Lion of the Blogosphere

What the left really loathes about IQ

A commenter posted a link to this article, which I suppose is worth reading, but what struck me was this paragraph at the very top:

The left loathes the concept of IQ — especially the claim that it helps to determine socio-economic status, rather than vice versa — because of a near-religious attachment to the idea that man is a piece of clay that can be moulded into any shape by society

I don’t think this is true anymore. Not with respect to prole whites. The liberal elite has come to hate prole whites, and they would be quite ready to believe that proles whites, the people who voted for Donald Trump, are actually genetically inferior to themselves.

Nope, the reason the left currently loathes the concept of IQ is entirely related to the “gap” between blacks and whites. The left believes that racism is the most evil thing in the world, and that only the most evil of racists would believe that the “gap” is caused by genetics.

Written by Lion of the Blogosphere

May 4, 2017 at 9:16 pm

Posted in Biology

119 Responses

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. Piggybacking on what you said, I think the left (by this I mean the UMC costal urban white left) is also uncomfortable with the idea that a person’s social status could be so dependent on factors beyond their control. It’s not enough to succeed, you have to deserve it was well. We know this is all a fallacy since there’s no ghost in the machine and even more wholesome factors that drive success like determination/drive, extraversion, appearance, are also innate and heritable, but it’s a lot easier to think of IQ as something external to one’s self.

    So man is not just a piece of clay to be molded by society, but also to be molded by one’s self if that self holds all the right opinions and does all the right things it’s supposed to do.

    Jokah Macpherson

    May 4, 2017 at 9:36 pm

    • Yes, there is an element of that. The other point is that magic negro is promoted as a religous figure of worship in the media/Hollywood and it is therefore sacriligious to point out magic negro does all this crime etc. The beacon of equalism can never be tarnished as inherently bad.

      The Philosopher

      May 5, 2017 at 8:48 am

  2. I think you have it backwards. The left dislike people who use the IQ difference between races to justify racism.

    Mike CA

    May 4, 2017 at 9:59 pm

    • Say it with me Mike:

      Diversity + Proximity = War

      Andrew E.

      May 5, 2017 at 12:21 am

      • Let all the poison that lurks in the mud, hatch out.


        May 5, 2017 at 1:58 am

      • so tired of that quote. if it were true, the US would have torn itself apart long ago . diversity + proximity just means a lot of ppl upset about diversity and nothing they can do abut it

        grey enlightenment

        May 5, 2017 at 10:04 am

      • Gosh, what a wonderful, ringing endorsement of the liberal global order.

        Andrew E.

        May 5, 2017 at 10:37 pm

    • Hey, Mike… have you ever complained about racism against White people?


      May 5, 2017 at 12:43 am

      • Black or brown people can’t be racist against whites because they lack access to the levers of power. I’ve heard this many times on PBS, and Spike Lee said it as well. I guess it must be true.

        Lewis Medlock

        May 5, 2017 at 12:09 pm

    • I also dislike people who use differences in IQ between races to justify racism.

      Conventional leftist dogma is that if you acknowledge that there are racial differences in IQ, at all, you are a racist. If you even argue that IQ is a legitimate measure of intelligence you are probably a racist.

      Panther of the Blogocube

      May 5, 2017 at 1:15 am

    • “The left dislike people who use the IQ difference between races to justify racism.”

      How delightfully circular!

      “We hate that you use racial differences to justify racism”

      “Racism is believing that there are racial differences.”

      Steve Johnson

      May 5, 2017 at 1:30 am

      • So, “We hate that you use racial differences to justify believing that there are racial differences”.


        May 5, 2017 at 7:15 am

    • “The left dislike people who use the IQ difference between races to justify racism.”

      You’re getting off the reservation, old man. Your assignment is to pound out 2,000 soporific words, conforming to the NPR style book, refuting “The Bell Curve” by showing us an all-black charter school that outperforms a mostly-White school (charter or public), demonstrating once and for all, with sample size N=1, that IQ doesn’t matter and, thus, demographic or international comparisons of IQ are ipso-facto racist [sic].

      One two three, go!


      May 5, 2017 at 9:38 am

    • Mike CA,
      ” The left dislike people who use the IQ difference between races to justify racism.”
      Unpack that please.
      The left is nervous about native intelligence because it goes right to the heart of “all men are created equal.”
      I used to know a firmly liberal yellow dog Democrat woman, who would say, “All men are equal before the law, but that doesn’t mean equal results.”
      She would be considered a hopeless bigot now. She’s dead now. They don’t make ’em like her anymore!


      May 5, 2017 at 10:16 am

      • IQ, intelligence or ability is an individual characteristic. You can compute racial average of IQ scores, but what does that tell you about any person? If you want to hire a smart person for a job, should you only consider candidates that are Ashkenazi Jews or Chinese? That limits your pool of applicants and you may end up hiring a stupid person from one of those racial groups.

        Liberals that I know think people should be judged by their abilities and accomplishments, not prejudged based on their race.


        May 6, 2017 at 2:57 am

      • Of course not, Mike. These are straw men. But since you brought up some silly scenarios, I’ll bring up one of my own, ripped from the headlines.

        A locked subway car is literally a cage. If I’m in a locked subway car, should I be uh, concerned if I’m the only white woman with 15-20 black teenaged males? 15-20 Chinese women?

        This is real life.


        May 6, 2017 at 10:53 am

      • “Liberals that I know think people should be judged by their abilities and accomplishments, not prejudged based on their race.”

        Is that why you support affirmative action and quotas? Because you don’t judge people based on their race?


        May 6, 2017 at 11:27 am

      • “A locked subway car is literally a cage. If I’m in a locked subway car, should I be uh, concerned if I’m the only white woman with 15-20 black teenaged males? 15-20 Chinese women?”

