Troublesome Sources: Nicholas Wade’s Embrace of Scientific Racism

Jon Phillips, Hatewatch, May 28, 2014

Editor’s Note: Earlier this month, a book by a well-known science writer was published by Penguin Press that seemed to support many of the claims made by academic racists over the years. Because of the importance to the proponents of racism and anti-Semitism of the controversial assertions made in A Troublesome Inheritance: Genes, Race and Human History, Hatewatch asked Jon Phillips, a graduate student and free-lance writer who studies the history of science with a focus on politics and evolutionary biology, to review the 278-page book and its claims.

Nicholas Wade’s new book, A Troublesome Inheritance, is only the latest in a long line of works arguing that humans can be divided into discrete races, and that between those races, there are differences in behavior, temperament, intelligence, and even political and economic structures. Although the specifics of the arguments change, what remains constant is the idea that white people of European descent are inherently smarter, better, more “civilized” than members of other races, especially black Africans and their descendants. Wade’s work is no exception.

This book’s failure as a work of popular science has been well documented by biologists and anthropologists. This review will focus on another problem with Wade’s book, one just as damning as its scientific errors: its uncritical reliance on and legitimization of fringe racist theories masquerading as mainstream biology.

Wade, a former science writer for The New York Times, attempts to fabricate a sense of scientific credibility for his outlandish theories with the division of his book into two very different sections. The first half is intended as a survey of the history and science of research into human evolution, race, and genetics, and Wade supports most of his claims with citations to scientific literature.

In the second, more ”speculative” half of the book, Wade’s claims about human genetics and evolution continue, but the scientific sources disappear. It is in this part of the book, for example, that Wade explains modern history through the claim that “European populations” have a genetic predisposition to “open societies and the rule of law to autocracies,” while the Chinese are inherently “drawn to a system of family obligations, political hierarchy, and conformity.” He posits that white Europeans and East Asians are innately more intelligent than Papuans or members of other “Stone Age societies” because “intelligence can be more highly rewarded in modern societies because it is in far greater demand.” Although he acknowledges at the outset that these portions of the book are intended to be speculative, in the text he presents these racist, hackneyed ideas as though they are simple facts, uncontroversial and incontrovertible.


{snip} In what is probably the most ill-judged element of his entire project, Wade decided to devote an entire chapter to the issue of Jewish intelligence and biological distinctiveness. Wade frames his discussion around a revisionist history of Judaism by two economists, Maristella Botticini and Zvi Eckstein, which argues that throughout history, a religious emphasis on literacy and learning explains how Jews became “an urban population of traders, entrepreneurs, bankers, financiers, lawyers, physicians, and scholars.”

But where Botticini and Eckstein credit social structures that prioritized education with paving the way for Jewish successes, Wade claims that the real driving force was the evolution of a unique intelligence that has allowed Jews to thrive, even in the face of a hostile majority. Wade quotes historian Jerry Muller as saying that “Jews had the behavioral traits conducive to success in a capitalist society,” and uses this to argue that, just as “Eskimos” are adapted to cold weather and Tibetans are adapted to high altitudes, Jews are “adapted” to capitalism.

This “adaptation” to capitalism has come about, according to Wade, through an “evolutionary process” that has led to Jewish minorities producing “proportionately more individuals of higher cognitive capacity” than their “host populations.” {snip}

Wade bases his belief in genetically-enhanced Jewish intelligence on a single paper, which he describes as “[t]he only serious recent attempt by researchers to delve into the links between Jewish genetics and intelligence.” This paper, from University of Utah researchers Henry Harpending, Gregory Cochran, and Jason Hardy, “elaborates the hypothesis that the unique demography and sociology of Ashkenazim in medieval Europe selected for intelligence.”

That hypothesis is the brainchild of Kevin MacDonald, an evolutionary psychologist and director of the racist American Freedom Party (formerly “American Third Position”), which he founded with lawyer William D. Johnson [… .] {snip}


MacDonald has published several books arguing that the Ashkenazim eugenically self-selected for high intelligence over several centuries, thus explaining the modern Jewish community’s “general disproportionate representation in markers of economic success and political influence,” and ability “to command a high level of financial, political, and intellectual resources in pursuing their political aims.”


Although they may not share MacDonald’s rabid anti-Semitism, Harpending and Cochran are no strangers to political controversy themselves. {snip}

Like Cochran, Harpending is obsessed with racial differences in intelligence. Harpending denies any racist motivations behind his work; however, his political activities tell a different story. In 2009, he participated in a conference on “Preserving Western Civilization,” where he spoke alongside notorious racists like Peter Brimelow (president and chief contributor to the white supremacist and Jean-Philippe Rushton (president of the Pioneer Fund from 2002 until his death in 2012). The statement of purpose from that conference read:

We believe that America’s Judeo-Christian heritage and European identity must be defended. Today, our glorious Western civilization is under assault from many directions. Three such threats will be discussed at this conference. First, the massive influx to the United States and Europe of Third-World immigrants who do not share our fundamental political and cultural values. Second, the threat from Islam, a militant ideology that is hostile to our society and, in principle, committed to destroying it. Third, because of the persistent disappointing performance of blacks (which many whites mistakenly blame on themselves) many whites have guilt feelings that undermine Western morale and deter us from dealing sensibly with the other threats.

Harpending is stridently anti-immigrant, stating, “I personally favor mass deportation [of “illegal” Mexican immigrants] . . . It might not be so difficult: there must be a large number of FEMA trailers that could be used to stock processing centers and in Utah, the site of several WWII Japanese internment camps, plans and blueprints must exist to reconstruct those camps.”

Harpending rejects the label of “racist,” because, as far as he can tell, racism does not exist. Showing an impressive lack of self-awareness, Harpending argues against the existence of racism by comparing it to the “witchcraft” of the Herero people of the northern Kalihari, and suggesting that black Americans only perceive racism because of some inherent pan-African belief in “vague and invisible forces that are oppressing people.”


Wade tries to insulate himself against charges of racism by saying “that ideas about race are dangerous when linked to political agendas.” The problem is that he doesn’t appear to understand what constitutes a political agenda, and why bias can be a problem. Most of the people Wade chastises for political abuses of biology throughout his book were anti-racist. He uses palentologist Stephen Jay Gould to prove that scientists “are as fallible as anyone else when their emotions or politics are involved.” Population geneticist Richard Lewontin’s arguments about biological diversity among human populations were based on a “misleading political twist.” Anthropologist Franz Boas’ anti-racism “may [have been] laudable in motive, but political ideology of any kind has no proper place in science.”

And so, for Wade, opposing racism is the kind of political bias that cannot be overcome, but white supremacy, anti-Semitism, and eugenics are not political at all, and certainly not sources of bias. Eminent scientists whose politics fall to Wade’s left, especially on race, are ideologues whose work is tainted. Yet Wade treats extremists like Lynn and Jensen, along with far-right businessman and failed Republican political candidate Ron Unz, as serious thinkers on issues of race and psychometric analysis.

Wade also encourages belief in an academic conspiracy of silence on racial issues. He deliberately misrepresents scientists on the subject, twisting their words to suggest that they are admitting to being in on it. To take one example, Wade discusses a paper from forensic anthropologist Norman Sauerarguing against the reality of biological race and discussing how to avoid being misunderstood by the public as endorsing it. Wade says that “[Sauer’s] suggestion was to obfuscate, by retaining the concept but substituting a euphemism for the word race, such as ancestry.” Needless to say, this is the opposite of Sauer’s conclusion, which was that anthropologists should “be more explicit about the social or cultural concepts of race” and “teach the non-existence of race in the classroom and do our best to clarify the use of races in forensic anthropology.”

