical groups of children – 10 year olds to 10 year olds, but they are actually comparing apples and oranges – 10 year old brains to 12 year old brains. Real intelligence has not increased, children just acquire it sooner, and fully mature people today may actually be less intelligent than fully mature people were decades ago.
Table 1 (Terman et al., 1973) shows Flynn Effect changes in average IQ scores.
Table 1
ESTIMATES OF THE AVERAGE 1972 IQ SCORES WHEN THE 1972 STANFORD-BINET TEST PERFORMANCE IS REFERENCED TO THE 1937 NORMS
That the maximum increase in IQ scores occurred between the ages of 2-0 and 4-6 is strong evidence that accelerated maturation is responsible for the Flynn Effect because not much else could cause such a large increase in the IQ scores of American children who are that young. The scores fall from age 3-6 to age 10-0, then rise again, consistent with faster maturation to age 3-6, followed by a slowing of the rate of maturation up to puberty and a second acceleration at puberty, which now begins earlier so the effects of the second acceleration start showing up at age 11-0.
The difference between black and white IQ scores is small at a young age, then increases towards adulthood. Lynn (2006, p. 45) reports an average IQ of 92 for 2 year old sub-Saharan Africans (s-S Africans), which drops to 67 by adulthood. (Lynn, 2006, p. 37). There is good evidence that blacks mature faster than whites, and that the black brain matures earlier than the white brain. (Rushton, 2000, pp, 147-150). The greater maturity of 2 year old s-S Africans raises their IQ scores, so they test only 8 IQ points (100 – 92) behind 2 year old whites. By adulthood, however, when both white and black brains are fully mature and therefore at the same level of maturity, the difference in IQ scores is much larger, 33 IQ points (100 – 67). This suggests that lower IQ scores at maturity may be the result of faster maturation, and that the Flynn Effect is due to faster maturation.
Adult female brain size, adjusted for body size, is about 100cc smaller than male brain size (Ankney, 1992; Rushton, 1992) and average adult female intelligence is about 3.63 IQ points (Jackson, 2006) or about 5 IQ points (Lynn, 2006) lower. Up to about age 14, however, faster-maturing girls have identical or higher IQ scores than boys, but after boys have their growth spurt at puberty they catch up and score higher than girls. (Colom, 2004). This also suggests that faster maturation may result in a lower IQ at maturity, and that the Flynn Effect is due to faster maturation.
If IQ scores are lower at maturity, real intelligence has very likely fallen. If it has, the Flynn Effect is not the good news that egalitarians hoped it would be, but is instead ominously bad news because it means that people are becoming less intelligent. The higher fertility of less intelligent people is often given as the reason for a dysgenic drop in real intelligence from one generation to the next (Lynn et al., 2004), but that would not explain a drop in real intelligence within a population as it ages; accelerated maturation would.
The Right Tail Effect
Figure 1 shows the bell-shaped IQ curves for males (blue) and females (red).
Figure 1
(Nyborg, 2005). “General Intelligence” is the number of standard deviations (SDs) above or below the mean IQ of all the test takers; one SD is about 15 IQ points and males have a greater SD than females. “Frequency” times 100 is the percentage of males or females who have the corresponding IQs. “Ratio” is the number of males at an IQ level divided by the number of females at that level.
In Figure 1, the number of males and females is the same (i.e., the total area under the male curve is the same as the total area under the female curve), but there are more males at the high end of the curve (i.e., the area under the male curve above, say, 1 SD is greater). There are two reasons for that: (1) the male mean IQ is higher, which disproportionately increases the number of males at the high end of the curve and reduces the number at the low end. That is, if the male mean is 5% greater than the female mean, the number of males who are above, say, 1 SD will be more than 5% greater than the number of females who are above 1 SD, and (2) the male curve has a greater SD, i.e., fewer males than females are in the middle of their curve and more are at the right and left ends.
The dotted line in Figure 1 is the number of times more males there are than females at each IQ level. The difference between the male and female means and SDs causes the dotted line to rise rapidly as IQ increases, which is the “right tail effect.” Even though the difference between the male and female means and SDs is only a few IQ points, those differences cause a large difference between the number of males and the number of females who have high IQs.
Because the difference between average black IQ and average white IQ is much greater than the difference between average male IQ and average female IQ, and the black SD is less than the white SD (Jensen, 1998, p. 353; La Griffe du Lion, 2000), the black-white right tail effect is greater than the male-female right tail effect (Herrnstein et al., 1994, p. 279). As a result, the number of high IQ blacks is far less than the number of high IQ whites.
The right tail effect is a mathematical result that occurs when any two groups have different means and/or different SDs. The two groups may be tested at the same time, but differ in age, sex, race, etc. (e.g., males and females, blacks and whites), or the two groups may be similar, but tested at two different times (e.g., 10 year olds in 1920 and 10 year olds in 1970). If two similar groups are tested decades apart and the curve with the higher mean is at the later time, then not only will IQ scores be increasing, but high IQ scores will be increasing disproportionately. Also, the increase in the number of high scorers will be matched by an equal decrease in the number of low scorers. In other words, as long as the size and shape of the later curve is the same as the earlier curve, a right tail increase (more high scorers) is matched by an equal left tail decrease (fewer low scorers), and a right tail decrease (fewer high scorers) is matched by a left tail increase (more low scorers).
The Left Tail Effect
A study in Spain (Table 2) shows that the Flynn Effect increased low-end scores much more than high-end scores, i.e., the number of people with low scores decreased more than the number of people with high scores increased.
Table 2
(Colom et al., 2005). The difference between the 1970 and 1999 Raw Scores is shown in the last column.
Those results should immediately raise suspicions about the Flynn Effect because, as explained in the preceding paragraph, if the IQ curve has moved to the right, the decrease in low scorers must be matched by an equal increase in high scorers. Since that did not occur, we know that something else is affecting the scores besides the Flynn Effect.
Similar to the results in Table 2, SAT scores, which correlate 0.8 with IQ scores (Seligman, 1991; Flynn, 1984), dropped at the same time that IQ scores were rising. (Deary, 2001, Chap. 6; Herrnstein et al., 1994, pp. 425-427). If the Flynn Effect is due to an increase in real intelligence then it is difficult to explain why SAT scores would fall at the same time that IQ scores increase. However, if the Flynn Effect occurs because the children taking the test are more mature, then an explanation becomes possible, namely that the children taking the test are both more mature and their real intelligence has fallen.
The IQ tests are taken by everyone, but the SAT takers are a more intelligent subset. If we compare people who took the SAT decades apart, we find that SAT scores are lower. The reason is that real IQ has fallen and, due to the right tail effect, the number of people at the right side of the SAT curve has fallen disproportionately.
On the other hand, if we compare people of the same age who took the IQ tests in the same years that the SAT was taken, we find that IQ scores have increased. The reason is that the test takers who took the more recent IQ test were more mature. Although increased maturity raised the IQ scores of everyone, the decrease in real intelligence disproportionately lowered the number of people at the high end, ergo, rising IQ scores and falling SAT scores and, in Table 2, the number of people with high scores did not increase as much as the number of people with low scores.
The Flynn Effect in Mature Adults
Once the brain is fully mature, there obviously can be no effect on IQ scores due to accelerated maturation. The density of grey matter in the brain increases to age 30 then rapidly declines, but the volume of white matter in the brain does not peak until about age 45. (Sowell et al., 2003). Thus, any increase in the IQ scores of people over those ages cannot be attributed to accelerated maturation. While IQ scores decline somewhat in the elderly (Mortensen et al., 1993; Raven et al, 1998, Graph G1), today’s elderly nevertheless score higher than elderly people did decades earlier. In one study, people of ages 20 to 70 who took an IQ test in 1942 were compared to people of ages 20 to 70 who took an IQ test in 1992. Those who took the 1992 test, including people over 45 and even people who were 70, did better than people the same age did who took the 1942 test. (Raven et al., 1998, Graph G2).
However, between 1900 and 2000 life expectancy at birth for all races and both sexes in the United States increased 63% from 47.3 to 77.0 (CDC, 2006, Table 27). Also, there is a right tail effect because intelligent people live longer than less intelligent people (Hemmingsson et al., 2006; Gottfredson et al., 2004) so, as a population ages, the number of people in the higher IQ percentiles increases disproportionately. In other words, people whose brain is not fully mature have increased IQ scores due to accelerated maturation, and people whose brain is fully mature have increased IQ scores because, while everyone is living longer, more intelligent people live longer than less intelligent people.
The Flynn Effect appears to have stalled or even reversed in Norway and some other countries (Sundet et al., 2004; Teasdale et al., 2005 & 2007). If accelerated maturation, as proposed, is the cause of the Flynn Effect, then in these countries children have stopped maturing earlier, either because the rapidity of maturation has reached a biological limit or because whatever was causing more rapid maturation has diminished or reversed.
Children Mature Earlier
There is considerable evidence that children today mature earlier. “In the abandoned medieval village of Wharram Percy in Yorkshire, the churchyard has yielded hundreds of skeletons for analysis. There ten-year-olds were around 8in shorter than children today: by the time they were fully grown they were nearly as tall as modern adults.” (Roberts et al., 2005).
A 1997 study of 17,000 American girls (Herman-Giddens et al, 1997) and a British study at Bristol University (Golding, 2000) tracked 14,000 children and found one in six girls with signs of puberty by eight years old, compared to one in 100 a generation ago. “The average age at menarche – when periods start – has plummeted over the past 150 years in western societies from around 17 years old down to 12 or 13.” (Macleod, M., 2007). Boys, too, showed an earlier onset of puberty. (Karpati, 2002).
Possible Causes for Earlier Maturation
A number of reasons have been given for the earlier maturation of children. Explanations have included hereditary and diet factors, increases in obesity and body weight, chemicals acting as endocrine disrupters, and the sexualization of children by the media.
An explanation that is consistent with experimental evidence and evolutionary theory is that earlier maturation is due to increased calories. It is known that substantial calorie reduction can extend the maximum life span of a variety of organisms, including monkeys, rats, mice, flies, worms, and yeast, by 30 to 70 percent (Weindruch et al., 1986; Yu et al., 1985). Restricting calories reduces aging in humans, which can be expected to extend life span. (Youngman et al., 1992; Roth et al., 2002; Heilbronn et al., 2003; Masoro, 2005). If reduced calories increase life span, increased calories should shorten life span by accelerating maturation.
That children consume more calories is shown by the increase in childhood obesity, which has been widely publicized and is a major concern. “A multivariate analysis confirms that obesity (as measured by BMI) is significantly associated with early puberty in white girls and is associated with early puberty in black girls as well, but to a lesser extent.” (Kaplowitz et al., 2001; also, Lee et al., 2007).
An earlier maturation, i.e., adapting a more “r” reproductive strategy (Rushton, 2000), when excess calories are consumed over a significant period of time, enables individuals to have more surviving offspring. Conversely, a delay in maturation when food is not available prevents the birth of children who are not likely to survive. The poorly nourished !Kung women of Namibia begin menstruation at 17, while well-fed white Americans begin at 12. (Arsuaga, 2001, p. 218). “Obesity can lead to larger babies …,” increasing the need for Cesarean births, further evidence that increased calories accelerates maturation. (Susman, 2006).
