Bharat Rakshak

This is a new thread to collect and analyze in one place the growing body of research and data on the factors that influence Intelligence and Achievement. The factors that influence these could be several - including genetic, social factors, religion, maternal & infantile nutrition, diet, education and others. Some of these could also involve a two-way relationship - ie they may not just be input causal factors in determining intelligence, but may also be an effect of the same variation in intelligence (eg social attitudes). So intelligence (or IQ, which is usually taken as the proxy for intelligence) can be analyzed as an output factor, but in some cases also as an input factor eg there are studies in the US that explore how IQ effects social / political beliefs (eg between Republicans & Democrats).

Data regarding Indians in India and in the global diaspora relating to intelligence and achievement parameters will be a key focus of this thread. However data on other ethnic groups such as those with origin in the West, China and Middle East would also be of interest.

Given that some of these can be highly emotive issues - preference would be for analysis and speculation that are backed by data and / or some kind of logical model that proposes linkages between the various factors above.

As a general observation - India is perceived today as a global leader taking market share away from other developed nations in high-end knowledge-driven industries. The diaspora continues to surpass others in most parameters of achievement and educational attainment. There are of course the professional nay-sayers - which covers the spectrum from racist Westerners to that ever-present breed of Indian Marxist / left-liberal denigrators. An example of the latter mentaility, which is also the immediate provocation for this thread is this recent comment:


I will be cross-posting the full post from Abhijeet next. Rather than having these random OT posts in the economic and other threads - a thread such as this devoted to analyzing the complex interlinkages between intelligence, achievement, social attitudes and various other factors is now a necessity.

Crossposted from Indian Economy Thread-

There is almost tendency of dumbing down IQ of Indians everywhere that is a matter of concern. It is like creeping anti-Hinduism festering all over and may have reached various levels even within India.

An example would be how MFHussein was summoned by courts, he left the country and Hindu right wing was blamed for scaring him away, thereby hiding how correct it is to drag such people to courts by Hindus. Another is the case of discontinuing topic of many Ramayanas from education in DU, while Hindus were blamed in some way, the fact later emerged that the teachers could not teach the course correctly.

This is nothing but anti-Hinduism that is thrown around as an excuse while effectively numbing down social discourse in the name of simplification/convenience etc while Hindus are made to lose understanding of true contexts and perspectives.

Another curious thing is dumbing down of officials in India w.r.t. foreign International people.

An example is the current bloody situation where a married Hindu women suffered for more than a week and lost her life. The employee personnel of MEA are suddenly caught unawares. The issue came to light only because the married lady was a known dentist and amongst chief organizers of Diwali festival. The brutal death happened during Hindu festival by chance and the local Hindu community did not celebrate, which lead to issue coming out and the local Irish politicians stretched the issue in local politics and nothing more. The learned MEA official perhaps have not let Indians all over the world aware of such situation where even life-threatening complications could not be treated in hospitals and Indians have to go out of country even for emergency medical purpose, and such issues that are coming from religious dogma and nothing else. Even now MEA officials don't quite say that all a Hindu married lady heard within hospital with doctors present already, was "Sorry, we are a catholic country". MEA officials have perhaps taken great pains to infact refer her as "young woman", etc. in secular manner, as if making Irish personnel aware of significance of religion of Hindu personnel would greatly annoy the Irish first world people.

To measure IQ of Indians in limited sense would be disastrous IMO. What we need is Intelligence that understands diversity, values, work culture, relationship responsibilities as a relative, festivities, and so on.

Given the general lack of systematic surveys and studies on intelligence/ achievement within India - data from Indian diaspora overseas, since they are directly comparable to the local populations, may be more representative and indicative of future competitive reality.

Indian Americans are known to be the highest income ethnic group in the US, but how do they perform on intelligence? Here is one rough data-point (The New Model Minority):

I would not get too carried away.

The IQ of Indians in Canada and the UK is probably much lower than of whites. It all depends on the demographics.