Wade’s paranoid belief that he is sharing a forbidden truth that scientists are working to suppress makes little sense coming from a respected science journalist. It would certainly be out of place in the pages of the New York Times, but it’s an idea that has widespread popularity in the dark corners of the Internet, on websites and forums whose users equate diversity with “white genocide,” or rail against the“Zionist Occupation Government.”


Wade’s book has been publicly endorsed by former KKK Grand Wizard David Duke, championed by noted white supremacists like Jared Taylor, John Derbyshire, and Steve Sailer, and tirelessly promoted on the neo-Nazi forum Stormfront, which the SPLC has shown to be linked to almost 100 racially motivated murders over the past five years. For all of Wade’s supposed concerns about the politicization of science, his book is entirely a phenomenon of the racist, far-right fringe.


Topics: , , ,

Share This

We welcome comments that add information or perspective, and we encourage polite debate. If you log in with a social media account, your comment should appear immediately. If you prefer to remain anonymous, you may comment as a guest, using a name and an e-mail address of convenience. Your comment will be moderated.
  • propagandaoftruth

    Took me a paragraph to smell the stink of hatchetry. Pathetic and misrepresentative ideological assault pure and simple.

    • Sick of it

      The third paragraph contains the biggest lie in this work of fiction. Real scientists know that racial differences exist. How could one honestly call himself an anthropologist…and then state we are all the same? Then what is the purpose of his profession? They study the DIFFERENCES for a living!

      • propagandaoftruth

        Anthropology, based on Boasian assumptions, is a form of crypto-Marxism. Of course it’s opposed to science.

  • MarcB1969

    It’s always “scientific racism” whenever points are well-reasoned and threaten the Left’s egalitarian apple cart.

  • JP Rushton

    ” Although the specifics of the arguments change, what remains constant
    is the idea that white people of European descent are inherently
    smarter, better, more “civilized” than members of other races”

    “He posits that white Europeans and East Asians are innately more
    intelligent than Papuans or members of other “Stone Age societies”
    because “intelligence can be more highly rewarded in modern societies
    because it is in far greater demand.”

    “Wade decided to devote an entire chapter to the issue of Jewish intelligence and biological distinctiveness.”

    In the first paragraph he tells us this guy is a white supremacist, but Wade talks about how intelligent East Asians and Jews are. I doubt Wade is secretly wearing a Klan robe at home. Maybe, just maybe, this book is a balanced look at race and intelligence?

  • Samuel_Morton

    Wow, they got an impressionable young graduate student to write a hatchet job. Blatant guilt by association: the SPLC labels MacDonald a white supremacist, Cochran and Harpending write an article about Jewish intelligence, which is enough to link them to MacDonald, and Wade cites the article by Cochran and Harpending. Thus, Wade’s book is fanning the flames of white supremacy.

    With this kind of logic, you could also claim that all vegetarians are genocidal fascists because, you know, Hitler.

    • shawnmer

      Was wondering how many caught that clumsy sleight of hand. The paper addresses “McDonald’s hypothesis” ergo the work – with no involvement from McDonald – must be tainted. Nothing saying the authors ever even heard of him.

    • Pro_Whitey

      While you are at it, bring up the fact that Hitler was supposedly anti-tobacco, or so I understand. Rob Reiner is a Nazi!

  • MekongDelta69

    Babbling from a site called Hatewatch

    Skip article…


  • Unintentionally a SUPER review. If I were a blank slate and read this review, I’d be nodding my head yes over and over at the parts describing theories of racial differences. I’d be shaking my head no at the reviewer for throwing in his silly, inconsequential “racist” and hater accusations. I’d be looking up this Jared Taylor fellow and all the other “racists” mentioned.

    This review will will win us friends and influence those uneducated in matters of race, but who look around and see the truth with their own eyes. Too bad it’s published on splc, where only self-hating, self-annihilating libtard anti-racists will read it.

    • propagandaoftruth

      Hatewatch asked Jon Phillips, a graduate student and free-lance writer who studies the history of science with a focus on politics and evolutionary biology, to review the 278-page book and its claims.


      Here kid. Hack this up and yer in even if yer white.

      Degrees of degrees, eh?

  • JackKrak

    I just realized that anything called “Hatewatch” can help me fill my bookshelves better than Amazon can….

  • HJ11

    The bigotry of the race-deniers is well known. They are our modern version of those who once denied that the sun is the center of the solar system. Bigots never change, they just change their targets.

    This review by a graduate student is so sophormoric and silly that taking it apart line by line to show the errors and lack of critical thinking would be like wasting your time telling a little child that his belief in the boogey man in his closet just isn’t rational.

  • dcc2379

    A hundred years of IQ testing prove races have different intelligences. A hundred years of crime statistics prove races have different cognitive functioning. Case closed.

    • JohnEngelman

      It is dangerous to point that out publicly unless white racism is blamed.

    • LHathaway

      What happened to examining new scientific evidence?

      • dcc2379

        What new evidence discounts my two facts about intelligence and crime? Please speak up and let us know. We all want to know!

        • LHathaway

          There were those authors examining IQ and the ‘Flynn’ effect. Most of the ‘scientific’ literature on IQ takes the ‘anti-racist’ position. Besides, Engelman is responsible for providing leftist factoids here, not me : )

          • dcc2379

            I have to take offense here. Anti-racist is the opposite of scientific debate. People like Charles Murray and Richard Herrnstein, serious academics, take the view that data overwhelmingly support IQ is connected to race. Economists like Thomas Sowell also state that race and crime and IQ are more than a correlation. Indeed, most of the scientific literature will not touch this issue because to speak a truth that one does not want to hear causes an end of a career.

    • Independent Thinker

      The evidence for group and individual differences is very well established and very consistent over time, these same inherent differences between individuals and groups pop up in virtually every environment that is more or less the same for the inhabitants. And the differences are found regardless of who takes the data or does the observing etc. The evidence (intelligence tests, crime statistics) has been scrutinized for bias and confounds,and has been very carefully taken so as to exclude any bias from the data and conclusions using basic statistical and research methods.

      The most ironic thing is that as far as individuals and groups are concerned differences in intelligence and personality i.e. aggressiveness, diligence, kindness, honesty, etc tend to be so obvious that anyone who makes egalitarian statements such as “all people are essentially the same” is either denying reality and duping themselves, or has a very limited ability to reason coupled with an aggressive personality and a disposition towards thinking they’re entitled to everything.

      No one would deny that individuals and groups look different physically and no one (who is honest and reasonable) should deny that they are different psychologically as well.

  • Guest

    Jon Phillips, in his last paragraph, engages strictly in personality destruction by associating Wade with the likes of David Duke and Stormfront.
    While avoiding the central question: Is Wade correct ?

    • tlk244182

      Another question might be “are David Duke and Don Black correct?”

      • adplatt126

        No, that’s the better question. Wade is correct. Duke and Black…eh, I think there’s probably some truth in what they say.

  • DaveMed

    More lies about Jared Taylor.

    My contempt for today’s graduate schools’ standards knows no bounds.

  • JohnEngelman

    Although the specifics of the arguments change, what remains constant is the idea that white people of European descent are inherently smarter, better, more “civilized” than members of other races, especially black Africans and their descendants. Wade’s work is no exception.

    – Jon Phillips, Hatewatch, May 28, 2014

    Any credible race realist acknowledges the higher average IQ’s and lower crime rates of Orientals.

