« Carl Paladino moving up in the polls! | Main | Psychic Half Sigma? »

September 22, 2010

Comments

There is a mystery with respect to why Koreans seem to like Christianity

There is no mystery. During the Japanese occupation, Koreans were forbidden post-secondary school education. However, the Christian missionaries who were in Korea at the time of the occupation were allowed to stay and they did offer post-secondary education to Koreans. This is how 20% of the country became Christian.

I called out Steve Sailer's readers before. A lot of them seem to be proles, judging by the pitiful quality of many of the comments on his blog.

"Religion is correlated with low IQ"

In East Asia, centuries (or millenia) of rule by brutal tyrannical government is associated with high IQ. Rule by smart people is looks worse every time I look at it. Ah, well: rule by divine, sovereign emperors ruling by the mandate of heaven is inevitable as the human race raises its IQ.

Indians are also considered to be “Asian,” yet they are more closely related to white Europeans than they are to the Japanese.

Well yeah, they're Caucasian.

For the most part, the names of races have been banned from polite conversation- Oriental, Negro, etc. This is straight out of 1984, where the idea was if you ban a word, you also remove the possibility of thinking it.

We're still allowed to mention location, so you get these euphemisms like Sub-Saharan African and East Asian and European. As you point out, "Asian" by itself covers too much territory to mean anything.

Apologies if you've been over this before.

A lot of white men are very good salesmen who might not be truthmen. As salesmen, you only take what make your side story good by cherry picking. Politics are very similar to sales. Verbal skill is important for cherry picking.

Only truth tellers are scientists who respect only data not tale.

"Indians are also considered to be “Asian,” yet they are more closely related to white Europeans than they are to the Japanese."

I never understood why Indians are considered Asian at least by the U.S. census (I don't think the public considers them Asian). Yes, technically India is in Asia, but so is Iraq, Iran, and Israel, and no one refers to Arabs, Persians and Jews as Asian and on the U.S. census they are all considered white. The general public and Richard Lynn lumps Indians in the same race as Middle Easterners which Lynn labels the South Asian/North African race, however the stupid census insists on lumping them in with East Asians and Souteast Asians.

My theory is that a lot of East Asians were concerned that the term ASIAN was becoming synonymous with MONGOLOID race, and not wanting to admit they are mongoloid, they needed to throw in some caucasoids which is why Indians get lumped into the category. But if Indians got lumped in with Asians, why didn't Arabs who look almost identical to Indians? Perhaps the East Asians wanted to be associated with Indians because of their high achievement but did not want to be associated with Arabs because of their lower achievement and the increasing stigma of radical Islam.

East Asians may not be religious, but many are extremely superstitious. Almost OCD-like.

Many Vietnamese and Filipinos are ethnically Chinese.

As for Linda's point, in some places such as Australia there is a new, de facto racial classification called MENA - Middle Eastern/North African.

Half Sigma, are you disgusted by how dishonest Steve Sailer is? See this post here.

http://isteve.blogspot.com/2010/09/sat-scores-in-california.html

Surely he must know that Southeast Asians and Pacific Islanders have significantly lower IQs than East Asians on average. And yet, whenever he compares East Asian academic performance to white academic performance, he always trots out the aggregate Asian scores. I think he does this in the hopes that his less astute readers won't come to the important realization that the aggregate Asian scores significantly understate the true performance of East Asian Americans.

Since IQ tests have a bias towards whites the East Asian IQ average of 105 is actually a deflated figure.

"I called out Steve Sailer's readers before. A lot of them seem to be proles, judging by the pitiful quality of many of the comments on his blog." - Yan Shen

Go ahead, dazzle us with your brilliance, either here or there.

@Linda
if you object to that census classification, take it up with your white forebearers. look up bhagat singh thind. asians have had little to do with how they were referred to until the 60s. it wasn't "mongoloid" they were trying to escape, it was "oriental" which has some pejorative connotations. it wasn't until sometime later that south asians really even came up for discussion b/c they were so few in number due to immigration restrictions on "non-whites."

as for whether the public considers them asian, i'd say they do for most relevant purposes. of course they don't think of a brown person when the term asian comes up, but the south asians in the US are generally high achievers. they are also often times fobs who speak with an accent and have cultural quirks. they aren't all muslims, which is what ppl think of when they think of middle easterners.

at least at my high school and college, east asians and indians often hung out together. they recognized that they had similarities in upbringing that were not shared by the majority or by other ethnic groups.

Half Sigma,
Can you publish more information on Korean Christians. Are the Christians in Korea higher IQ than the non Christians or lower IQ?

Half, Korea in the past was responsible for a massive number of female babies sent to the USA for adoption.

I am not an expert on this but my understanding is that if a poor married woman in China gets pregnant, her husband will force her to get the fetus tested and abort the female fetuses and carry the male fetuses to term. On the other hand in Korea, if a poor married woman gets pregant her husband will force her to get the fetus tested and plan to put the fetus, if female, up for adoption but will make plans to keep it if it is male.

For some reason, married couples in Korea are reluctant to abort the females while married couples in China are ok with aborting the females.

I always wondered if it is just the poor married Christians in Korea that showed this reluctance or whether it is a Korean thing that extends to Christians and non Christians alike.

anyway, it is well known that korean female babies who are adopted by American whites almost always grow up to have IQ dramatically higher than the white average. This of course proves that most of IQ is determined by the genes of your parents not determined by the behaviour of your adoptive parents.

Anyway, if any other readers here can explain to me why people in Korea are generally not as eager to abort as people in China, I would be interested

I think The Asian of Reason build a bit of a straw man here. True, some people are like that but vast majority in the Stevosphere easily agree that the average IQ of East Asians is higher that that of Whites. The point of contention is why higher IQ cultures did not conquer the World and provided all of the foundations of modern civilization. Could be a mere fluke but unlikely. More likely, just IQ is not enough. Whether it is innate higher degree of conformism or lower individualism or different propensity to risk or what have you, something made Whites but not East Asians to take over all other continents. It is interesting to try to figure out what that something is, isn't it? And lets just drop the superiority talk, OK? It's just stupid.