        What does that have to with intelligence?


        May 6, 2017 at 12:42 pm

      • It has to do with judging people by immutable characteristics.


        May 6, 2017 at 1:14 pm

      • “Is that why you support affirmative action and quotas? Because you don’t judge people based on their race?”

        Who says I support affirmative action or quotas?


        May 6, 2017 at 12:47 pm

      • Well, that’s a relief, and it’s progress! We can all agree that racial/gender quotas have been a terrible imposition on hiring efficiently and now we’ll just tear down 40 years of the structure of the liberal state, mike.


        May 6, 2017 at 1:15 pm

      • “Who says I support affirmative action or quotas?”

        I figure that if you didn’t then you would have said so rather than deflecting. Weasel.


        May 6, 2017 at 3:04 pm

      • It’s been a couple of days. Since mike ca, usually so quick on the draw, hasn’t responded, I’ll assume he thinks it’s OK for a lone, unarmed woman to judge people by a few immutable characteristics, under certain circumstances.

        Look what happens in Gramercy Park. Oh sorry, it was Harlem. The poor girl probably told herself not to be a racist.


        May 8, 2017 at 2:36 pm

    • Any white person not racist by now has rocks in his head. You may not be racist, but your conquerors will be.


      May 5, 2017 at 7:01 pm

  3. I think leftists would like to believe they have better, less racist souls or selves than prole whites, but come from the same indistinct genetic material. That way they can still be better people, but only because they “chose” to not be racist.

    Granted, this view doesn’t make much sense, but a lot of other views people have don’t make sense either.


    May 4, 2017 at 10:00 pm

    • You kind of touch on it, but the belief is akin to religion. And in the golobhomo religion, western nations exist to be dumping grounds to the ‘less fortunate’.

      One of the religious requirements is faith justified by belief alone in the idea that there is no such thing as race, gender, or deviance. The last of these is by far the most important to Master. Without deviance, anything goes.

      The Philosopher

      May 5, 2017 at 8:46 am

      • Two points:

        1. Steven Pinker in the Blank Slate made a great argument about the “Personal Pronoun in the Machine,” which is the modern Marxist version of the “Ghost in the Machine.” When you read the old time fools like Lewontin and Gould, they’d speak of how, “we can choose any society we want!” They make it sound like there is a great “we” that can organize society at will.

        Leftists nowadays will rhetorically accept that there are genetic differences between individuals and the sexes, but they underplay how powerful a role genes play. Furthermore, whenever you bring up to them that genetic differences between the sexes mean that we shouldn’t expect wage earnings to be equal between the sexes, they don’t even argue with you. They just get hysterical and start screaming until you shut up or, if you fight back, the nice crowd tells you’re being offensive.

        2. The underlying belief of social liberalism is that right and wrong are, at best, just relative human preferences. In Afghanistan they sleep with dancing boys and put their women in burqas, whereas all but a handful of American women are virgins on their wedding day. Who’s to say what’s right between them?

        This line has reasoning is extended to human sexual orientation (“Who’s to say that homosexuality is less natural than heterosexuality?”) and gender identity (“Who or what says what makes us male or female?”).

        In contrast, most conservatives either believe that God created a moral order, or that moral and natural norms evolved with us over time. Afghanistan is a hellhole, so even if our moral norms aren’t perfect, we shouldn’t take Afghanistan as a role model. Gays can’t reproduce, and reproduction is the purpose of sex, so clearly their preferences are a deviation from the evolutionary norm. Bruce Jenner fathered children, so the idea he’s actually a woman because he puts dresses on now is ludicrous.


        May 6, 2017 at 1:47 am

      • I disagree Sid – and for me this this is the most telling conclusion of modern day neocon liberalism.

        They very much believe in right and wrong.

        But for some reason….only apply it to white men. Religion is not supposed to make logical sense. But there are very clear right and wrong opinions on the correct behaviours demanded by liberals in terms of what to say, what to think and who to give money to.

        However these only apply to white men.

        Because, this religion is a tool created by others to advance their agenda. The followers are useful idiots.

        The Philosopher

        May 7, 2017 at 4:08 am

      • I wouldn’t say that liberals don’t believe in right and wrong. They just think that they’re relative human preferences. This means there’s no divine origin to morality for them, or even an immutable logic that always makes something right or wrong.

        From what I’ve observed, there are two reasons why liberals apply morality to strictly to white men and not others:

        1. Cultural relativism. It might not be bad if, say, Turks hate Kurds, because that might just be their culture. But we know our cultural values, and our values say it’s wrong to hate other races!

        2. White men have privilege! It’s ok when a poor person steals money, but it’s wrong when a rich man does that. So it’s bad when white men do harmful things because they, unlike everyone else, has the means to resist!

        That said, one thing that’s weird about SJWs is their inconsistency. For example, SJWs tend to be almost as judgmental and vitriolic towards Japanese culture as they are to white men. I think one reason​ why they were so hard on Ghost in the Shell is because it’s a Japanese property adapted with white actors, which for them is a double whammy.

        They also hate India. I’ve read tons of articles which talk about “rape culture” in India, a term SJWs would never apply to Muslims.


        May 8, 2017 at 3:30 am

      • Yes but there is an ‘immutable logic’. Namely the help the ‘oppressed’. Oppression is bad. Helping pokemon is good – as long as theyre not Asians.

        Its not logical true, but not in the ‘relativism’ way. Relativisim would mean whites only act evil because of their education or ‘privelage’. But they seem to imply is inherent that whites are evil.


        Its against the law to say.