    • Einsatzgrenadier

      More credible race realists acknowledge that Northeast Asians (“Orientals”) do not have higher IQ’s than Europeans. In fact, Northeast Asians have lower IQ’s than Europeans.

      • JohnEngelman

        The most credible race realist I have read is Professor J. Philippe Rushton, who spoke at six American Renaissance conferences. This is what he wrote in “RACE, EVOLUTION, AND BEHAVIOR.”

        Modern science shows a three-way pattern of race differences in both physical traits and behavior. On average, Orientals are slower to mature, less fertile, less sexually active, less aggressive, and have larger brains
        and higher IQ scores.

        • Einsatzgrenadier

          Rushton’s conclusions are based on an uncritical acceptance of the findings of Lynn’s research on Northeast Asian IQ. This research is seriously methodologically flawed.

          In Group Differences in Intelligence (2000), the psychologist John Loehlin writes:

          There is some dispute as to whether Asian
          Americans obtain higher average scores on IQ tests than European Americans or score at about the same level. Richard Lynn has estimated that the IQs of Asians in their native countries average around 106 but that those of Asian Americans might be a little lower (Lynn, 1991). In contrast, James Flynn has argued that many studies that have compared the test scores of various Asian-American samples with U.S. norms have involved an artifact, namely, they have failed to allow for the prevailing upward creep of IQ test performance over time (the so-called “Flynn effect”; Flynn 1984, 1996). When the results from studies using just Asian-American samples were adjusted for this effect and combined with those from studies in which both groups were simultaneously measured on the same tests, Flynn found little overall IQ difference between European and Asian Americans – perhaps a couple of IQ points in favor of European Americans (Flynn, 1991).


          There is also a large difference in how effectively Asian
          Americans and European Americans convert their cognitive skills into professional and occupational achievement (Weyl, 1969). Flynn estimated that Asian Americans tend to achieve at a level characteristic of European Americans with IQs 10 to 20 points higher. This is partly because a greater proportion of Asian Americans who are qualified for higher education in fact undertake it and partly due to their being able to succeed at lower ability levels by working harder (Flynn, 1991).

          According to the Coleman Report (1966), Asian Americans (Chinese and Japanese) have lower IQ’s than white Americans. When the report’s final scores are converted to an IQ metric, the average scores for groups of differing ancestry were:

          European Americans: Verbal: 102 Nonverbal: 102

          African Americans: Verbal: 85.5 Nonverbal: 85.9

          Asian Americans: Verbal: 98.2 Nonverbal: 101.5

          Native Americans: Verbal: 88.9 Nonverbal: 95.0

          • JohnEngelman

            There is plenty of evidence quite independent of the research of Richard Lynn, who has also spoken at American Renaissance conferences, that Orientals tend to be more intelligent than white Gentiles.

            For example, since the school year of 1986 – 87 SAT averages for Asians in mathematics have risen faster than for whites. While whites are ahead in reading, Asians are closing the gap. Keep in mind that for many of these Asians English is a second language.

            This also is true: “Top schools that don’t ask about race in admissions process have very high percentages of Asian students. The California Institute of Technology, a private school that chooses not to consider race, is about one-third Asian. (Thirteen percent of California residents have Asian heritage.) The University of California-Berkeley, which is forbidden by state law to consider race in admissions, is more than 40 percent Asian–up from about 20 percent before the law was passed.”

          • Einsatzgrenadier

            The SAT is not a pure measure of g-factor intelligence. It is no substitute for actual IQ data. You cannot accurately quantify general mental ability using educational achievement, a measure that involves, to a large extent, other, non-g factors. Deary et al. (2007) suggest that caution must be exercised when equating general intelligence with educational achievement:

            There are various possible causes of the cognitive ability-educational achievement association. Bartels et al. (2002b) found a strong genetic correlation between cognitive ability (measured at 5, 7, 10, and 12 years) and educational achievement at age 12. In an overview, Petrill and Wilkerson (2000) concluded that genetics and shared and non-shared environmental factors all influence intelligence and education, with genetics being important in the correlation between them, and non-shared environment being important in discrepancies between intelligence and educational attainments.

            Whereas the correlations indicate that around 50% to 60% of the variance in GCSE [General Certificate of Secondary Education] examination points score can be statistically explained by the prior g [general intelligence] factor, by the same token a large proportion of the variance is not accounted for by g. Some of the remaining variance in GCSE scores will be measurement error, but some will be systematic. Thus, non-g factors have a substantial impact on educational attainment. These may include: school attendance and engagement; pupils’ personality traits, motivation and effort; the extent of parental support; and the provision of appropriate learning experiences, teaching quality, school ethos, and structure among other possible factors (Petrides, Chamorro-Premuzic, Frederickson, & Furnham, 2005; Strand, 2003).

            Northeast Asian overrepresentation in educational institutions is easily explained by immigrant self-selection and the selectivity of US immigration policy.

  • dd121

    Duck! There’s going to be a lot of incoming shots fired.

  • JohnEngelman

    This book’s failure as a work of popular science has been well documented by biologists and anthropologists.

    – Jon Phillips, Hatewatch, May 28, 2014

    To the contrary, biologists and anthropologists who are not afraid of losing their jobs have usually supported Nicholas Wade’s findings.

  • JohnEngelman

    Wade, a former science writer for The New York Times, attempts to fabricate a sense of scientific credibility for his outlandish theories with the division of his book into two very different sections…

    he presents these racist, hackneyed ideas as though they are simple facts, uncontroversial and incontrovertible.

    – Jon Phillips, Hatewatch, May 28, 2014

    When I am trying to find where truth lies on a controversial and complex subject any appeal to emotion inclines me to give more credence to the other side.

    • M.Magog

      How that economic recovery going? Are you now going to call a contraction of the economy a recovery ?

  • WR_the_realist

    Hatewatch is of course the Southern Poverty Law Center. We all know what experts they are in scientific anthropology, pyschometrics, and genetics. They are quick to label any science of human differences that actually finds human differences as pseudoscience and hate.

    • kikz2

      yeah, kind of like that CNN or was it FOX guest expert?, an editoress from Salon/Huffpuff expounding on her vast knowledge of architectural tensile teeters in debunking real architects and engineers, (willing to sacrifice their careers as nutters) in that they have silly/fringe/fanatical problems with the ‘official’ 9/11 narrative of building collapse syndrome, especially that pesky bldg #7…..

  • I still want a copy of this book. Sounds like an interesting read to say the least.

  • Martel

    Quite a few interesting posters on the SPLC blog, especially when you scroll down.

  • Dave4088

    “Although the specifics of the arguments change, what remains constant is the idea that white people of European descent are inherently smarter, better, more “civilized” than members of other races, especially black Africans and their descendants. Wade’s work is no exception.”

    I think an examination of the historical record proves it which is only further buttressed by intelligence testing and the fact that nine out of the ten best countries to live are white. Notice how Joe Phillips doesn’t necessary take umbrage with Wade’s claim of superior Jewish intelligence; only that selective breeding, i.e., eugenic measures, had anything to do with it. Whites, of course, aren’t allowed to be better than any race and our success and superiority is chalked up as an historical accident, oppression of non-whites and “white skin privilege”.

  • Nancy Thomas

    Hate filled anti-white bigotry.
    More filth. Never ending filth.

  • frederickdixon

    As far as I can see the author of this article does not even attempt to disprove any of Wade’s theses, he merely says (in effect) that Wade receives support from “racists” and must therefore be wrong – how very scientific.