Lynn (1990) has suggested that the Flynn Effect may be due to improved nutrition. Better nutrition, however, implies not just an increase in IQ scores, but that a deficiency in the brain has been remedied, so that real intelligence has increased, which is not consistent with Lynn’s later position that real intelligence has fallen. (Lynn et al., 2004). Given the brain’s first claim on the body’s resources and the absence of supporting data, that hypothesis does not seem likely except for severe nutritional deprivation, which is not applicable to developed countries that have had Flynn Effects. If the Flynn Effect is due to increased calories, however, the Effect would be only the normal age-related increase in intelligence occurring at a younger age.
It is primarily the quantity of food that affects the maturation rate, not its nutritional quality. Indeed, overall nutrition in the industrialized nations may have actually declined because, despite the fortification of milk, cereals, salt, and other foods with vitamins and other nutrients, there is a greater consumption of low-nutritional, but high-calorie, “junk” food and sugary soft drinks.
There is evidence for increased head circumference (Ounsted et al., 1985) and brain weight (Kretschmann et al, 1979) in children, and also for brain weight in adults (Miller et al., 1977). Faster maturation explains the increased head circumference and brain weight in children. The small increase in the brain weight of people whose brains are fully mature is due to (1) the fact that, on average, more intelligent people have larger brains (“r” = 0.44, Lynn, 2006, p. 214) and (2) the increased life span of more intelligent people, resulting in a right tail effect – a disproportional increase in the number of more intelligent mature people, as explained above.
Testing the Proposed Explanation
There are a few ways that the proposed explanation can be tested. Group A are children of several decades ago who at that time had a chronological and maturity age of, say, 10. Group B are children living at the same time as Group A, but they had a chronological and maturity age of, say, 12. Group C are more mature children living today who, compared to Groups A and B, have a chronological age of 10 and a maturity age of 12. Group C takes the same two intelligence tests that Groups A and B took decades ago. The proposed explanation predicts that the scores of Group C will be higher than the scores of Group A due to their increased maturity, but lower than the scores of group B due to their decreased real intelligence.
The proposed explanation also predicts a positive correlation between the increase in IQ scores and the number of years that the age of puberty (and other indicia of maturation) has dropped.
Assuming that increased calories are the principal cause of faster maturation, a similar positive correlation is predicted between yearly increase in calorie consumption (or increase in obesity) and the increase in IQ scores, though there may be a lag time between the two and, of course, the effect will eventually reach a biological limit.
The proposed explanation further suggests that the Flynn Effect should be at a maximum at about the age at which the difference in maturation between the earlier and later test takers is greatest. As suggested by Table 1, a curve plotting maturation differences and the Flynn Effect against age may show two Flynn Effect peaks and two corresponding maturation difference peaks, one for toddlers and the other for teenagers; the toddler maturation difference peak is expected to be greater because the toddler Flynn Effect is greater.
References
Ankney, C.D. (1992). Sex differences in relative brain size: The mismeasure of woman, too? Intelligence, 16:329-336.
Arsuaga, J.L. (2001). The Neanderthal’s Necklace. Four Walls Eight Windows: New York. CDC. (2006). Health, United States, 2006 with Chartbook on Trends in the Health of Americans. Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
Colom, R., Lluis-Font, J.M., Andres-Pueyo, A. (2005). The generational intelligence gains are caused by decreasing variance in the lower half of the distribution: Supporting evidence for the nutrition hypothesis. Intelligence, 33:83-91.
Colom, R. & Lynn, R. (2004). Testing the developmental theory of sex differences in intelligence on 12-18 year olds. Personality and Individual Differences, 36(1):75-82.
Deary, J.J. (2001). Intelligence: A very short introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Flynn, J.R. (1984). The mean IQ of Americans: Massive gains 1932-1978. Psychological Bull,95(1):29-51.
Flynn, J.R. (1987). Massive IQ gains in 14 nations: what IQ tests really measure. Psychological Bulletin, 101:171-191.
Flynn, J.R. (1999). Searching for justice: The discovery of IQ gains over time. American Psychologist 54:5-20.
Golding, J. (June 19, 2000). University of Bristol’s Institute of Child Health, ALSPAC: the Avon longitudinal study of parents and children, BBC News.
Gottfredson, L. & Deary, I.J. (2004). Intelligence predicts health and longevity, but why? Current Directions in Psychological Science, 13(1):1-4.
Heilbronn, L.K., & Ravussin, E. (2003). Calorie restriction and aging: Review of the literature and implications for studies in humans. American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 78:361-369.
Hemmingsson, T., Melin, B., Allebeck, P., & Lundberg, I. (2006). The association between cognitive ability measured at ages 18-20 and mortality during 30 years of follow-up—a prospective observational study among Swedish males born 1949-51. International Journal of Epidemiology, 35(3):665-670.
Herman-Giddens, M.E., Slora, E.J., Wasserman, R.C., Bourdony, C.J., Bhapkar, M.V., Koch, G.G., & Hasemeir, C.M. (1997). Secondary sexual characteristics and menses in young girls seen I office practice: a study from the pediatric research in office settings network. Pediatrics, 99(4):505-512.
Herrnstein, R.J. & Murray, C. (1994). The Bell Curve: Intelligence and Class Structure in American Life. New York: Free Press.
Jackson, D.N. & Rushton, J.P. (Sept.-Oct., 2006). Males have greater g: Sex differences in general mental ability from 100,000 17- to 18-year-olds on the Scholastic Assessment Test. Intelligence, 34:479-486.
Jensen, A.R. (1998). The g Factor. Praeger: Connecticut, USA.
Kaplowitz, P.B., Slora, E.J., Wasserman, R.C., Pedlow, S.E., & Herman- Giddens, M.E. (2001). Earlier onset of puberty in girls: Relation to increased body mass Index and race. Pediatrics, 108:347-353.
Karpati, A.M., Rubin, C.H., Kieszak, S.M., Marcus, M., & Troiano, R.P. (2002). Stature and pubertal stage assessment in American boys: the 1988-1994 Third National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, Health Studies Branch, National Center for Environmental Health, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia 30333, USA. J. Adolesc Health, 30(3):205-12.
Kretschmann, H.-J., Schleicher, A., Wingert, F., Zilles, K., & Löblich, H.–J. (1979). Human brain growth in the 19th and 20th century. Journal of the Neurological Sciences, 40(2-3):169-188.
La Griffe du Lion (Sept., 2000). The politics of mental retardation: A tail of the bell curve. 2(9).
Lee, J.M., Appugliese, D., Kaciroti, N., Corwyn, R.F., Bradley, R.H., & Lumeng, J.C. (Mar., 2007). Weight Status in Young Girls and the Onset of Puberty, Pediatrics, 119(3):E624-E630.
Lynn, R. (1977). The intelligence of the Japanese. Bulletin of the British Psychological Society, 30:69-72.
Lynn, R. (1990). The role of nutrition in secular increases in intelligence. Personality & Individual Differences, 11(3):173-285.
Lynn, R. (1996). Dysgenics: Genetic Deterioration in Modern Populations. Westport, CN: Praeger.
Lynn, R. & Van Court, M. (2004). New evidence of dysgenic fertility for intelligence in the United States. Intelligence, 32:193-201.
Lynn, R. (2006). Race Differences in Intelligence. Augusta, GA: Washington Summit Pub.
MacCleod, M (Feb. 10, 2007). “Why are girls growing up so fast?” New Scientist, Issue 2590, 38-41.
Masoro, E.J. (2005). Overview of caloric restriction and ageing. Mechanisms of Ageing & Development, 126:913-922.
Miller, A.K.H. & Corsellis, J.A.N. (1977). Evidence for a secular increase in human brain weight during the past century. Annals of Human Biology, 4(3):253-257.
Mortensen, E.L. & Kleven, M. (1993). A Wais longitudinal-study of cognitive-development during the life-span from ages 50 to 70. Developmental Neuropsychology, 9(2):11115-11130.
Nyborg, H. (2005). Sex-related differences in general intelligence g, brain size, and social status. Personality and Individual Differences, 39(3):497-509.
Ounsted, M., Moar, V.A., & Scott, A. (1985). Head circumference charts updated. Archives of Disease in Childhood, 60:936-939.
Roberts, C. & Cox, M. (2005). Medieval ancestors measured up to our height standards. British Archaeology, 84:51.
Roth, G.S., Lane, M.A., Ingram, D.K., Mattison, J.A., Elahi, D., Tobin, J.D., Muller, D., & Metter, E.J. (2002). Biomarkers of caloric restriction may predict longevity in humans. National Institute on Aging, 5600 Nathan Shock Drive, Baltimore, MD 21224, USA.
Rushton, J.P. (1992). Cranial capacity related to sex, rank, and race in a stratified random sample of 6,325 U.S. military personnel. Intelligence, 16:401-413.
Rushton, J.P. (2000). Race, Evolution, and Behavior: A Life History Perspective, Third Edition, New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers.
Sarich, V (Feb. 7, 1999). Sarich says 70IQ blacks are normal except IQ vs 70IQ whites. Email message from Vincent Sarich; posted by Arthur Hu.
Seligman, D. (Apr. 15, 1991). Is America smart enough? IQ and national productivity. National Review.
Sowell, E.R., Peterson, B.S., Thompson, P.M., Welcome, S.E., Henkenius, A.L., & Toga, A.W. (2003). Mapping cortical change across human life span. Nature Neuroscience, 6:309-315.
Sundet, J.M., Barlaug, D.G., & Torjussen, T.M. (2004). The end of the Flynn effect? A study of secular trends in mean intelligence test scores of Norwegian conscripts during half a century. Intelligence, 32:349-362.
Susman, E. (May 10, 2006). ACOG [American College of Obstetrics and Gynecology: Rising Cesarean Birth Rates in U.S. Tied to Obesity. MedPage Today, online.
Teasdale, T.W. & Owen, D.R. (2005). A long-term rise and recent decline in intelligence test performance: The Flynn Effect in reverse. Personality and Individual Differences, 39(4):837-843.
Teasdale, T.W. & Owen, D.R. (2007). Secular declines in cognitive test scores: A reversal of the Flynn Effect. Intelligence, In Press. doi:10.1016/j.intell.2007.01.007
Terman, L.A. & Merrill, M.A. (1973). Stanford-Binet Intelligence Scale: Manual for the Third Revision Form L-M (1972 Norms Edition). Houghton Mifflin Company.
Weindruch, R, Walford, R.L., Fligiel, S., & Guthrie, D. (1986). The retardation of ageing in mice by dietary restriction: longevity, cancer, immunity and lifetime energy intake. Journal of Nutrition, 116(4):641-654.
Youngman, L.D., Park, J.Y., & Ames, B.N. (1992). Protein oxidation associated with ageing is reduced by dietary restriction of protein or calories. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A., 89(19):9112–9116.
Yu, B.P., Masoro, E.J., McMahan, C.A., & Gerontol, J. (1985). Nutritional influences on ageing of Fisher 344 rats: I. Physical, metabolic, and longevity characteristics. J. Geonntol., 40(6):657-670.