Not true at least for the UK. The closest measure of ethnic IQ is probably the performance of various ethnic groups in the GCSE school board tests. The outperformance by Indians and Chinese has been remarkably consistent over the last decade or so (Chinese population in UK is much lower than Indians and also has a greater self-selection component).

Some data-points here: Chinese and Indian pupils get more top grades at GCSE than British children

Some research on immigrant (2nd generation) educational and income attainments in Canada and Australia that came out just last month: Racial Minority Immigrant Offspring Successes in the United States, Canada, and Australia



Note that 'South Asian' in this study refers to all South Asians (including Pakistanis & Bangladeshis). Given well-known patterns from other developed nations it is almost certain that the figure of S. Asian performance is depressed by the Ps and Bs. Indian educational / income attainment, as a result is likely to be much higher than the S. Asian ethnic average for these countries, and possibly even surpasses the Chinese figure.

I am not doubting these figures. If you care to further analyse them for subgroups, Hindus of every strip do much better than these numbers would indicate. South Indian and Panjabi Hindus again do better than the all-Hindu average.

I have met numerous non-Hindu Indians who are not even doing as well as lower class whites. Again for cultural reasons. Not necessarily innate factors. So it may be good to get a warm fussy feeling if one is Hindu, but large tracts of Indian immigrants are disadvantaged in the UK and Canada.

This is a futile topic in this forum IMHO.. Reason is that even neuroscientists are uncertain how to define intelligence..

Most of the literature ( studies , books , press articles ) that deal with topic on race and intelligence have an element of bias within them ..Some of the articles are outright bigotry... (notably Steve sailors "wealth of nations")


Some of my observations ;-

1) Most of the advancement in theoretical physics and mathematics happened between 1800s and 1940s ...The present Indian HDI and other "well being" indicators match or exceed the western indicators from that period ...This means that in theory we can have as many Einsteins and Max Planks per unit population as germany had in 1900s ..

2) The Average European is far better nourished than he was 6-8 decades ago.. The height of an Average european from 1930s would be about 165 cm (data obtained from millitary recruits) ..they are 10-15cm taller these days ...
Even though massive technological advancements have taken place in the last 6 decades , we are no closer to solving many theoretical ,abstract problems than we were 6 decades ago..For instance we are no closer to discovering the "unified field theory" than Einstein was was ... And how long did it take for us to find the proof of "fermats last therem" ? About 360 years...Yet the chap had the proof back in 1600s ...Even poorest region of Bihar has better HDI than France had back in 1600s ...

3) Technological advancements in Since 1950s arguably exceed those from 10000 BC to 1950s ..The main reason for this is that we are wealthier ...We have built a greater capacity to utilise and mobilise resources and to use them... The foundations of almost every technological development today were laid before the 1950s..

A Paki immigrant in netherlands might be watching goat p0rn on his tablet with an HSDPA network that downloads with 20 MBPS...But the djinns who came up fundamental taniki for 3.5 g or 4g were born in oirope in 1800s when oirope was poorer than present day Bihar...

Not to mention one of the inventors was a certain Indian Bengali by the Name of Jagdish Chandra Bose ..Who was born ,breastfed and brought up in Bengal....Now Bengal in those days had lot worse HDI than it has now..

Very true, and that is precisely the reason for this thread. Steve Sailer and his statistics are a bunch of Grade A BS, but that does not prevent his brand of crap coming up on top when googling for Indians and IQ. As a matter of fact, I'd be quite curious to see if anybody actually perceives even a modicum of justification for Sailer's statistics.

Abhijeet's post I linked on top is another example of how entrenched these views are in Indian left-lib circles, leave alone the West.


Agreed. The focus of this thread is not just on intelligence but also on 'achievement' of various kinds. Achievement is in many cases easier to define than intelligence - for example income statistics are one easy and objective measure of achievement. There are also many others that can be explored.