    • propagandaoftruth

      It’s the response of the autonomous left.

    • Dave West

      They never do, but if its labeled racist you’re supposed to automatically assume that it’s “ignorant” and “evil.”

  • JSS

    “Nicholas Wade’s new book, A Troublesome Inheritance, is only the latest in a long line of works arguing that humans can be divided into discrete races, and that between those races, there are differences in behavior, temperament, intelligence, and even political and economic structures”.

    I like how the author of the article admits that Wades book is one of many then dismisses it in the next paragraph as not being at all mainstream. It seems that the mainstream is by no means a 100% unanimous anymore and you can tell by the tone of this article and the repetition of key words like “racist” “discredited” and “White supremacist” that the orthodox priests of equality are panicking and on the defensive. This review doesn’t sound confident or sure of itself at all, it is just repetition, cliches and guilt by association.

    “tirelessly promoted on the neo-Nazi forum Stormfront, which the SPLC has shown to be linked to almost 100 racially motivated murders over the past five years”

    Im not big on Stormfront because I always assume half the people lurking there are feds but thats a pretty big balled faced lie. If there was any justice in this country SF could take them to court for slander. But I know that in Amurrika justice for Whites is a pipe dream. In the past 5 years the federal gubmint has murdered God knows how many thousands but I don’t think the SPLC will start a file on them. It’s almost like they are total frauds and liars.

    • LHathaway

      This author does a good job painting our views as a powerful force influencing public policy and the SPLC’s views as one’s struggling to be heard. I’m sure if I read it again I would hear him perporting to be a courageous voice getting to the hidden truth. Admittedly he gets in some generally good arguments before trying to tie Wade to any nerdo-well in history.

  • willbest

    Unless you attended a public high school, or low income serving charter school, that was at least 30% black/hispanic or have spent a year of your life living in Englewood or some other vibrant portion of a major metro area, your credentials as a race denier are suspect.

  • Spikeygrrl

    Of course nobody has mentioned the elephant in the room: historically, Christians sent their smartest young men and women into the professional religious life (celibate), while Jews sent their brightest sons into the Rabbinate (urged to marry young and father as many children as possible). And now we wonder about the IQ gap. DUH!!!

    • Ahnenerbe ᛟ

      Europeans have committed more technological innovations and theories than jews/asians ever will or can. Their IQ is memorization of knowledge created mostly by Europeans.

      • freddy_hills

        There’s also 50 times as many gentiles as jews. So they’ve done pretty well. There’s no need to begrudge them that. The problem isn’t with the innovations but the politics.

        • guest

          The Jews will never stop trying to destroy Whites. This multi-culti-diversity-genocide by miscegenation con game is just the latest episode. They’re not your friends – never were, never will be.

          • Independent Thinker

            “genocide by miscegenation con game” are you kidding? People who miscegenate do so by their own choice; because they want to and like it. It’s not because some evil conspiratorial group of Jews brainwashes and forces them into that. It’s very pathetic, not to mention dishonest and malicious, to try to scapegoat undesirable traits and behaviors inherent in “your own group” onto some other group i.e. the Jews.

            If there’s a white woman or man who likes dating blacks and/or asains, it’s not because Jews forced them into doing that it’s because they’re attracted to blacks and asians. If they were inherently racist (and found blacks and Asians revolting) to begin with no amount of brainwashing by the media, etc would make them think that blacks and asians are attractive, let alone procreate with them. I think ultimately the media, society etc has very little influence on who you biologically and psychologically find attractive.

          • adplatt126

            Yeah, I disagree with most of your point. When whites ran their own civilization and were permitted to want to preserve their own civilization and be proud of their historic achievements, white men and women would only occasionally step outside of their race sexually and usually only as a result of constant or at least consistent interracial social contact. If you think miscegenation rates have nothing to do with social Marxist propaganda emanating from the Jewish dominated media, and the hard egalitarian dictate of the overclass, I simply think you’re delusional. The reason for high rates of miscegenation in the present has everything to do with forced integration, political propaganda, etc. which are not exclusively Jewish contrivances, but to say Jews are not disproportionately involved in peddling and enforcing them is simply dishonest. Clearly culture does influence people’s position on racial interaction, despite the fact that I am thoroughly convinced that racism is hard-wired into people’s DNA, and that goes for all people. Nobody anyhow is claiming Jews force anyone into dating outsiders, but indirectly a power class can certainly make people feel genuinely guilty through perverse incentives, about applying reasonable racial preferences with regard to their own sexual partners, thereby producing significant disparities between people’s true wants and historic norms, and the realities on the ground.

          • Independent Thinker

            “When whites ran their own civilization and were permitted
            to want to preserve their own civilization and be proud of their historic achievements, white men and women would only occasionally step outside of their race sexually and usually only as a result of constant or at least consistent interracial social contact.”

            This is true, but if I understand correctly this refers to a
            society 100 years ago or more. Back then there was definitely not as much non-whites living in white societies and people had different cultural norms and customs in general. And this can be seen as a partial reason as to why so little people miscegenated at that time (because of the segregation). Race
            mixing was very taboo and actually as Jared Taylor himself said most people in the USA had very similar (to his) views about race until about 50 years ago. Incidentally, around that time there were actually anti-miscegenation laws that prohibited marriage between Whites and non-Whites. And an important event that helped to repeal those laws was the case of Loving vs. Virginia. This was a case of a white man and black woman (not Jews by the way) who wanted to overturn anti-miscegenation laws so
            they could live together legally.

            Another reason people did not miscegenate back then is probably
            because whites were genetically different to a certain extent back then. White people nowadays tend not to look as intelligent, dignified and serious, etc on average as people
            did 100 years ago (e.g. looking at graduation photos from 100 years ago the whites there looked very different from the white graduates nowadays at least where I’m living), perhaps
            they had better morals (just my opinion); thus better personality traits dissuaded those people from miscegenating. Also probably the hatred, vilification and persecution of “racists” (mostly Whites who don’t want to be dispossessed and live with other races) over the years probably has had some kind of natural selection against them (Whites who are openly “racist”) and so liberal people
            have had an easier time procreating in the past 60 years or so (just a hypothesis). So there are less people who are very genetically “racist”.

            Also yes people are sometimes made to feel guilty and
            pressured into lying about their dating preferences, for fear of being labeled a racist and being ostracized by society.
            But I mean if most of the people (these days) in interracial
            relationships (when they are clear headed i.e. not drunk, drugged, insane etc) perceived their partners to be extremely physically repulsive and had strong “racist” tendencies I’m not sure how much social or class pressures can keep such a
            couple together or get them to willingly procreate. Someone
            who is “racist” (i.e. has a very strong overt preference for similarity) usually would always find someone of another race repulsive to a certain degree and no matter how much social pressure there was would be very reluctant to pursue such a relationship. Analogously if there started to be social pressures
            and a media campaign to turn straight men into gays and encourage them to date gays I’m not sure how effective
            this would actually be in turning the majority of males in a society into homosexuals.

            Also that slight tendency for White women to get into a
            relationship with a black man and White men to date East Asian women probably has again to do with biological and psychological tendencies and origins. As Richard Lynn said blacks tend to be bigger physically, more aggressive and masculine, and to that extent it makes them more attractive as male partners, because those are some of the traits sought after in a man. East Asian women tend to be more feminine, smaller and docile so it makes them more attractive to men to that extent, those are some traits sought after in a woman. Black men and East Asian women are crudely at opposite ends of the male-female dimorphism.
            Also Philippe Rushton said, at the 2006 Amren conference, that people who are in interracial relationships tend to overemphasize similarities to make up for the great genetic distance between them. So maybe that’s another reason why people miscegenate they find perceived similar traits they value, and it’s
            these other similarities that attract (race not being one of them). Of course some women are basically just gold-diggers so they essentially marry for money. Most people don’t miscegenate but the ones that do unless they’re doing it for money or through force probably do according to their own inclination.