        The Philosopher

        May 8, 2017 at 6:54 am

  4. Your followers and much of the HBD world are smarter the average liberal elite. However, they’re correct when it comes to America’s insufferable proles. They have no excuse to lather in their current predicament — the type of conditions found in the Red States/Staten Island. It’s disgusting and unforgivable. They’re better than that.

    This past summer, my story about a young man from Indiana who was visiting New York City for the 1st time, describing his first trip to Spain and his pleasant encounters with Spaniards, and another guy from Oklahoma, also visiting Manhattan, who wants to enlighten himself with Greek philosophy, proves the fact that proles are not inherently stupid, but willfully ignorant and parochial.


    May 4, 2017 at 10:00 pm

    • Proles need stricter moral guidance than what they’re currently getting.

      There. I said it!


      May 5, 2017 at 12:11 am

      • Exactly. Prole whites 100 years ago in every small town across America had the upper echelon who ran the banks, factories, law firms, grain depots, and doctors’ offices. These upper-crust neighbors had to live next to the prole farmers and factory workers, thus the bourgeoisie expected a certain propriety from the others. If you got out of line, then rumor would spread, and it would be tougher to get a bank loan, job, etc.

        In return for proper decorum the bourgeoisie helped improve the towns with schools, roads, public squares, churches, etc., all built in a style and with quality that absolutely puts modern architecture and urban planning to shame.

        Until we revert back to the model of bourgeoisie and proletariat leaving side-by-side in small towns across America, proles will still prole and the upper crust will still move away and remain insufferable.


        May 5, 2017 at 9:13 am

      • It’s also good for the white American bourgeoisie to live alongside proles. Proles have their faults, but their down-to-earth, no-nonsense attitudes help keep the bourgeoisie grounded.

        Do proles come up with new ways to virtue signal about NAMs? Talk themselves into a fright because of microaggressions? Devise 58 genders? Expound that a 60 year old man with numerous children is sane for dressing up as a young woman and getting his penis removed?

        An emphatic NO on all counts. It’s American SWPLs who are given to this claptrap. Being around salt of the earth types helps keep them “based.”


        May 5, 2017 at 9:40 pm

      • “If there is hope, it lies in the proles.” Orwell, 1984

        Andrew E.

        May 6, 2017 at 12:17 pm

    • What specifically do you find disgusting about them? McDonalds and big houses?

      Paul Ryan's Sickly Old Lapdog

      May 5, 2017 at 12:16 am

      • JS is no better than a spambot posting the same regurgitated lines over and over.

        Panther of the Blogocube

        May 5, 2017 at 1:49 am

    • N=2. Very scientific.


      May 5, 2017 at 4:54 am

      • The mean IQ of Republicanville is comparable to that of Italy and Spain in the high 90s. Don’t forget NAMs are omnipresent in the deep south which drives the down the average.


        May 5, 2017 at 10:56 am

      • But of course, low-class Meriproles willfully behave like buffoons making them look dumber than the average Spaniard or Italian.


        May 5, 2017 at 10:58 am

  5. The Left is extremely wedded to Nurture over Nature by A LOT.

    I once debated a Lefty about sperm donation and they were convinced the biological father had nothing to do with who the child was. They said something to the effect of: “Any man could’ve donated sperm, but only the man who raised the child could ever be the father.”

    Sentimental though it may be, it’s the absolute OPPOSITE OF THE TRUTH. Not any man could’ve produced that child; *only one* very specific man in the entire world in the entire history of existence could produce that particular child. And indeed, *any number* of men could’ve raised the child and been that child’s foster father.

    To here this Leftist you’d think the foster parents nurtured the child into very existence!

    I think part of the Leftist fixation with nurture over nature/genes, besides race rejection, is a subconscious rejection of the idea of true individualism or even the soul itself. They like the idea of everyone being interchangeable and fungible. They think it’s a beautiful vision, like the sentimentality above, but it’s really bleak and disturbing.


    May 4, 2017 at 11:39 pm

    • If I may:

      They like the idea of being God.

      A Dilettante

      May 5, 2017 at 2:21 am

    • “Any man could’ve donated sperm, but only the man who raised the child could ever be the father.”

      Any man could’ve raised the child, but only the sperm donor is the biological father.

      It’s always easy to invert a sentence’s structure while maintaining or increasing its veracity when someone is standing on a foundation built of sophistry. You guys were just debating semantics.


      May 5, 2017 at 9:51 am

    • What if I told you that most IQ is X-linked?


      May 5, 2017 at 10:17 am

  6. “It`s an article of faith among many liberals that I.Q. has no meaning, it`s culturally constructed, and should never be used to judge people`s intellectual ability. But suddenly, when I.Q. is the means by which to rescue r*t*rded criminals on death row, I.Q. is just fine, thank you very much.” – Andrew Sullivan, 2002


    May 4, 2017 at 11:50 pm

    • It’s much better understood as liberals wanting to advocate for their constituencies than having some sort of principled consistent view about IQ. In addition to embracing IQ tests for limiting capital punishment they will cite it if one of their social programs shows IQ improving or if some pollutant is shown to cause a decrease.

      Republicans are the same way. They started talking about how awful mercury pollution was when the government phased out incandescent in favor of CFLs but take the opposite view when it comes to limiting mercury emissions from industry. The main difference is that the democrats stick up for their actual constituents while Republicans are just completely corrupt and dedicated to the very wealthy and large corporations.