Re: Indians. India is very genetically heterogeneous. Very crudely, cast =~ separate genetic group. E.g., Brahmins are Indian "Jews". Almost all of Indian intellectual elite is Brahmin.


@Sando3
LOL. what rock have you been living under? no seriously. this is so obvious that i'm not going to debase your intelligence in answering. you need to think a little (or a maybe a LOT) harder.

Japanese don't really work long hours - they just hang out in the office for a long time, and no one wants to be the first to leave. Sadly this custom seems to be catching on in the US as well.

As a rule Japanese don't do as well as Koreans or Chinese in the US. Anecdotally most of the slacker Asian kids I knew in college were Japanese Americans. But Steve has posted numbers that bear this out. Whether successful Japanese simply don't emigrate, or Japanese need the cultural support of other Japanese to excel, I'm not sure. I don't know whether Vietnamese IQ is lower than Chinese - but it is true that many "Vietnamese" in the US, especially successful ones, are of ethnic Chinese descent. In most of South Asia - the Philippines, Indonesia, Vietnam, Malaysia - ethnic Chinese are the business elite and in some places the political elite as well.

I want to illustrate that in England "Asian" is a euphemism for Arab:

http://thelambethwalk.blogspot.com/

Half Sigma, I think you should encourage many more Northeast Asians to post here. I would like to hear their perspective.

That being said, Yan Shen is 100% unfair to Steve Sailer. Steve Sailer has often told the truth about Asian IQ

Steve is the first to say that Northeast Asians have IQ that is much much higher than whites and also that if you average the IQ of all other Asians you come to an average IQ way lower than the IQ of whites.

And there is assortive mating going on. All over the USA you see super high IQ white males marrying females of Japanese, Korean, and Chinese ancestry while at the same time you see super low IQ white males marrying Southeast Asian females.

@Sando3

China has the one child law, Korea doesn't. When you are only allowed to have one child and it is going to be a girl, your lineage will end unless you abort it. Putting your child up for adoption isn't easy, and I don't believe doing so grants you the privilege of having another child.

If I read the Metropolitician correctly (look to the left at the blogroll, this guy writes about life in Korea, perhaps you could ask him), Korean Christianity isn't exactly the type that is fervently anti-abortion.

Can someone explain to me why almost every single Asian-born person I've ever met is really weird, yet American-born Asians aren't?

@ Yan Shen,

How much does it underpredict to treat two normal distributions as one with a higher consequent standard deviation? I don't really know much in the way of serious statistics.

Messing around in Excel with the normal distribution function though (which is about the limit of my ability to try and tackle this) I see that taking the midpoint of Black-White IQ and increasing standard deviation by 20% (coincidentally the standard deviation difference that Sailer points out in the SAT table), the number of 140 IQ people would seem to be unchanged, for instance. But looking at predictions for higher and lower IQs, It seems like there are higher numbers at lower and upper tails. Perhaps you get overprediction at high and low numbers as opposed to treating them as separate?

Also I think whats missing from the discussion for most part is that group averages IQ are related to proportion of high IQ achievers in the group.

Thats the individual examples like " I knew black guy who was smart, " or asians are superstitious and like gambling" are not relevant if we discuss the contribution or potential of the group as a whole, nor moral character and intellect of "average citizen".


On its own difference of 5-7 point betweeh white and asian is not huge. Both "averages" are pretty damn dumb ignorant and imho useless.

Noticeably less than monkey sub saharan blacks, but the 100 iq ones dont build nor support civilizations either. Only the elite does that -top 10 % are support (engineers, rank and file officers ,etc) , top 1% are rulers and top 0.01% are creators

black IQ is so low that they only have maybe 1% at best of those who can support and none who can create. No matter their population level signal to noise ratio is way too low

Asians on the other hand are populous and they do have IQ high enough to produce that layer. More than enough. Ashkenazi jews are the only ( and I ll speculate "only widely known and publicized group, as there might be similar groups inside other races) group which has IQ so high it can produce enough top tier people only in total population of several million to run entire modern nation and be regional super power.

In the absolute terms though chinese have more of those people. And their leadership start become apparent to all but closet white supremacists. 21 first century is the age of China

You can't go to any high IQ white suburb in the US and not bump in to Korean girls being raised by white parents...

I mean, there are massive numbers of korean females who decide to carry female babies to term and then put them up for adoption.

The pattern in the US, China, Japan, Russia, Europe, basically every high IQ country in the entire world that I know of is to abort.

So if anyone here knows of another country where so many girls are put up for adoption, another country with high IQ where the females don't abort, I'd like to know.

Something that is not that well known about Korea is the acute male / female imbalance outside of the cities.

First of all, there is of course a huge imbalance in the number of males and females growing up in Korea. Add to that the desire of most females to move to Seoul and live a more exciting life.

Just like NYC, single young females flock to Seoul and Seoul has a male female ratio that favors males. But outside Seoul the ratio is extreme in the other direction

Putting a finer point on this, South Korea sends some of its own high IQ female babies to the USA.

Then years later, the fact that those high IQ females are not living in South Korea causes the South Korean Betas to be forced to fly to other countries to import lower IQ brides

see the below article. Seems to me that the South Korean predilection for getting rid of females is dysgenic

__
Korean bachelors scour Vietnam for brides
March 04, 2007|By Norimitsu Onishi, New York Times

(03-04) 04:00 PST Hanoi — 2007-03-04 04:00:00 PST Hanoi -- It was midnight here in Hanoi, or already 2 a.m. back in Seoul. But after a five-hour flight on a recent Sunday, Kim Wan Su was driven straight from the airport to the Lucky Star karaoke bar here, where 23 young Vietnamese women seeking Korean husbands sat waiting in two dimly lighted rooms.

"Do I have to look at them and decide now?" Kim asked, as the marriage brokers gave a brief description of each of the women sitting around a U-shaped sofa.

Thus, Kim, a 39-year-old auto parts worker from a suburb of Seoul, began the mildly chaotic, two-hour process of choosing a spouse. In a day or two, if his five-day marriage tour went according to plan, he would be wed and enjoying his honeymoon at the famed Perfume Pagoda in the Huong Tich Mountain southwest of here.