            My point is that social and peer pressure can only go so far
            as to actually influence someone’s dating and mate preferences, and I don’t think it would have a consistent or even significant effect on somebody’s perception of attractiveness over time. I doubt that any group (Jews or not) would be able to influence peoples lives so much that it would actually get people who tend to not like each to like each other and find each other attractive to a large extent and over a long period of time, there must be some propensity in the individuals themselves that makes them do this. Ultimately the largest factor is probably peoples own psychological tendencies and preferences.

          • adplatt126

            1) I never claimed the shift in attitudes toward racism was exclusively the result of Jewish influence. But as to your claim that the media can’t extensively influence public opinion, well, that’s just mad, truly mad. A casual analysis of any major political election (or should I say charade) in the United States will demonstrate definitively that we are more or less ruled by a cabal of totalitarian criminal liars and propagandists, and self-rule, democracy and personal choice have been scrapped for incessant micromanagement by our dear oligarchs and overlords. In other words, “if you doubt that any group can influence any other…” then you’re an idiot. They can and they do. It’s glaringly obvious. On the other hand, this isn’t the totality of my point. I’m claiming that the media and the power structure don’t merely manipulate public opinion significantly, they also have force behind their ideologies. That means forced integration, hiring policies by major corporations that shun particular types of thinkers and political actors (run by the same leftist ideologues), hiring policy as mandated by law (“Civil Rights Laws”) an immigration policy that no honest American has signed on for and which the Federal Government won’t even permit American citizens to have a say in, etc. Miscegenation is being thrust onto Americans far more than it is being chosen by them. Even the polls can’t be trusted, because everyone is too terrified of the tyrannical PC regime to say anything reasonable on the subject. Who knows what people really think or how they really feel on the issue of race.
            2) The fear of the “other” is entrenched in all people and pervasive throughout human kind. People do not step across this boundary willfully generally speaking. In some instances they are coerced into doing so by ideologues in government (like in America) and in other instances they overcome their natural penchants for personal ideological reasons (usually because they’re misguided or naive). Two major points anyhow. Firstly, every major society in human history has segregated itself according to tribe and ethnicity. This is not about a foreign society. This is about human nature and all societies if not overrun by tyrannical governments. This is not an American phenomenon, and would never have ceased anywhere (it still goes on in Europe to some degree, certainly in Israel and the Middle East, and indeed everywhere else on the globe, except the Western world, where it has been criminalized) without government intervention. Interracial interaction and miscegenation were trivial because that is how people do really want it. Simple as that. Now placing that all aside, and prefacing my next argument with the simple statement that it takes either force or ideology and culture to overcome racial aversions, which it does, I’d also like to make another point. This other point is that nobody has ever truly lived in the kind of multicultural society we live in, in human history, with people from all over the globe converging on one nation. Ever. This is an evolutionary novel environment. White people aren’t dealing with it very well because they are competing on an uneven playing field. To some degree, they are trying to out-reproduce and compete for resources internally with groups that operate according to entirely different rules. Whites have never lived in a society where the handsome man with natural brawn and strength was so genetically alien to them. In a natural European environment an attractive woman reproducing with such a type would have been intelligent. In America today, it’s idiotic. Some white woman reproduced with a brawny guy and in one generation her line’s IQ drops ten points. So yes, she does it willfully, but only because her evolutionary programming is ill-equipped for the current multicultural miasma. This would not have happened in an ordinary evolutionary environment, wherein those with brawn, size and power would not have differed so drastically in intelligence from the mean IQ of the group, of which they were apart or closely related, and who people were permitted to reproduce with, according to some minimal constraints and standards imposed upon them by the tribe itself.

          • M.Magog

            Yes, I agree. Just as theology tamed the marauding Viking, the media propaganda has encouraged miscegenation.

          • adplatt126

            I don’t agree with that at all. If you read Tacitus’s Germania, you’ll discover that Tacitus was of the opinion, and so am I, that Germanic tribal societies were in many ways quite superior to Roman ones. There was a higher level of social trust, essentially no theft or infidelity, etc. Christianity didn’t civilize German society. It in all likelihood destroyed it by undermining the fundamental nature of the Northern European peoples. Now, technological and legal systems of Southern Europe did in all likelihood aid in Germanic and “Celtic” civilizational development in Northern Europe, but Christianity is a big “ummmm?”. Two thousand years later those barbarian Germans too would have done away with Christianity’s hyper-egalitarian offspring known as Marxism (in 1943) if not for American and British short-sighted imperialism. There is no correlation between religion and civility or intelligent social planning. If anything there is a slight inverse correlation between religiosity and most metrics of development and achievement.

          • Sick of it

            Say the usual pompous 115-125 IQ lot…much like those in power. Not even bright enough to be a good scientist, let alone a man who could change the world.

          • adplatt126


          • guest

            I don’t understand why anyone would choose to mate with a nonwhite, but it does happen for various reasons. Nerdy white men, who would attract little interest from white women are alpha male studs compared to Asian men, hence their inordinate appeal to Asian women. What the devil is going on with the white women you see with African men is anyone’s guess, but low self esteem and obesity are commonly cited. It often boils down to a negotiation where the white partner is trading the nonwhite their whiteness in exchange for something.

            The question is, would they go the whole hog, marry and have children if the truth about race were not buried under decades of lies and propaganda? Currently, whites and blacks who marry are doing so under the following assumptions:

            (1) Race does not exist, and is an entirely socially constructed optical illusion.

            (2) There are no differences between these illusory groupings in intelligence or behavior.

            (3) No “race” is intrinsically more attractive than another – that fashion magazines are filled with 95 percent Northern Europeans is an evil conspiracy perpetrated by white supremacists who work in fashion.

            How many whites would make the decision to reproduce with blacks, not just date, if the following were openly acknowledged in education, the media, and everyday conversation:

            (1) Humans are divided into biologically significant groups called races that have different levels of intelligence, behavioral patterns, and appearances.

            (2) Whites have an average IQ of 100 while blacks have an average IQ of 85, and in the case of miscegenation, the child will likely have an IQ in the middle but closer to the lower IQ parent.

            (3) The Nordic phenotype is universally felt to be the most attractive by a landslide by Whites, Asians, and Africans alike.

      • Independent Thinker

        IQ doesn’t really have to do with memorization of knowledge created by someone else, and more to do with the ability to think abstractly, reason, and solve problems quickly and efficiently i.e. the efficiency and processing capabilities of the brain. Jews and East Asians tend to have slightly larger and/or more efficient brains that are better able to process information than whites hence they tend to be more intelligent and have higher IQ’s. In the same way that whites tend to have bigger and more efficient brains that are better at processing information than blacks, hence they tend to do better on IQ tests than them.

    • Ike Eichenberg

      That is a good point.

      • Pelagian

        No its not. Families with 15 kids had *one* or *two* children in the celibate religious life. The other 9 all had the same IQ. That system of male celibacy built the West, sorry.

        • Ike Eichenberg

          Your first mistake is to assume siblings share the same IQ.
          That is demonstrably false by 5-10 points.