Posted by Guest Blogger on Friday, January 11, 2008 at 08:35 PM in Psychology
Comments (229) | Tell a friend
Comments:
Posted by Guessedworker on January 12, 2008, 12:19 AM | #
… and fully mature people today may actually be less intelligent than fully mature people were decades ago.
This is something I have often pondered when admiring the beautiful clarity of expression of 16th, 17th and 18th Century writers - not necessarily authors of renown, but just ordinary letter-writers. These men and women were not graced with an electronic keyboard, complete with that most useful of devices, the delete key. They simply expressed their thoughts with economy and precision, and the question arises: did they also think in that manner?
If so, the ready explanation is doubtless educational, and perhaps the simple consequence of the social importance of reading during those times. And yet the suspicion lingers that our ancestors, who, after all, were capable of raising the incomparable Chartres, could not have been as James Flynn would have them.
Posted by calvin on January 12, 2008, 12:36 AM | #
The focus of the IQ debate has concentrated on children because faster maturation rates in Blacks means that Black children have the potential to out perform White kids until around the age of ten. Environmental interventions before this age have the potential to increase Black IQ beyond those of White children, this doesn’t alter the fact that Blacks peak early but peak low, as is evidenced by adult IQs. The liberal shift of focus from adult IQ to children’s IQ is a devious attempt to take advantage of a well known physiological phenomenon.
From the New Yorker article of Malcolm Gladwell:
“Flynn points out that scores in some of the categories—those measuring general knowledge, say, or vocabulary or the ability to do basic arithmetic—have risen only modestly over time”
In other words the further removed intellectual attainment is from the possibility of environmental bias, the more it is shown that intelligence is NOT affected by environment.
A fair assessment of Black IQ as compared to Eurasian IQ would be to measure how much Blacks and Whites diverged in the ares of intelligence (general knowledge, vocabulary, arithmetic) that Flynn’s investigations indicate are NOT affected by environmental bias.
Flynn and Gladwell ignore the great strides that have been taken to eliminate test bias, strides that have failed to eliminate a divergence of racial attainment.
BTW, does anyone know what’s happened to the PHORA?
Posted by Englander on January 12, 2008, 01:31 AM | #
Guessedworker, I have even thought the same about 20th century people. Think of the letters soldiers wrote home from the trenches of The Great War.
Regarding childhood IQ levels, how often do we see gifted black children of the sort we associate with Asians/subcons and of course Whites? If Black children have the capacity to outperform others during the early stages of life, then where are these prodigy types?
Posted by Bert Rustle on January 12, 2008, 05:46 PM | #
The subject matter of the references below is old news for Majorityrights.com, however I suggest that the clarity of exposition within them would be helpful when discussing the subject with the scientifically challenged.
The Flynn effect and the IQ Conundrum more generally were debated by Flynn and others at the Cato Institute . James Flynn commences with Shattering Intelligence: Implications for Education and Interventions Linda Gottfredson responds with Shattering Logic to Explain the Flynn Effect
These two articles, written by experts in the field for general consumption are far more informative than the usual Drive-By Media articles. In particular the Linda Gottfredson article debunks some of the standard arguments, a task carried out more thoroughly by Neven Sesardic who has a very helpful paper, Philosophy of Science that Ignores Science: Race, IQ and Heritability . Despite the title it is a clear demonstration of the decades of politically motivated science related to between group differences of IQ. This typical operates by a restatement of the original research to include trapdoors making it amenable to attack together with personal smears on the original author and his research as tainted. From hereon in, the original research is not quoted, only the trapdoor version and corrections to misstatements are largely ignored.
Neven Sesardic has also written Making Sense of Heritability which debunks a vast array of misrepresentation regarding heritability in a highly readable fashion, accessible to the educated layman. A remark in the opening of the book by David Lykken: “The denial of genetically based psychological differences is the kind of sophisticated error normally accessible only to persons having Ph.D. degrees.” Sesardic’s work is mentioned elsewhere on Majorityrights
Posted by Calvin on January 12, 2008, 11:30 PM | #
Bert, great links, thanks!
GW, I think that I have heard age seven touted as the point at which Eurasian intelligence accelerates beyond that of Blacks, however, I think that Rushton claims that the Eurasian ascendancy begins at age four. What is without a doubt is that Black children mature significantly faster than Eurasian children and that Blacks have an advantage in terms of more rapid brain development. Faster maturation may mean that Black CHILDREN have a greater unrealised potential, in terms of achievable IQ, (because of developmental advantage) than Eurasian children, and that educational interventions could, in fact, push Black children’s educational performance into parity with Eurasians for as long as faster maturation yields developmental advantage. If such interventions are undertaken in a unilateral and exclusionary way, these interventions may even result in temporary Black ascendancy in intellectual performance. The point is that analysing racial differences in intelligence by studying children is a bit like analysing a marathon by looking at who is ahead at the halfway mark.
If Black children have just as great intellectual potential as Eurasians throughout a large part of their childhoods, the conundrum of the lack of Black child prodigies is probably due to the fact that a prodigy in terms of Black intelligence would only qualify as a gifted pupil in terms of Eurasian intelligence, also Black people may not be temperamentally suited to European educational systems.
We can look forward to a massive external effort to bolster and maximise Black children’s academic performance running conterminously with an increasingly neglectful approach to “racist” underclass White kids that will finally “prove” that Blacks are more intelligent than Whites. The fact that Black post-adolescent educational achievements will still lag massively behind White and Asian achievements will be attributed to their frustration at the growing realisation that despite their obvious intellectual superiority to Whites, White racism is still preventing them from enjoying their proper niche in society, leading to a rejection of the education as a means of self improvement.
Yawn!
Posted by Fred Scrooby on January 13, 2008, 03:22 AM | #
It wasn’t me, guys. I didn’t do it. Some moron is signing as me — probably one of Birch’s and Arcane’s friends.
Posted by Fred Scrooby on January 13, 2008, 03:32 AM | #
The guy doing it is obviously posting from the States: he posts when he judges the blog’s owner in the U.K. has gone to sleep, so it won’t be deleted until many hours later.
Posted by Fred Scrooby on January 13, 2008, 09:17 PM | #
Needless to say, this is an excellent article, by the way, a landmark. It solves the mystery. Congratulations on this posting!
Posted by Robert Lindsay on January 14, 2008, 05:18 AM | #
This article is not correct, though it has an interesting premise. Some of the comments following are also not correct.
First of all, IQ’s have been rising among all age groups, not just kids. It’s really a cohort effect. James Flynn agreed with me (personal communication) that Black adults of today have the same IQ scores (100) as the Whites of 1957. Their scores are a bit higher than the Whites of WW2. This brings up a conundrum as we wonder if today’s Blacks would have been able to beat the Japanese in WW2 since they can’t even seem to run Detroit. This long and rather involved post of mine deals with a lot of the arguments around the Flynn Effect (FE), including some of the misconceptions about it on display here. My post theorizing that Blacks of today equal the Whites of 1957 is here. Here, I show that Black children and adults have indeed made about a 5.5 pt gain on Whites over the past 30 years, coinciding with the liberation of Blacks via Civil Rights laws.
The notion that IQ has risen due to increased caloric intake is interesting, but probably invalid. Flynn himself says that after 1950, gains due to nutrition were minimal to nil in the West. Furthermore, the gains should have been across the board, not just in certain areas that the FE is in. The FE is also occurring in 3rd World countries like Kenya and Dominica, where excess nutrition is certainly not an issue. In those countries, it is related to better education, if anything. Much of the FE remains mysterious.
The notion that gains are occurring only in certain areas that are “subject to environmental bias” is not correct. First of all, in Dominica and Kenya, huge gains were seen in vocabulary, one of the areas that is not seeing much gain in the West.
Vocabulary, general knowledge, basic math, and math analysis are all subject to environmental influence too, but Western society has not been promoting these areas so much. The areas that the FE is occurring in - verbal analysis, analytical reasoning, visual analysis, visuospatial reasoning, on the spot problem solving for which no previous method was known, etc. - are areas that our increasingly sophisticated society has been promoting. We have promoted this in terms of an increasingly complex society and the mass promotion of scientific thinking. The visuospatial aspect may be due to video games, cell phones, computers, and many things that need programming - boom boxes, car radios, microwaves, answering machines, thermostats, on and on.
My personal opinion is that TV has a lot to do with it. TV shows are increasingly complex and kids sit in front of TVs with clickers clicking through 50 different channels one after the other. The camera usually only focuses on an area for a short period of time, then moves on. Even jokes and dialog on TV come at a rapid pace. Movies seem to have gotten a lot more complex too.
Lastly, the FE is only ending in Scandinavia. It is still going full blast in the US and in the 3rd world.
The notion that IQ is rising while “real intelligence” - general knowledge, math and vocabulary - is not is not supported. Those three things are no more “real intelligence than the stuff that is going up in the FE.
Posted by silver on January 14, 2008, 07:43 AM | #
What can one really say about the diseased mind of Robert Lindsay except that it is the same diseased mind that afflicts all lefties?
The same diseased mind that sees left-voting Chicanos as “progressives” is the same diseased mind that saw Iranian Islamic fundamentalists as leftie “revolutionaries”.
Posted by Desmond Jones on January 14, 2008, 07:54 AM | #
Robert Lindsay:
“An anomalous study in Germany (Eyferth 1961) based on the children of Black and White soldiers and White German women found no differences at all in IQ among the White and Mulatto children.”
Another Eyferth sighting. Often quoted, never replicated.
“Africa, a continent reeling in disease and poverty, needs to be thrown out of the nest like a baby bird and told it is on their own, cutting off all food, medical and developmental aid. The result will be massive death and suffering in Africa. In the US, similar policies will be less severe but still frightening and tragic.”
Patronizing, white liberal racism. Wow. The black man is unable to make it on his own. It seems Louis Farrakhan thinks differently. Those people in Africa, who the Portuguese stumbled upon, several centuries ago, were actually white men in black face?
Surely if blacks are as intelligent as 1957 whites then there is no fear of “massive death and suffering in Africa”. There was no “massive death and suffering” among whites, especially the “creepy” Northern European whites, in Europe/North America or Oz in 1957.
How does Robert Lindsay logically arrive at that conclusion? Another in a long line of sanctimonious, mendacious genophobes.
Posted by silver on January 14, 2008, 08:27 AM | #
Another in a long line of sanctimonious, mendacious genophobes.
He is not even that.
He admits to living in “Mexifornia” (he actually uses that term). He even admits to preferring the company of white people because they are like him.
He just wants some form of socialism or outright communism and he wants it right now; he wants it so bad there isn’t a lie big enough he won’t tell if he feels it will advance the leftie cause; he wants it so bad he’ll gladly look forward to the extinction of all US whites and happily peddle whoppers like “whites are bad for America” to advance it.
Posted by Robert Lindsay on January 14, 2008, 09:13 AM | #
The quote you are quoting from is a sarcastic take on what you folks propose for Africans based on the logical ramifications of your genes-IQ “Blacks are permanently stupid” game.