@ Peter A: Exactly. Worker productivity in Japan is 71 percent that of the U.S. In the service section, it sinks to 60 percent. These numbers are 5 years old but "have remained unchanged for 15 years."

http://www.japaneconomynews.com/2007/04/19/japans-labor-productivity-at-71-of-us-levels/

By Nobel Prize standards, Japanese scientists have done exceptionally well over the past decade. But many of them are "mavericks" by Japanese standards, meaning they lived outside of Japan for a significant part of their lives.

2008: Osamu Shimomura, U.S. resident
2008: Yoichiro Nambu, U.S. citizen in 1970
2008: Makoto Kobayashi and Toshihide Maskawa
2002: Koichi Tanaka
2002: Masatoshi Koshiba, Ph.D. at University of Rochester, postdoc at University of Chicago
2001: Ryoji Noyori, postdoc at Harvard
2000: Hideki Shirakawa, postdoc at University of Pennsylvania

As Steve Sailer puts it, "Hard though it is for Americans to believe, the French wake up in the morning and look forward to a full day's-worth of Being French." The same applies to the Japanese.

Though unlike the French, the Japanese work so hard at being Japanese it tires you out just watching them.

Steve Sailer had a link to the top 0.5% of PSAT high scorers in California. Asians (Indians, Chinese, Koreans) were way overrepresented, but Japanese-Americans were about as evenly represented as white Californians. Steve Sailer posited that the Japanese have adopted American surfer/slacker culture, so they aren't as ferociously driven as Koreans or Indians.

For Japanese and white Californians to be equally well represented on the PSAT suggests parity in IQ.

Lynn and Rushton have a tendency, at times, to massage the data. Especially with respect to Indians/South Asians. Flynn is much more intellectually honest about things in general.

For example, Indians do pretty well in the UK, despite being the descendants of peasants from Punjab and Gujarat. Lynn and Rushton, despite the data in front of them, ignore this and have compared Indians to the other NAMS. They also ignore that Indian civilization was pretty advanced for most of human history, but then point out Chinese civilization's achievements as an indicator of high Chinese IQ. Intellectual laziness + dishonesty.

Within China, the southeasterners dominated on the imperial exams historically and were very well represented as the business elite. Lots of the Chinese diaspora come from there. Internal variation within China and India, two highly heterogenous countries, needs to be studied more. It's likely that subpopulations vary in IQ in both countries. In highly homogenous Korea and Japan, variance would've been more difficult.

The North Asian/South Asian pattern isn't clear. The Fujianese and Cantonese are from southern Asia, but are pretty high IQ and successful. The Kazakhs and Mongolians are north Asian, but don't perform well economically. I'm not sure what selected for IQ in Asia, but there seems to have been IQ elevation in parts of North and south Asia.

@OneSTDV

The more interesting question and the more appropriate one would be why so many people in the white nationalist community appear to be proles.

In response to someone earlier asking why South Asians are classified the way they are: it's because in the early 80s, Indian lobbyists asked for South Asians to be considered Asian for US Census purposes. Why? So the Asians could cash in on affirmative action goodies for businesses. Apparently Asian companies get first dibs on government contracts over white-owned companies.

On the other hand, in England, "Asian" in everyday speech usually refers to South Asians and not East Asians at all.

There is a serious problem with this analysis.

All the talk about average IQ misses a crucial element: the standard deviation. Even if Asians have, on average, a higher average IQ, that does not mean that the Asian IQ's are distributed in the same was as White IQ's.

It's quite possible, for example, that Asians have a higher average IQ, but a much narrower standard deviation. This means that their "right tails" are not as wide even though the bulk of their people cluster slightly more to the right compared to whites.

This would explain why Asians, with their higher-than-average IQ's, did not conquer or advance the world as well as the European. Europeans simply produce more geniuses because they have wider standard deviations that move the tail further to the right.

This results in an optimum ratio of geniuses to make the discoveries and above-average competence to implement what the geniuses do.

The Asians just have above-average competence.

Half, you need to distinguish between Filipino IQ and IQ of people from Korea and China

Filipino iq is dramatically lower, and Filipino violence level is much greater, vs Koreans and Chinese.

Now, you can't blame an entire group for the work of a small number of people, but a Filipino tortured a white boy recently in Seattle and the Filipino was just arrested.

"...the Chinese dominate the lower-IQ southeastern Asians."

The hell they do! We've smacked those bastards around so many times I've lost count. Shit, beating on the Frogs and GI's was just practice...Nothing personal, of course.

"The point of contention is why higher IQ cultures did not conquer the World and provided all of the foundations of modern civilization. Could be a mere fluke but unlikely"

nanonymous - I actually believe it is a fluke of historical incidents, and the trajectory of development seems to be favouring Asian dominance in the (very) long term. Unlike blacks, it's not as if Asians had never created large, complex societies that furthered technological development in the past.

"Can someone explain to me why almost every single Asian-born person I've ever met is really weird, yet American-born Asians aren't?"

Since weirdness is defined against cultural norms, isn't the answer obvious? Although I suppose you could say many American blacks still seem weird to you eg hip hop and gangster culture.

It's probably because you're a nerdy white guy and Asian Americans are basically whites that focus on school and education.

"India appears to be a below-average-IQ country, but one where the population is so huge that there are millions of Indians with IQs on par or higher than the typical American college graduate, and those are the Indians who mostly immigrate to the United States."

I would hypothesize that the dispersion of IQ levels within the Indian population may be peculiarly stratified due to the existence of the caste system and its continued effects. What I mean is: it may be that due to this willful subdivision of its own population, that High IQ Indians (and the families and genetics they come from) may be segregated into the upper castes, thus leaving the vast number of Low IQ Indians within the lower castes. This could explain why a country with so many low IQ people (as evidenced by the lack of sanitation and abundance of squalor in some areas) could also be a contender in space exploration and a nuclear power... and why many of its immigants present as High-IQ.

This is just a hypothesis... I dont have the knowledge of Indian genetics to back it up.

