Official Blog Position on Race and Intelligence

Dave M. writes:
AJ said, “There is nothing superior about your genes…”

Not true! I believe Robert may at least partially agree that there is a lot of truth in the fact that genetics of groups, and group intelligence, are intertwined. European and East Asian, Along with Jews, are superior in “intelligence” to the rest of the world.

Hello, the official position of this blog, as stated on the About page, is that there are presently differences in intelligence between the races as measured by IQ tests, and IQ tests are a valid way to measure intelligence.
Whether those differences are due to genes, environment or something in the air is uncertain. It is also uncertain whether the lower performing groups will be able to close the gap with the higher groups and if so, to what extent.
So the “revolutionary” positions of Liberal Race Realism are:

  1. 1. At the moment, different groups on Earth differ intelligence as measured accurately on IQ tests. For instance, Blacks are less intelligent than Whites as measured accurately by IQ tests, and Jews, European Whites and East Asians are more intelligent than the other groups as measured accurately by IQ tests.
  2. 2. IQ tests accurately measure intelligence.

That’s it! Pretty meager, no?
For these positions, LRR is absolutely vilified across the board as a hideously racist and White Supremacist organization. A lot of liberal/Left sites remove any links to my site and some Left sites have blanket policies to not link to me on the basis of “no platform for fascists” (apparently I am a fascist).
I think if we could get society go agree to even these two modest tenets, we would be accomplishing something revolutionary.

Please follow and like us:
error3
fb-share-icon20
Tweet 20
fb-share-icon20

0 thoughts on “Official Blog Position on Race and Intelligence”

    1. It shouldnt, except if you want to explain income and success diffrences among groups divided by their race, so that you dont come to the conclusion some kind of “Oppression” is holding some groups back, but instead it is their Iq that is holding them back.

  1. I think “IQ tests accurately measure intelligence” is a simplistic statement, which may not be true.
    If a person only speaks French, but you give him an IQ test in English, he may score zero. You may say of course the test must be in the language native to the person being tested, but there are many subtle issues relating to a cultural group which the designer of a test may not allow for.
    A hunter gatherer may be able to climb a tall tree and gather honey from a wild bee hive, which likely involves quite a lot of intelligence, but he might not be able to answer questions about abstract things or things that are common knowledge to people who grow up in a different context.
    A hunter gatherer has the intelligence to survive in his own environment, where a city person with a PhD might be dead in a week.
    I suspect that different races have evolved over long periods to adapt to their environments. Intelligence is likely adapted also, as much as physical adaption. IQ tests may focus on different aspects of intelligence which a person from a particular race may not have his greatest strengths in.
    It is many years since I did an IQ test, and it is not a subject I know a great deal about. I just feel that designers of IQ tests may have egg shaped heads, and may often make assumptions about the test subjects experience and environment which may not be true. I don’t think a “one size fits all” test would work to compare persons from different cultures, races, and environments.

    1. Actually only Western Europeans :p Germany, France and United Kingdom are a world apart from Russia, Poland and Romania, both historically and in this current era, though they are catching up at the moment. Just like not all Asians are that intelligent and just the Easterns, the same with Europeans, only the Westerners actually.

    2. Though Russians and Polish seem to have some of Western genius in them, they had their share of innovations, maybe Communism was at fault, by North Korea alone one would guess the Koreans are among the less intelligent, who would have guess their potential as a South Korea, but for sure Romanians and their neighbours are not that bright

  2. Again all of the superior IQ in the world doesn’t help without attitude. It’s like that slogan “The only disability is a bad attitude.”. People who are over-sensitive, and have no self confidence rarely do anything, even with brains, which often they don’t believe they have.

    1. Not really true. Asians are the most neurotic race in the US. They have the lowest self-esteem and therefore the least confidence, the highest anxiety levels and assuming they are neurotic, they are no doubt oversensitive and introverted. Jews are also notorious for all of these traits.
      Jews and Asians are the highest performing race in the US.

      1. But somehow their insecurity doesn’t keep them from going to college, or getting hooked on dope, but with a lot of people it does.

        1. They more secure people do not tend to go to college. The more insecure ones tend to go to college. The more secure people tend to use drugs more and more insecure people use drugs less.

      2. Blacks and Hispanics(to an lesser extent) have the highest self-esteem and most confidence.In my life finding a black introverted like myself was difficult and spotting an extroverted Asian was even harder.