Arjun, I hadn't been to this forum in a few days. How nice of you to take my post -- without my consent -- from another thread, use it to start a different discussion, and call me names behind my back. Bravo.

Marxist, left-lib -- what BS. As an entrepreneur, I am about as far from a Marxist or leftist as it is possible to be -- though it does leave me with a lower than average tolerance for stupidity.

I substantiated my post with data on why environmental factors are to be blamed for low intelligence -- not genetics or something innate. There is nothing intrinsically unbelievable about this. I noticed that in your voluminous posts above that you do nothing to refute this -- talking about Indians outside India is irrelevant because those environmental factors do not apply. Of course, it's easier to call people names than to think of something intelligent to post in response.

Finally, I remember you asking me to start a thread like this one with a seemingly genuine interest in "exploring the subject" and "not flinching" from it in the interests of science. Given what you've posted above, I can only believe that that suggestion was made in bad faith -- you have no interest in actually exploring the subject, you just want to point to others and call them Marxist etc for making statements that you apparently disagree with.

Dishonest, sneaky and unthinking -- as I said above, bravo sir. Please pat yourself on the back for being such a fine example of a human being.

Abhijeet, Not exactly sure what you mean by 'without my consent' and 'behind my back'.

This topic of the relationship between achievement, intelligence - how one measures these & the factors that are relevant to each in the context of individual / community performance - is one that has been of high interest to me. When I noticed your post a couple of weeks back that related to some of these same topics, I remember mentioning to you that I thought this deserved to be brought up in a thread dedicated to Intelligence studies, and requested you to initiate it - since a full development of that topic in the Economic Thread would have been OT. I waited for a while and initiated it myself since I did not get any response from you.

Instead of replying to you in the Economic thread, I have crossposted your post for further discussion on this thread where it would not be OT - this is fairly standard practice. Also, this is an open forum & and I fail to understand how this goes 'behind your back' when there is nothing hidden whatsoever on this thread or elsewhere.

Also, the focus of this thread is intended to be much broader than some of the immediate issues brought up in your post, as is detailed in my introductory post above.

Btw - since it seems to be causing you discomfort, I will be happy to delete the reference to your comment in my introductory post if the Admins can let me know how that could be done (just noticed that the system does not allow me to modify that post any longer).


The posts above are not intended to refute your particular post at all, though parts of it would be relevant. The scope of this thread is much broader than the specific comments brought up in your post. The latter is something I have not yet come around to addressing, but I will do so in a separate followup post.


We have not yet started exploring the subject - so not really sure why you want to jump to conclusions. Please wait for me to address your particular post and we can then take it from there.

Abhijeet,

Let me first clarify my 'left-lib' comment before coming to the issue raised in your post. I made the assumption (perhaps wrongly) based on your emphasis on the HDI issue that you are a votary of the Amartya Sen school of thought - which de-emphasizes growth in favor of HDI / redistribution schemes (as you know, Amartya is the main force behind the HDI idea). This is the classic left-liberal thinking that went behind the economic mess that India is in today (no wonder Jagdish Bhagwati referred to 'those economists' as 'NY cockroaches who turn-up perennially'). In case you are not of that school of thought - my apologies in advance.

Coming back to the post of yours, my primary issue is with the phrasing (& I will elaborate on the couple of dangers I see there). Beyond the phrasing issue, there are only some questions that logically follow from your conclusions that can be validly debated on this thread.