I would love nothing more than to see 12 million Hispanic illegal aliens hightail it back to where they came from. I am not against immigration per se, but this group has caused a lot of problems for the US. We can continue to let Hispanics into the US, but we need to be just as selective about them as we are about other immigrants. As is, the door is open for anyone to walk in. Yes, Hispanics are a left-voting group, but I do not think that it is wise to open the floodgates to let them pour into the US just so Dems can win elections. We may as well flood the country with Caribbean Blacks if that is what we want. In California, once a town gets over 60% Hispanic, it’s usually run-down, crime, drug, graffiti and gang-ridden.
To show you not all immigrants are bad, in my town we have many Punjabi immigrants. A finer group you could not hope to find.
US Whites are going to miscegenate themselves out of existence anyway, and we are headed towards becoming just another mestizo/mulatto part of the Americas no matter what we do. I don’t favor flooding the US with immigrants to dilute reactionary US Whites. Whites are headed towards extinction all over the world anyway, and the world will get along just fine without us.
A side benefit of no more Whites is no more ppl like you guys!
Communism isn’t coming to the US or anywhere in the West anytime soon, but the future will be some kind of socialism over increasing parts of the globe. Most of us Commies are promoting lots of capitalism nowadays anyway (See China).
Posted by James Bowery on January 14, 2008, 10:55 AM | #
US Whites are going to miscegenate themselves out of existence anyway
There is one way US Whites might not miscegenate themselves out of existence:
If people like you would cease using government force to impose your preferences in human ecology on the rest of us. Now, you may say there is no way you will cease using government force to impose your preferences in human ecology on the rest of us and all I can say is, we’ll see about that…
Posted by silver on January 14, 2008, 12:43 PM | #
The quote you are quoting from is a sarcastic take on what you folks propose for Africans based on the logical ramifications of your genes-IQ “Blacks are permanently stupid” game.
Many would be happy to pay to keep Africans alive if they agreed to be sterilized or limited themselves to one child. What is your objection to this?
In California, once a town gets over 60% Hispanic, it’s usually run-down, crime, drug, graffiti and gang-ridden.
You’re clearly capable of perceiving present reality yet appear incapable of inferring conclusions from what you so clearly observe. Thus the above somehow sits matter-of-factly with:
we are headed towards becoming just another mestizo/mulatto part of the Americas no matter what we do
Whites are headed towards extinction all over the world anyway, and the world will get along just fine without us.
Who then will feed all the Africans? Who will save the whales? Who will plan the hoped for state-run economies? Jose and Latrell? That sounds promising.
A side benefit of no more Whites is no more ppl like you guys!
They often speak in harsh tones, don’t they? But are their wishes really so outrageous? You support self-determination in principle, and even promote violence in the case of the Palestinians, so why doesn’t the same right to self-determination apply to whites?
Posted by quotes on January 14, 2008, 01:40 PM | #
“so why doesn’t the same right to self-determination apply to whites? “
Good question:
“I shouldn’t gloat, as I’m you’re suffering, but what the hell, it IS fun to watch; keep it up.
Can I heap it on or would that be in bad taste? Ah, why not: your own women are lost to you, you know that, don’t you? Even now. Especially now. They’ve always preferred the duskier man, though they’ve preferred him to have Caucasian features along with the dusky skin. Even though the swarthies of today don’t always precisely fit the bill, they do possess enough “mystique” to steal away the white girl. But think of the progeny of such unions. Darker skin AND more caucasian features. Subsequent generations of white girls will MELT. Face it white boy, your end is nigh.
Here’s to keeping you awake at night.
You cannot have failed to note the reluctant acceptance of racialism (as understood by its typical advocates, such as yourself) on the part of your racial kin. Many will explore any alternative, no matter how great their dissatisfaction with the status quo, before coming to terms with your views. And this even though there exists a paucity of refutations of racialism on the internet; at least of the sort that grant the racialist some of his premises. That is because there is for now little point in or need for engaging them. Should racialism ever threaten to become more widespread than the fringe movement it currently is—one beset with contradiction and internal bickering—there are a great many counter-arguments that could be employed against it (quite devastatingly, imo
Well, no, dammit; I won’t sit idly by and watch the genuine humanistic progress made since the war evaporate in an orgy of white phenotypomania. I *am* heartened that their efforts—*your* efforts*—are coming to naught and I am determined to do my best to ensure that they do.
Having said all that, yes, I say again, there is a glaring weakness in your position that I see unadressed. No, I am not in any particular hurry to draw your attention to it because there’d be little in it for me, expect perhaps a flurry of excitement in noting the exasperation of bunch of dehumanisers whom I despise. But that’s a pleasure I can reserve for a time of my choosing.
Furthermore, where will the facts be disseminated? On obscure fora such as WM or Vdare? Big deal. Fact is, most whites will barely get a whiff of them. And of those that do, most will take a great deal of convincing, and skepticism will abound. Few will maintain interest long enough to get to the bottom of matters; not with busy lives to lead and assurances that things will be “just fine” despite momentarily unpleasant facts. Quite simply, the “paradigm shift” required is so large that there will be nothing like a mass movement towards WN. In the meantime… tick tick tick…
How many whites does one miscegenation inure, and secure for anti-racism? Certainly not just the white involved in the act. My estimate is 3-5 people. Tick tick tick.
No guesses? I can assure you, have at a minimum touched on it; perhaps there’s a more complete discussion of it on here (or elsewhere) but I haven’t seen it. I know it’s childish to play games, but I honestly do consider it glaring and overlooked.
This isn’t so much about being “right” or “wrong” as much it is me gloating over your demise, which I regard as nigh on inevitable.
I came on here to goad, not because I “hate Anglos”, simply because I detest the views sites like this propound.
I’m not averse to racial and cultural change, but the pace of it must be slow enough to be almost imperceptible.
I don’t consider myself “white”—never have and never will. I originally came to goad and stir the pot a bit, and that’s not because I hate “whites”, but because I hate whites that insist on “defending” their race by slurring everyone else and seem intent on causing maximum feasible pain to those would “betray” there race by following through on their constitutionally safeguarded heart’s desire and mating with non-whites. I find it repugnant and morally indefensible.”
Posted by onlooker on January 14, 2008, 01:47 PM | #
“A side benefit of no more Whites is no more ppl like you guys!”
Yes, and the world will naturally advance to the higher culture of Congo?
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/01/11/60minutes/main3701249.shtml
Posted by silver on January 14, 2008, 02:11 PM | #
“quotes,” it’s all water under the bridge, feller; all of it long since explained away.
Looking back on what I wrote then, I guess I did feel much the way Rob Lindsay does today; race matters but the manner in which hardcore racialists discuss it disgusted me. Sadly, there doesn’t appear much alternative to straight talk, however harsh the language employed. Ultimately, one has little choice but to embrace reality.
Evidence of whose “fraud” is now “mounting” I do wonder.
Posted by got fraud? on January 14, 2008, 02:46 PM | #
“all of it long since explained away.”
No, it hasn’t.
“Evidence of whose “fraud” is now “mounting” I do wonder.”
Yours.
I’ll stick with this thread then, rather than bouncing between the two. You made it quite clear that you were disgusted with this site, and, in your own words about the putative failure of this blog’s agenda: “I am determined to do my best to ensure that they do. “
You then went on and on about the “flaw” in this blog which you were going to exploit. Not long after you started doing so, whining about Nordicism, while warning “your fellow Southern Europeans” not to be “useful idiots,” while all the time bolstering divisions and arguing *for* the alien nation of “Serbians such as yourself” - all the while pretending to fear that this alien nature “was going to be discovered.” Sort of like a Jew in Nazi Germany anguished about the fear of being “discovered” - while at the same time running down the street dressed as a Hasid screaming vicious anti-German slurs and cursing Hitler.
Now, there’s no doubt that before your first posts here you spent some time perusing the comments threads, and now doubt you are very familiar - by your own admission - with all sorts of details of Amren, TOQ, and other aspects of WN. So, you were quite prepared to exploit the flaw you observed with respect to ethnic and subracial divisions within the WN that you so (openly) despised.
Now, no doubt these divisions exist and predate your attempts to inflame them. No doubt as well that there are some here that you “pegged” so well that they couldn’t observe your transparent (virtually, self-admitted) tactics - or they just couldn’t resist having their “buttons pushed.” It’s one thing to have whatever ideology one has, it’s another not even to recognize one’s own exploitation by a shit-stirrer. Well, agreed, that’s quite the argument in favor of some of your assertions - but that’s something already known. And it doesn’t excuse your shameless efforts to promote these “flaws” in order to “ensure” the failure of majoritarian efforts.
Now, you may argue - as you have been doing - that you’ve been misunderstood, and you have really, really changed your ways. Perhaps. Perhaps not. The problem is that it is more prudent to assume that you are a fraud and make the error of ignoring a “true conversion” (like barlow’s?) than to make the opposite error of accepting your sudden “change of heart” at face value if, as some suspect, you are still pursuing your original agenda.
And if you are “wrongly accused?” Then blame yourself. Your history here, and your recent, almost verbatim, repeating of comments made by people you claim to “fear” makes your sincerity much in question.
There are many here who disapprove of my own ideology, fine, but there is no “evidence” of “fraud” in my case, or in theirs. There are strong disagreements here, but the question of fraud is being narrowly considered only for those whose actual behavior warrants it.
Posted by Fred Scrooby on January 14, 2008, 02:49 PM | #
“it’s all water under the bridge, feller; all of it long since explained away.” (—Silver)
No, none of it is explained away, not one jot, it’s all there festering worse than ever and glaring as on day one; none of anything about this weird, slimy, dishonest individual is explained away: none of it. “Water under the bridge”? Anyone who believes this devious slinking individual is a Serb may be interested in a bridge I have to sell connecting Brooklyn and Manhattan. There’s your only bridge, you creepy fraud! You’ve got the part right about thinking like Lindsay, at least — you two are birds of a feather, a match made in heaven!
Posted by got fraud? on January 14, 2008, 03:00 PM | #
Why is is then that people such as Fred (and there are others) have these suspicions, silver?
Posted by Calvin on January 14, 2008, 03:43 PM | #
There is no “Flynn effect”. The following quotes are from Malcolm Gladwell’s New Yorker article “None of the Above”.
“Flynn points out that scores in some of the categories—those measuring general knowledge, say, or vocabulary or the ability to do basic arithmetic—have risen only modestly over time”
“The big gains on the WISC are largely in the category known as “similarities,” where you get questions such as “In what way are ‘dogs’ and ‘rabbits’ alike?” Today, we tend to give what, for the purposes of I.Q. tests, is the right answer: dogs and rabbits are both mammals. A nineteenth-century American would have said that “you use dogs to hunt rabbits.”
In other-words the Flynn effect is a Flynn uneffect in virtually all of the most important areas of intelligence, and general IQ in these areas has failed to rise significantly in any of these areas despite a massive rise in standards of living over the last 100 years.