"The more interesting question and the more appropriate one would be why so many people in the white nationalist community appear to be proles."

Because lower-class whites have the most to lose through globalism, affirmative action set asides and the unfettered immigration of unskilled workers.

"@OneSTDV

The more interesting question and the more appropriate one would be why so many people in the white nationalist community appear to be proles." - Yan Shen

I thought you were so brilliant. It is obvious why. Because lower class whites don't have the money to insulate themselves from NAMs.

Pakistanis $70,047
Indians $68,771
Filipinos $65,700
Chinese $57,433
Japanese $53,763
Koreans $43,195
Total US Population $44,684

Median household income for Asian Americans in 2004. Most Pakistanis/Indians/Filipinos hold very religious beliefs and yet make more than whites. Also, I argue that Chinese/Japanese are religious as well. Most have Buddhist beliefs without having to say outright their Buddhists. Buddhism is more of a psychology then a religion. In fact, I think Zen Buddhism can explain the work ethic of Asians. Zen Buddhism says to focus all attention on the present moment, therefore not tiring the mind out while working. Moreover, many companies in Japan have their workers learn meditation to overcome fatigue.

I'd also like to point out that in Asian families the biggest disgrace would to not serve the family by getting a good job. My Mom is from the northern Philippines and everyone studies for professional occupations, Doctor, Engineer, Nurse (and since they speak English well they all come to America to earn a upper middle class income that translates into a rich income when they send it back to the Philippines.) Plus women in Asia, it seems, breed for intelligence, smart = attractive in Asia, believe it or not.

I forget to point out that no word exists for "leisure" in Japan. While in the West, we divide our time as work/fun, I theorize (could be wrong) that Japanese people view work as just "fun", therefore working long hours seems alright.

"While in the West, we divide our time as work/fun, I theorize (could be wrong) that Japanese people view work as just "fun", therefore working long hours seems alright."

The most successful people in the world are those who are smart enough to make money off of what they consider fun. They don't know whether they are working or playing and enjoy every second and get rich in the process.

"It's quite possible, for example, that Asians have a higher average IQ, but a much narrower standard deviation."

There's no consistent evidence of this.

"This would explain why Asians, with their higher-than-average IQ's, did not conquer or advance the world as well as the European."

Conquering and advancing the world requires more than just IQ. It also requires certain primitive traits that Asians lack such as aggression, ambition, and the psychological disorders that give rise to creativity.

"Ashkenazi jews are the only ( and I ll speculate "only widely known and publicized group, as there might be similar groups inside other races) group which has IQ so high it can produce enough top tier people only in total population of several million to run entire modern nation and be regional super power."

But it's not fair to compare Ashkenazi to East Asians, because East Asians are an entire race (with billions of people) and Ashkenazi are just an elite subset of the larger caucasoid race. It's like comparing Indian immigrants to white people.

"India appears to be a below-average-IQ country, but one where the population is so huge that there are millions of Indians with IQs on par or higher than the typical American college graduate, and those are the Indians who mostly immigrate to the United States."

Also, as I keep reminding people, India is severely malnourished (average man there is only 5'5") so one would expect Indians born in the U.S. to have much higher IQ's than Indians in India even if immigration was not selective; simply because of the vastly superior nutrition.

For a bunch of people who claim to be rational skeptics, there does seem to be a lot of "racial woo" among the HBD crowd.

For example, they exalt the typical prole 100 IQ white person as if he is so irreplacable and entirely responsible for Western Civ. Like liberals who are insulated from "diversity", I suspect many of these racial woo people are upper middle class and not actually around too many drab, dull 100-IQ proles. Western Civ certainly owes very little of it's existence to them (it's an elite driven thing). And I don't see anything so bad about having many of them replaced with something better anyway, like higher IQ immigrants.

The Chinese have very poor social skills by our standards. Indians are much better. For example, Chinese are rotten salesmen; Indians are good. I work in a field with a lot of both. I see the Indians succeeding because of their social skills, plus they ARE smart.

"nanonymous - I actually believe it is a fluke of historical incidents, and the trajectory of development seems to be favouring Asian dominance in the (very) long term."

As to the long term trend from past history - http://i54.tinypic.com/1222elk.jpg (and the lecture this is taken from here - http://isites.harvard.edu/fs/docs/icb.topic599385.files/Lecture%201.pdf). This bins a lot of Western groups though, and whether very long term trends count for anything is a bit dubious (consider Africa).

"Ashkenazi jews are the only ( and I ll speculate "only widely known and publicized group, as there might be similar groups inside other races) group which has IQ so high it can produce enough top tier people only in total population of several million to run entire modern nation and be regional super power."

South Africa? Singapore does alright for itself as well. You just have to go to a really dodgy (or empty) region!

"Conquering and advancing the world requires more than just IQ. It also requires certain primitive traits that Asians lack such as aggression, ambition, and the psychological disorders that give rise to creativity."

Don't tell Genghis or the Land of the Samurai!

@Park Slope Pubby

People of big mouth can only talk and get nothing done.

Check this debate out.

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/peterfoster/100051493/chinese-insularity-v-indian-insecurity-a-recipe-for-trouble/

"Pakistanis $70,047
Indians $68,771
Filipinos $65,700
Chinese $57,433
Japanese $53,763
Koreans $43,195
Total US Population $44,684"
_____________
The top three have larger than average household sizes.

[HS: This is a good point: Indians are less likely to be divorced, and they don't get the American tradition that unmarried adult children should live on their own--they think it makes more sense for unmarried adult children to live at home and save their money so they can buy a house when hey get married.]

I see that OneSTDV has no comment regarding my inquiry as to why most of the white nationalist community appear to be proles. Maybe the truth is too painful for him to handle?

All the Asians are less likely to be divorced and more likely to live with adult children. I would think Indians are probably more likely to do these things than other Asians.