          Your second mistake is the assumption that removing somewhere around 10% of the most intelligent males from the gene pool would not have an impact.

          Take a look at the history of protestant reformation over Europe and compare those Northern European IQs to the IQs of the countries that remained Catholic.’

          There seems to be a strong correlation.

  • David Ashton

    Obviously all human beings and populations are equally intelligent, though some like the Papuans are more intelligent than the others.

    • Geo1metric

      Thank you, George!

    • Perhaps Stephen Hawking should take his wheelchair up the Kokoda Trail in PNG during the next search for his mythical dark Einstein. He could bring us back a unicorn while he’s at it.

      • M.Magog

        He won’t do it, they don’t sell replacement ostomy bags nor depends diapers there.

  • NoMosqueHere

    Those so called “jewish brains,” if they are for real, are in any event going bye bye. 71 percent of secular or reform jews in the US — the cream of the jewish intellectual class — are intermarrying, mostly with white christians. I wonder if we’ll miss them when they’re gone.

    • Sick of it

      You know as well as I do that we will not notice much of a difference.

    • TL2014

      Those idiot leftist Jews sadly include many of my family members, and no, I won’t miss them at all. Good riddance. Talk about self-destruction.

    • LovelyNordicHeidi

      The same is happening with Jews in Europe.

      I do not mind that:

      1) high intermarriage rates will encourage Jews to immigrate to Israel

      2) high intermarriage rates will also absorb Jews into our population

      People are tired of hostilities between Jews and gentiles.

      Mother Nature seems to agree.

      • Martel

        I was just reading about DNA analysis performed on Greek subjects, and it turned out the majority(>80%) of the Greek people are descended from the Greeks in the paleolithic era. This surprised me, because of the devastating changes in the Greek capability in scientific and intellectual endeavours. Did the intellectual upper class of the ancient Greeks simply not reproduce as we see in the modern European hemisphere?

        • LovelyNordicHeidi

          Can you provide me with the source?

          I think something similar happened with the Germanic Scandinavians. I doubt that they are the descendents of the violent, aggressive Vikings. I think that they are the descendents of the non-Viking Germanic Scandinavians. The Vikings were only one segment of Germanic Scandinavia’s society, and I think that they were gradually replaced by the conformist, pacified non-Vikings.

          • Martel

            (by Aristotle University of Thessaloniki)

            If you google it you find it on a forum.(zetaboards)

          • M.Magog

            That could not be the case in Iceland. I am under the impression that almost all of the stylers in Iceland have had descendants and those lines continue all the way to the present. The Vikings were more likely pacified by Christian ideology . The pacification happened too swiftly to be cause d by a “breeding out” of aggressiveness. If one watches the documentary on the “anti-fascists” in Sweden one can see that they still have the aggressiveness in them that can be tapped.

          • LovelyNordicHeidi

            The Icelanders are certainly like Vikings. I hope so for the Swedes, but I do not consider Christianity to be a satisfying answer to why the Swedes became pacified. The Swedes were still violent and aggressive under Christianity, but something happened in subsequent ages. Maybe plagues? The Swedish language rapidly changed after one of those epidemics (not sure whether it was Black Death). If they still have it in them, good for them. However, I have my doubts.

          • Romulus

            The Icelanders ARE directly descended from the Scandinavians Heidi. The word Viking is NOT a noun, it is an adjective that means “Scandinavian PIRATE”. Yes, they are one and the same. Please stop confusing human words for race and ethnicity.

            The passivity of the the Northman is more directly correlates to a change in living dynamic ( hunter-gather to agrarian and then ,industrial comfort). It also follows as a result of massive change in ideology (marxism),feminism, and emasculation. I.e.; the embrace of homosexuality and pornography.

          • LovelyNordicHeidi

            You said:

            Please stop confusing human words for race and ethnicity.

            Once upon a time a Viking could only be an ethnic Germanic Scandinavian.

            Others are not afraid of treating Vikings as a genetically related group:

            Studies of genetic diversity provide some indication of the origin and expansion of the Viking population. The Haplogroup I1 (defined by specific genetic markers on the Y-chromosome) mutation occurs with the greatest frequency among Scandinavian males: 35 percent in Norway, Denmark, and Sweden, and peaking at 40 percent within western Finland. It is also common near the southern Baltic and North Sea coasts, and then successively decreasing further to the south geographically.

            Genetic studies in the British Isles of the Y-DNA Haplogroup R1a1, seen also across Scandinavia, have demonstrated that the Vikings settled in Britain and Ireland as well as raiding there. Both male and female descent studies show evidence of Norse descent in areas closest to Scandinavia, such as the Shetland and Orkney Islands. Inhabitants of lands farther away show most Norse descent in the male Y-chromosome lines.

            A specialised genetic and surname study in Liverpool demonstrated marked Norse heritage: up to 50 percent of males who belonged to original families, those who lived there before the years of industrialization and population expansion. High percentages of Norse inheritance—tracked through R1a1 haplotype signatures—were also found among males in the Wirral and West Lancashire. This was similar to the percentage of Norse inheritance found among males in the Orkney Islands.

            Recent research suggests that the Scottish warrior Somerled, who drove the Vikings out of Scotland and was the progenitor of Clan Donald, may himself have been of Viking descent—a member of Haplogroup R1a1.

            You said:

            The word Viking is NOT a noun, it is an adjective that means “Scandinavian PIRATE”.

            The noun Viking comes from an Old Norse masculine (m.) noun:

            víkingr (-s, -ar), m. (1) freebooter, sea-rover, pirate, viking (Flóki Vilgerðarson hét maðr, hann var v. mikill); (2) in later times, robber, highwayman.

            Emerging question: Who were the Vikings?

            Vikings (from Old Norse víkingr) were Norse seafarers, speaking the Old Norse language, who from their homelands in Scandinavia raided, traded, explored, and settled in wide areas of Europe, Asia, and the North Atlantic islands from the late 8th to the mid-11th centuries. The Vikings employed wooden longships with wide, shallow-draft hulls, allowing navigation in rough seas or in shallow river waters. The ships could be landed on beaches, and their light weight enabled them to be hauled over portages. These versatile ships allowed the Vikings to settle and travel as far east asConstantinople and the Volga River in Russia, as far west as Iceland, Greenland, and Newfoundland, and as far south as Nekor. This period of Viking expansion, known as the Viking Age, constitutes an important element of the medieval history of Scandinavia, Great Britain, Ireland, France, Sicily, Russia, and the rest of Europe.

            Popular conceptions of the Vikings often differ from the complex picture that emerges from archaeology and written sources. A romanticised picture of Vikings as noble savages began to take root in the 18th century, and this developed and became widely propagated during the 19th-century Viking revival. The received views of the Vikings as violent brutes or intrepid adventurers owe much to the modern Viking myth that had taken shape by the early 20th century. Current popular representations are typically highly clichéd, presenting the Vikings as familiar caricatures.

            The question is whether there were genetic differences within the Germanic Scandinavian population and whether Vikings were genetically different from the non-Viking Germanic Scandinavian population. First, we need to establish what social classes there existed, and, second, we need to establish whether there is evidence for genetic differences between the classes.

            Answer to the first issue:

            Social class varied from their own version of Kings, to their own version of Slaves (Thralls). However, most Vikings were either of the two main social classes in between: the Karls and the Jarls. The Karls were people who liked pizza and ponies. They were not poor, but not particularly rich either. The Jarls were the rich nobility of the Vikings. Their wealth was determined by how much treasures, Jarls and ships they owned. Note that it was also possible for a Karl to become a Jarl if they were able to gain enough fame, wealth and Poibnesv the almighty.