The apparent rise in IQ is entirely attributable to a rise in performance in the similarities are of the test. Prior generations did badly in this area because, as Flynn indicates, they tended to use pragmatic logic in an abstract setting. As society has become more urbanized, technological and computerized, the premium of abstract knowledge has risen and that of pragmatic knowledge has fallen, thus the apparent rise in IQ uncovered by Flynn, is simply a historical flaw in the methodology of intelligence testing.
Flynn (or at least most of the people who tout his findings) is postulating a fictitious environmental explanation for a general rise in IQ in the area of similarities, but ignores the more surprising lack of any rise in general knowledge, vocabulary or arithmetical skills. Sounds like an elaborate mansion built on sand foundations to me!
Posted by D.E. Johnson on January 14, 2008, 07:11 PM | #
Excerpt from http://tinyurl.com/2fe8p3
The Flynn Effect
To digress briefly, there’s an anomaly in this otherwise clear (but discouraging) picture of genetic deterioration, which is known as “the Flynn effect.” James Flynn, political scientist from New Zealand, has reported “massive gains” in IQ in the U.S. and elsewhere because people consistently find earlier versions of IQ tests easier, and score higher, than did the original test-takers (Flynn, 1984). There’s no consensus on what this means. Enormous gains in IQ over a relatively short period of time are hardly consistent with casual observation or declining SAT scores. Many dismiss “the Flynn effect” on the grounds that it’s simply implausible that the population actually gained 3 points per decade since 1932, as claimed. Chris Brand makes the case that people have merely become savvier test-takers over the years (Brand, 1996). Philippe Rushton (1999) has reported that the gains are not related to g, the general factor in intelligence. Flynn himself questions whether the so-called “gains” are real, but more research should eventually resolve this mystery.
Posted by campofthesaints on January 14, 2008, 07:29 PM | #
Posted by Robert Lindsay on January 14, 2008, 08:43 PM | #
A few things. Flynn does not any longer question whether the gains are real.
The gains are NOT just on Similarities - they are on a wide variety of tests. Even the results on Similarities show a rise in scientific thinking, an important way of thinking that has real value in life. There are rises in verbal abstract thinking, visual analysis, visual intelligence, on the spot problem solving for which a previous method is not known. There are even rises in things that test raw brain speed and efficiency.
Most observers have now dismissed the notion that the FE is a test-taking effect. For one thing, it shows up as early as age 4, by which time few have taken any tests.
The fact that vocabulary, arithmetic, mathematical analysis and general knowledge are not rising much or at all is compatible with the observation that people do not seem any smarter. However, I DO think today’s kids are smarter.
Whether or not the results are on g is debatable, and it’s not that important anyway. Raven’s Progressive Matrices shows the largest rise of all. Raven’s is a test with no verbal matter at all on it - just tests of intricate puzzles. Raven’s was designed to measure g and only g and it is considered to measure pure biological or even genetic intelligence. Jensen says that the intelligence measured on Raven’s cannot be increased beyond the first few months of life. So the rise in Raven’s is all the more mysterious. Saying the results are not on g is incompatible with huge rises on Raven’s. Also, Flynn is finding that the FE shows a rise in fluid g but not in crystallized g.
Fluid g is more or less how well your brain works. Crystallized g is “how much you know”, or “wisdom”. Crystallized g can rise and be quite high late in life and even into old age, while fluid g tends to peak young.
It is not the case that vocabulary, arithmetic, mathematical analysis and general knowledge are “the areas of intelligence that matter”. Fact is that those are the crystallized g parts of the test. Flynn himself explains the lack of rises in SATs on the lack of rise in the FE in crystallized g.
I published a detailed response to this very post here just today. In it I show that in the 3rd world we are seeing rises in crystallized g. In Dominica, scores are rising 5 pts per decade on vocabulary. Kenya saw a 26 pt rise in 14 years and Dominica saw an 18 pt rise in 36 years recently. Both were on Raven’s, not the Similarities subtest.
Posted by Robert Lindsay on January 14, 2008, 08:56 PM | #
The choice is not between a civilized White America and the Congo. I myself do not favor flooding the US with ordinary Blacks from around the world. We have enough trouble with the Blacks already here. We have been very picky about the Black Africans we have been importing, and they have become the highest-performing immigrants of them all.
I agree with quotes. I really do not care one way or the other about the White race, but our demise through miscegenation will mean the extinction of you guys and your movement, which warms my heart.
There is no evidence that non-Whites in the US will produce a legislative barbarization of America. It is the WHITES who are creating the reactionary nightmare here. Non-Whites are voting for a progressive agenda via the Democratic Party. That includes environmentalism. Despite all the White Nationalist wailing that Whites are the only ones who care about the environment, in the US, it is the Whites who are dedicated to destroying it and the non-Whites who are voting to preserve it. Likewise with feeding and housing the poor.
As far as the notion that only Euro-Whites can implement socialism or social democracy, that is not true. Look at China, Sri Lanka, Nepal, Venezuela, Bolivia, Grenada, Guatemala, Iran, Vietnam, Algeria, Syria, Mongolia, Korea, Laos, Mozambique, Angola, South Africa, Zimbabwe, Japan, Taiwan, Singapore, Cuba, Chile, Costa Rica, Libya, the Gulf countries (past and present).
US Whites do not have a right to self-determination, and I do not support separatism in principle. I support most cases of legitimate separatism of real nations, but I do not support all separatist movements.
Posted by got lindsay? on January 14, 2008, 09:11 PM | #
“I agree with quotes”
Idiot. I was quoting “silver.” That you and he may have much in common is no surprise.
I gather there is some instructive benefit for all of this? Besides a zoological analysis of self-destructive, maladaptive leftist madness?
Posted by James Bowery on January 14, 2008, 09:13 PM | #
US Whites do not have a right to self-determination
And you thereby forfeit your rights as a human.
Posted by skeptical on January 14, 2008, 09:24 PM | #
Robert Lindsay,
Non-Whites are voting for a progressive agenda via the Democratic Party.
Not for long…
Non-Whites will bust up the Democratic Party into various ethnic/racial factions (and by doing so stymie the advancement of your precious “progressive” ideals) once the traditional Euro-American majority has finally been eclipsed (ergo, no need to form a rainbow coalition of “color” under the Democrat ticket).
The traditional two-party “Republican vs Democrat” system was created and designed for White Americans. Hence, as the racial composition of our country changes so will the political parties that represent it. The old “White vs Black”, “Secular vs Christian”, “Liberal vs Conservative” paradigms will all breakdown as America becomes more and more heterodox.
Posted by Fred Scrooby on January 14, 2008, 09:37 PM | #
There aren’t words filthy enough in English to describe Robert Lindsay. And no, don’t worry, I’m not letting him push my buttons, master button-pusher though he is, perverted lump of mental/moral disease, twisted mass of pure psychopathology who lives by and for button-pushing. No, I’m just calling a spade a spade. The need here goes way beyond “asshole,” way beyond “excrement.” I’m not sure but I think in Hungarian there might be words like the ones we need. Anyone happen to know? It is said there are languages and cultures with words so filthy you’re legally entitled to kill a guy if he uses them on you. Those are the words we need for Lindsay, the Jeffrey Dahmer of socio-political commentary. In this piece of filth Lindsay you’re looking at the final stage of Euro degenerateness, lower than which it’s no more possible to descend than in thermodynamics to descend under absolute zero. You’re looking at one of the fundamental limits of filth, joining other theoretical limits such as the speed of light and the direction of entropy — you’re staring it right in the face: this is as bad as it gets, as filthy as filth can theoretically be.
Posted by skeptical on January 14, 2008, 09:42 PM | #
Fred,
Agreed.
This is why we need to resurrect the old European notions of honor and chivalry so that one of us could challenge the coward to a duel and be done with it.
Posted by Desmond Jones on January 14, 2008, 09:47 PM | #
“Non-Whites are voting for a progressive agenda via the Democratic Party. That includes environmentalism. Despite all the White Nationalist wailing that Whites are the only ones who care about the environment, in the US, it is the Whites who are dedicated to destroying it and the non-Whites who are voting to preserve it.”
Now that’s funny.
ince 1996, leaders of the Sierra Club have refused to admit that immigration driven, rapid U.S. population growth causes massive environmental problems. And they have refused to acknowledge the need to reduce U.S. immigration levels in order to stabilize the U.S. population and protect our natural resources. Their refusal to do what common sense says is best for the environment was a mystery for nearly a decade.
Then, on Oct. 27, 2004, the Los Angeles Times revealed the answer: David Gelbaum, a super rich donor, had demanded this position from the Sierra Club in return for huge donations! Kenneth Weiss, author of the LA Times article that broke the story, quoted what David Gelbaum said to Sierra Club Executive Director Carl Pope:
“I did tell Carl Pope in 1994 or 1995 that if they ever came out anti-immigration, they would never get a dollar from me.”
In 1996 and again in 1998, the Club’s leaders proved their loyalty to Gelbaum’s position on immigration, first by enacting a policy of neutrality on immigration and then by aggressively opposing a referendum to overturn that policy. In 2000 and 2001, Gelbaum rewarded the Club with total donations to the Sierra Club Foundation exceeding $100 million. In 2004 and 2005, the Club’s top leaders and management showed their gratitude for the donations by stifling dissent and vehemently opposing member efforts to enact an immigration reduction policy.
Posted by Matra on January 14, 2008, 09:51 PM | #
Non-Whites are voting for a progressive agenda via the Democratic Party. That includes environmentalism
According to a Rasmussen presidential tracking poll Hillary, the wife of the ‘first black president’ now has the support of only 16% of blacks. Barack Obama, a man virtually unkown a couple of years ago, is polling 66% among blacks.
Robert Lindsay, do you think Obama’s environmental policies are more important than race to the 66% of blacks who back him?
Posted by Desmond Jones on January 14, 2008, 09:56 PM | #
Non-Whites will bust up the Democratic Party into various ethnic/racial factions (and by doing so stymie the advancement of your precious “progressive” ideals) once the traditional Euro-American majority has finally been eclipsed (ergo, no need to form a rainbow coalition of “color” under the Democrat ticket).
With respect, not at all. There is only one group that controls the Democratic Party. Just follow the money.
In any contest of wealth, Hillary has the advantage. Her blue-chip backers include the likes of Lady Lynn Forester de Rothschild, wife of Sir Evelyn de Rothschild of the famed Rothschild banking dynasty.
“I’m always doing everything I possibly can for Hillary Clinton…”, Her Ladyship told Portfolio magazine. “I have been waiting for this since Bill Clinton left office, frankly.”
Married November 30, 2000, Lady de Rothschild spent her wedding night in the Clinton White House.
OpenSecrets.org reports that Hillary has raised $90.9 million, only slightly higher than Obama’s $80.3 million.
However, most of Hillary’s money is off the books. No one knows how many millions Hillary has laundered through George Soros’ “Shadow Party”, a network of Democrat front groups masquerading as non-partisan charities. These include Fund for America, the Democracy Alliance, America Votes and Media Matters for America, among others.
Posted by onlooker on January 14, 2008, 10:00 PM | #
“There aren’t words filthy enough in English to describe Robert Lindsay.”—Fred
He’s just your typical mentally defective college ill-educated white-liberal. Ill-educated white-liberals are our worst enemies.