In Surrey/Vancouver (Canada, British Columbia), Indians live three generations to a home. Then they pool their money together and buy huge, monster-sized mansions. Drive through south Vancouver one day and you'll see what I'm talking about.

http://medind.nic.in/ibv/t04/i2/ibvt04i2p121.pdf

Pune ( India ) Low Birth Weight Study – Cognitive Abilities and Educational
Performance at Twelve Years

Normal birth weight kids = 97 IQ
Low birth weight kids = 92 IQ
Very Low birth weight kids = 86 IQ

Pakistanis, being muslims are like NAMs
See data below
Their women are much less educated than Hindu women
Hindu women go to college and go to jobs, most Pakistani muslim women are child breeders, trying to demographically outbreed the infidels

College Rate and Median Family Income below from US data

2005 Data

Indian = 68% / $73K
White = 29% / $49K
Chinese = 52% / $59K
Pakistani = 54% / $53K

2006 Data

Indian = 68% / $78K
White = 28% / $51K
Chinese = 51% / $61K
Pakistani = 54% / $55K


2007 Data

Indian = 68% / $83K
White = 29% / $53K
Chinese = 51% / $66K
Pakistani = 57% / $58K
Bangladeshi = 41% / $41K

2008 Data

Indian = 70% / $90K
White = 29% / $55K
Chinese = 55% / $68K
Pakistani = 54% / $60K
Bangladeshi = 49% / $49K

The jobs allowed to each caste ensured that each caste had a different g selection profile

The US diaspora is 60% upper caste, 30% peasants and 10% of low IQ muslims and untouchables, whereas in India, the population is 20% upper caste, 40% peasant and 40% low IQ groups like muslims and untouchables

Someone blogging in the “Steve-o-sphere” denies the higher average IQ of Asians? Name names.
To everyone wondering why the Asians could not be bothered to “conquer or advance the world as well as the Europeans,” despite some Asians having those fancy higher-than-average IQ's…Well…I’ve always suspected it has something to do with testosterone.
Loon_Jobbie

"Asian surnames were curiously underrepresented in the list of JD students with top 10% grades. I think that a certain type of logical thinking that Asians excel at is actually counterproductive to acing law school essay exams".

Nope, law school prizes logic but it also requires a high verbal ability. Steve S has previously suggested (I seem to recall) that Asians are less gifted in this latter area.

(And, of course, it is harder to really excel - not merely get by - in English if you don't come from a family of native speakers.)

HS, do you find it amusing that many of your readers are morons? :-) though i guess it's useful for me to see who is stupid so i know who to ban if they ever leave a comment on my blogs.

i'll be productive, as i can answer many of the questions being thrown out there. i know something of the koreans and religion. i will give you some data from the last wave in the 2000s. let's have three countries, USA, Korea (South), Japan.

1-10 scale, how important is god in your life?

not important at all (1)
USA - 5%
japan - 13%
korea - 11%

very important (10)
USA - 58%
japan - 6%
korea - 13%

religious person/not a religious person/atheist

USA - 72%/24%/4%
japan - 24%/61%/14%
korea - 30%/41%/29%

south korea is a very religious nation, for an *east asian nation*, but not for a european/western nation. 30% of south koreans are christian, with a majority of those what we in the states would term 'evangelical.' they're intense, but they're not the majority. in the USA the numbers i've seen is that 75% are christian. part of that is selection bias of migrants, but part of it is that the korean church is strong in the states and new immigrants who aren't religious find in the church their ties to the wider community, so they convert. this is clear in the ethnography.

some of the readers pointed to the historical reasons for this. christians in korea were identified with anti-japanese nationalism. koreans are also now mostly a circumcised nation. they go in for western stuff for historical reasons.

korean christians are a "progressive" community. here are the % by category who are upper middle class:

religious - 30%
not religious - 18%
atheist - 16%
buddhist - 21%
protestant - 33%
catholic - 17%

the current president and his cronies are all protestants, often presbyterian i think. korean hasn't had a practicing non-christian head of state since the 1993 (roh moo-hyun was a lapsed catholic, so i don't know what he'd count as, but sociologically he falls into the argument for christian dominance).

"Asian surnames were curiously underrepresented in the list of JD students with top 10% grades. I think that a certain type of logical thinking that Asians excel at is actually counterproductive to acing law school essay exams".
--

I would like to find this list to see how many Hindu names I can find on this list

As with all genetic determinants, one answer is not the whole answer. If behavior also has a genetic basis (and if you are on HS, you already know that), future-time orientation, which is essentially a behavioral trait, is also genetic. East Asians, while having a relatively higher IQ, have a *much* higher future-time orientation, which results in a better work ethic. See Hofstede (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geert_Hofstede), who indexed various cultural values by what he called "nation" but of course we know really means "race." Taiwan, Hong Kong, Japan, Korea, India round out the top five "nations" for Long-Term Orientation. Combine that with higher IQ and you get higher achievements rates that can't be explained by IQ alone.

http://www.clearlycultural.com/geert-hofstede-cultural-dimensions/long-term-orientation/

China - 118
Japan - 80
Brazil - 65
Singapore - 48
Germany - 31
Kenya - 25
Norway - 20

This is really predictive of thrift and deep cultural values?

OK so what we were told above is that 30% of Koreans are what we might call evengelical christians, or fundamentalist christians

I could understand how if a teenage girl from one of these evangelical christian families got pregnant she would put the baby up for adoption and not abort

that explains the large number of korean babies shipped to usa

***The more interesting question and the more appropriate one would be why so many people in the white nationalist community appear to be proles.

Posted by: Yan Shen | September 22, 2010 at 07:46 PM ***

Proles aren't likely to be socialised by New York Times/SWPL norms. Also, as someone above said, they are more directly affected by NAM dysfunction.

I think Godless Capitalist had a good post about how the West is conditioned.

"But here's the thing. You've seen hundreds or thousands of hours of footage of events in which rightist ideas of one stripe or another are causing harm to minorities. The Holocaust, My Lai, Bull Connor, the Japanese internment, Operation Wetback, Columbus, Guantanamo, etc. Literally trillions of dollars in capital investment has resulted in a reflexive, emotional association of rightist action by whites with mass murder in your mind. I know it has because I have the same association. How could you not, when you have been strapped into a chair with the Holocaust beamed into your eyes for the K-12 years and beyond?