      May 5, 2017 at 9:14 pm

      • The argument that liberals don’t believe in IQ is really a straw man anyway. They think it’s a limited measure of intelligence (what Sullivan was glancing at when he said “it’s culturally constructed”), and more importantly that the natural potential of blacks and other minorities is artificially suppressed by living under white racism and its historical legacy. That’s so basic to liberal thought that it was cited in the Supreme Court’s ruling on Brown v. Board of Education. Once you accept that, it isn’t even inconsistent to use IQ to take someone off death row or become giddy at the apparent success of some social reform. And if your reforms fail, well, that just shows how heavy the shackles of white repression remain upon their victims.


        May 5, 2017 at 9:49 pm

    • Also when determining if someone should qualify for disability payments from the state IQ is just fine thank you. We are now in a position where we invite sub saharan Africans into the country whose mean IQ qualifies them to get disability payments because they are considered too mentally handicaped to work.


      May 7, 2017 at 6:35 am

  7. “The typical white intellectual considers himself superior to ordinary white people for two contradictory reasons: a] he constantly proclaims belief in human equality, but they don’t; b] he has a high IQ, but they don’t.” – Steve Sailer


    May 4, 2017 at 11:53 pm

    • Liberals are insufferable gas chamber fodder. Who cares why they think it?

      Paraphrasing the words of General Patton: “I don’t care what makes the liberal tick, only the kind of round necessary to bring it down.”

      Why do some Christians refuse to believe in evolution? It contradicts their religion.

      Same with liberals. The liberal religion requires that all humans be fungible therefore of science contradicts it, it must be ignored.

      Paul Ryan's Sickly Old Lapdog

      May 5, 2017 at 12:20 am

      • This is the most correct explanation. Most liberals just like most people in general are believers. They believe what their brains click with. And so it perpetuates.

        My Two Cents

        May 5, 2017 at 12:44 am

      • Hey, some of us liberals understand human biodiversity. If I have a problem with the right, I make every effort to distinguish which particular branch I’m beefing with. It would be nice if you would reciprocate.


        May 5, 2017 at 5:37 am

      • “Why do some Christians refuse to believe in evolution? It contradicts their religion.”

        Gratuitous swipe noted. Some Christians refuse to believe in evolution because speciation has never been observed, though supposedably it has occurred tens of millions of times.


        May 5, 2017 at 9:54 am

      • Jesse — What makes you liberal rather than conservative?


        May 5, 2017 at 11:17 am

      • If you believe in HBD you aren’t a liberal. If you believe in HBD and still support multicultural integration then you are either:

        A) an idiot
        B) a fifth column saboteur
        C) a hopelessly deluded idealist that can’t be bothered to put down your utopian vision well after turning 30 (see option A)
        D) it doesn’t matter because you still can’t coexist peacefully with the right

        Liberalism is usually a dominating ideology like Islam (they can’t exist with cultures unlike them even if each culture has its own geophysical boundaries). So if we can’t have peace we will have war. Those who haven’t seen that yet are what we call independents, i.e. the stupidest voting block in America.

        Paul Ryan's Sickly Old Lapdog

        May 5, 2017 at 11:45 am

      • “Hey, some of us liberals understand human biodiversity”

        If you accept HBD, you are not a true liberal.

        Otis the Sweaty

        May 5, 2017 at 11:54 am

      • “If you accept HBD, you are not a true liberal.”

        Certainly you can’t be a 21st century liberal if you believe in HBD.

      • Liberals hate white people. There is nothing more you need to know. Their concerns about racism are built on virtue-signalling to their Masters hoping that they will be exempted from the Rendition their Masters have planned for other whites.

        Evolution is just a lefty plot against Christianity, because Christianity is mostly white.

        HBD is a pointless distraction.


        May 5, 2017 at 12:42 pm

      • “Jesse — What makes you liberal rather than conservative?”

        Well, more in the old school, nationalist, Keir Hardy type of liberal. Of course you want your compatriots, even the trashy and annoying ones to have nice things – well paid work, nice houses, opportunities for advancement if that’s possible and a good life if that’s not. Of course you’re willing to spend money to try to have those nice things, if for no other reason than what the hell else are you going to spend it on? Let some rich guy buy his fifth yacht and hire his fortieth bodyguard?

        If anything, HBD has solidified those opinions. Many people, maybe most of them, simply can’t bootstrap themselves up. It’s not their fault or anyone else’s. And basic arithmetic says that even if they could, then if a higher wage is based on scarcity, lots of people flooding the market will depress wages and benefits. It may be a way for a few people to get on the lifeboats but the ship is still sinking.

        So we need strict and viciously enforced equal pay laws (if for no other reason than to stop employers being able to start a race to the bottom by hiring women and racial minorities – I will never understand why the alt right types don’t understand how such laws benefit white men). We need a high minimum wage. Single payer healthcare. We need CLOSED BORDERS. To stop waging wars. Plenty of investment in R&D. High taxes. To restructure employment so smart women have more babies.

        We also need to understand that, at least in the short term, many people will still languish. Their genes simply make them less smart and less healthy. But it’s important to take care of our own, no matter how hapless they are, and it will be infinitely better for social cohesion. Imagine not having to worry about your less intelligent grandchildren because you know they’ll have work, healthcare etc.! Imagine not having to worry about riots or hiring security because the lower orders will be working for their bread or under supervision!

        I’m not a “conservative” in the sense that I believe precisely nothing of the conservative establishment dogma.


        May 6, 2017 at 8:57 am

      • Jesse — I believe political orientation is more about values and motives than actual policies. For example, it’s completely possible to support abortion from either liberal or conservative motives. It’s similarly possible to oppose abortion from liberal or conservative motives. Some of your policies are kind f liberal. But your motives sound more conservative.