Posted by Robert Lindsay on January 14, 2008, 10:13 PM | #
The cognitive dissonance of an environmental movement that promotes environmentalism while at the same time flooding the US with illegal alien Hispanics (who degrade the environment just by adding more humans) is serious. But there was a serious counterinsurgency in the Club and the vote against immigration got something like 40% of the vote. I see that some big money Jew pulled the Club’s strings on this issue. The Club is pretty much silent on the issue of immigration though, as their stance of neutrality shows. Jews themselves are split; the Amren forums which I frequent (Jared Taylor gifted me a sub to his magazine) are full of Jews who hate immigration.
The reactionary movement of the past 27 years has been anti-environment among other things. This movement is nothing but the last dying gasps of White America. As Whites in Europe are progressive, here they are reactionaries. As White power fades, so will this movement. But Whites will become more and more reactionary as their power fades. Same thing here. As Whites move towards Threatened and then to Endangered status, you guys get angrier and angrier.
I am not sure that the progressive movement will split into many different ethnic identity parties. I kind of doubt it. We will see.
Blacks support Obama on race, but all Black politicians are hardcore environmentalists, and Black voters do not oppose this.
I am happy to report that my brother just married a Vietnamese who birthed an Amerasian child. I see that he is playing his part in the miscegenation of US Whites. As he is the only one of the kids to have children, hopefully Whites will go extinct in our family.
Thx for the kind words, Fred.
Posted by skeptical on January 14, 2008, 10:18 PM | #
Robert Lindsay,
“...hopefully Whites will go extinct in our family.”
At least we can all agree on something.
Posted by calvin on January 14, 2008, 10:26 PM | #
“The gains are NOT just on Similarities - they are on a wide variety of tests. Even the results on Similarities show a rise in scientific thinking, an important way of thinking that has real value in life. There are rises in verbal abstract thinking, visual analysis, visual intelligence, on the spot problem solving for which a previous method is not known. There are even rises in things that test raw brain speed and efficiency”
So! The gains are NOT just on Similarities? Would you be so kind as to take that up with Flynn? That’s where the information comes from Bob.
It is a well known fact that any cognitive test becomes easier without any direct causal linkage, with time. This fact has been noted by Rupert Sheldrake and by Ken Keyes and has been used to validate some most extravagant hypotheses. A common sense approach might be to simply accept that in a time of constant information acceleration the gap between academic theory and public understanding is constantly decelerating, the gap between public knowledge and academic/elite knowledge is closing conterminously with the destruction of elite monopoly of information. Bob’s last post seems more like strident assertion than rational response to me, but in the final analysis he should take the issue up with Gladwell and Flynn instead of having an ego spout here.
Posted by ANR on January 14, 2008, 11:02 PM | #
I think Robert Lindsay is a parody, not just because of his OTT Ray Stokes hairstyle and specs either. He even admits to “channeling Andy Kaufman”. Anyone of reasonable IQ reading him would be repulsed into rejecting his outlandish ideas. As an environmentalist and vegetarian, the (ironic?)romantic view of repulsive nations like China, Korea and other assorted third world cruelty and filth makes me chuckle. Either that is his motivation, or he’s just a mentalist out for kicks and infamy. Either way, I don’t think his existence is a bad thing.
As for “quotes” or whoever he is, one can’t help but imagine him typing here in tears, left hand on nob, hoping to God that his futuristic arabised race of super-borats will drive the white girls wet for sexxxxxy tiiiimeees. I don’t think he’s being ironic, though...just a kid hoping that racial regression will somehow win the day. We came from the mud, we must return and all that. Indeed, how could we not? Not enuff crackers and skippies likes teh naaaaaaaazzzeeesss and neva will so itz teh brown peepz FTW!
Posted by Fred Scrooby on January 14, 2008, 11:25 PM | #
To ANR and anyone else who may have missed what was going on: the comment by the person signing as “quotes” consisted entirely of excerpts culled from statements of “Silver’s” in various older MR.com threads, statements Silver would like everyone to forget. The person signing as “quotes” had gone back and retrieved a choice selection of Silver’s sickening former comments, in order (quite rightly) to throw them in Silver’s face. “Quotes” was against the opinions expressed by Silver in those excerpts, not for them.
Posted by D.E. Johnson on January 14, 2008, 11:36 PM | #
I am happy to report that my brother just married a Vietnamese who birthed an Amerasian child. I see that he is playing his part in the miscegenation of US Whites. As he is the only one of the kids to have children, hopefully Whites will go extinct in our family.
Thx for the kind words, Fred.
Posted by Robert Lindsay on Monday, January 14, 2008 at 10:13 PM | #
Lindsay is getting lost in his lies and posturing. No surprise, there. Hey there, Robert: Was it a shotgun wedding? Sounds like it to me. How can you be sure that it was your brother who knocked up the gravid dink he just married? Are you trying to imply that your brother - unlike you and silver and barlow and amanda, et al - actually has balls? Don’t you just hate that bastard?
Posted by James Bowery on January 14, 2008, 11:41 PM | #
That’s easy. I just heard an ad for Identigene on a rock station while driving home . “Available at Rite Aid”.
Posted by Robert Lindsay on January 14, 2008, 11:45 PM | #
The rises are NOT only on Similarities, for Chrissake. There are also major rises on the Comprehension test. I think that deals with verbal analytical thinking.
Quite a few other subtests are elevated too, mostly ones that have to do with visual analysis and intelligence. Raven’s shows the largest rise of all, and Raven’s has nothing to do with Similarities.
Anyway, it is not true that there have been no gains on Vocabulary. There has been a 4 pt IQ rise on Vocabulary in the US. Not too shabby eh?
Look at the gains:
Similarities 23.45
Picture Arrangement 21.5
Coding 18
Object Assembly 17.35
Block Design 15.9
Picture Completion 11.7
Comprehension 11
Vocabulary 4.4
Arithmetic 2.3
Information 2.1
Similarities and Raven’s are both highly loaded for fluid g - that is, pure neurological efficiency, or raw brain speed.
Posted by ANR on January 14, 2008, 11:46 PM | #
The reactionary movement of the past 27 years has been anti-environment among other things. This movement is nothing but the last dying gasps of White America.
A world full of Halal slaughter, Asian pollution, Aboriginal bush burning and child rape, maladaptive dog eating, retarded Hispanic misuse of soil, Japanese whaling, Chinese zoos, African overpopulation, Arab desertification and rape of all flora and fauna, Bird Flu etc....clearly, the dream of all environmentalists: the parasitic brown hordes, finally given the ability through white science, to rule the earth. A verifiable return to the noble savage......but with extra cruelty, like a Korean dog hammered to death for “extra adrenaline purposes” which makes small Asian peepee more fertile!
Unironic version: The last dying gasps of White America is the last dying gasps of environmentalism and any hope for non-human life.
PS- understood now, Fred, thanks.
Posted by Robert Lindsay on January 14, 2008, 11:54 PM | #
They got married first, then the baby a couple of years later.
No, I don’t hate him for getting married. Almost did myself a few times, somewhere amidst the scores of women.
ANR: My goal is to make as many people hate me as possible. This thread is very successful in that regard. Thx for playing.
Posted by James Bowery on January 14, 2008, 11:58 PM | #
I don’t hate you Robert. I view you as an animal control problem.
Posted by Calvin on January 15, 2008, 12:10 AM | #
“The rises are NOT only on Similarities, for Chrissake”
Vocabulary 4.4
Arithmetic 2.3
Information 2.1
Fuck me! Imagine a rise in vocabulary of 4.4 running conterminously with the growth of literacy, radio and television? I ‘m surprised it as low as 4.4, still I suppose that’s what being a racist does for you!
If the areas of the tests in which the significant rises were evident, comprised a significant part of IQ tests, the general rise in IQ, as assessed by Flynn, would be far greater than the final tally he arrives at. Plus you are ignoring the fact that no one is disputing the fact that a significant (but far from definitive) influence on intelligence IS environmental, and that the past century has seen the greatest increase in positive environmental influence in the history of the world. The Flynn effect is nothing more than would be expected in a scenario of continued test refinement and rise in affluence.
And BTW, this is a debate about the racial disparities in intelligence upon which Flynn’s semi-literate expositions have no bearing whatsoever.
Posted by silver on January 15, 2008, 01:22 AM | #
And if you are “wrongly accused?” Then blame yourself. Your history here, and your recent, almost verbatim, repeating of comments made by people you claim to “fear” makes your sincerity much in question.
I do blame myself. Who else am I suppose to blame?
The simple fact is this site and, I have since discovered, plenty of other forums, discuss racialist matters in terms that horrify and disgust me and not in the reasonable terms I had been accustomed to. I never felt there was nothing to discuss or no problems that required solving, I just wasn’t prepared for the venemous language employed.
Robert Lindsay, I imagine, is in a similar boat. He realises that WN brings an awful lot that of truth to the table but is so disgusted and frightened by VNNers his reflex is to wish death upon them. He doesn’t really believe, deep down, that whites are so horrible or that they deserve to perish; he just wants to hit back with some harsh language of his own. It’s an entirely human reaction and it’s quite surprising that you cannot understand it.
Why is is then that people such as Fred (and there are others) have these suspicions, silver?
In Fred’s case, I suppose I just hurt him too much. Others, like yourself, I don’t really know.
Posted by Fred Scrooby on January 15, 2008, 01:30 AM | #
I’m just devastated.
Posted by Lurker on January 15, 2008, 01:33 AM | #
Robert Lindsay - “My goal is to make as many people hate me as possible. This thread is very successful in that regard. Thx for playing.”
What a singularly pointless objective to have.
It sounds like the sort of thing a surly, unpopular teenager would come out with to get attention, to sound edgy. Are you a surly teenager Robert?
It might be a superficial aim to want lots of people to like you but at least there might be some positive outcomes to you from that. But whats the point of wanting people to hate you for the sake of it? If its true, then you are suffering from some kind mental problem. If it isnt true and you are just saying it for effect then you are very silly and shallow little boy.
As you say on your blog - “If I’m not making you mad, I’m not doing my job.”
Thats probably what you mean by making people hate you, but thats something else entirely, as well you know. The opinions you read here on MR obviously make you angry as they challange your beliefs. What you come back with is hate. Trying arguing instead of trying to get people to hate you, its likely to more constructive.
And finally…
This from your blog - “The hard to find Russian neo-Nazi beheading video taking the net by storm is on this blog here.”
Robert, either its hard to find or its taken the net by storm. Try to decide which before putting finger to keyboard.
Posted by Robert Lindsay on January 15, 2008, 04:01 AM | #
You guys are not making me mad at all.
I like to tick people off.
I just received an email from Jim Flynn (I’m acquainted with him) in which he criticized this post and the comments in it:
“His (Fuerle’s) article shows how easy it is for someone not conversant with the full literature to go astray. He has not read my current book (What Is Intelligence? - amazon.com) which shows the reverse of his main contentions. As to the Terman article, I refuted it in 1984 in the JEM.”
