What is the average IQ of the Jews

The evidence against racial doctrine is overwhelming

content

Read on one side

A second pillar in the racial rationale is as follows: Human bodies evolve when it comes to skin color, ethnic diseases, and other things like lactose intolerance - why shouldn't the human brain change too? The answer to this is that like is not being compared here with like. Most of these physical changes involved single gene mutations. Intelligence, on the other hand, consists of a network of thousands of genes. And genetic variations between populations associated with intelligence have never been found.

Nevertheless - and this is pillar number three - race theory depends on the idea that different average values ​​of the intelligence quotient (IQ) between population groups are innate. The whole construct of race theory would collapse without this aspect.

Twin studies reveal the influence of social differences

The role genes play in IQ can be investigated by finding identical twins who were separated at birth and grown up separately. There are only a few investigated cases in which twins grew up in different families who belonged to different social classes with different educational levels at the same time. Investigations here showed clear differences in the IQ scores - in one case there were 20 IQ points between the twins, in another even 29 (Science: Bouchard et al., 1990).

Research into adoptions confirms this impression. For example, a French study examining records from adoption agencies showed that children from poor families who were referred to poor families had an average IQ of 92.4. In contrast, there was an average of 103.6 (New York Book Review: Letters to Frank J. Sulloway, 2006). In another French study, researchers found an average IQ of 77 among neglected and abused children at the time of their adoption. Nine years later, the following picture emerged: The IQ of children who were adopted by workers and farmers was now around 85.5, the IQ of children in middle-class families on average was 92 and that of wealthy families was 98 (PNAS: Duyme et al., 1999).

IQ scores have nothing to do with genetics

If you look at entire populations instead of individual people, you will discover a similar pattern. The biggest change in IQ scores was seen among Kenyan children - one study found that they increased by 26.3 points in 14 years - the result of better nutrition, health and education in their parents (Psychological Sciences: Daley et al., 2003).

IQ tests conducted during the first two decades of the 20th century each time showed how the IQ of Ashkenazi Jews in the United States was below average. At the time of the Second World War, however, it was above average. Among the children of the Mizrachim Jews in Israel, the first generation had an average score of 92.8. The second had an average IQ of 101.3. Records by Chinese Americans showed averages of 97 in 1948 and 108.6 in 1990, while African Americans filled the 5.5 IQ gap with white Americans between 1972 and 2002 (Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology: Lieblich et al., 1972 and What is intelligence?: James Flynn, 2007).

The most important IQ theorist of the past 50 years is New Zealander James Flynn. He found that the IQ tests have to become more demanding with each generation if a 100 average is to be maintained (American Scientist: Neisser, 1997 and What is intelligence?: James Flynn, 2007). He found that the average IQ scores in 1900, by today's standards, would be around 70.

What has changed has nothing to do with genetics. Instead, people today are more often confronted with abstract logic, which is measured in the IQ tests. Some populations encounter it more often than others, which explains why their IQ scores differ from one another. Flynn showed that the different mean values ​​of populations can be completely explained by external influences (What is intelligence?: James Flynn, 2007).

Despite the overwhelming evidence against them, racial doctrine remains an integral part of the views of the US Alt-Right, who use it as a political battering ram for their small-state agendas. Anyone who believes that the poor are poor because they were born stupid does not need a lot of imagination to extend the thesis to entire population groups who are affected by poverty.

Not "politically incorrect", but wrong

Stefan Molyneux, an Alt-Right media star, once remarked in an interview with Nicholas Wade that different social consequences are a result of innate IQ values ​​of different races - such as the high IQ among Ashkenazi Jews and the lower among blacks. Wade replied that prejudice only played a "small and diminishing" role in social outcomes among blacks. He then promptly condemned the "wasted development aid" for African countries.

Something must be countered to these ideas. Not because they are "politically incorrect", but because they are wrong: race theory is just bad science. In fact, it is not a science at all.

The alternative - one that really originated in science - encompasses a broader concept of race. One that humanity regards as the only race in which some populations are constant losers. These are changing in a world where genes are shared faster than ever as traveling becomes easier and easier. Despite huge cultural, ecological and economic differences between these permeable population groups, we find the full spectrum of human existence in each and every one of us: cruelty and kindness, violence and warm-heartedness, madness and reason, stupidity and ingenuity.

This guest article was translated by Linda Fischer and edited by Sven Stockrahm.