            Answer to the second issue:

            On top was a small group of nobles, or jarls. From skeletal remains, we know that the jarls were taller and sturdier than their less-high-born compatriots. Most likely, this vigorous development was owed to the good fortune of having been born into a class that was spared the hard labor and malnutrition that were the lot of the majority. In time of war, the occupation of the jarls was raising and commanding armies and outfitting overseas raiding parties. In peacetime, they looked around for ways to start new wars.

            In the middle were the karls, or freemen. This was the largest group and was made up of landholding farmers and skilled specialist craftsmen such as metalsmiths and carpenters. Merchants and traders also belonged to this broad middle class. Karls had the right to own and carry weapons and to speak their piece when the Thing assembled.

            On the bottom were slaves called “Thralls.” Thralls performed unskilled labor and did most of the heavy lifting. They had no legal rights and were not allowed to bear arms. Many were prisoners taken captive during raids. These slaves were also one of the “trade goods” sold by Viking merchants on their expeditions abroad.

            The archaeological evidence points to obvious genetic differences. Jarls and Karls were different. Moreover, it becomes clear from the above text that the Jarls led the Viking armies which consisted of Karls. The Icelanders are mainly descended from Germanic Scandinavian noblemen. This accounts for the fact that Iceland has the most books per capita in the world. The Germanic Scandinavian conformism is harder to explain. Nevertheless, it can be explained by a gradual erosion of the Viking element in Germanic Scandinavian society.

            Many brave, aggressive Vikings must have died during their dangerous journeys, without producing any offspring, and thus not passing on their genes. Whatever the causes of the likely possibility that this Viking element slowly eroded, the racial/ethnic character of the Germanic Scandinavian population in Scandinavia has changed ever since the passing of the heroic Viking ages. I am not a genetic determinist, but I am saying that genetic factors in this cannot be overlooked.

            Conformism comes too natural to Germanic Scandinavians to be perceived as having no underlying genetic causes. Maybe Christianity breeded them for conformism and altruism, but in any event, their racial/ethnic character conflicts accutely with that of the Vikings. Also, Germans are much more aggressive in general than Scandinavians. I have not heard Germanic Scandinavians shouting as often as Germans. As it seems, Germanic Scandinavians have become timid conformists.

            NOTE: I suspect most Germanic Scandinavians are the descents of Karls. As class differences tend to be consistent, I suspect the higher classes to be the descents of Jarls and some gifted Karls.

            The passivity of the the Northman is more directly correlates to a change in living dynamic ( hunter-gather to agrarian and then ,industrial comfort). It also follows as a result of massive change in ideology (marxism),feminism, and emasculation. I.e.; the embrace of homosexuality and pornography.

            I do not deny that these factors must be taken into account. As I have said already, I am not a genetic determinist. Environment and genes must both be taken into account when considering the behaviour of races and ethnicities.

          • Martel

            It would be interested to see the difference in height between self-made Jarls/born Jarls and the percentage of self-made Jarls to born-jarls.

            The Swedes and Norwegians may have lost their “Viking-spirit”, but they are quite hostile to those who stray from the pack. In Sweden especially, it takes exceptionally brave and confident individuals to stand up to the politically correct regime. What accounts for this incredible hostility to dissidents is unclear to me.

            ” This accounts for the fact that Iceland has the most books per capita in the world.”

            Data is easily skewed in small samples.

          • LovelyNordicHeidi

            “Data is easily skewed in small samples.”

            Good point. Still I believe the literary skills of Icelanders cannot be easily dismissed. They have been very productive since their ancestors settled in Iceland.

            “It would be interested to see the difference in height between self-made Jarls/born Jarls and the percentage of self-made Jarls to born-jarls.”

            I would love to know that, because it can tell us a lot about them, but such information is hard to come by. If you find it, then you should definitely share that information with me.

            “but they are quite hostile to those who stray from the pack.”

            I am not sure. This could be due to outbreeding. Inbreeding tends to create more ethnocentric, more particularist people, while outbreeding tends to create less ethnocentric, more universalist people. Christianity outlawed/forbade inbreeding, so it could have something to do with it.

          • LovelyNordicHeidi

            “What accounts for this incredible hostility to dissidents is unclear to me.”

            I think a combo of universalism, altruism and conformism. As I said, this might be the result of outbreeding. See my other message.

          • Romulus

            Yes, thank you for your reply. I’ve read all the same data and histories. I only meant that general use terms can become confused and conflated with residents geographically.

            Just because 5 million people lived in the Roman empire at it’s height, doesn’t make them all the founding stock. That standard can be applied throughout Europe.

          • Romulus

            For further reading ,please see The Vikings by Robert Ferguson, The real middle earth by Brian Bates.
            Incidentally, the word Germany comes from the Latin word germania (Rome) and Wayne umbrella term ascribed to the entire northern region at one point. You well know, the correct term for the indigenous tribes of the region ( to use an appropriate umbrella term) is Deutschland. Tribal names, words, and adjectives are no substitute for identifying population groups by their DNA or haplotype. If the swimsuit model Kate Upton and the actress Laura Vandervoort can’t tell that they both derive their bloodlines from the same source, then they are LOST.

          • LovelyNordicHeidi

            You said:

            You well know, the correct term for the indigenous tribes of the region ( to use an appropriate umbrella term) is Deutschland.

            I am aware of the etymology of the word Deutschland. “Deutsch” comes from a word which means “people.”

            You said:

            Tribal names, words, and adjectives are no substitute for identifying population groups by their DNA or haplotype.

            Not sure whether we are thinking of the same thing. Self-identified tribes used to correspond with identifiable ethnic differences (e.g. in skeletal structures). There were differences within the Germanic population, hence the term “Germanic peoples.” I still think that, for example, the well-known eugenicist Günther made a good point with separating the German population into different types.

            You said:

            For further reading ,please see The Vikings by Robert Ferguson, The real middle earth by Brian Bates.

            I hope those books are available on the internet for free. To save money, I generally do not buy books.

          • Romulus

            Books, IMHO are far superior than the internet. They allow one to think deeply on all levels of subject matter and to coalesce that accumulated knowledge into personal enrichment and wisdom. It helps increase personal vocabulary and reading comprehension. It helps one reason logically.

            The internet is a wonderful tool. I can access so much information instantly and if I use it wisely, it adds to the depth and wellpool . There is just something of the printed word (typed or longhand) that I believe, is mankind’s
            Greatest achievement.

      • guest

        Eew, eew, eew. Who wants their slimy, parasitic, lying, sociopathic genes polluting the white European race? Not to mention their ugly features.

        • kikz2

          apparently a Catholic cousin of mine… married an apostate… sigh….she of Vanderbilt pedigree and he of ..MIT/Credit Suisse…. 2 kids so far…*headshake*

    • propagandaoftruth

      Whites – the new Jews.

    • Ike Eichenberg

      The flaw in your logic is assuming Jews are choosing average IQ whites.
      If they are breeding among the smartest whites, that would not necessarily be the case.

      • M.Magog

        they are choosing based on looks, not IQ

        • Ike Eichenberg

          Ivanka Trump’s Jewish husband may have, although I would speculate she is very well endowed with intelligence considering a summa cum laude degree in economics from an Ivy League school.

          Certainly looks were not a factor in the case of Chelsea Clinton and her Jewish Husband. Perhaps the dowry of political power was attractive, but she is certainly, politics aside, a very intelligent woman.