I am not sure which Terman article he refers to. Here is a nice photo of Flynn, along with your friends Richard Lynn and Phillipe Rushton at an intelligence conference last year. There is also a nice interview with Flynn in there and a lot of neat little abstracts you folks might like. This field is really optimistic for us environmentalists, you know. I found the studies showing that the stupider people are, the more likely they were to believe in God to be interesting. They also found that among the religious, the more fervently people believe, the dumber they were. The smarter they were, the more liberal their faith was. Lots of other cool stuff in there - smarter people live longer, etc.
Posted by Robert Lindsay on January 15, 2008, 05:25 AM | #
Silver is correct about me.
Now that I am surrounded by ethnocentric Mexicans, I have become an ethnocentric White. I tell them that I wake up every morning and thank God for making me White. I’m always telling them to act White and describing behaviors as “the White thing to do” or “that’s not White”. The reason I do this is because so many of them act like barn animals and it disgusts my White sensibilities. I have some issues with Whites, but at least largely White areas are civilized. I last lived in a White town where there was little crime, no graffiti, no gangs, not much drugs, no street whores or pimps, and nothing to be afraid of. They were boring and paranoid and the cops bother innocent people because they have nothing to do, but at least it’s safe and civilized. It’s also horribly reactionary.
I could no longer afford to live there so I moved to the large 70% Hispanic city nearby. I live in the hood now with gangbangers, whores, pimps and drug dealers. It’s downright dangerous, there is graffiti everywhere, and I have been ripped off 3 times already. Almost all the criminals and bad actors are non-Whites, but even a lot of the Whites here are pretty scummy. It’s like if you were too scummy of a White to live in White Town in the hills, you move downslope with the minorities and totally scum out.
If I have to live with poor people, I would rather live with poor Whites in a mostly-White town than poor Blacks or Browns. Small #’s of Hispanics, Am Indians and even Blacks are no big deal, but there does seem to be a tipping point.
Whites are a mixed bag. Their decline is inevitable and not very relevant, but the main positive thing about it is you guys will also go extinct.
Phenotypically, it may not be so obvious either. It’s getting awfully hard around here to tell an “Hispanic” from a “White”. Most of the Whites here are Mediterranean or Armenian anyway, and a lot of the “Hispanics” have so little Indian in them they don’t look much different from me. I wonder what all the fuss is about. Instead of being like Brazil, we will probably end up more like Argentina or Chile.
Posted by Fred Scrooby on January 15, 2008, 05:31 AM | #
“I’m acquainted with [Jim Flynn]” (—Robert Lindsay)
There goes whatever reputation Flynn had, all shot to hell.
Posted by Fred Scrooby on January 15, 2008, 06:06 AM | #
Robert Lindsay is positively the worst piece of dog shit ever to foul this site’s pages, and we’ve seen lots of dog shit come and go. He was unutterably vile, morally-diseased stinking leprous excrement three years ago when he first left his stench here and he’s unutterably vile morally-diseased stinking leprous excrement now that he’s come slithering back. No ordure that has soiled this site’s threads has approached Lindsay in pure unadulterated filthiness. I cannot think of anybody who horrifies me as much, apart from the ilk of someone like Jeffrey Dahmer. Yes there have been commenters here who’ve made my skin crawl but they weren’t a patch on this specimen who takes crawling skin to dimensions previously undreamt of. This piece of what you step in accidentally in the street then must scrape off the bottom of your shoe has as his motivation the most absolute self-loathing, and that with impeccable reason.
Posted by silver on January 15, 2008, 06:10 AM | #
They also found that among the religious, the more fervently people believe, the dumber they were.
Few here are really religious. Personally, absent religion, I see no reason at all to care about the survival of, say, negroes. If there’s no God, there’s not much need for traditional morality, thus Africans starving away into nothingness would be perfectly meaningless to me; indeed, it’d be an event to be welcomed. It’s only religious belief that makes me care enough to be willing to part with money to keep not only negroes but other dimwits and misfits alive.
But I guess this is just another aspect of reality that you leftie muppets will never comprehend. I wonder what it must be like to live so at odds with easily observable reality, day after day, year after year, disappointment after disappointment. Quite incredible.
Posted by skeptical on January 15, 2008, 06:10 AM | #
silver,
If you don’t mind my asking, when did you reach your personal tipping point and start identifying with the commentary on this site (instead of criticizing it)?
Posted by Desmond Jones on January 15, 2008, 06:43 AM | #
Whites are a mixed bag. Their decline is inevitable and not very relevant, but the main positive thing about it is you guys will also go extinct.
Lindsay is wrong again because he discounts evolution. Traits that enhance fitness, like ethnic consciousness will survive. Extinction will be borne mainly by less intelligent and less conscientious whites, i.e. Robert, his brother and the whites in slum town.
Auf wiedersehen Lindsay.
Posted by Robert Lindsay on January 15, 2008, 07:10 AM | #
Oh, we understand you, all right, Silver! I understand the mindset of everyone on this board. One of the things I do in order to understand folks is to put their mentality on like a thinking cap, and play their role, like an actor. So you and me are not that different. People like me have the same feelings that you guys do sometimes, but we just realize that that is part of our base, cave-man like element, and dismiss it and rise above it. Humans are not like dogs and cats. We can choose whether to be racist or beat or wives or rape women or do any of the other stupid things that we are genetically coded to do or be. People like me have just evolved to a higher level than you guys.
Blacks are human beings too, even the not very well-behaved ones. If the ones in Africa stay in Africa and never come to here or have any contact with you, why should you wish them ill will over in Africa? I don’t get it. Over in Africa, they have no effect on you in any way, yet you still wish them ill will. How odd.
US Blacks are here to stay. They are not going back to Africa and we are not going back to Europe. Like an old married couple, we are stuck with each other and have to work something out. Blacks are divided into a civilized group that has more or less assimilated to US society and an Underclass that is pretty much of a catastrophe. It’s almost like 2 different races now. The same seems to be happening for Hispanics. The way you guys lump these people all together in one race is just sickening.
Posted by zorn on January 15, 2008, 07:13 AM | #
lindsay is still smarting from james malloy’s (of gnxp) attack on his article re skyrocketing black iq. it’s fairly apparent from exchanges over there, as well as at dienekes’s blog (and there is ample evidence here and at lindsay’s bizarre blog, which reads more like a diary you’d find in a serial killer’s crawlspace), that lindsay is typical of underemployed cranks living on the margins of society and is quite possibly mentally ill.
Posted by silver on January 15, 2008, 08:04 AM | #
If you don’t mind my asking, when did you reach your personal tipping point and start identifying with the commentary on this site (instead of criticizing it)?
A few months ago, roughly. It’s not so much that I “identify” with it, in the sense that it speaks to me (it doesn’t and I resent attempts to insist that it does). I understand your concerns, though, and I think they are fair—harsh, oftentimes, at least at first glance, but ultimately fair.
I understand the mindset of everyone on this board.
I gathered that. It’s that you propose thoroughly unworkable solutions based on lies that you must know have no hope of working that bothers me.
Blacks are human beings too, even the not very well-behaved ones. If the ones in Africa stay in Africa and never come to here or have any contact with you, why should you wish them ill will over in Africa? I don’t get it. Over in Africa, they have no effect on you in any way, yet you still wish them ill will. How odd.
Must you twist words?
US Blacks are here to stay. They are not going back to Africa and we are not going back to Europe. Like an old married couple, we are stuck with each other and have to work something out. Blacks are divided into a civilized group that has more or less assimilated to US society and an Underclass that is pretty much of a catastrophe. It’s almost like 2 different races now. The same seems to be happening for Hispanics. The way you guys lump these people all together in one race is just sickening.
Why do you insist on subsidizing the growth of this underclass, then, if you grant that it’s rooted in heredity?
Why not focus on domestic problems instead of distracting people with ridiculous, doomed “Save Africa”, “Save Darfur”, “hail Chavez!” etc nonsense?
Why peddle lies about Chicanos being “progressives” and blacks “environmentalists” when you know damn well they only vote left to advance their ethnic interests?
Posted by Robert Lindsay on January 15, 2008, 09:10 AM | #
How am I “subsidizing the growth of the Underclass”? I never said anything about that. They are human beings and they have a right to survive. Persons in the underclass vary from relatively healthy to profoundly unhealthy. As a Commie, I’m not into welfare either. We support forced work programs. The Underclass would have to work for their money. We take care of their kids in daycare while they work. If they can’t find work, we make work for them somehow. Give them a broom to push. If they can’t make it to work, we drive by and pick them up in vans and take them to work. I have no problem putting gang members in gulags up in Alaska. If they are really irresponsible, we will pay them with a card that they can only spend on rent, utilities and good food. Once they take care of all that, they can cash it in.
In Mozambique under socialism, there was almost zero Black crime, in the heart of darkest Africa. There is nothing genetic in Blacks that mandates they must have a high crime rate everywhere. In Cuba, the crime rate is very low and it’s mostly Black. Personally, I think Blacks need socialism. Under capitalism, too many fail, get frustrated and angry and become criminals while trying to get rich.
America seems hopeless, and anyway, I’m an internationalist, not a nationalist. We support popular struggles all over the world. At least in Venezuela good things are happening. What are the prospects here?
Hispanics and Blacks at the moment are voting for progressive and environmental causes. Their representatives support these causes to the hilt. That’s all we need to be concerned about now. Most of them don’t have a lot of money and see progressive causes as in their interest. Most are not hostile to environmentalism either. If they change in the future, we deal with that.
Malloy and I have patched everything up.
Posted by got fraud? on January 15, 2008, 10:07 AM | #
“Others, like yourself, I don’t really know.”
That’s already been explained. Is acting like a junior JJR part of your disruptive plan as well?
“Malloy and I have patched everything up.”
That’s not surprising since you both have, in the ultimate analysis, the same objective.
Posted by got fraud? on January 15, 2008, 10:42 AM | #
“They are human beings and they have a right to survive.”
Whites, presumably, are not human beings and have no right to survive?
Anyway…
what to make of a person who is economically leftist, open to environmentalist arguments (when rationale) - but is an “extreme white racist” and separatist?
Or, is anti-white genocidal agendas and “internationalism” considered part and parcel of being “progressive?” I wonder when the anti-racist Marxists trademarked the term “progressive” for their exclusive use, leaving “reactionary” to describe all else?
One may consider maintenance of the current globalist, anti-white, pro-immigration and pro-miscegenation regime to be “reactionary,” while alternate sociopolitical visions which incorporate true racial justice along with economic justice are “progressive.”
Since survival and feeedom of association are basic human rights, any call to racial justice must include rights to self-determination and separatism.
Enforced maintenance of multiracialism and multiculturalism is reactionary. Dismantling coercive social controls ("social pricing") as well as the repressive legal infrastructure, never mind the media apparatus are worthy goals of true progressives.
An emphasis on the economic, coupled with a disregard for biological interests, fused to a totalitarian mindset: reactionary.
Robert Lindsay, extreme reactionary.
“The way you guys lump these people all together in one race is just sickening.”
It’s not “sickening” - it’s science.
