Comments 1 - 31 of 31 Search these comments
Had the British settled South Africa and not the Bower. The black population in SA would be an educated lot today
Tenpoundbass saysHad the British settled South Africa and not the Bower. The black population in SA would be an educated lot today
The degree that IQ is environmental vs genetic is not known. However the high estimate of 82 for sub saharan africa is less than the 83 minimum required to join the US army, for example. Uncle Sam wont allow this level of intellect to serve messhall slop. They're fucked
https://ieet.org/index.php/IEET2/more/pellissier20120307
India and China got the cultural aptitude for it, I believe as a direct result of being subjugated to the British where Order required their subjects get a classic education and follow the Church doctrine.
Had the Zulu not chased the British out of Kenya over a Century ago
Kenya and many African Nations would be the world's cheap tech centers today. Instead of India and Asian countries
Kenya and many African Nations would be the world's cheap tech centers today. Instead of India and Asian countries
Had the British settled South Africa and not the Bower. The black population in SA would be an educated lot today, that would not be calling on genocide of the White Farmer.
They would have had more of a role in managing and farming land, than just sitting on side lines as paupers watching the rich white folk rake in the dough.
he degree that IQ is environmental vs genetic is not known. However the high estimate of 82 for sub saharan africa is less than the 83 minimum required to join the US army, for example. Uncle Sam wont allow this level of intellect to serve messhall slop. They're fucked
https://ieet.org/index.php/IEET2/more/pellissier20120307
You are seriously quoting something based on IQ of Nations?
Every time the data (which is basically a bunch of guesses) doesn't match up
IQ Tests are stunningly accurate and fantastic predictors of accomplishment.
It doesn't matter how they're weighted or created, if they have enough questions it works.
utch made the first east india company and took over sri-lanka, indonesia and other places in Asia. But they lost to a small kingdom in India. After that english east India company became stronger. We would be having this discussion in dutch maybe, if not for that small kingdom...
"white men spread civilization"
bob2356 saysYou are seriously quoting something based on IQ of Nations?
Every study ever conducted has had similar results.
bob2356 saysEvery time the data (which is basically a bunch of guesses) doesn't match up
I'm sure averages amongst a sample within a population is very difficult for today's super computers. eyeroll
Yep the Raj sucking all the wealth out of india while treating indians as sub human and British conquering china ports to sell them massive quantities of opium was great for the education of the people.
I read the book. I still have a copy that I'm looking at right now to get these numbers. The book is a total joke.
I am sure you both agree that no ethnicity has a lock on high or IQ.
If you took the offspring of Korean Scientists or Jewish Physicists, and placed them in an environment where these babies came of age in sub-Sahara with disease, malnutrition, and low mental stimulation, these babies would show low IQ.
Do the IQ test takers take the test in "local language" or do they have to take it in english?
I dont think we should take the IQ numbers seriously for non english speakers. If language is also part of the IQ test then it should not be named "IQ test".
If you want proof you can check how much gold was looted from India and shipped to UK. Similarly we know how much gold was looted from american civilizations shipped by Spaniards.
There seems to be a great cycle that all civilizations go through
Yes, but they all stopped at a certain level. Rome, Egypt, India, and China all made strides in writing, constructions, arts, and commerce. The Roman Aqueducts, Egyptian Pyramids, and Great Wall are significant achievements. But why the arrest in progress? For example, the Roman Army had the same weapons and infantry tactics for hundreds of years. And why for a millennium of civilization, did China stay about the same level? Compare that to Western European civilization 1600-1900.
If you took the offspring of Korean Scientists or Jewish Physicists, and placed them in an environment where these babies came of age in sub-Sahara with disease, malnutrition, and low mental stimulation, these babies would show low IQ. Likewise, if you took a sample of babies away from those sub-Sahara lands and placed them in Western households, those babies would trend toward higher IQ.
Are you familiar with the flynn effect?
indc saysIf you want proof you can check how much gold was looted from India and shipped to UK. Similarly we know how much gold was looted from american civilizations shipped by Spaniards.
The Industrial Revolution, not Colonialism, created the growth both in investment and science.
Spain is actually a great example. They drowned in gold, but all the Spaniard wanted was a Hacienda and a title. China and parts of India were far richer than the West in 1600 overall, but the boom didn't start there.
i.e. Flynn Effect peaked in the generation born in the early 1970's.
The reverse of Flynn Effect for western population born after 1975 was the result of the welfare state: more children are born to women who (accidentally) get pregnant by losers, and can look forward to being supported by the welfare state. Cue movie Idiocracy intro:
Do you think having machines is enough to create market. The cloth was 4 times more costly than hand made cloth.
bob2356 saysYep the Raj sucking all the wealth out of india while treating indians as sub human and British conquering china ports to sell them massive quantities of opium was great for the education of the people.
Keep in mind, both Indians and Chinese had been conquered and living under foreign domination for hundreds of years when the British arrived (and even when the Portuguese and the Dutch arrived before the British).
Under the Mughal's India was a powerhouse. Something like 25% of the worlds GDP if I remember correctly Which doesn't matter because the Marathas had defeated the Mughals centuries the British showed up.
The Manchu weren't foreign either. They were one of the largest ethnic groups in China through out history. The earlier Jin dynasty was Manchu or at least Jurchens who became the Manchu..
Which has nothing to do with TPB believing british conquest brought the concept of education to backward people.
The Maratha Empire didn't even formally exist until 1674. Persian sacking of Mughal capital Delhi (signalling rapid decline of Mughal Empire) didn't take place until 1739, mid 18th century.
India and China got the cultural aptitude for it, I believe as a direct result of being subjugated to the British where Order required their subjects get a classic education and follow the Church doctrine.
Had the British settled South Africa and not the Bower. The black population in SA would be an educated lot today, that would not be calling on genocide of the White Farmer.
They would have had more of a role in managing and farming land, than just sitting on side lines as paupers watching the rich white folk rake in the dough.
Had the Dutch subjugated India, they would not be prevalent in high tech IT fields today.