        I don’t have any objection to your motives. I don’t mind most of your policies either. They wouldn’t be my first choice but I could tolerate most of them. Not sure about the wealth redistribution and equal pay laws though. The problem with wealth redistribution is that it’s too easily abused and incentivizes bad behavior. For example, 90% of the people on welfare are single mothers. As for equal pay, not everyone is equally productive, If the law mandated equal pay then it would price most women, minorities, etc out of the workforce. And if it mandated equal pay on top of quotas then it would lead to discrimination and exploitation of white men. Even more than there already is.


        May 6, 2017 at 11:20 am

  8. OT but excellent:

    First-person reporting on proles’ absence of future orientation.

    The reporter spends a day in an eviction court.


    May 5, 2017 at 12:37 am

    • That might have been a worthwhile article, if I could actually believe anything written it. That was written by Kevin “die white working class die!” Williamson, number two never Trumper behind Jonah Goldberg at NR. Williamson hates Fishtown with a passion, so he’s not exactly an unbiased observer.

      Mike Street Station

      May 5, 2017 at 6:15 pm

  9. You might be right Lion, or maybe Mikeca is. I don’t know. But what I do know is that the author knew he couldn’t mention race at all and still get traction with his intended audience. The BBC radio programme would have been impossible. HBD writers (eg Garrett Jones) have to compromise to get their ideas in front of a mainstream mass audience. The compromise is surely worth it.

    The lioncub

    May 5, 2017 at 1:18 am

  10. “The left believes that racism is the most evil thing in the world.”

    Robert K. Merton’s concept of the self-fulfilling prophecy stems from the Thomas theorem, which states:
    “If men define situations as real, they are real in their consequences.”

    According to Thomas, people react not only to the situations they are in, but also, and often primarily, to the way they perceive the situations and to the meaning they assign to these perceptions. Therefore, their behavior is determined in part by their perception and the meaning they ascribe to the situations they are in, rather than by the situations themselves. Once people convince themselves that a situation really has a certain meaning, regardless of whether it actually does, they will take very real actions in consequence.

    The Left, probably like all coalitions, sees an advantage in piecing together a seemingly coherent demonology that casts their opponents as objects of fear while also maintaining some semblance of coherence for the meta theories they develop to tie traumatic social and personal events to their political enemies. Racism, though almost certainly a prophecy (in Popper’s vocabulary), is elevated from an attribute of eccentric personal preference to an independent population scale social force capable of causing wars and lowering IQs. By offering a natural sciences counter-theory to racism, evolution, and IQ as its manifestation, must be destroyed and marginalized at all costs. Causal racism, as a meta-theory, being non-falsifiable, can only compare badly to evolution if a comparison is allowed. However, if social shaming mechanisms are employed to deter comparisons, causal racism as a plausible theory survives to fight another day.

    The belief in historical destiny is sheer superstition. There can be no prediction of the course of human history by scientific or any other rational methods. –Karl Popper

    The Left believes racism was the predicate upon which slavery and the Holocaust were based and racism will be the predicate for any group disparity going forward. Since alternate theories of both events not dependent upon population scale racism for their plausibility are not permitted airing (without extreme marginalization and social shaming), racism wins by default as an explanation. In effect, we know that racism is powerful and real because we know slavery and the Holocaust occurred. Racism as an historical prophecy retains its luster.


    May 5, 2017 at 2:54 am

  11. I’ll occasionally tune into Bill Maher’s Real Time and watch Bill castigate religious believers because–as he loves to proclaim–the existence of God isn’t provable. Never mind that neither is Divine existence unprovable, but then Bill ofcourse is the King Bitch of liberal hypocrisy. And then imagine for a moment broaching the topic of HBD on his show, it’s safe to imagine Bill’s interest in facts and deductive logic would go out the window in a heartbeat and an ugly rant would ensue, directed at the unfortunate HBD supporter. If HBD supporter is still standing two minutes into the conversation, attack dogs would be summoned to take care of business.


    May 5, 2017 at 3:11 am

    • Liberals don’t use science or reason to refute HBD. They use name calling, censorship and pressure tactics to delegitimize proponents of HBD. HBD, along with dozens of other topics, has been declared off limits because it violates braindead pc dictums.

      Lewis Medlock

      May 5, 2017 at 10:28 am

  12. OT: Hillary just started a new PAC, called Resistance.

    Now, this is just another avenue for her, Bill and Chelsea to scam and scheme more money for themselves, but it also demonstrates that Hillary intends to stick around. The crazy lady will run again in 2020.

    This defeat may have reinvigorated her health. In interviews she appears more coherent. It is likely that what health issues have ailed both her and her husband all these years have been due to sloth and lack of exercise. Even at the late age of 70 one can turn one’s health trajectory with vigorous exercise.


    May 5, 2017 at 3:48 am

    • She’ll never run again, but she’ll always be wanting that gold.


      May 5, 2017 at 9:16 am

      • Hillary won’t run for President in 2020 but Michele Obama will. Oh, and Pres. Trump will not.

        E. Rekshun

        May 5, 2017 at 5:06 pm

    • The real question is: will all those corporate chumps and foreign governments again pony up $250,000 bribes masquerading as speaking fees or have they learned their lesson?


      May 5, 2017 at 9:57 am

    • Grifters gonna grift.

      God I hate those people.


      May 5, 2017 at 12:07 pm

    • This defeat may have reinvigorated her health. In interviews she appears more coherent. It is likely that what health issues have ailed both her and her husband all these years have been due to sloth and lack of exercise. Even at the late age of 70 one can turn one’s health trajectory with vigorous exercise.

      Or it was all just a lie that her opponents no longer have any motive to disseminate any more?


      May 5, 2017 at 5:34 pm

    • Maybe she switched to the paleo diet? I could see her health improving 500% of her business as usual doctors were pumping her full of whole grain dreck and low fat yogurt.