As regards phrasing, you've yourself used the term 'poverty p0rn' in a recent post to describe an article from the Economist relating to India. It refers to the modus operandi of focusing with regular periodicity, for the magazine's own reasons, on poverty statistics of India to the exclusion of other aspects. Usually these statistics are completely true - but that doesn't make it any less of 'poverty p0rn'. I see the same danger with something I term as 'underdevelopment p0rn' which many from the Amartya Sen school regularly indulge in to focus repeatedly and incessantly on HDI / underdevelopment issues to the exclusion of any other positive aspect in India's growth....I definitely see the danger here based on some of your comments such as the ones below, as also many others where you've focused on infrastructure deficits as opposed to 'mental faculty deficits':



Btw, this 'underdevelopment p0rn' MO comes not only from one particular breed of 'economists' but also from many overseas sources who are looking to dent India's image and standing as THE leading offshore destination for high-end R&D work (Steve Sailer kind of statistics is an example of racist idiocy of this kind...Your comments will only provide ammo for Steve Sailer, despite the fact that you disclaim any 'genetic factors' as being responsible).

You mention that you are an entrepreneur. The very many entrepreneurs I deal with as part of my business, are typically highly optimistic by nature. In many ways it is an intrinsic part of being an entrepreneur. Entrepreneurs make things happen - they focus on the solution as opposed to the problem. Its the back-office / babu mentality of 'why things can't be done' that has been of immense irritation to me personally (as I am sure it has been for you).

Now that we are past the phrasing, the substance of the issue you've raised is that most (ie >50%) Indians are intrinsically less smart than Americans at the same percentile of IQ, because of HDI issues such as malnourishment. The questions that follow from this, which we can debate are-

1. What is the true percentage of the Indian population with cognitive / mental faculties impaired as a result of malnourishment and HDI issues?

2. What do we know about the effect of malnourishment on intelligence? How can we quantify this?

3. How much of the HDI issue is a drag on achievement of economic growth, ie is the rest of the non-malnourished population already fully productive in gainful occupation such that growth is now stunted because of lack of supply of reasonably intelligent workers?

4. Presumably, using your same logic, the average Keralite is much smarter than the average Maharashtrian or Kannadiga ? And an average Indian Hindu much smarter than an Indian Muslim ? Would you agree with these and other similar statements that apply your same logic regarding mental faculties?

Further, you've also raised an issue with the thinking abilities of the engineers you've come across. Presumably these engineers did not grow up malnourished. So would this mean you are now questioning the intelligence of the entire Indian population (rather than only those who grew up malnourished) ? This would imply that practically all Indians (including perhaps folks like yourself and the rest of us out here) are relatively less smart than an American at a similar percentile of IQ?? Besides obvious conflict with self-perception, this varies widely with the known statistics as to which locations are the most scalable for high-end R&D offshoring globally & available statistics on first generation Indian-American IQ.

Are the obese, for example in USA, also considered malnourished? Are there any studies on the relationship between obesity and intelligence or professional achievement?

On the other hand, folklore in India speaks of doing tapasya without thought for food or drink to achieve a higher level of consciousness! How does that fit in?

Good point !

A recent study relating intelligence of child and obesity of mother here: Obese Mothers Give Birth to Less Intelligent Children


And here's a trend that means that the US may need to worry more about its coming 'Retardation Cliff' rather than the Fiscal Cliff: Fat and getting fatter: U.S. obesity rates to soar by 2030

Arjun, quoting someone else is standard practice on this and other forums. Using their post as the anchor for a new thread, and then using that as an excuse to call them names, is not.

To dumb it down further, perhaps appropriately for this thread: it would have been ok if you had taken my post, quoted it here, and said "here are some parts I disagree with, and here's why". It is emphatically not ok to take my post and use it to say "here's a Marxist left-lib thinker and here's how they think". That is unsubstantiated BS and I called it out as such -- causing you to again retreat behind a facade of hurt innocence.

You should see an edit button next to every post you've made on this forum, and you can use that to remove your wild rantings about my motives if you like.

No, looks like there is a recent change to the system. The Edit button only appears for the last 2 posts I have made (probably set to some time limit - last 24 hours?).

Since I might have made an erroneous assumption about your motives, I will be happy to change my posts if the Admins help out. There are only two - the introductory one and another one some bit later.

