I’ve long been curious about the IQs of black Republicans because blackness and conservatism are both negatively correlated with IQ, and yet blackness and conservatism are strongly negatively correlated with one another. It’s kind of rare when you get two variables that both correlate with a third variable in the same direction being negatively correlated with one another. I don’t have much data on black Republican IQ, but one might make an educated guess.
In 2004, 11% of African Americans voted Republican suggesting the average black Republican was more conservative than 95% of African Americans or 1.67 standard deviations more conservative.
Now in whites, the correlation between IQ and conservatism is probably around -0.3. If we make the assumption it’s also -0.3 in blacks (which is very speculative because the correlation might be positive in blacks) then we would expect black Republicans to have IQs that are -0.3(1.67 SD) = -0.5 SD from the black mean of about 85. In other words, we would expect black Republicans to have an average IQ of around 78.
Is it possible that black Republicans could have such low IQs? If one thinks of politics as kind of an IQ test where liberalism is the correct answer and conservatism is the wrong answer, then the test is biased in favour of blacks because blacks are socialized from a very early age to believe that Republicans are evil. So if inspite of all this social and cultural training and pressure to vote “correctly”, and despite it being in their ethnic genetic interests (if you believe in those) to vote correctly, they still get the wrong answer, that might indicate especially low IQ.
Evidence of the low IQ of black Republicans comes from the fact that even their best and brightest might not be especially smart. For example Condi Rice has claimed that her high school guidance counselor told her that her preliminary SAT scores indicated she wasn’t college material (implying an IQ below 115?), though in fairness, Condi also claimed she’s not a good test taker, was sick during the test, and she probably took the test young, given her childhood precocity (she graduated high school young and as a toddler she scored high on an IQ test).
A second example is Colin Powell who very stupidly allowed himself to become the face of the unpopular Iraq war, even though the ultra high IQ neocon liberal intelligentsia in academia, think tanks and media were the ones who actually conceived it and so desperately needed it, but they were smart enough to hide in the shadows as Powell, Bush and Cheney became the fall guys.
A third example is Clarence Thomas who you would expect to be brilliant given that he attended Yale law school and sits on the supreme court, and yet liberals mock him for never speaking.
Supreme court judges are supposed to have spectacular verbal IQs, yet this man’s claim to fame is never saying a word, like the silent retarded Jason from the Friday the 13th movies.
It’s interesting to contrast him with Barack Obama since both men attended the best law schools and then rose to positions of extreme power, but while Obama displays signs of high IQ (ligh skin, scrawny body build), Thomas has a dark more stocky muscular build.
White liberal women hate, hate HATE black conservatives, and years ago a couple of liberal white women tried to diminish Thomas by writing a biography claiming he was a poor student at Yale Law. However I saw black conservative Armstrong Williams on Phil Donahue’s brief cable show (circa 2003) deny that Thomas needed affirmative action at Yale because Thomas had better admission test scores than Bill Clinton (though I dismissed this as nonsense because how would he know).
One black conservative who might be extremely bright is Alan Keyes who is incredibly fluid on his feet, though he comes across as a little nutty:
Pumpkin Person 
The correlation for blacks is probably positive. Black republicans are more likely to hold libertarian/classical liberal viewpoints, which actually tend to dead-heat or slightly overtake “liberal” viewpoints in terms of individual IQ. White republicans are a mish-mash of those viewpoints and “traditional” viewpoints. Blacks generally are more “traditional” in attitude but socialized as “democrats.” Consequently, Blacks who become republican are more likely to do so because they hold libertarian/classical liberal viewpoints.
Clarence Thomas doesn’t speak during oral argument because the other justices talk too much. The only justice who is justified in speaking a lot is Scalia, and for all his talented speaking, he still mostly writes (admittedly entertaining) dissents. But Thomas has been much less effective than his predecessor, Thurgood Marshall.
Yes, it might be useful to divide conservatives up. The highest IQ are probably the economic conservatives, while the lowest IQ are probably the social conservatives and the foreign policy conservatives (puppets for the neocons).
It’s possible that conservatism is positively correlated among blacks if for no other reason than the fact that diverting from one’s ethnic group think shows independent thought.
Why don’t you just fetch some data and look? Just download the ANES 2012 dataset and do the analysis. http://www.electionstudies.org/studypages/anes_timeseries_2012/anes_timeseries_2012.htm
Yeah c’mon Pumpkin, you’re a math genius.