But bear with me for a second and imagine what would happen if the polarities had been reversed, if the footage on TV was of the people manning the White
Sea Labor Camps, of the Killing Fields and the laogai, of South African crime and Saudi Arabian fanaticism, of Mexican illiteracy and pre-Columbian savagery.

In short, imagine if the Blank Slate Asymmetry were inverted -- if the footage were intended to spur the immune system of Western Civilization to action (and overaction) rather than to disable it. No doubt such a world would be blinkered and biased in many aspects...but it would in major respects be closer to reality.

It's a vertiginous thing to even contemplate, because it makes you realize the extent of the unreality you've internalized. For example, everyone has been told -- over and over and over again -- that blacks are victims rather than victimizers when the reality is the complete opposite. The realization that the media has been lying to you comes too late...

The whole point is that h-bd is the one determining aspect which is not publicly discussed. Of course marginal tax rates affect tax receipts. But so does IQ. Of course bilingual policy affects immigrant assimilation. But so does IQ. Of course the educational curriculum affects achievement. But so does IQ.

Yet IQ is the factor that cannot be publicly mooted, let alone debated. And as for the reason that it cannot be debated -- that reason is even more doubleplusungood.

Anyway, by now it's a moot point. These taboos are not going to change anytime soon.

Civilizations *do* die. The West had a 500 year run in which it was characterized by being the most willing to jettison holy lies in favor of truth. That willingness to embrace truth, regardless of where it may lead, lead to world beating power and unmatched material wealth. And eventually, it lead to contentment, relaxation, and subsequent immunocompromisation.

In addition to the admission of millions of illiterate migrant workers, the West has now admitted groups that are in some respects symbiotes, but that have now well and truly sabotaged its immune system and its nervous system. Not just the Ashkenazim, but the South and East Asians as well -- my people. If the numbers were manageable that would be one thing; the symbiotes might eventually be integrated into the host.

But the numbers are not manageable. Everyone is now in the ethnic activism game, intent on suppressing the immune response and preventing frank discussion of truth.

"Ask not what you can do for your country, ask how the country can benefit your ethnic group". Look at Racialicious or some of the posters on Sepia Mutiny for examples of this attitude; Racialicious in particular is written by a modern-day Torquemada.

Bottom line -- like a man with a sabotaged immune system, the West can no longer make self/nonself distinctions:

At the heart of the immune system is the ability to distinguish between self and nonself. Virtually every body cell carries distinctive molecules that identify it as self.

And like a man with a damaged nervous system, the West's internal perceptions are out of sync with the external reality. Consider a hand on a hot stove. It does not matter if the lowly epithelial cells are burned by the million if the nerve cells refuse to communicate this truth to the seat of conscious action.

Similarly, the media is the nervous system of a civilization. The signals it chooses to amplify, dampen, or interpret control the response of the body. If paralyzed, it matters not if the body is hale and hearty and theoretically capable of action. A malfunctioning nervous system will leave an otherwise healthy body jerking around in response to phantasms of racism -- or directing its efforts against its own cells.

Witness the reaction to Katrina: the fact that whites had to defend themselves against black looters somehow became an indictment of white racism. The obvious facts on the ground, the facts sensed by those lowly epithelial cells, were simply inverted by a compromised nervous system.

By selective signal amplification or damping one can make overlaps appear to be equalities. The signals exist -- they need not be made up out of whole cloth. One need only turn up the volume on (say) poor migrant workers stranded in the desert and turn down the volume on (say) anchor babies to achieve the desired effect without obvious fingerprints.

...anyway, I've gone on long enough. The West's time in the limelight is fast coming to an end; the West will be known for fractious infighting in the years to come, with the taboo looming above like a solar eclipse, with "decent people" tasked with blotting out truth for as far as the eye can see. Hate speech legislation will come to the US. Sensitivity demands it."

http://www.2blowhards.com/archives/2007/11/watson_populati.html

I wonder if circumcision of American-born Asians plays a role in the differences in characteristics from their Asian born counterparts.

@ Half Sigma

I am a Chinese from WU region of SouthEast China. I am interested in reading some of your IQ-related acticles & comments. Most of the time, however, I find it extremely amatuerious and anoying for many people here repeatedly citing confusing terms such as "Asia", "Asians", etc.

So what is "Asia"? who are "Asians"?

If you are a person with a tiny drop of professionalism and wants to be taken seriously here, please forget and SAY NO FOREVER to "Asia" and "Asians" in HalfSigma, but always specify clearly which and where. e.g. East Asians, South Asian, Southeast Asians, Middle-eastern Asians, etc, etc. They are totally different animals.

I hope that it won't be very difficult for my fellow posters to comprehend that just as if when you are tallking in terms of Maths, 1 is 1 and 2 is 2, not more "several", "a few" -alike screw-up terms such as "Asians","Aisa" OK? Chinese are Chinese; Indians are Indians; Filipinos are Filipinos; Afgans are Afgans... there is a huge gap among each of them.

Rushton and lynn are frequently cited, but for the former, the term "asians" largely refers to Northeast Asians, and for the latter it means alsmot exclusively "South Asians in the sub-continent". So no more blind quotes of them without specifying, is that clear? Thank you very much!

-------------------------------------
-------------------------------------
-------------------------------------

@ MT | Posted at September 22, 2010 at 07:03 PM


"Lynn and Rushton have a tendency, at times, to massage the data. Especially with respect to Indians/South Asians. Flynn is much more intellectually honest about things in general."

It's likely that you are drawing a conclusion too soon without significant stats backup.

-------------------
-------------------


"For example, Indians do pretty well in the UK, despite being the descendants of peasants from Punjab and Gujarat. Lynn and Rushton, despite the data in front of them, ignore this and have compared Indians to the other NAMS."

What do you mean by "Indians do pretty well in the UK"?

Many black people do pretty well in the UK too! And your point is?

Without significant and meaningful stats, your criticism on Lynn& Rushton is feeble at best.

-------------------------------
-------------------------------


"They also ignore that Indian civilization was pretty advanced for most of human history, but then point out Chinese civilization's achievements as an indicator of high Chinese IQ. Intellectual laziness + dishonesty. "

What do you mean by "Indian civilization was pretty advanced for most of human history"?