Added Later: Abhijeet, my calling you a 'left liberal' has clearly upset you. If you are a votary of the Amartya Sen school of thought - that does make you a left-liberal in my eyes. At this point I don't know for sure whether you are or are not a follower of that camp - but irrespective, that entire issue does not belong to this thread and I will therefore be happy to remove those references.

I would just add that I termed you a left-liberal because I believed you were one. You term the majority of Indians 'stupid' because you believe they are so. I will leave it to others to decide which person is more of a 'fine example of a human being', a phrase you've used on one of your posts above.

Now that we've put that issue to rest, look forward to your comments on my last response to your post.

The Global Bell Curve

Summary of Richard Lynn's work in global IQ, which deserves study on this thread:


Lynn is essentially on the right track, by studying long-term consistent differences between the performance of various ethnic groups, when forced by circumstances to compete in the same region. However he errs in two ways-

1) What he's basically tracking is a measure of the 'competitive ability' of various groups when competing together in the same region for economic and educational rewards. It would therefore be more appropriate to use the relative rankings above as a measure of 'competitive ability' of ethnic groups rather than an IQ ranking, which is a more controversial and ill-conceived term.

2) He's obviously wrong in focusing on 'racial hierarchies' when these differences are masked by much larger differences within races due to other factors such as social attitudes and religious values. That explains the faulty result where he assigns 'South Asians' (which he considers as one race) to be overall inferior to whites in competitive ability - when a simple analysis of competitive ability measures of Indians (who are predominantly non-Muslim), Pakistanis and Bangladeshis would make it obvious to any researcher that Indians have consistently outperformed Whites in all regions. 'South Asian' averages are very obviously depressed by the huge non-Indian contingents in these regions.

I have posted data in earlier posts that detail out the outperformance by Indian population over Whites in the US, UK, Canada and Australia. Even if one considers other older diaspora areas (Malaysia/Singapore, South Africa, West Indies, Fiji) - in each case the Indian population has outperformed based on education parameters (as well as economic, if one ignores affirmative action for local bhumiputras in some regions) when compared to the local non-immigrant populace in each one of these regions.

Clearly, if we are to establish a competitive ability ranking like the one Lynn attempts - Indians would definitely rank above Whites. The more pertinent issue is really the relative position of East Asians and Indians at the top of the heap. Here the results seem to be mixed. Chinese in India don't seem to be doing all that well in relative terms. Chinese seem to be doing much better than Indians in Malaysia/Singapore.

Anybody with any research/data that adds to or refutes / corroborates either Lynn's or my categorizations ?

There are many other serious problems with interpretation and in fact basic inference with this global Lynn effect. So 30 years ago Chinese were economically at the level of Africa.

A most remarkable evolution o f achievement and hence IQ over 3 decades. It really does help to be a bit smarter than Phillip Rushton when discussing IQ.

This could be a valid argument if China was economically no different than Africa for most of its recorded history. Obviously, that's simply not true.

Anyway, this topic has been done to death under "The Real Indian IQ" at the India-Forum. Basically, the Indians there exhaustively try to prove their IQ is as high as the Chinese. They go through every single American PSAT score in every single state and every single intelligence based competition known to man where Indians and Chinese compete against each other. This goes on for 25+ pages. Around page 22-ish, the OP finally concedes the Chinese are smarter and then a few days later he deletes all those posts and resumes again trying prove Indians are as smart. Maybe this is a kind of group therapy for you guys, but amusing nevertheless.

In my field, quantitative finance, all the heavy lifting is done by Chinese, Russian Jews, Ivy/OxBridge Caucasians and French dudes. The IIT Vikram Pandit-types may be able to play the politics and get ahead that way, but they simply can't do the real work.