        1. East Asians seem introverted cause they’re in America. In Asia, they’re a lot more extroverted. In fact, a lot of them are down right mean, and will bully you.

  3. Of course, with Jews and Asians you gotta big cultural thing (again, not a genetic factor) which makes them far more likely to go to college, and not get hooked on dope (to the point where their lives are ruined).

  4. Rank each race’s IQ in a hierarchy from highest to lowest, and include the other races i.e. australoid, native american, middle eastern, indian, etc

  5. Robert, don’t you realize that IQ tests aren’t used for a reason: they are completely biased (one major bias is cultural bias). And you are biased…cognitive error seems to be what you are good at…

    1. They are not biased at all. That argument is crazy and it’s done and gone. We now have tests like Raven’s Progressive Matrices that do not even have any language in them! That test is not culturally biased.
      And you are banned.
      HAND!

  6. Then at least you must define the notions of “Whites” and “Asians”. There are at least a dozen of anthropological types of Europoids and near so of Mongoloids. Not to mention of South Asians (Indians, etc.) which I wouldn’t rank as “Whites” or Europoids, but technically they can be such. “Blacks” are no less heterogeneous. So the problem is we cannot definitely say what exact physical racial trait: proportions of skull, colours of skin, eye and hair (there are dozens!), which are responsible are for intelligence if there is any. First, we must drop out these stupid American “racial” definitions. They are not racial, they are retarded. There is no “Whites” and “Blacks”. But Nordids, Atlantids, Dinarids, Nilotids, Сongolizid etc. Then we must define each tester to each type and then make IQ tests again. “Whites do IQ tests better than Blacks, and Asians do IQ tests better than Whites” is a totally-total unbearable retarded nonsense.

      1. It’s just words not terms. It sounds like “Any green fluid stuff is poisonous” and “Any transparent fluid stuff is safe” instead of defining which exact matters consisted of which exact chemical elements are poisonous or safe. Races do not work the American way “What-Black-Others”.

      2. I’ll give you a good example why this is really important, if we base some conclusion on races. The border between Europe and Asia is very vague. If geographers can define it more or less definitely, but from sociological point of view this is quite impossible.
        Let’s look. The North Caucasus is a part of geographical Europe.
        But people living here are quite unique. First, their languages (apart from Ossetic and Turkics which we can assign as Asian more definitely). Their religion is Islam, which has made a great impact on their mentality. But more important their social structure and the level of their social development were very primitive (not in a bad sense but in the sense of “original, simple”) until recently. They were more like mountain tribes of Papua, or Native Americans just looking more “European” and being Muslims not Pagans. But from racial definitions, especially the American colour-blind one (“White-Black”), they are Whites (e.g. they are not Africa-looking nor China-looking, then Whites). And hence their must behave as White as “American Whites” or, say, Germans or Frenchmen. But in fact they occupy the niche of Blacks of America. Their mentality, their behaviour, their fashion, everything are very-very “Black”. And from these obvious facts they’re even called “Blacks” in Russian pejorative slang. Now what shall we do? But if we look more closely, not in the “White-Black-Asian” paradigme, we’ll find out that they are not just “Whites”, nor “Blacks” but of the anthropological type called “Caucasoid”. So they are neither “Blacks” like Russians call them, nor clearly “Whites” and Russians have the whole right define them as “Blacks” (from the Russian Northern perspective). Simply their are what they are. We can connect their intellect level and mentality to their physical type, but I won’t intend doing this.
        From the other hand, we can look at Volga Tatars, a great bulk of them look very North European, their mentality, in spite of Turkic language and Islam (trigger “Asians!”), is VERY “White”, urban Tatar are hardly different from Russians. Even métis “Eurasian” or “Asian-looking” Tatars are far more “White” then most of Chechens or Daghestanis, which can look sometimes like the Southern French or Italians.

  7. Do you disagree with researchers like Arthur Jensen and Phillipe Rushton who argued that the evidence favored the view that the B/W IQ gap is probably mostly, though not entirely, due to genetics? And if so, why?

    1. I am officially agnostic on the cause of the Black-White IQ gap. Sure, Whites are more intelligent than Blacks today as a race as measured by IQ tests. That is beyond doubt. But perhaps Blacks can close some or all of that gap.
      I do not wish to discuss why I have arrived at my conclusion, and I do not wish to discuss whether the Black-White IQ gap is due to genes. It is just not something I am interested in talking about. If you want to talk about it, by all means, do.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.