Persians were pretty advanced too; so were Egyptians, etc.

Any stats on that? Not historical GDP ( India as a concept only has existed for 60 years. Historical GDP of sub-continent as a whole carries little meaning because of the large agrarian population there in teh pre-industrial revolution age), but also GDP pre cap, and concret and recognised technological innovations in both civilian and millitary arenas.

--------------------------------------
--------------------------------------

"Within China, the southeasterners dominated on the imperial exams historically and were very well represented as the business elite. Lots of the Chinese diaspora come from there."

Right and wrong!

yes, that southerners dominated on the imperial exams historically.

NO, because Southeasterners of China refer to a huge amount of population. Which part of Southeast China you refer to? The correct answer is WU region.

As for "Lots of the Chinese diaspora come from there." But from where??? The correct answer is: majority of the Chinese diaspora in SE Asia came from Fujin and Canton provinces, while majority of Chinese diaspora in North America and Europe ( at least early waves) came from Canton Province mainly. That's why traditional Chinese cuisine in the West was mainly Cantonese Cuisine.

-----------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------


"Internal variation within China and India, two highly heterogenous countries, needs to be studied more."

VERY WRONG! China is a highly homogenious country, much much more than India.

This is mainly due to numerous huge wave of historical migrantions within China from the North to the South and from the East to the West, and vice-versus. On top of that, China has never had "Caste System" as India does, hence inter-marriage between most sub groups of Han Chinese has never been an issue.

Another irony is that contrary to "conventional wisdom", China is most likely much more homogenouis than Japan, whose typical DNA is consisted of 25% Han Chinese, 24% Korean and 49% of many many tiny sub races across the region. Sure, Han Chinese itself is highly mixed, yet due the sheer volumn of it at the very beginning, Han is absolutely dominant during numerous assimilation processes.

One of the evidences is that Han Chinese IQ, which has been quite consistent across different regions of China over the years (being the eastern seaboard provinces, or western Sichuan , Northen Manchuria, Northwestern Shangxi, or Southern Canton, or Southeast Fujian, etc.) and diverse overseas Han Chinese communities.

----------------------------------
----------------------------------


"It's likely that subpopulations vary in IQ in both countries. In highly homogenous Korea and Japan, variance would've been more difficult."


Not likely. (see above)

--------------------------------
--------------------------------

" The Kazakhs and Mongolians are north Asian, but don't perform well economically"

I wouldn't lump the two together as Northern Asian like apple-orange ----different races


----------------------------
----------------------------


MT, I am afraid that you have created many misleading confusions wiht that post.

"I think that a certain type of logical thinking that Asians excel at is actually counterproductive to acing law school essay exams."

The Northeast Asian advantage is in visuo-spatial thinking, not verbal-logical. In fact, Northeast Asians tend to be slightly behind Caucasians in verbal reasoning.

"It’s not clear to me if the Asian work ethic is cultural, or partly due to a genetically inherited conscientiousness personality factor. I’ve known some lazy American-born Japanese people. "

I don't know, but I suspect some of it is genetic.

There's plenty of criticism of Lynn and Rushton on the blogsphere. You can Google it if you want more detail. I don't really feel like elaborating on all the points that different posters have made, but Lynn and Rushton have a tendency to ignore data that doesn't fit their theories. Flynn is more willing to admit when the data don't support his personal theories.

In the UK, Indians academically outdo whites on the GCSEs. They also economically perform close to whites on income and have lower rates of incarceration and other social problems. Rushton and Lynn won't tell you that, but it's a reality. What's more impressive is that most Indians are the descedants of laborers from Punjab and Gujarat, though some came as professionals too.

Lynn/Rushton use China's historical accomplishments as evidence of a high IQ, but then can't really explain Persia or India or Egypt. Suggests that their theory needs more refinement.

Where is the Wu region specifically? From my knowledge, the Chinese regions that did well on the exams included present day Zhejiang, southern Jiangsu, Guandong, and Fujian province. These regions, and other urban areas (Haifeng, etc.), produced the bulk of the successful candiates, while large swathes of the the north produced hardly any. Gladwell attributes this to the north being a wheat farming region, while the southerners farmed rice, which is more labor intensive and hence selects more for industriousness.

It's easier for differences to spring up in a country like China, when you consider that different regions are under different selective pressures. For example, the selective pressures of Yunnan would be different from those of the mercantile southeastern coast.

I'd also add that the Chinese didn't have a caste system, but they had a residential permit system that limited entry into the large cities. So that had the effect of creating economic stratification of the affluent in urban areas. There's another issue with Chinese merchant clans, especiallly Cantonese, recruiting and doing business within their clans. So in some respects, China isn't that far apart from India and could have higher IQ subgroups.

China's present day rural-urban inequality, especially in education and economic development, doesn't suggest an equal distribution of abilities across the country, but rather that China is reverting to what it has been historically - advanced in the cities and southeastern coast, but less developed in the interior.

PHD Geneticist Cavalli-Sfozra genetically has lumped in Kazakhs and Mongolians with the other North Asians.


@MT, I've seen some data about Canadian immigrants that indicate Indians doing better among the poorer immigrants from India.

http://crcw.princeton.edu/migration/files/library/Group%20Differences%20in%20Educational%20Attainment%20Among%20the%20Children%20of%20Immigrants%20%282%29.pdf

Skip to about page 18-19, and if you analyze it a bit it indicates that Indian immigrants with non-university educated parents(mostly rural Sikhs), is about 30%.

Likewise the data suggests Africans, Middle-Easterners and etc. are also very high achieving. African samples are extremely low though, and Jamaicans are forming an underclass here as the data confirms. European immigrants with degree-less parents also achieves about 30%.

I can anecdotally confirm this, as my Canadian-equivalent of a magnet high school(80% of our students go on to university) has about a 40% Asian/Indian/Mid-Eastern population. I've yet to see more then five blacks though.

Perhaps Canada is the least racist, most meritocratic system? We have no affirmative action except towards Aboriginals.

