RSS
What the commenter Cicerone wrote in response to the study about dysgenic decline in Germany.
The findings come rather surprizing to me and I am always sceptical of using these low N studies to make out trends.
Using fertility by education data from the Wittgenstein database, my estimate for the intrinsic IQ loss over the next generation is 1.0. That of course doesn’t take migration into account and only incorporates differences in fertility rates by education classes. Contrary to the past, these fertility rates don’t differ that much anymore. University educated women in Germany have a TFR of 1.3, vs. 1.45 for medium educated women and 1.6 for the least educated.
Fertility driven IQ losses per generation for other countries:
Belgium and Finland: 0 (the best scoring countries in the world, no dysgenic fertility here, rest of Scandinavia not far behind)
Canada: -0.4
Indonesia: -0.6 (best scoring developing country)
Japan: -0.8
UK: -1.0
Germany: -1.0
Italy: -1.2
China: -1.3
France: -1.3 (France has a very fertile underclass compared to the UK or Germany)
South Korea: -1.4
Singapore: -1.4 (the only country openly following eugenic fertility policies, with dismal results it seems)
Australia: -1.6
USA: -1.7
Russia: -1.8
Poland: -2.2
Romania: -2.9 (worst scoring European country, everyone knows why)
India: -3.2
Mexico: -3.3
Nigeria: -3.4
Iran: -3.6
Turkey: -3.6
Brazil: -3.9 (worst scoring major country, educated women in Brazil have extremely few children (1.2 on average))
Afghanistan: -5.1 (worst scoring country on earth)
English
Arabic
Chinese (Simplified)
Dutch
French
German
Hebrew
Hindi
Italian
Persian
Portuguese
Russian
Spanish
Swedish
Some of these are kind of hard to believe. Nigeria? India? How low can these countries go? What is the average Dalit IQ?
On the other hand, I knew a few Nigerians in college and I would say that if these people represent at least a 1SD difference but reproduce lower than the normal Nigerian AND emigrate, then Nigeria is doomed – I mean literally doomed.
And notice that IMF is often accused of being too sanguine about growth in general. Nigeria had a major (90% upwards) revision in GDP data which was extremely suspect and they also rode the commodity supercycle when China was growing(or bursting) at the seams.
What is going to happen to a country with a declining per capita GDP but an exploding population? On top of that, you have a near 50/50 religious divide between Christians and Muslims. I wouldn't be surprised if they turned out to be the next Iraq or Afghanistan. And you better believe that the left will push for many millions of refugees. And this time they'll throw in "legacy of colonialism" and whatever else they have.
On the other hand, I knew a few Nigerians in college and I would say that if these people represent at least a 1SD difference but reproduce lower than the normal Nigerian AND emigrate, then Nigeria is doomed - I mean literally doomed.Replies: @Reply, @NoFap_Newton
On Nigeria, and being eventually doomed. The IMF came out with their latest WEO flagship report for autumn of 2017 and their projections for Nigeria is that they will have negative per capita growth for the entire projection period.
And notice that IMF is often accused of being too sanguine about growth in general. Nigeria had a major (90% upwards) revision in GDP data which was extremely suspect and they also rode the commodity supercycle when China was growing(or bursting) at the seams.
What is going to happen to a country with a declining per capita GDP but an exploding population? On top of that, you have a near 50/50 religious divide between Christians and Muslims. I wouldn’t be surprised if they turned out to be the next Iraq or Afghanistan. And you better believe that the left will push for many millions of refugees. And this time they’ll throw in “legacy of colonialism” and whatever else they have.
What is the general calculation method that is implied here?
Another question: Did anyone ever use 20th-century data for, e.g., the U.K. or the US and try to see how it squares with testing data from early in the century compared to late in the century? (Admittedly I would expect that to be a rather difficult proposition due to insufficient historical data.)
The differential fertility patterns in, say, Poland or Romania may not be a huge deal since the vast majority of migrants who went abroad (and in many cases stayed there) came from the bottom 20% of their respective populations.
Also, the findings of Scandinavia goes against the knee-jerk attacks on the welfare state. We’re often told that the welfare state is terrible for eugenics and maybe it is, but harsher social environments, like that in EE, produces worse – not better – results. After all, in a society like Poland which has no real social security(at least up until 2014), one would expect high IQ men to have an even greater social advantage over low IQ men since women when choosing mates can’t depend on low IQ men being fed by the state. Poland also has no significant gypsy population unlike Romania. And their PISA results places them around Germany, so their kids are fairly bright.
That’s the opposite of what “muh welfare state” obsessives would predict. A harsher social environment would not see greater differences in fertility between low IQ and high IQ people. Yet it does.
Finland is probably the country in Scandinavia where the welfare state is still the strongest, even more so than in Norway. Belgium has long had a streak of socialism. They famously avoided any austerity in the post-2008 period(though as much a result of government paralysis than anything else, but still).
So, counter-intuitive findings. It will be interesting to see if the libertarian muddleheads take this into account or if they don’t even want to think about it. Reminds me of all the GOP stupid talking points about how abortion and unwed mothers is responsible for social chaos and decay. Then you show them the statistics on Iceland, which has both high abortion rates *and* a lot of unwed mothers(though with partners). Yet Iceland does quite well on crime, social tranquility and so on. A lot of these talking points are really just cuckservative BS which is repackaged in the alt-right by people who frankly don’t use their brain.
The findings on Scandinavia+Belgium vs EE are counter-intuitive. We’re told that the welfare state accelerates IQ dysgenic trends, namely that poorer and supposedly duller people reproduce even faster whereas in more harsher social environments, where there isn’t as easy to have lots of kids, the higher IQ people will have more or at least as many kids.
Yet what we see is the opposite. Finland has arguably the strongest welfare state in Scandinavia and Belgium is up there together with France on the continent. Yes, Romania has gypsies, but Poland does not. Furthermore, looking at the PISA tests, Poland does quite well. So the population is not the problem. So why are bright Polish people reproducing so much less than less bright Polish people?
After all, those who are obsessed with the welfare state can’t explain this. It reminds me of Iceland. Iceland both has a high abortion rate *and* a high unwed mothers rate. Both of these are supposedly signs of social decay and chaos. Yet I’d venture to say that Iceland is far more tranquil than even most white-supermajority states in the US. Certainly not behind any of them. A lot of these theories on the welfare state – or unwed mothers – are just repackaged cuckservatism which many people in the altright have been unable to shake off and actually think about.
Welfare states also help to break up traditional family arrangements that encourage fertility among the poor and discourages it among the rich. When you can count on the state to support you and you don't have to rely on your big extended family, you can plan your own life instead of having to follow old conventions, which lowers fertility among the poor. A big reason why gypsies have so many kids is because tehy are still caught in those traditions that expect from girls to marry in their early teens. With a welfare state they could run away from their families more easily and get an education.
They sorta are.And in any case, someone arguing in good faith would ask what's special about Iceland (a mono-ethnic island nation of 300.000), not the other way around.>tranquilBeware of a silent dog and still waters. If they're anything like my idea of WASPs and Scandis, Icelanders have got to be super-Scandi. That is, puritanical mores and strict social control, a very high-context culture, behind a nicey-nice faсade. As a Joo who enjoys his urban anonymity, I wouldn't want to be trapped on an island with 300.000 Scandis. Actually, I wouldn't want to be trapped on an island with 300.000 of any group, incl. Joos.>just repackaged cuckservatism "Cuckservatism" is the kind of conservatism that is given to compromising with shitlibs on cultural issues and immigration. Advocating a "clean" personal life isn't cuckservatism. What's the supposed inconsistency again?
If a man and a woman live together they'll have an extremely hard time convincing the authorities that they're not a couple. The cultures have also shifted to the point where no one thinks it's weird for a man to call a woman his wife even though they're not technically married. The state found out about their relationship, declared that they're in de facto marriage and essentially married them already for all practical purposes.
Scandinavian behavior didn't change that much but the belief and cultural expectation that marriage needs to be formalized and sacralized by the Lutheran church has collapsed. And that's a good thing: Lutheran clergy loves to promote homosexuality, feminism and Muslim immigration and loathes having to defend tradition so the fact that Scandinavians no longer feel that the church has sanctity to offer shows Scandinavians to be somewhat traditional in attitudes, not the opposite.
Also, one thing here is that Scandinavia has the most inflated number of degrees. Those elementary school teachers with master's degrees in "education" and so on are not really equivalent to what a master's degree meant back when even a liberal arts degree meant that you were expected to read classics in their original Latin. Education as a proxy for IQ likely overestimates IQ the most in Scandinavia with all the investment in women's studies, environmentalism and so on where state funded degrees are handed out for just repeating leftist ideology.Replies: @Anonymous
I assume that’s due to fertile gypsies; the overall trend must be even worse given the brain drain of the more intelligent and educated Romanians to Western Europe.
What’s going on in Afghanistan?
Thank’s Anatoly for posting my figures again! 😀
I have to add though, that they are unreliable when it comes to developing countries, as I used education as a proxy for IQ. We all know that in developing countries reaching your potential is harder than it is in developed countries, so education level may be a worse predictor of IQ in developing than in developed countries, especially so in countries like Afghanistan.
1/ I notice Hungary, the country that’s going to have a wall to keep out foreigners isn’t shown. It’s likely going to be similar to Romania. Oh well.
2/ Such Unz.com negativity. I can think of one country that could go in the other direction.
Yet what we see is the opposite. Finland has arguably the strongest welfare state in Scandinavia and Belgium is up there together with France on the continent. Yes, Romania has gypsies, but Poland does not. Furthermore, looking at the PISA tests, Poland does quite well. So the population is not the problem. So why are bright Polish people reproducing so much less than less bright Polish people?
After all, those who are obsessed with the welfare state can't explain this. It reminds me of Iceland. Iceland both has a high abortion rate *and* a high unwed mothers rate. Both of these are supposedly signs of social decay and chaos. Yet I'd venture to say that Iceland is far more tranquil than even most white-supermajority states in the US. Certainly not behind any of them. A lot of these theories on the welfare state - or unwed mothers - are just repackaged cuckservatism which many people in the altright have been unable to shake off and actually think about.Replies: @Cicerone, @ussr andy, @Anatoly Karlin, @Jaakko Raipala
I guess the biggest myth around is that the welfare state only serves the poor. But that isn’t really the case in Scandinavia. Many of their policies are actually aimed at the middle class. Think of subsidized childcare. Subsidized childcare mostly encourages births in the middle class and among the highly educated, where two parents are working. So a middle class or upper middle class household which might worry whether they could afford a third child in the US with its extremely high childcare costs don’t have to worry about it in Sweden.
Welfare states also help to break up traditional family arrangements that encourage fertility among the poor and discourages it among the rich. When you can count on the state to support you and you don’t have to rely on your big extended family, you can plan your own life instead of having to follow old conventions, which lowers fertility among the poor. A big reason why gypsies have so many kids is because tehy are still caught in those traditions that expect from girls to marry in their early teens. With a welfare state they could run away from their families more easily and get an education.
Yet what we see is the opposite. Finland has arguably the strongest welfare state in Scandinavia and Belgium is up there together with France on the continent. Yes, Romania has gypsies, but Poland does not. Furthermore, looking at the PISA tests, Poland does quite well. So the population is not the problem. So why are bright Polish people reproducing so much less than less bright Polish people?
After all, those who are obsessed with the welfare state can't explain this. It reminds me of Iceland. Iceland both has a high abortion rate *and* a high unwed mothers rate. Both of these are supposedly signs of social decay and chaos. Yet I'd venture to say that Iceland is far more tranquil than even most white-supermajority states in the US. Certainly not behind any of them. A lot of these theories on the welfare state - or unwed mothers - are just repackaged cuckservatism which many people in the altright have been unable to shake off and actually think about.Replies: @Cicerone, @ussr andy, @Anatoly Karlin, @Jaakko Raipala
>Iceland both has a high abortion rate *and* a high unwed mothers rate. Both of these are supposedly signs of social decay and chaos.
They sorta are.
And in any case, someone arguing in good faith would ask what’s special about Iceland (a mono-ethnic island nation of 300.000), not the other way around.
>tranquil
Beware of a silent dog and still waters. If they’re anything like my idea of WASPs and Scandis, Icelanders have got to be super-Scandi. That is, puritanical mores and strict social control, a very high-context culture, behind a nicey-nice faсade. As a Joo who enjoys his urban anonymity, I wouldn’t want to be trapped on an island with 300.000 Scandis. Actually, I wouldn’t want to be trapped on an island with 300.000 of any group, incl. Joos.
>just repackaged cuckservatism
“Cuckservatism” is the kind of conservatism that is given to compromising with shitlibs on cultural issues and immigration. Advocating a “clean” personal life isn’t cuckservatism. What’s the supposed inconsistency again?
Yet what we see is the opposite. Finland has arguably the strongest welfare state in Scandinavia and Belgium is up there together with France on the continent. Yes, Romania has gypsies, but Poland does not. Furthermore, looking at the PISA tests, Poland does quite well. So the population is not the problem. So why are bright Polish people reproducing so much less than less bright Polish people?
After all, those who are obsessed with the welfare state can't explain this. It reminds me of Iceland. Iceland both has a high abortion rate *and* a high unwed mothers rate. Both of these are supposedly signs of social decay and chaos. Yet I'd venture to say that Iceland is far more tranquil than even most white-supermajority states in the US. Certainly not behind any of them. A lot of these theories on the welfare state - or unwed mothers - are just repackaged cuckservatism which many people in the altright have been unable to shake off and actually think about.Replies: @Cicerone, @ussr andy, @Anatoly Karlin, @Jaakko Raipala
Ironically, pretty much the only guy who gets it right is Andrew Anglin – go hard on White Sharia (or don’t bother at all).
Or Nordic/English grannies making 'special' trips to Africa
But so long as educated women have one or two decimal points higher TFRs. To each their own I guess
2/ Such Unz.com negativity. I can think of one country that could go in the other direction.Replies: @reiner Tor
No, actually. Hungary has way lower fertility among the lower classes, and higher fertility among women with higher education. (I think in both countries the data has three actual categories: primary education only or lower, in Hungary defined as 8 finished years; secondary education, in Hungary defined as 12 finished years of schooling; higher education. Romania might vary a little, like I think 9 years for primary education, but otherwise seems to be similar.)
In addition to the birth rate it is necessary to consider the mortality rate among children (in the uneducated people family, such mortality should be higher on average)
These calculations are considered children (in most cases, love) which uneducated/poor girls give birth as a result of ties with the educated/wealthy men?
I must say nationalists, or worse, ethno-nationalists who crow about social liberalism always made me laugh. It is, and will remain, a contradiction in terms, and only leads to this: https://www.volkskrant.nl/magazine/smoorverliefd-op-een-syrier~a4503160/
Or Nordic/English grannies making ‘special’ trips to Africa
But so long as educated women have one or two decimal points higher TFRs. To each their own I guess
Perhaps Russian IQ rises in conjunction with the ascendency of the oligarches then?
Yet what we see is the opposite. Finland has arguably the strongest welfare state in Scandinavia and Belgium is up there together with France on the continent. Yes, Romania has gypsies, but Poland does not. Furthermore, looking at the PISA tests, Poland does quite well. So the population is not the problem. So why are bright Polish people reproducing so much less than less bright Polish people?
After all, those who are obsessed with the welfare state can't explain this. It reminds me of Iceland. Iceland both has a high abortion rate *and* a high unwed mothers rate. Both of these are supposedly signs of social decay and chaos. Yet I'd venture to say that Iceland is far more tranquil than even most white-supermajority states in the US. Certainly not behind any of them. A lot of these theories on the welfare state - or unwed mothers - are just repackaged cuckservatism which many people in the altright have been unable to shake off and actually think about.Replies: @Cicerone, @ussr andy, @Anatoly Karlin, @Jaakko Raipala
Unwed mothers is not the same as single mothers. Those anglosphere conservatives who assume that the collapse of marriage in Scandinavia means some explosion of single mothers with fatherless children are retarded. The vast majority of these “unwed” mothers in Scandinavia are coupled up with the fathers of their children, in de facto marriages recognized by both the state and the culture around them.
If a man and a woman live together they’ll have an extremely hard time convincing the authorities that they’re not a couple. The cultures have also shifted to the point where no one thinks it’s weird for a man to call a woman his wife even though they’re not technically married. The state found out about their relationship, declared that they’re in de facto marriage and essentially married them already for all practical purposes.
Scandinavian behavior didn’t change that much but the belief and cultural expectation that marriage needs to be formalized and sacralized by the Lutheran church has collapsed. And that’s a good thing: Lutheran clergy loves to promote homosexuality, feminism and Muslim immigration and loathes having to defend tradition so the fact that Scandinavians no longer feel that the church has sanctity to offer shows Scandinavians to be somewhat traditional in attitudes, not the opposite.
Also, one thing here is that Scandinavia has the most inflated number of degrees. Those elementary school teachers with master’s degrees in “education” and so on are not really equivalent to what a master’s degree meant back when even a liberal arts degree meant that you were expected to read classics in their original Latin. Education as a proxy for IQ likely overestimates IQ the most in Scandinavia with all the investment in women’s studies, environmentalism and so on where state funded degrees are handed out for just repeating leftist ideology.
If a man and a woman live together they'll have an extremely hard time convincing the authorities that they're not a couple. The cultures have also shifted to the point where no one thinks it's weird for a man to call a woman his wife even though they're not technically married. The state found out about their relationship, declared that they're in de facto marriage and essentially married them already for all practical purposes.
Scandinavian behavior didn't change that much but the belief and cultural expectation that marriage needs to be formalized and sacralized by the Lutheran church has collapsed. And that's a good thing: Lutheran clergy loves to promote homosexuality, feminism and Muslim immigration and loathes having to defend tradition so the fact that Scandinavians no longer feel that the church has sanctity to offer shows Scandinavians to be somewhat traditional in attitudes, not the opposite.
Also, one thing here is that Scandinavia has the most inflated number of degrees. Those elementary school teachers with master's degrees in "education" and so on are not really equivalent to what a master's degree meant back when even a liberal arts degree meant that you were expected to read classics in their original Latin. Education as a proxy for IQ likely overestimates IQ the most in Scandinavia with all the investment in women's studies, environmentalism and so on where state funded degrees are handed out for just repeating leftist ideology.Replies: @Anonymous
Finland has degrees in customer service and waitressing! Education prevails!
College educated women have more babies than non-college educated in the US: https://thepracticalconservative.wordpress.com/2017/06/09/college-education-and-birth-numbers-2007-2015/
On the other hand, I knew a few Nigerians in college and I would say that if these people represent at least a 1SD difference but reproduce lower than the normal Nigerian AND emigrate, then Nigeria is doomed - I mean literally doomed.Replies: @Reply, @NoFap_Newton
The high class of India (the ones who had an university education and then had a professional job) are very sterile…They want to work as much as possible till 40, because of cut throat competition and nobody is sure how the economy will play out once automation hits big way…this class has female professionals too
This class is stopping at 0-1 child per family and very rarely 2..this has been going last 10 years..before that it was higher..we donot say per woman, as it considered offensive to imply that a woman is bearing children from more than one man
The trader, business and industrialist class are much more secure as they work as a cabal or cartel..they have no such worries and have around 2-3 children per family
Then there is the underclass, which would be like 75-80 percent of India….They live in merry and without a single worry in the world..not even inflation can crush their soul…they have on average 3-4 children per family
Only way for India to progress is to make 3-4 cities where entry is based on IQ …else things will always fall aprt at a faster pace than they are built..no matter how much one tries
Hmm….I was expecting more insults towards Romanians. Maybe because of the recent immigration from the MENA, we were replaced, at least temporarily, as the “black sheep” of the EU. Not that we were not at least partially responsible for our poor reputation. Which brings me to my question: is anybody aware of research that explains the poverty of the Balkan Peninsula (of which we are part of, even though, sometimes, we say we are not) without taking Communism into account?
These numbers are not comparable because the groups do not have the same meaning across countries IQ-wise. The IQ-education relationship depends on the distribution of education in the country.
Turkish rule?