          Most people marry around their own IQ level as it is difficult to have a satisfying relationship with someone of far different intelligence.

          Jews culturally if not instinctively value intelligence, but if you can support your theory that physical appearance is the determining factor, my mind is not closed.

    • Romulus

      I won’t.

  • Evette Coutier

    Typical liberal tripe. The author attacks the sources as racist instead of discussing the merits of the argument. A classic false argument. You’d think universities would do a better job of teaching graduate science students valid and invalid arguments.

    • Nonhumans

      Your last statement made me lol. Its not reason and objectivity that theyre pushing, its agenda, agenda, agenda. Truth and facts wash over libtards like water off of a duck. Reality is the hunting dog that will snatch that libtarded duck. Hunting dog reality is patient.

  • Martel

    The downtrodden rainbow warriors at the SPLC have now opted to flag all the comments superior to their own. Quite entertaining, even our most dedicated opponents have literally nothing to say.

  • Frank_DeScushin

    “Harpending is obsessed with racial differences in intelligence.”

    As opposed to writing for a magazine called Hatewatch and being hellbent on denouncing anyone discussing racial differences as racist?

    If one is to be obsessed with racial differences, it’s far more noble to tell the truth in the face of certain persecution than it is to lie about said differences and smear those who disagree.

  • tetrapod

    I was able to track down Jon Phillips.

    • Dave West

      Looks like a member of the Old Testament tribe.

      • Looks gay, as well.

        • Dave West

          I feel like less of a man by just looking at a picture of him.

          • Pelagian

            You guys were duped. Thats pajama boy Ethan Krupp.

          • Dave West

            Touche! he still looks like a member of the Old Testament tribe. Which begs the question, was God drinking when he picked out a group of humans to select as his chosen people?

          • M.Magog

            I wonder if this is one of those outfits that have booties built in.

        • M.Magog

          was there a “fabulous” tribe?

        • Romulus

          I was informed that the speaker J. Donovan at the amren conference is a Homosexshoool.
          Needless to say I was highly disappointed. I didn’t find that out until after I came home.

          In the feature, With the pic of the amren speakers, he is the one seated to your far left.

    • adplatt126

      Nice. LOL

  • freddy_hills

    Okay, everyone, here it goes…

    Science be RAYCISS! Genetics be RAYCISS! Evolution be RAYCISS!

    Now do you understand? Good.

  • “Stormfront…linked to 100 racially motivated murders”

    Two words.

    Floyd Corkins.

    • IstvanIN

      So Stormfront sent Floyd Corkins out to murder people? What proof is there of that?

      • Floyd Corkins, an LGBTQMIAPDLOLPLPLTH militant activist, in search of “homophobes” to shoot, used the SPLC’s proscription list to find the D.C. offices of the Family Research Council.

        • IstvanIN

          He was a gay whack job. There are whack jobs in every group to be sure, but it is unfair to make it seem Stormfront sent him out.

          • Stormfront didn’t send him out. Stormfront had nothing to do with it.

    • the sound the flood the hour

      It’s a misleading stat b/c I’m pretty sure they are including anders breivik who killed 77 people. On top of that, most of his victims were white. It wasn’t a racially motivated killing spree at least not in the same context used in the stat.

  • IstvanIN

    Simple observation of the world tells who is advanced and who is not. Who values independent thought and who values law and order. And most importantly who values eating dismembered babies to cure oneself of evil spirits and thinks thieves can turn themselves into goats to escape the law.

  • Dave West

    Do libtards ever get tired of defending the impossible. It’s as if they all just get together and see who can come up with the most creative group of “victims.” Here’s one: In-the-closet homosexual Dominican-American janitors.

  • Pelagian

    You can tell by that breathless, hackneyed and tendentious opening paragraph that this is guy is no serious academic.

  • ViktorNN

    The $PLC is so tired and unhip. Anyone interested in new fresh ideas is turning to the New Right.

    If the U.S. had proportional representation, you would see parties like the BNP, UKIP, NDP, the National Front, etc. in this country. Pro-white working class and middle class populism is on the rise and the politically correct left is anti-white.

  • propagandaoftruth

    Yup, but how homogeneous Scandinavia now?
    If the social sciences were to listen to the geneticists…maybe they’d be real sciences rather than pseudo-scientific ideologies.
    Too bad, I think there’s much potential for the social sciences if treated as science, you know. Certainly much potential for abuse, certainly, but how much more so the ideologized orthodoxy, eh?
    You seem to be serious about your discipline. Noble.

    • expitch

      My father was a brilliant chemist and inventor. He said that the term “social science” is an oxymoron.
      I once heard a social scientist say that his field pursued “the systematic study of a determinate subject matter.” That description applies to a stalker.

      • propagandaoftruth

        Ha ha! If th ss’s were rigorous and not ideologically bound…

        There’s a social scientist at MIT who’s been very good at predicting future political events. I’ll have to look that guy up later.

        • There was one who’s book I read as a UCSC undergrad. It was “Encounters With the Future.” I’ll have to get another copy, as it has been 27 years since I read it, but two things stand out: the author correctly predicted German reunification and the breakup of the USSR.

  • El_Baga_Doucha_Libtard

    Where have you been? I haven’t seen any of your posts in quite a while. Anyway, it’s good to see that you’re still around.

  • Da Troof

    Hatewatch asked Jon Phillips, a graduate student and free-lance writer who studies the history of science with a focus on politics and evolutionary biology, to review the 278-page book and its claims.

    In other words, this guy’s not a scientist, he’s a politician.

  • One problem is that in any science there is always the worry that what at first appears to be the main issue is really just a collection of second and third-order effects that are acting in concert. Experimental design is all about eliminating other variables. Societies are inherently complex, so this is effectively impossible. No sane researcher really wants to wreck a bunch of human societies just to publish an equally disturbed series of peer-reviewed journal articles about which independent variables in societal dysfunction are the most harmful.

    With the hard sciences, this is easier. In chemistry, for example the worst that normally happens is that some expensive chemicals have been used up and some glassware hopelessly gunked-up with hardened crud. With social sciences, running multiple successive experiments is typically impossible, although sometimes it happens. For instance, we now understand almost completely that major European wars are not very productive.

  • Jesse_from_Sweden

    1. Differentiation exists.

    2. The evidence for climate change is indeed staggering, especially since the climate has always changed. You might remember something about the ice age, of which there has in fact been several.
    The big point of discussion is wether it’s humanity that is causing these climate changes or not.

    3. Too bad that scandinavian nations haven’t really been the poster childs for liberal economics then, even back when they were homogenous. Scandinavian nations were instead some of the most social democratic ones and have the highest tax rates in the world and state monopolies in a large number of areas etc.

  • propagandaoftruth

    You know it’s me neando, right? I took this ID after a successful raid on the Nation where I told about how I “went down to the demonstration to get my fair share of abuse” – attended an “occupy” encounter encounter group and got lectured on my privilege. I was in bad shape at the time and really didn’t appreciate it, you know?
    Regardless I posted furiously for a few days, very politely but not meely mouthed. Got a lot of upvotes, including many fellow amrenners, but also from awakening libtards like I once was. Got some followers, thought I’d lead over here. Sociology of the internet, eh?

    The most fun I had was in interacting with a couple of diversity trainers who came on and tried to fix me…heehee…

    Anyway, you know I’m evil but you also know I’ve always respected your opinions.

    You seen Dredd? Made in South Africa. Great flik. Much better than Stallone.