Never compare between only Blacks (B) and others for example, or only Caucasian Whites (CW) and B. One should consider at least three together instead of only two. For example, consider also the North East Asians (NEA). Why? Without considering NEA, B and CW are merely two different regions in whatever parameter space, say crime rates, and all interpretations are still on the table. But relative to B, NEA are almost invariably on the other side of the CW data points, at even higher intelligence, even less crime, even less sexual dimorphism/rape, even higher GDP, graduation rates, and so on. The three points give clear evidence of a direction inside whatever parameter space, because CW is always between B and NEA, regardless the NEA are a majority (Japan) or a minority that was strongly discriminated (NEA in America) for example. It is B-CW-NEA basically every time, consistent with the naturalist basis, the scientific explanation: The biology underlying the human bio-social evolution, genes.

Racists usually agree with the above example, but they seldom apply this general ‘next-step methodology’ of considering three, not just two races, in case of Ashkenazim Jews (AJ). However, the properly scientific racist gains much insight from considering the triplet B-CW-AJ when pondering the ‘Jewish question’.

Verbal-analytic IQ is very important for influence and power, and national per-capita GDP for example can be well predicted from the national average verbal IQ; La Griffe du Lion has shown this via discussing the NEA verbal-visual IQ split. In terms of average verbal-analytical IQ, the difference between CW and AJ is almost as large as that between US Blacks and CW: A whole standard deviation (!) – that natural separation that clearly distinguishes different classes in even just the first order analysis by the general empirical scientific method in a mere one dimensional parameter space – the reality of race is quite undeniable here, and socio-biological reality translates this difference into huge differences on all socially relevant scales.

Many a White argues for colonialism being good for the otherwise impoverished Blacks, and African countries decay after expelling their Whites. However, the gentile racist seldom thinks like this when discussing how the 2% Jewish fraction of the US-population can possibly occupy 50 to 90% of the most powerful positions, in the most influential media or Supreme Court seats for example (which indeed cannot be modeled by IQ alone, because it only reproduces directly the 30% ‘over-representation’ in certain measures of high achievement [1]).

Gentile racists emphasize that Jewish ‘over-representation’ is not (just) due to higher average verbal-IQ, but due to ethnocentrism, intra-racial favoritism. Gentile racists complain about that the Jews feel to be something more worthy, the chosen people, that the Jews ultimately watch out for their own and their own advantage far more than for those that they merely pretend to care about. But I say: Yes, of course, and that is precisely what the Negro thinks about the White man, too. Now where is the science to support such a biased emphasis in one case but not the other?

Ethnocentrism is simply a smart strategy. Should we not look out first of all for ourselves? After all, are we not more necessary to them than they are to us? Do the Blacks not need our medicine and technology and do these not supposedly help them, rather than having destroyed the Blacks’ natural balance in Africa, having brought perhaps more suffering to them than they had before and would have ever had? If Whites think that way, why should the Jews not think similar about their influence?

Now some may argue with Kevin B. MacDonald perhaps for that the necessity of the Jew for Western civilization is nil and none beyond the Jews’ own hype, and that a perhaps slightly less rapid modern science would have been more beneficial to the environment and to humankind as it is enslaved by technology. But now we are back again to what many a Black man is basically saying about the White man being necessary to the happiness of Blacks.

Dr. David Duke and Prof. Slattery focus on how racist the Jews are. They also insist on that if you are intelligent and well educated, you should be racists, and many more CW would be racist if it were not so that intellectuals are brainwashed and all of that. So, what then is David’s problem here? The Jews are intelligent and educated, and so they have many enlightened racists, and of course they hide it from CW as much as a racist CW does in the company of Blacks. Should David not love the Jews then and rather hate the stupid CW for not being as racist as the Jew?

They say that Jews are deceptive. Do you think that equally intelligent White people are any less deceptive, any less brainwashed, including by their own internal deception and denial mechanisms? Are we to think that CW would not be equally ethnocentric if being a tiny 2% minority? And if indeed not, why would that be better rather than worse, especially in the eye of a racist?

Duke and Slattery wag the finger about how the greedy Jewish took over Russia again under Yeltsin. They tell us that the media’s current anti Russian war mongering and fake news campaign against Russia started way back when Putin in the 1990s kicked out the Jewish oligarchs. All this is more true than anything in the mainstream news today, yes, but why the hate? Every one of these Jews was convinced about not only doing the best for themselves, but also doing the best for Russia and mankind overall, the Bolsheviks as well as the oligarchs, no different from the White colonialist. Of course some of them are consciously racist Jewish supremacists, but nobody can quite resist the urge to see one’s own self as being something good, and that is always a more fundamental drive of the self-deception mechanisms than ideology or even directly biologically anchored preference for one’s own ethnic background.

So the question is: Why hate the Jew? Why not impartial enlightenment instead? Duke and similar maintain that the White man is naturally not only more empathetic than B and NEA, which is understood from evolution theory (and backed by recent genetics findings), but more empathetic than AJ, which I doubt. Well, mister Duke, show it! Be that advanced being that “cries out in pain as he strikes you” out of love and empathy rather than as an act of deception.

The fundamental problem is that verbal-IQ is important for deception and justifying confabulation, i.e. including self-deception (denial); that is what [1] is really about, and this is why it is suppressed by all, the right, the left, the Jews – all intellectuals - no journal will ever publish such honest research. The AJ are not directly the problem, but intellectuals being selected for hyping idiocy instead of focusing on the limitations of the human mind, the unintended consequences of their grand improvements. AJ are simply caught up in this because of their high verbal IQ.

The right wing winning now is not under Jewish/intelligentsia control like the neo-cons are. No wonder the media are in war mode. It is refreshing that this proper right wing turns against these fake media and biased, politicized science, and ideological education. It is a turn against the idiocy-intellectualism that destroys especially the Western world now. This is all good about the current shift to the right, but I will not support it if it ends up with antisemitism again, regardless the Jews in power of course also suppress me, suppress almost any mentioning of Jews in fear of another round of pogroms.

The right wing revolution must be one of hearts and minds, not hating, but loving hearts and mature minds, or I will not support it. It is far more important to address the incredible idiocy of common intellectuals than being all butt-hurt about that there emerged a minority with higher verbal-IQ. Trump addressing the fact of that the media is almost throughout ‘Luegen Presse’, YES! Antisemitism a la Andrew Anglin and David Duke, NO!

[1] S. Vongehr: From Jewish Verbal and General Intelligence to Jewish Achievement: A Doubly Right Wing Issue. Vixra:1608.0403 (2016)


By the way, increasingly, there is some research published that emphasizes the close relation between verbal-IQ (includes verbal memory) and deception: "Verbal working memory is the number of words a person can remember ... good liars performed better in the verbal working memory test ... The link between lying and verbal memory ... In contrast, there was no difference in visuo-spatial working scores between good and bad liars." Source