The whole IQ issue is overwrought and obnoxious, anyway. No one these days seriously believes in the idea of innate superiority of a race or ethnicity. That some ethnicities do generally better than others is a function of upbringing, support, environment, education and other factors. Not of their skin pigmentation or geographical origin. One does find Chinese bringing up this whole silliness in various fora, often forcing Indians into an unpleasant discussion. That Chinese do indeed raise the matter is a function of their authoritarian, domineering mindset, which comes from their political ideology that they have had drilled into them for ages. Not of course, because of their race. One should challenge these Chinese to go on a liberal American, British or Canadian TV discussion programme, and state plainly that they think Chinese( or whomever) is innately smarter than some other 'race' or ethnicity. And see how long they last!

Sanjay,

There are a couple of core assumptions of the Lynn study that I completely agree with-

1) That there are patterns of consistent difference in the performance (education/income or other achievement parameters) between various ethnic groups, and that these differences NEED to be studied. I am NOT with those who believe that these differences need to be papered over & perhaps not even studied or researched. That would clearly amount to an anti-science position.

2) That the best way of studying these differences is to examine multi-ethnic societies (ie societies where multiple ethnicities coexist and have competed on education / economic fruits over a long period of time). I believe this methodology to be a BETTER indicator of competitive ability of ethnicities, than say performance in TIMSS, PISA kind of tests that don't involve direct co-location of nationalities.

Besides these two, Lynn pretty much screws up on all other assumptions and conclusions - including linking performance to intelligence (wrong - I would link it simply to one valid kind of competitive ability) and linking the difference to race (wrong - race may be one factor, but attitudes towards education /religion / income levels etc play a much bigger role than race).

There are some very clear conclusions that can be derived from ALL studies worldwide. Both the Chinese and Indians in most cases do outperform local White / Black / indigenous populations on educational & increasingly, income parameters.

Here's yet another validation, this time from Canada on Chinese + Indian outperformance: Group Differences in Educational Attainment Among the Children of Immigrants


Wong, welcome to the thread.

There are 50% more Chinese Americans in the US than there are Indian-Americans. Was this factor accounted for in the comparison? Since I, & presumably others here, are not familiar with the India Forum thread, we will just have to examine the data again on this one...


Anecdotal examples don't mean anything. If you have any statistics on # of Chinese vs Indians starting hedge funds in the US, THAT I would consider as useful data. Surely analyst kind of work must translate at some point into being able to show returns directly to investors! Wall Street seems to be one place where Indians may be more numerous than the Chinese. Now that is again my anecdotal impression - any statistics to prove one way or the other would be useful.

This could be a valid argument if China was economically no different than Africa for most of its recorded history. Obviously, that's simply not true.



And if the Chinese were so smart, how did they get themselves to the level of Africa? Was it the foreign, round eyed devils?

I am inclined to believe the wisdom of the engineers of the Communist Party of Chin,: the average Chinese is not bright enough to direct his own society.





There are a couple of core assumptions of the Lynn study that I completely agree with-

1) That there are patterns of consistent difference in the performance (education/income or other achievement parameters) between various ethnic groups, and that these differences NEED to be studied. I am NOT with those who believe that these differences need to be papered over & perhaps not even studied or researched. That would clearly amount to an anti-science position.



2) That the best way of studying these differences is to examine multi-ethnic societies (ie societies where multiple ethnicities coexist and have competed on education / economic fruits over a long period of time). I believe this methodology to be a BETTER indicator of competitive ability of ethnicities, than say performance in TIMSS, PISA kind of tests that don't involve direct co-location of nationalities.



Of course there are major differences between ethnic groups and multi-ethnic societies are prima facie the way to look at these issues.


Let us take the example of Canada-a relatively egalitarian, liberal society where immigrants can do very well.

The aboriginal population scores dead last on any scholastic or achievement metric one cares to examine. Obviously IQ tests included. Phillipe Rushton would express paroxysms of pleasure only that is politically unacceptable here currently.

However let us examine the demographics and politics more closely: These peoples are the detritus of genocide, they are marginalised, physically sequestered from civilisation. They may live on the worst land hundreds of miles from the cities where the quality of life may well be the best in the world. However natives are provided the worst teachers, the worst schooling, the worst public health, hepatitis and TB are not uncommon; they may have no running water. They have had their children abducted by the state, and Christian groups, and concentrated in schools where they were taught to despise their ancestral religions, languages and culture. They have been narcotised with alcohol as their only anodyne.