      Bill I don’t know about, it’s possible he has some illness unrelated to diet.

      I hope she had the rocky montage music playing in the background as she was getting whipped into shape.

      Paul Ryan's Sickly Old Lapdog

      May 5, 2017 at 10:23 pm

  13. I don’t think they care much about the black-white gap. Most probably don’t even acknowledge it exists.

    The real reason why the hereditary component of IQ troubles them is that it challenges the morality of the meritocracy they benefit from and believe in. They assuage their guilt over inequality by donating money to educational institutions and by voting for Dems who promise to “invest more” in education.

    Acknowledging hereditary inequality in aptitude blows that all up.

    Dave Pinsen

    May 5, 2017 at 3:56 am

    • It’s this. It’s entirely about the technocratic meritocracy. Bringing the grace of God into individual outcomes diminishes the moral weight of “merit.” Well placed leftist technocrats suddenly aren’t better people who worked hard.

      The left doesn’t care about nature/nurture vice black IQ. They’re just annoyed that the visibly obvious persistent black underclass complicates their meritocratic status assignment credential machine.


      May 5, 2017 at 1:32 pm

    • “Acknowledging hereditary inequality in aptitude blows that all up.”

      Actually it blows up the entire leftist worldview because it would put limits on what can be accomplished. The left believes that poverty, racism, sexism and gender differences can be eradicated through education and government programs. Once genes come into play, their utopian plans become much more difficult or even impossible to attain.

      Lewis Medlock

      May 5, 2017 at 3:53 pm

    • Baloney.

      They assuage their guilt by talking down to working class coal miners and by accusing them of white privilege.


      May 6, 2017 at 12:14 am

  14. But the liberals are right about economics, democracy, civil liberties, environment, some aspects of social policy and almost certainly about opposition to war.

    If Bernie was somehow grafted onto Trump’s imigration, criminal justice and social policy we would have the perfect candidate. But that can’t happen as long as Master plays the two sides off one another.

    The Philosopher

    May 5, 2017 at 8:50 am

    • Even is stuff that the left is right about , it gets there with the wrong logic.


      May 5, 2017 at 6:14 pm

    • Liberals are NOT right on environment. I voted 4 hillary but agree with repeal of epa. States should control standards not federal. If WV and KY want 2 Frackville and do coal mining we shouldn’t prevent them.


      May 5, 2017 at 7:58 pm

      • Rivers and mountains and grasslands go through multiple states.

        The Philosopher

        May 6, 2017 at 8:33 am

    • Bernie is a f###ng shyster. Big loser. I don’t get how so many people like him.


      May 5, 2017 at 7:59 pm

    • In what strange reality are liberals right about economics?

      Of course, its all in the definition of “liberal”. Perhaps you meant classical liberalism a la Adam Smith?


      May 7, 2017 at 4:00 pm

  15. Speaking of prole whites and IQ, I would like to know what your take is on the reported fact that the Charleston church shooter Dylann Roof has, according to the court-appointed psychologist, an IQ of 141?

    See the link below:

    Jimmy Kangaroo

    May 5, 2017 at 9:24 am

  16. “I don’t think they care much about the black-white gap. Most probably don’t even acknowledge it exists.”

    correction: they dont even know it exists. we’ve been insulated in our little e-world for so long we forget that most of the stuff that gets talked about on blogs like this is pretty arcane. most liberals/conservatives would be shocked at the idea of a b/w IQ gap bc theyve likely never heard of it and would think youre just fabricating the idea on the spot. IQ is a pretty poorly understood concept as it is, let alone group differences in it.

    james n.s.w

    May 5, 2017 at 9:31 am

  17. HBD renders much of left’s costly social programs useless. There’s billions of dollars and thousand of jobs at stake in promoting an ideology that doesn’t work. But some on the right are not immune to this failure of logic ,in, believing that ‘hard work’ aone can suffice to pull people out of poverty, ignoring the role of IQ.

    grey enlightenment

    May 5, 2017 at 10:08 am

  18. OT Lion: an interesting and reasonable take on the health care vote yesterday

    Andrew E.

    May 5, 2017 at 10:11 am

  19. In an ideal meritocracy, wealth transfers from parents to adult child, or, for that matter, from husband to wife (or vice versa), would be prohibited. Everyone earns what he can earn based strictly on his own merits and effort. But therein lies an absurdity, for the greatest motivator most of us have is to provide a large bequest for our children. Once that possibility is removed, you also remove the prime motivator for hard work and high achievement for a majority of the population.

    Mark Caplan

    May 5, 2017 at 10:25 am

  20. Good article on Vox about how Trumpcare is designed to help middle class whites at the expense of poor blacks and latinos:

    Otis the Sweaty

    May 5, 2017 at 11:50 am

  21. Yeah, Lion, the left is interested in actually advancing the interests of the people that vote for them, whether they be the college educated (whose superior IQs mean something) or blacks (whose lesser IQs therefore don’t mean anything, and to the extent they do its strictly a result of the environment and not genetics) or gays (who are the way they are because of genetics rather than environment).

    Wouldn’t it be great if Republicans actually did the same and stood up for the people that voted for them rather than using their so called principles to constantly screw them over in favor of a tiny economic elite?

    You seem to have fallen into the trap of thinking that the democrats are somehow wrong for doing this.


    May 5, 2017 at 12:17 pm

    • Magnavox,

      That’s all well and good, but the entire Democrat platform of ethnic nepotism for me but not for thee is contingent on whites not advancing their own ethnic interests. It’s a game that works for you until someone else decides to play.

      With the Alt-Right, the whites are now starting to play. When that blooms, the Democrats are game over.