Posted by got fraud? on January 15, 2008, 10:54 AM | #
“The smarter they were, the more liberal their faith was”
In all modesty, I have no doubt that I am “smarter” than you. Then again, since you are an extreme reactionary, who is enabling the current system, it’s also quite possible that my “faith” is more “liberal” than yours.
Point to Lindsay.
“...decline is inevitable...”
Inevitability?
“...and not very relevant, but the main positive thing about it is you guys will also go extinct. “
Celebrating extinction and questioning its relevance. Tsk, tsk, now *that’s* reactionary. Not very environmentally friendly either. Do you, like your “environmentally concerned” Blacks and Hispanics, throw garbage in the streets?
“Phenotypically...”
Reactionary, yet again.
What a fossilized, backwards looking reactionary you are, Lindsay!
Let us hope that the progressive forces represented by Majority Rights, as well as concepts such as “universal nationalism,” win out against the extreme reactionary politics of the backwards thinking Lindsay.
Posted by silver on January 15, 2008, 11:10 AM | #
Robert, let me tell you a few things about myself, so that you get a better picture of where I am coming from.
I’m of Serbian origin, living in Australia, with parents who settled here in the early 60s. I feel a deep connection to this country, its people and its ways, but nevertheless, I fall outside the majority phenotype here and Australian racialist nationlists are not shy to point it out.
Race, of itself, was never of great concern to me; I simply recognized it as a factor which can divide people and which requires a strong, coherent culture to override it. While I was growing up, I had the distinct impresssion that such a culture existed: Australia was a British, Christian country with European ethnic minorities that accepted that fact. I grew up away from heavily immigrant settled areas and was surprised that many of my co-ethnics and (related ethnies) tended not to share my views or my appreciation for the country we lived in. I initially paid that little heed, but slowly grew to realize those were views shared by most immigrants, especially the newer and culturally more alien arrivals and the cohesive world I thought I knew began collapsing before my eyes. For a while I believed the leadership of the country knew what it was doing but after some time I concluded it did not; some time later, I came upon racialist arguments. Not unexpectedly, I was quite disappointed and distraught to find so much of what I had thought about the world was essentially false. Hardcore racialism does sadden and disgust me, but I can appreciate the wellspring of such sentiment; ultimately, I felt I had to concede its point. And here we are.
How I, personally, feel about race is somewhat different to how the average MR-er feels about it. I am more of a ‘culturalist’ than a ‘racist’. I don’t mind well-behaved blacks. I wouldn’t go out of my way to befriend them, but I can get along with them and share a laugh. I have a cousin who is married to one, in fact. I think it’s ridiculous to marry so far out of your race, but I haven’t disowned her for it. Large concentrations of blacks are not known for being well-behaved or law abiding anywhere in the world, and it’s a great pity that their deliquency must be introduced here. I first encountered large numbers of them when I moved to America, and even though I was not a ‘racist,’ quickly learnt to avoid them. All that said, it’s Islam that I fear and loathe more than anything.
Immigrant groups like the Greeks and Sicilians tended to disdain Australian culture, mostly in order to strike back at Australians who taunted and teased them, but I never had the impression it was anything serious. I myself also resented being teased and excluded for being an outsider, but accepted it as a ‘rite of passage’, and never considered it a deep seated hatred (sadly, much of it likely was/is). The first real hostility towards Australia I experienced was from Muslim immigrants. They were not only hostile towards Australians, they were hostile towards all other European immigrants too. Being a Serb I was well aware of the historic European conflict with Islam and it was the presence of large numbers of Muslims here that first got me doubting the wisdom of Australia’s immigration policy—all this well before 9.11. A policy which ignores Islam, hushes up or jails opposition to it and insists on importing more of it is simply the greatest disaster to befall this country I can imagine; there is not even a theoretical case for it—they are as alien to liberal Australia as they are to traditional Australia.
Now, to see you, Lindsay, ignore all the cultural and racial friction and clashes that are an unavoidable consequence of the multiculturalist, race-blind (actually anti-white) policies your side of the political spectrum champions and instead focus on income redistribution and communism (!) is just mind-bendingly frustrating and exasperating. I scarcely know where to begin responding to you, and I would not bother saying another word were it not for the fact that you do realise that some things in the current order are seriously amiss. You needn’t join hands with Alex Linder, but good grief man, there are many intelligent positions you can adopt well left of that, and surely perpetuating IQ-denial is entirely counterproductive.
Posted by got fraud? on January 15, 2008, 11:41 AM | #
Not wanting to seem overly combative, I’d like to praise and congratulate silver on that fine piece of fiction writing. It would have been better to have that story worked out before first posting here, but better late than never.
Once again, a fine piece of work and quite imaginative.
Posted by silver on January 15, 2008, 01:00 PM | #
It would have been better to have that story worked out before first posting here
Given that it’s unchanged since my first posting I’d say it’s about as good an admission that you know damn well my story is straight as one could get.
Just what is your purpose here? All I can recall you ever doing is mercilessly savaging other posters and the only coherent point I can infer you trying to make is that ‘testing’ is required so people really are what they think they are. Curiously, you’re held in great respect for this trivial service.
Obviously, my early posts deserved to be savaged, and it seems I can never apologise enough for them, but beyond that I really unable to comprehend what problem you have with me or my ‘sincerity’ other than my opinion that ‘white’ in the main refers to nordics and closely related centrals; this seems to offend you so I must be made a liar. Ooookay. Good luck with that.
Posted by larch on January 15, 2008, 02:03 PM | #
“Given that it’s unchanged since my first posting I’d say it’s about as good an admission that you know damn well my story is straight as one could get.”
Liar. You deny that you were saying you were South Asian during your first postings?
“Just what is your purpose here? All I can recall you ever doing is mercilessly savaging other posters and the only coherent point I can infer you trying to make is that ‘testing’ is required so people really are what they think they are. Curiously, you’re held in great respect for this trivial service.”
What an imbecile. Don’t know how to use the MR search functions, or even read GW’s recent comments? In case you’ve missed it, genius, I used to be a regular blogger at MR, and have a considerable number of posts to my credit, even though I haven’t done any in quite some time. Included in these is introducing and expanding Salterian concepts to the blog, which is likely the reason that GW “holds me in great respect” - not for the “trivial service” of stating the obvious fact that ancestry is ultimately determined by genetic assays. What’s your “service” here?
“...other than my opinion that ‘white’ in the main refers to nordics and closely related centrals; this seems to offend you so I must be made a liar.”
And that’s one key point: you claim to “fear” “militant Nordicism” and yet you constantly promote the Nordicist idea that only Northern and Central Europeans are “white.” If that’s your opinion, fine, but don’t pretend that - while promoting that idea - you are a “Serbian afraid of a Nordicist Anglo backlash.”
Once again, you are equivalent to a Jew in 1938 Berlin, allegedly afraid of “Nazi persecution”, while all the time running around dressed as a Hasid, cursing Germans and Hitler, and giving speeches about how alien and unassimilable Jews are.
Posted by Manish on January 15, 2008, 08:57 PM | #
Mr Lindsey,
I am Indian from India. The truth is you are wrong. We Indians do not and never will support socialism. Indeed we (Hindus) and Muslims are a very conservative people. The reason so many coloured people like me hate the west is not because of racism but because the west is TOO LIBERAL. The Hindu religion believes in natural inequality of all men (the caste system). Socialism never was very popular in India. Only two states West Bengal and kerala have supported the communists and in both cases it was due to rigged elections. And besides if you believe muslims are going to support environmentalism and socialism, you are a stupid idiot. If you have not noticed, we look down upon intercaste or interracial marriages. Such marriages are unhealthy according to our great wise ancestors of old. It does not mean we support inbreeding. We are supposed to marry in the same caste but in different gotras. Socialism, one world, humanism etc...are stupid concepts. There is no wisdom in them. We wish the seperation of all peoples.
Manish
Posted by bbgun on January 15, 2008, 11:21 PM | #
Recognise this Manish?
Preamble
WE, THE PEOPLE OF INDIA, having solemnly resolved to constitute India into a SOVEREIGN, SOCIALIST, SECULAR, DEMOCRATIC, REPUBLIC and to secure to all its citizens:-
JUSTICE, social, economic and political;
LIBERTY of thought, expression, belief, faith and worship;
EQUALITY of status and of opportunity; and to promote among them all
FRATERNITY assuring the dignity of the individual and the unity and integrity of the nation;
IN OUR CONSTITUENT ASSEMBLY this twenty-sixth day of November 1949, do HEREBY ADOPT, ENACT AND GIVE TO OURSELVES THIS CONSTITUTION.
Posted by bbgun on January 15, 2008, 11:24 PM | #
Manish said: The reason so many coloured people like me hate the west is not because of racism but because the west is TOO LIBERAL.
-- Yet in Britain, and I strongly suspect throughout the west, Indian settlers vote overwhelmingly for the leftist parties, coincidentally those most attached to mass-immigration and multiculturalism.
Posted by Svigor on January 15, 2008, 11:53 PM | #
hopefully Whites will go extinct in our family.
Agreed.
P.S., thanks for openly stating your opposition to self-determination.
Posted by larch on January 16, 2008, 12:09 AM | #
“All I can recall you ever doing is mercilessly savaging other posters...”
Fine.
GW is too much of a gentleman to say anything online directly, but I am aware that he dislikes the “flaming” overly combative commentaries of recent days. To respect his position, therefore, I’ll overlook the “past” and concentrate on the present.
Does silver have any objections to answering a polite and collegial question or two (or three) based on that biographical sketch?
There are some points that do need clarifying, and I believe they can be addressed in a manner that respects GW’s property interests.
Posted by Fred Scrooby on January 16, 2008, 12:24 AM | #
“Yet in Britain, and I strongly suspect throughout the west, Indian settlers vote overwhelmingly for the leftist parties, coincidentally those most attached to mass-immigration and multiculturalism.” (—bbgun)
But in the West the so-called “conservative” parties join the leftist parties in their attachment to mass immigration and multiculturalism. It’s not true that “the leftist parties” are “most attached” to these twin plagues: both are equally attached. Does David Cameron show any sign of being unattached? Does any of the current Republican front-runners? No, they’re all as attached as Hillary and Obama the Jewish Wonder-Creation.
Those views that question mass immigration and multiculturalism are neither leftist nor “conservative” but orthogonal to both and enemies of both. The Bush, Kennedy, and Clinton families and the Republican and Democrat Parties are equally their enemies.
Posted by Desmond Jones on January 16, 2008, 12:42 AM | #
“both are equally attached.”
True, Fred, however, in an exit poll analysis, (i.e. which party they vote for) loyalty is overwhelmingly to those parties designated liberal. In Canada, even though Steve Harper and the “Conservatives” profess mass immigration, visible minorities will vote for the"Liberal" party 70% of the time. Of course that practise, at least in Canada, is not just limited to non-whites. However, that’s an old story.
Posted by Svigor on January 16, 2008, 12:58 AM | #
I understand the mindset of everyone on this board.
Please do elaborate on my mindset, Bob.
People like me have the same feelings that you guys do sometimes, but we just realize that that is part of our base, cave-man like element, and dismiss it and rise above it.
Good point; base, ca