Crime Rates For Hispanics, Polynesians and Amerindians

Repost from the old site.
In the comments section, an anonymous commenter notes:

Hispanics, Amerindians, and Polynesians are all Asians or have Asiatic roots (and thus presumably lower testosterone) and still their crime rate is higher than Whites…this suggests that there is a social element to crime rates as well, probably related to the status of these groups as ‘persecuted minorities.’

I respond:
I have already discussed this in some of my other posts. It is true that elevated rates of crime among Asian-derived groups are somewhat mysterious.
However, no one knows what the testosterone levels of any of these groups are, nor do we have much information about personality styles, although Richard Lynn claims that numerous studies show that Amerindians have elevated rates of sociopathy.
However, they all have relatively low IQ’s (Hispanics = 90*, Amerindians = 88*, Polynesians = 87*) and in modern industrial capitalism, lower-IQ groups resort to mass crime, probably due to failure to achieve the successes that society tells them they deserve and the resulting extreme frustration.
This failure is probably to a great degree due to lowered IQ levels. Lower IQ groups generally do not do well in modern urban societies.
Hispanics have high crime rates in all of the capitalist nations of the Americas. The more Amerindian blood, the higher the crime. Pure Amerindians also seem to commit a lot of crime in Latin American urban areas. These people evolved in tribal societies and lately in small villages. Modern urban capitalism is just something they can’t cope with. They didn’t evolve with it, culturally or otherwise.
I doubt of Amerindians are persecuted much at all in most of the US (although there is a lot of anti-Indian racism in North Dakota at least). In this part of the country, AMERICAN (not Mesoamerican) Indians are highly regarded, and many Whites around here want to be Indians (Indian wannabes).
There are lots of California Indians living in these foothills here, and racism against them seems to be about zero, although there would seem to be grounds for some because their levels of pathology are unbelievably high and some of them live in nearly unimaginable filth and squalor, apparently deliberately. Most of their problems is this part of the country are self-inflicted.
Some tribes around here became very wealthy with casino money.
One tribe was giving out $7000/month checks to members, but they didn’t seem to act much better. Most of the young ones blew every nickel of the money on dope, alcohol, gambling and whatnot, did not invest in or improve housing stock (you drive by there and see 20-30 Indians of all ages lounging about with chickens running everywhere in a trashed-out front yard).
However, a few of them did save and invest the money. I know one fellow who is a millionaire who invests in many business ventures.
In this part of California, there is no discrimination against Hispanics at all. My city is majority Hispanic. They run the whole place. The only racism in that town is against White people. Hispanics are in charge in large swathes of this state. From my POV, they experience little or no discrimination or racism as a dominant group.
There is little to no discrimination or racism against Samoans or Tongans here either.
I can’t speak of Hawaii.
I really don’t think that any of these groups qualify as persecuted minorities, at least not in California. Other than lower IQ’s, I don’t have a good explanation for elevated crime rates though.
American Samoa has very high crime, while Western Samoa next door, with a traditional Polynesian lifestyle, is nearly crime-free. Clearly, Polynesian crime is predicated to a large degree on culture.
I understand that Mexico, especially in smaller villages, did not use to have a lot of crime. This has certainly changed recently.
It is extremely difficult to generalize about Amerindian behaviors. The Amerindian behavioral phenotype, like the Polynesian one, seems to be quite plastic and is capable of expressing itself in many different ways depending on the environment.
It’s well-known that there are Amerindian tribes, especially in the Amazon, who are so pacifistic that it’s almost comical. I can think of at least one in Venezuela. Curiously, they live near the Yanonamo, long thought to have the highest homicide rate on Earth. I doubt if their genes are much different.
With a relatively plastic behavioral phenotype, Amerindians are possibly highly susceptible to culture. In a pro-violence culture they can become ridiculously violent and criminal. In a culture that promotes pacifism and non-violence, they can become so peaceful that that it is almost a caricature. These are tribal people who evolved culturally to strictly abide by tribal cultural norms.
I suspect Polynesians also may have a plastic behavioral phenotype. The differences in the two Samoas suggest that Polynesian criminal behavior is heavily mediated by culture.
This is discussed in greater depth in the another post, The Moriori and the Dangers of Pacifism.
Crime is about a Hell of a lot more than testosterone or IQ.
Criminology is traditionally a black hole for theory.
*One  point was added to each score due to the recent renorming of US IQ scores.
This research takes a lot of time, and I do not get paid anything for it. If you think this website is valuable to you, please consider a a contribution to support more of this valuable research.