      May 6, 2017 at 12:23 am

      • And I hope that much of the alt right succeeds. And I hope by doing so both sides are forced to be more
        genuinely principled and consistent (something that won’t look anything like the present day republicans who love crowing about their principles).


        May 6, 2017 at 7:10 pm

  22. If you believe people have different abilities then racism cannot always be at fault. And if racism is not always at fault then some people will need to find another gig.

    Prof. Woland

    May 5, 2017 at 3:20 pm

  23. People have two kinds of thinking. The first kind is rational and objective, ie crossword puzzles, writing a program or playing chess. The second kind is emotional and subjective ie whenever a topic touches on someone’s values. emotions, etc. This is why people get angry and argue about economics but not calculus. Economics touches on values and emotions whereas a math problem does not.

    Values and emotions short circuit reason. So being smart doesn’t make one right when it comes to those kinds of issues. On the contrary, I believe that smart people are more likely to be wrong on many issues because the greater wealth associated with higher IQ insulates them from the negative consequences of their values and opinions. There is also evidence that environment, especially when young, affects brain development and that this, in turn, affects political views.

    Regardless, Moral Foundation Theory provides good explanation for most views relating to values. Basically, most people share 5 main values (fairness, caring, respect for authority, group loyalty and morality). Of course, people don’t share them to the same extent. How one rates on these values determines whether they’re liberal or conservative.

    Liberals, however, rate even higher on the first two (fairness and caring) but much lower on the rest. There’s also a crucial difference between how liberals and others view fairness. Most people define fairness as equal opportunity. How do you give people equal opportunity? By not cheating, stealing, discriminating, etc.

    However, liberals define fairness as equal outcomes. They think it’s unfair if some people are more successful than others no matter how honestly it was earned. Psychological studies have also shown that people seek to punish those they think are acting unfairly. Since leftists see unequal outcomes as unfair they want to punish those who are successful.

    Of course, unequal outcomes are a natural consequence of equal opportunity. So leftists are in a constant state of outrage viewing everything in terms of victim vs oppressor. They’re constantly comparing groups looking for any difference or “gap” to be self-righteous or angry over. And they enjoy it, too. Studies show the brain releases endorphins to reward someone for acting on their values. This is a similar high as people get from drugs. So leftists are literally addicted to throwing fits. And it doesn’t even have to be real. It could be a completely fictitious narrative and often is.

    It may seem strange that white leftists want to blame and punish whites for being successful and doing what they’re supposed to. After all, Asians are regarded as a “model minority” for being successful. But realize that liberals also rate low on group loyalty. It’s not simply a matter of rating low on these values or being neutral. As one continues left on the spectrum one actually becomes hostile. So leftists aren’t just neutral on those values. They actually hate their own people. Some even hate their own family.

    This video is from a slightly different angle but makes sense.



    May 5, 2017 at 3:28 pm

    • Leftists are running a scam on you. It is a power play…nothing more. They would gladly equalize outcomes…for a cut of the profits.

      That said, understand that equality of outcome vs. equality of treatment really is a distinction without a difference. How would you know if anyone was treated equally unless you had equal outcomes? After all, any result could be described as equal treatment.


      May 6, 2017 at 12:34 am

  24. OT: The nerds over at 4Chan have done it again. They have released images of a purported document that demonstrates that Macron has been hiding money in off-shore accounts to avoid taxes. Maybe Le Pen can pull this off. Either way, the accusations will dog Macron going forward, hopefully cripple him politically.

    Be nice to nerds. They can be vicious when riled up.


    May 5, 2017 at 5:00 pm

  25. Leftists/liberals know as well as you and I do that IQ exists and is real. They disparage white proles for their supposed lack of such IQ. They just refuse to acknowledge it’s existence because doing so would only encourage white proles and validate their point that Blacks stress out and breakdown because of lower general IQ.

    Leftists’ true bete noire are white proles. All liberals and leftists hate white proles. White proles have always jilted them and left them at the altar of social advancement.

    Lenin hated proles. He massacred and starved them in the hundreds of thousands. Stalin hated white proles. He called them Kulaks and massacred and starved them in the millions. Castro hated white proles. He drove them from Cuba and called them Scum and Worms. All the technocrats in Brussels hate the hundreds of millions of white proles whom they lord over, just as in the USA almost all Democrats and many/most Republicans loathe white proles.

    Remember the “hip” writer Terry Southern? He wrote the screenplay for that ridiculous leftist fantasy, “Easy Rider”. Southern is quoted as saying that as much as possible he inserted content that would make simple, white rural folk look as evil and backward as possible. He blamed them for all the ills of America in the 1960s. Vietnam, Cold war, Kennedy-King assassinations, race riots, white flight/white fright, Goldberg, Wallace, Reagan, Nixon reactions, etc.

    In the last scene of Easy Rider Southern has two “good old boys” riding around in their pickup truck on a Sunday afternoon. Primordial, blue-collared, drunk, joking, chewing tobacco. They blast away the leftist saint/hero Dennis Hooper with a shotgun for no reason other than a lark and to get a hippy biker. Leftist actually believe in these fantastical caricatures of white proles. They believed them then, fifty years ago, and they believe them today.


    May 5, 2017 at 5:21 pm

    • FDR loved white proles.

    • There is a similar story about a famous director/writer. He was camping and hiking out in the backwoods of a southern state, but got into some serious trouble. His life was saved by the locals.

      To thank them, he wrote “Deliverance.”


      May 6, 2017 at 12:40 am

  26. The cover piece in my May 2017 issue of National Geographic is on intelligence. The introduction starts of:

    …for our story we wanted to go beyond one man [Einstein] and explore the nature of genius itself. Why is it that some people are so much more intelligent or creative than the rest of us? And who are they?