Now is it surprising that they score dead last on IQ tests.

Of course, one may consider them as genetic Chinese, transplanted across the Bering Sea.

I was just trying to be kind. The truth is China of 30 years ago was still way ahead in most HDI metrics than Africa and South Asia even today for everything from literacy to life expectancy to infant mortality. So things were bad, but they never got themselves to India bad.

Look at it this way, 30 years ago China had a true ICBM with a 12,000+ km range, does Africa or India today?? China in 1982 already mastered the hydrogen bomb. Has Africa or even India (for real) today?? How about the simple assault rifle?? I could keep going, but it's clear China of 30 wasn't even Africa today. Does IQ play a part in that?? I think so.

Yes, it may take a type of IQ to let 30 million starve, kill off another 30 million and turn into the running dog of the Soviet Union in spite of the Russiansi low opinion of you. So you got your bomb a few years earlier. Please don't insult my intelligence.

Sanjay & Wong- This thread would go entirely off track if we start attributing country governance issues to IQ (and frankly I don't believe there is any relationship between the two).

This thread would focus ONLY on individual achievement or competitive ability statistics in various areas. Community achievement would only be discussed in the context of being the aggregate of individual achievements.

Please stay off any further discussion that links failure of governance in India, China or any other nation to competitive abilities of individuals in that country.

"quantitative finance". Dark mysterious stealth missile indeed. I guess I will have to handover my savings to you guys now that you have the futuristic skunkworks version of Sakuni's dice.

That's an extremely poor argument. Famine and IQ have zero relationship. North Koreans regularly starve to death, but they are 100% genetically similar to their South Korean brother and sister (humans btw are 99.9% similar, 98.8% gets you to a chimp, 60% gets you a banana plant).

It does however take IQ to create an atomic bomb like the North Koreans have done with a minuscule population, half of which are always starving to death. It takes even more IQ to create a thermonuclear one. Something Africa obviously hasn't done and India also (the fusion part of Pokhran-II is a matter of controversy outside of India).

Again, this approach has been done to death. The most recent being Anatoly Karlin on Indian IQ.
http://akarlin.com/2012/08/18/rec1man-on-indian-iq/
http://akarlin.com/2012/08/14/the-puzzl ... -and-jews/

Inevitably this approach turns into a game of outlier math for Indians, as if that one Indian child with a 200+ IQ somehow makes up for the tens of millions that don't even come close

I am well aware of the many kooks out there on the net, including this particular kook.

Maybe you did not notice this particular piece from me in an earlier post, on the methodology we are going to be using on this thread-



Basically all these PISA, TIMSS and country tests mean zilch. What really matters is the consistent patterns we see when two or more communities directly compete with one another in a meritocratic setup.

The data that is pouring in from all such multi-ethnic societies is quite consistent. In the US - Indian Americans dominate by far any other community on educational / income parameters. Some doubters raise the argument that Indian Americans are highly 'self selected', ie only the best from India go to the US. That is not entirely true, but even if we were to accept that argument - one only needs to look at the UK & Canada where the communities that emigrated were from what would be considered among the lower castes. And yet, the outperformance with respect to the White population is very evident and consistent. So, all this IQ stuff is sheer BS - what matters is that even the supposed 'bottom' half from India outperforms the local populations wherever they have gone in large numbers.

How do Asian Indians vote

Interesting that Steve Sailer, who has been associated with junk statistics on IQ, has realized the writing on the wall...He now says Indian-Americans are the group most likely to come close to the Jews of America in terms of power and ability to mould the country's opinions.

That's an extremely poor argument. Famine and IQ have zero relationship. North Koreans regularly starve to death, but they are 100% genetically similar to their South Korean brother and sister (humans btw are 99.9% similar, 98.8% gets you to a chimp, 60% gets you a banana plant).