Steve Sailer's posts on IQ and population genetics tends to solely concentrate on Euro populations, and incorporation of Asians are usually on the side.

His blog is way too into politicizing HBD as well as the study of genetic intelligence to confirm and cater to his type of audience(who I also suspect that the majority are pretty much standard paleocons, distrusting Jews, distrusting immigrants and holding 1900's WASP views).

Inductivist, GNXP and Information Processing IMO are much more into the science and fascination behind this field.

Has anyone realized that Steve Sailer also comes off as being a bit of a prole?

@YanShen

What does being a prole have to do with anything? Class doesn't determine ideas, words or anything for that matter. Marx was a prole, yet his ideas shaped the academia more so than anyone else at that time.

You are coming off as a prude classist.

Has anyone realized that Yan Shen has an unhealthy obsession with Sailer?

Nanonymous: "Re: Indians. India is very genetically heterogeneous. Very crudely, [caste] =~ separate genetic group. E.g., Brahmins are Indian "Jews"."

• It should be sufficient to set a Munda side-by-side with a Nagamese and a Kashmiri Pandit in your head to see that your first point is, while certainly correct at face, rather understated. Often overlooked in these circles are the tens of millions of Indians belonging to non-caste tribal strata, whose administration poses considerable challenges in the Northeast (a land of Tibeto-Burman-speaking mongoloids that’s really only “India” by dint of the Raj).

• Btw, while the equation of Brahmins with (Ashkenazi) Jews is to some extent well-founded, a far tighter analogue (even down to the apparent initial female-bias of admixture with the natives) would be the Parsis.

Early Catholicism in Korea is a highly interesting case insofar as much that the earliest adherents essentially “converted themselves” through study of Jesuit texts brought from China.

Wencil: "Seems to me that the South Korean predilection for getting rid of females is dysgenic"

• That’s not really the most proximate factor at work. Marriages to women from Southeast Asia, China, Mongolia, etc.*, are primarily a function of the terrible marriage prospects of rural and working-class males (e.g., farmers and fishermen) and of huge population influxes out of the countryside and into urban centers. The figures point to an astoundingly high female aversion to marrying down socioeconomically: I’ve seen it estimated that 30-40% of fishermen and farmers in S. Korea take foreign brides.

* - As a fraction of these marriages, they don’t seem to be all that significant, but there’s probably a preference, ceteris paribus, for ethnic Koreans from NE China or former Soviet Central Asia over racial outsiders.

A Han Chinese: "Another irony is that contrary to "conventional wisdom", China is most likely much more homogenouis than Japan, whose typical DNA is consisted of 25% Han Chinese, 24% Korean and 49% of many many tiny sub races across the region."

• The claim about homogeneity falls flat if your conception of “China” encompasses more than the Han Chinese (do Japan or China have 55 minority “nationalities”?).

• That percentage-wise breakdown is idiotic: (A) because it presumes a historical constancy of ethnicity (or equivalence with geographic origin/phenetic similarity to present-day groups – I don’t know which is worse) which is inconsistent with the antiquity and actual facts of Japanese ethnogenesis. I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you’re not pinning Japanese origins to hoary fables about Xu Fu and the Peng Lai islands.

• Sure, the Yamato Japanese arose from the fusion of comparatively very disparate elements (including, for one, actually non-mongoloid indigenes with affinities to the Ainu), but significantly admixed populations are not precluded from homogeneity – so long as the significance of the ancestral components do not vary widely across geographic regions or social strata. I don’t think the data permit us to talk at great length about the extent of population structuring within Japan, but you might want to look at pairwise FST’s within Han China.

MT: "PHD Geneticist Cavalli-Sfozra genetically has lumped in Kazakhs and Mongolians with the other North Asians."

• Kazakhs have considerable West Eurasian ancestry (though less so than, for instance, Uzbeks and Turkmen) and low but detectable levels (7% is a favorite ballpark) are also present in Mongolians – but this isn’t the smoking gun you’re looking for.

• I’ll next say that Cavalli-Sforza’s techniques had far weaker resolving power than contemporary approaches -- but that's not the whole story either. You should ask yourself whether "North Asian" membership really ought to carry so much weight vis-à-vis IQ (or, rather, economic performance) expectations. Does overall phylogenetic affinity necessarily rule out considerable disparities in intellectual (or other) characteristics? No. Just consider how the massive, shell-eschewing robber crab, Birgus latro, within a clade of “normal” terrestrial hermit crab. Sure, in terms of raw numbers, the Chinese and other practitioners of wet-rice agriculture are overwhelmingly predominant, making high-latitude hunter-gatherers, equestrian nomads, etc., seem like puzzling outliers, but you should think a little bit more about basal and derived conditions.

Perhaps Asian of Reason would like to know that I, a compulsive Sailer reader, don't have the slightest interest in or opinion on white/Asian IQ comparisons (and I went to a high school that was 45% asian). I concede I'm probably unusual. Heck, I can't stand most black people, and I don't even buy that they are IQ-deprived. I just think that when any group gets pre-defined as "cool" (thank you, Norman Mailer) intellectual lethargy is bound to ensue. But if you've got an empirical bent, life outside the Steveosphere can be rather barren.

"These people also like to point out that there are more great white thinkers and inventors, as if trying to show that whiteness had something to do with their success, so that they can take partial-credit for belonging to a superior group. "

Of course it does. The Asian of Reason is Racist because he thinks some Asian groups are superior then.


Are white people moving to Asian countries? No, They suck. If Asians are so great stay in Asia and stop living off of white civilization.

ASIANS,PLEASE STAY IN THE HELL HOLE THAT YOU HAVE CREATED AND GET OUT OF AMERICA.

IF YOU ARE SO SMART,WHY DID YOU NEED W EDWARDS DEMING TO TELL YOU HOW TO MANUFACTURE THINGS?

"as some whites in the “Stevosphere” having racist motivations"

Half Sigma, I thought you weren't going to use the term racist?

I think Americans are now working longer hours than the Japs. Is that good? I'd rather live in Sweden.

The comments to this entry are closed.