    That’s were our trouble begins…the uniformity was obvious – and unsettling…those hailed as geniuses were most often white men, of European origin.

    And, of course, that’s because of racism and sexism.

    These relentless subtle and not-so-subtle anti-White male or other liberal spin will lead me to not renew my low-cost subscription to National Geographic, as I did w/ ESPN Magazine and probably will do with Sports Illustrated and, perhaps, even Popular Mechanics. This week, after I could take it no longer, especially the constant anti-Trump in every other piece, I finally un-bookmarked LA Times and WaPo.

    E. Rekshun

    May 5, 2017 at 5:30 pm

  27. Liberal virtue signaling can get you killed.

    Tourist rents AIR BNB room in Harlem. Gets robbed, teeth knocked out and sexually assaulted.

    I’ll bet she is a good white/asian. Most likely European or Japanese. Harlem is a wild place, stay a way.

    I’ll bet that she hates white proles. After this incident she will only hate them more.


    May 5, 2017 at 6:51 pm

    • 146th St and FDB is pretty far from any white areas.

      • Tourist is from Germany. Stupid SJW. She knew damn well of Harlem’s reputation. She is seething with rage against white people tonight.


        May 5, 2017 at 11:22 pm

      • “Tourist is from Germany. Stupid SJW. She knew damn well of Harlem’s reputation. She is seething with rage against white people tonight.”

        Based on what’s been happening in Germany lately, victims of vibrant rape know not to blame the perp, but society.

        Mike Street Station

        May 6, 2017 at 7:54 am

    • Japanese? Japanese women are not stupid like that. The article says she is German.


      May 7, 2017 at 7:09 am

      • Japanese think they are superior to other races and don’t feel guilty about it. One of the reasons why I like Japanese, you don’t have to worry about their racial sensitivities, they don’t have any.

      • It is not just Japanese women that are realists when it comes to understanding the dangers of the hood. Women from every ethnicity except white instinctively know how vulnerable they are in the ghetto. It only ever seems to be white people that ever naively wander into the hood and think they are safe.


        May 7, 2017 at 8:39 pm

  28. The left are mainly meritocrats (what does Lion call them? Self actualizing job people) and if they believed in IQ they would have to simultaneously believe a) that they don’t really deserve their success, it wasn’t a product of hard work entirely and b) that they have some responsibility to people with low IQs, because low IQ people don’t deserve poor paying jobs. Instead, they believe that a) their success is entirely earned and b) poor people are poor because of external circumstances – poor education, racism, etc – and that these barriers can be reduced with enough gov’t spending and charity fundraisers. IQ is a direct threat to their legitimacy because their legitimacy rests on merit, not on inherited traits like IQ.

    BJ dubbS

    May 5, 2017 at 7:37 pm

  29. Does anyone here know if a Left-leaning site that takes up race and genetics issues in a serious way?


    May 5, 2017 at 8:10 pm

    • how would that even work?

      There are some Leftists who have admitted HBD is true: Sam Harris and Andrew Sullivan, and you can be sure more will be coming over the coming decades, but for the most part liberals aren’t going to acknowledge or talk about HBD.

      Otis the Sweaty

      May 5, 2017 at 10:47 pm

      • I was unclear with my question. Given that the interwebs are full of declarations, without citation, to alleged debunkings of HBD, I’d like to read whatever purports to be the apex of Leftist thinking in this dept. I understand Dershowitz is advertising a new book (not yet out) he claims will do that. It must be based on some kind of seemingly plausible argument. Since I’m currently unaware of any plausible counter argument to HBD I’d like to find what passes as the gold standard for that side of the discussion.


        May 6, 2017 at 11:37 am

    • What interesting things would liberals have to say about HBD? They would just say that it justifies all the massive welfare programs they put in place. In fact, even more transfers from white men to non-whites are required.

      When the truth is that HBD is real AND state welfare should be abolished. The world’s (and the nation’s) minorities are not the white man’s burden.

      Andrew E.

      May 6, 2017 at 12:29 am

      • Thanks. I posted a comment as part of a discussion there regarding the meaning of racism.


        May 6, 2017 at 4:14 pm

    • GNXP was slightly left leaning I think.

      Paul Ryan's Sickly Old Lapdog

      May 6, 2017 at 11:59 pm

  30. Isn’t it relatively easy to suss out the IQ income-race gap? What is the income of Blacks vs. Whites with comparable scores?


    May 6, 2017 at 12:29 am

  31. The liberal elite has come to hate prole whites, and they would be quite ready to believe that proles whites, the people who voted for Donald Trump, are actually genetically inferior to themselves.

    No. This is your New York view of the world. In my experience a lot of the most rabid leftists are smart people from “Red” America, who despise the kids they went to school with and their own families. They reject genetic explanations because they want to believe their neighbors are just bad people.

    Although ironically two of the smartest and most bitter leftists from rural America I know were both adopted, which would tend to reinforce the genetic inheritance theory.

    Peter Akuleyev

    May 6, 2017 at 5:31 am

    • Being able to understand and pontificate in leftist ideology takes high IQ (think Foucault and Derida). It is therefore a way for highly verbal nerds to feel better about their inadequacy in the red state evolutionary chain which values Braun over brains.

      Paul Ryan's Sickly Old Lapdog

      May 7, 2017 at 12:00 am

  32. Nope, the reason the left currently loathes the concept of IQ is entirely related to the “gap” between blacks and whites. The left believes that racism is the most evil thing in the world, and that only the most evil of racists would believe that the “gap” is caused by genetics.

    So leftists in other Western countries hate IQ for similar gaps with other minorities, then?


    May 7, 2017 at 11:51 am

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: