It must be because of Arabs’ high IQs.
Steve Sailer writes: “As we all know, we have to allow massive immigration from Latin America since nobody could possibly make a living there. Except … all sorts of people have moved to Latin America and many made a killing. What does this say about the people we are getting from Latin America and what does it say about the people who are dumping their unwanted populations on us?”
The Comparison of Mean IQ in Muslim and Non-Muslim Countries
The present research found that the Muslim country mean IQ of 81 is half a standard deviation below the mean IQ of non-Muslim nations and is not related to strength of Muslim culture as defined by the percentage of Muslims in the country. The mean IQ of 84 in Arab countries is not associated with per capita income and is incompatible with the intellectual achievements of the golden age of the Muslim Empire. Possible explanations for this decline include hybridization with sub-Saharan Africans, dysgenic decrease in the more educated Muslims employing birth control as suggested by Meisenberg, the Muslim religion not fostering critical thinking, and the intellectual contributions being both exaggerated and made by non-Muslims.
1. Introduction
The purpose of the present study was to compare the mean IQs of Muslim and non-Muslim countries. The great intellectual achievements of the Muslim Empire from the 7th to the 12th century have been written about by numerous authors (e.g., Bloom & Blair, 2000; Lyons, 2009; Masood, 2009). These achievements have been especially noted in science, mathematics, architecture and medicine. However, the contemporary Muslim world is underrepresentated in highly creative contributions published in prestigious scientific journals. Lynn (1991) presented the total number of Nobel Prizes in science, literature, and economics combined with the Fields award in mathematics as a function of five major categories of ethnic origin. Europeans had a total of 541, North East Asians 23, South Asians and North Africans combined 10, Africans one (in literature), and Southeast Asians none. It is apparent that the predominantly Muslim countries are in the bottom three categories. Such a dearth of superlative scholarly achievement is consistent with the Lynn & Vanhanen (2006) Table 6.5 listing of mean IQs of the world’s countries. Indonesia, the most populous Muslim country, has a mean IQ of 87. If the standard deviation in Indonesia is 15, two standard deviations above the mean is only 117, which probably is not a high enough IQ to obtain a Ph.D. in physics from prestigious universities in high mean IQ countries. Even if mean IQ differences between two countries are modest, the disparity of extremely gifted persons can be huge.
The IQs of the Muslim populations in non-Muslim countries tend to be lower than those of the majority population (Lynn, 2008a). In the Netherlands, the mean IQ of Turks is 83, of Moroccans 81, and Indonesians 94 (Lynn, 2008a). Mackintosh (2007) reported that in the United Kingdom Pakistanis score 4 to 6 IQ points below the Indians. It is unlikely that this can be attributed entirely to minority status. The Chinese are a minority in many countries of the world and yet obtain higher mean IQs than the majority populations. They generate and/or control over half the wealth in Southeast Asian countries. In Indonesia the Chinese constitute 3.8 % of the population and generate/control 73% of the wealth. In Malaysia they constitute 28% of the population and generate/control 69% of the wealth (Lynn, 2008a). Caution should be employed because of the possibility of selective migration.
Special attention is given here to the Arab countries for two reasons. One is to examine the role of the great variation in per capita income. At the high end are Kuwait with $25,314, Qatar with $20,987, and the United Arab Emirates with $20,585. At the low end areYemen with $2,588 and Syria with $2,892. The second reason is to raise for consideration an incongruity between the achievements of the past and the state of the present. The Muslim Empire began in the Arabian Peninsula and the Arabs played a dominant role in its expansion and rise to greatness. Islam did not become established until the 15th century in Indonesia and in what is now Pakistan. The 16 countries regarded as Arab are Algeria, Bahrain, Egypt, Iraq, Jordan, Kuwait, Lebanon, Libya, Morocco, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Tunisia, United Arab Emirates and Yemen.
* In the land of the blind the one-eyed man is king.
* Lebanese Christians are largely descended from the native people who go back to the Phoenicians, while the Muslims have much more ancestry from nomads from the Arabian peninsula. The Lebanese that we get in the West are largely from the Christian community.
* I’m more than a little surprised that the professional media don’t seem to have bothered to look at Trump’s own writing. I’ve listened to bits and pieces of two of his books in audio format at YouTube and they’re really content rich for anyone curious about his views. The book he co-authored with Robert Kiyosaki is very expressly political, despite its self-help title. I found it at YouTube under: “1. Why We Want You To Be Rich (Audio Book) Trump & Kiyosaki”.
* I have a kind of ridiculous theory that the world’s 2 preeminent transnational market minorities have divided Earth into 2 basic spheres of commerce. Our good friends the Jews get the big, important countries like the USA, France, Germany, Russia, England and the developed white world in general. They have their eyes set on China and India too, of course. They handle the big, big, big money.
The Lebanese are in charge of setting up shop in little, less important countries like Haiti (hehe), African countries (with the exception of South-Africa back in the day), south and central american statelets etc. There are middling countries like Brazil and Argentina where the 2 spheres of influence overlap.
* Hayek was not a Jew. In fact, he probably didn’t care for them:
“I don’t have many strong dislikes. I admit that as a teacher—I have no racial prejudices in general—but there were certain types, and conspicuous among them the Near Eastern populations, which I still dislike because they are fundamentally dishonest. And I must say dishonesty is a thing I intensely dislike. It was a type which, in my childhood in Austria, was described as Levantine, typical of the people of the eastern Mediterranean. But I encountered it later, and I have a profound dislike for the typical Indian students at the London School of Economics, which I admit are all one type—Bengali moneylender sons. They are to me a detestable type, I admit, but not with any racial feeling. I have found a little of the same amongst the Egyptians —basically a lack of honesty in them.” (Nobel Prize-Winning Economist: Friedrich A. von Hayek, Regents of the University of California, 1983. p. 490).
* There are Jews in Brazil too. The richest banker in the world is a Brazilian Jew, Joseph Safra.
* Having spent decades working the Middle East scene, I’ve had lots of dealings with Lebanese as immigrants to America as well as native Lebanese “marketing” the Middle East. My take: they can “out-Jew the Jew” when it comes to financial scheming, which suggests that the stereotypical behaviors we attribute to the Jews are not religious based but rather endemic to the culture of tight, clan-based international traders. The Lebanese are better at this game than the Jews.
Most of the Lebanese I’ve dealt with claim a Christian heritage. They spoke English, French, and Arabic. The cross-cultural perspective gave them an advantage in international deals. As one Lebanese told me, their objective is to become a millionaire by the age of 30. If you haven’t made it by age 35, your family and clan consider you a failure.
I considered one a close friend until it became clear that I was nothing but a potential source of revenue. He said that if I ever needed any money laundered or needed to spirit large amounts of cash into the United States, let him know; they had the process wired. (I had no need of either … I was a “techie” not a businessman and both were also illegal.) When I announced I was relocating back to the United States, they threw a “going away” party for me. I naively took my wife and son. It turned out to be a “hot hand-off” to their Lebanese business partners in the United States. It was embarrassing. Yes, the clan pursued me in the United States in the hope that they could become involved in one of my high-tech company’s international business deals.
The Lebanese business model (one they share with the Jews) was clear. You find out where the cash flows are among the elite in targeted countries and you stand in the middle. You scheme as an obstructionist. The hope is that the other parties will realize that the deal won’t go through until you get your cut … so, you get your cut to go away. A variation on this theme is to collect indigenous business partners to force the parties at the receiving end of a cash flow out of the game and own the deal. (Carlos Slim?)
It is also clear that, in this business model, the Lebanese obstructionists bring no value added to the table. The business model is a form of wealth extraction or looting based on family connections, shady business deals, and exploiting local politics among corrupt ruling classes.
Damn, am I describing the evolving business model in the United States?
* You can’t drink tap water in Shanghai. The press is government controlled and it’s a police state. There is probably a cancer epidemic in Shanghai, but we don’t know for sure. Chinese who migrate are not considered residents and have no say with the local party chiefs. The minimum wage is less than $200 per month. They cannot afford to buy the stuff they make. There are no public golf courses in or around Shanghai. There are no birds (other than sparrows), squirrels, rabbits. I could go on.
* Vietnam is where Chinese expansionism, one of the biggest forces in human history, finally met an immovable object.
Henry Kissinger talks about his first secret trip to Hanoi in early 1973. He asked to visit museums. They all turned out to be war history museums. Damn, he thought, we sided with the less nationalist side.
* Nasser, for all his failings (and there were many) was a great politician. Compare him to Hillary – it’s like day and night. You see him up on the stage relaxed and confident and comfortable and joking and in command of his audience, convinced that history is on HIS side and that his opposition is just a bunch of hypocrites who do not practice what they preach. He’s not shrilly haranguing his audience in dictator style. Trump (and I mean this as a compliment) is more like Nasser than Hillary but Nasser was much better. Despite hating 99% of Nasser’s beliefs (his opposition to radical Islam was good) you just have to like the guy and his style.