"Someone with a modicum of intelligence would have realised that there are three ways in which this is relevant.


If a society sacrifices tens of millions to build a technological toy, even if only 0.1% of them have any true intelligence, much can be done.

If Chinese are so smart how did they ever get themselves killed like flies?

With reference to South Korea, yes that is the whole point, societies and individuals are engineered. Just as your father was engineered to sing the Little Red Book and you were engineered to be rich and glorious.

Please let us raise the level of debate.

Here's the flaw with your methodology and I'll quote one of Mr Karlin's commenters verbatim since he/she does such a nice job (and saves me the time):

[The notion that “India – A Country Of Gypsies And Jews” is very flawed. A lazy remark if i dare to say.

“Brahmins have average IQ in the US of 112 ” is the key here. Assuming (I have yet to look at detail from which generally recognised stats 112 comes from) this is a fact, it won’t automatically deduce that Brahmins as a tribe have average IQ of 112, for if test the most recent sub-sahara H1B1 arrivals to USA by idenifying one specific African tribe as we do to Brahmins, then one might get the same conclusion that ” Kenya(or whatever) is a Country Of Gypsies And Jews”; or if single out H1B1 Russians or Germans or Mongolians or Iranians, we’ll get Russia ( or Germany or Sweden or Mongolia or Iran) is nation of Country Of Gypsies And Super Super Super Jews, aren’t they? lol. It makes no sense anymore in such contex where basically you get top 3 or 4 sd.

If all brahmins in India are free to travel and work in USA by only showing their identity cards to the customs, will Brahmins in the US have the same or remotely close to “112 average IQ” (here again, assuming the stats behind is legit)? I guess we all know the answer here, don’t we?

Or look from another angle, actually the RIGHT question here that should be logically asked, and asked loudly, is that

“Why it is so so low of ONLY 112 average IQ”?
( logically assuming the stats behind don’t include some illegal Brahmins who work in cornershops, 7/11, motels and cashwash…at all, but only include those with official SS numbers who primarily in unis and basic code-writting IT firms of H1B1 type)

If not Brahmins, but say Lower Saxon Germans or Flemish Belgians or Alps Italians primarily on H1B1 instead, their average IQ in the US would probably shoot up to the roof towards 130 or more!]

Wow, more flaws in your Indian "logic". Ashkenazi Jews allowed 50%+ of their population (in your words) to be "killed like flies". The Korean War took 35%+ of the North Korean population. "Killed like flies" as you say. The Great Leap Forward that Indians love to talk about took less than 5% of China's population and even less of the Han Chinese race as a whole when you include everybody. Does that mean the Ashkenazi Jews are basically retards by your logic and dumber than Indians??

Yes, you definitely need to raise your level of debate. Agreed.

Err.....was it Jews killing each other?

But it was Chinese killing each other.

^^^

Eh, where Chinese killing each other either during the Great Leap Forward???

LOL, Under the "great" Indian education system you aren't taught about the many Indian famines, like they never happened??

And Jews sent Jews to the gas chamber and Germans/Non-Jews saved Jews. Spielberg made a movie about it, perhaps you've of it or its Bollywood knock-off??

I think this discussion has been debased as much as it can.

Onward Christian soldiers!

"However let us examine the demographics and politics more closely: These peoples are the detritus of genocide, they are marginalised, physically sequestered from civilisation. They may live on the worst land hundreds of miles from the cities where the .."

Wonderfully said. Can you picture a mainland Chinese using words like 'detritus' or 'institutional', 'deconstruct', 'reductionist', 'post modern' etc. Their mindset, which comes from their political ideology, is more about domination and control. They won't use humanistic, universalistic expressions, that itself would dilute the whole game of rabid ethno-centrism and ethno-supremacy. You can see this on message boards, wherever there is any question of an China-India comparison.