Please follow and like us:
Tweet 20

6 thoughts on “Crime Rates For Hispanics, Polynesians and Amerindians”

  1. Crime is not just for stupid people. Think of Madoff. Or consider this: In 1908,” according to the Jerusalem Post, “Jews were 25 percent of the four million residents in New York City but 50% of the prison population.
    Also Sir Arthur Conan Doyle used another Jew by the name of Adam Worth as his model for Professor Moriarty.
    Check out this site for more on Jewish crime if you have the interest
    “Worth started out re-joining and re-deserting various Civil War regiments (both Union and Confederate) for enlistment bonuses and later expanded his exploits into forgery, larceny, robbery, burglary, and other criminal mainstays. In England, Sir Robert Anderson, head of Criminal Investigations at Scotland Yard, observed in 1907 that “Adam Worth was the Napoleon of crime. None other could hold a candle to him.” The Pinkerton security agency noted that “in the death of Adam Worth there probably departed the most inventive and daring criminal in modern times … Among all the men Pinkertons have known in a life time, this man was the most remarkable criminal of them all.”

  2. I believe that certain racial stocks are either high crime or low crime by genetic nature. However, stocks that are low crime by nature (at least in a modern environment) can certainly descend to incredibly low depths if things can bad enough. There is little limit to how long the best can sink if times get desperate.
    With the enclosure of Commons in Britain in the 1300’s, the rural poor were fenced away from their land into crowded cities with little work. The purpose of this was deliberate, to create an army of rural poor that could be readily exploited by capital.
    Leading thinkers of the time were adamant that there could be no creation of capital in the UK as long as most folks were self-sufficient farmers in rural areas. The crime rate rocketed up, and it is estimated that the rate was 50X that of modern Whites. I’m uncertain whether the genetic stock of Whites was really crime-prone at that time and has evolved to be less crime-prone. What do you think?
    Also in the Gold Rush you had armies of mostly White males flooding in California with no females to tame them, little law and order, and tons of gold and easy money for the taking. The crime rate during the Gold Rush was much higher than it has been at any time in the 20th Century, and Whites were doing most of it. I’m really dubious that we are that much different from the Whites of 1850’s!
    However, some stocks seem to be prone to crime, at least in modern societies. Blacks have high crime rates nearly all over the world, with only some exceptions. High rates of violent crime, especially rape, are notable. It’s mostly Black males doing this, but it’s males who always do most crime.
    My point is that sure Whites can descend below the lowest Underclass ghetto animals, but can Blacks ever create a society like the Whites of Sweden or the Japanese of Japan? I ask this in all seriousness.
    Genes provides the clay, culture is the sculptor. If the clay is low quality, even the best sculptor can’t do much with it. He cannot create great art out of it. But even the best clay can make a sculpture that is dropped and broken, or, in the hands of an amateur, turns into a crappy work of art.
    Do you follow?

  3. “Genes provides the clay, nature is the sculptor”
    I like your analogy.
    Blacks have high levels of testosterone (clay) and a sense of alienation from society (Sculptor) This does indeed make them more likely to turn to crime.
    High levels of Jewish crime are based on alienations from society. Jews were taught from the earliest times that because everyone wanted to kill them so it was ok to lie, cheat and sleep your way to the top. Consider the first recorded Jewish words were a conspiracy to lie in order to gain access to power. Abraham told Sarah: I’m going to tell them that you are my sister. You are such a beautiful woman that I am afraid if they know you are my wife, they will kill me so that they can have you” They got the Pharaoh to fork over gold, silver, flocks, and the deed to Goshen. This is the sculptor
    Now let us consider Jacob who swindled his brother Esau, by trading a bowl of slop for Esau’s birthright. Then Jacob with the aid of his mother Rebecca lied to his father Isaac in order to complete the con. Jacob fled to his Uncle Laben who tricked Jacob into marrying Leah. Jacob in turn screwed his uncle by changing the genetic composition of Laben’s herds which vastly increased Jacobs share, and when Jacob skedaddled his wife Rachael stole Laben’s Gods. I would argue that this was the clay if I thought there was much genetic continuity between Jacob and today’s practitioners of Judaism.

  4. Thx, I have read JTR extensively, but not entirely. I was just having a discussion the other day about whether Jews act the way they do due to culture or genes. No way is it genes.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


Enjoy this blog? Please spread the word :)