You ungrateful ape!
After all I have taught you, you turn around and mock me?
In my own home?
First you betray your own people by voting Republican, and now you betray me.
Should change your name to Lion of the Judas-sphere.
https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Judas_Iscariot
I’ve actually never voted Republican (I pretty much never vote, so I don’t really have the chance). I only meant that I’ve liked some Republican leaders and their beliefs. Rob Portman, junior Senator from Ohio, is pretty interesting. I identify strongly with a lot of people who label themselves “radical center” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radical_center_%28politics%29.
Back when I used to flirt with libertarian ideals I used to follow Ron Paul (although I now realize most of his beliefs are kinda kooky.)
Back when I used to flirt with libertarian ideals I used to follow Ron Paul (although I now realize most of his beliefs are kinda kooky.)
He’s not as kooky as the media portrays him. His problem is the neocon intelligentsia in the media hates him with a passion because he wants to end wars in the Middle East so he’s unelectable
But it’s disproportionately blacks that fight in those wars so it makes sense for blacks to support him
He also opposes drug laws that disproportionately lock up blacks
He’s not as kooky as the media portrays him. His problem is the neocon intelligentsia in the media hates him with a passion because he wants to end wars in the Middle East so he’s unelectable
But it’s disproportionately blacks that fight in those wars so it makes sense for blacks to support him
He also opposes drug laws that disproportionately lock up blacks
That’s where I agree with Ron Paul, even now. I also like that he’s one of the few libertarians who is anti-open borders. His economic beliefs are too far from the mainstream for my tastes, though.
BTW, I wasn’t trying to mock you, I was just hoping you would do the analysis.
It’s kind of silly to claim black Republicans are stupid relative to black Democrats because white Republicans are stupid relative white Democrats. Being a black Republican requires unconventional thinking, which probably signals higher IQ. Also, being a white Republican means you’re engaging in an “evolutionarily familiar” behavior: supporting policies that help keep you and people like you at the top of the societal hierarchy. For blacks, supporting Republican policies works against their interest, which is an “evolutionarily novel” behavior (or maybe just stupid, or clever silly as Satoshi Kanazawa would say). Blacks who vote vote Republican may be concerned less with immediate benefits like receiving welfare goodies, and more concerned with the commonweal and future national economic sustainability, which requires more abstract thought. And as you mentioned, blacks who vote Republican may do so because they endorse libertarian/classical liberal thinking, which is associated with higher IQ, not lower (although I’m guessing most blacks regardless of their political party are highly religious, which is a negative mark on IQ).
I’ve supported Republican candidates in the past (although I’m mostly liberal), and the blacks I know who vote Republican tend to be more educated (again, signalling higher IQ). Some in the HBD-sphere have suggested an American voting pattern where those at the top (SWPLs) and very bottom (blacks, certain other minorities) of society’s status hierarchy vote Democrat, while those in the middle tend to vote Republican (Christian conservative white family). Maybe the few blacks who vote Republican managed to move up from the very bottom to the middle of the hierarchy, but very few blacks reach the top of the hierarchy, so none of them vote Democrat for the reason SWPLs do.
By the way, I’ve met Clarence Thomas. He didn’t seem too stupid, but he wasn’t all that smart either. Maybe he’s just stupid relative to the other Supreme Court justices. In Colin Powell’s autobiography he mentions majoring in geology at I believe the City College of New York, and being a completely mediocre (C average) student. His IQ can’t be any higher than 115 , if even that. Despite that, at one time, he was one of the most likeable blacks in America.
Maybe he’s just stupid relative to the other Supreme Court justices
Thomas is just straight-ahead and sticks to his guns. But he’s actually had several brilliant legal moments. And he’s actually taken Scalia to task once or twice. With the exception of Kennedy, the current conservative justices are probably smarter than the liberal justices.
The last liberal on par with Scalia was Brennan.
By the way, I’ve met Clarence Thomas. He didn’t seem too stupid, but he wasn’t all that smart either.
You met Clarence Thomas???
Yep, during an internship program in DC about four years ago.
Also, being a white Republican means you’re engaging in an “evolutionarily familiar” behavior: supporting policies that help keep you and people like you at the top of the societal hierarchy.
Yes, if genes program us to behave a certain way through primitive impulses, the more intelligent will be able to think beyond those impulses, and outsmart evolution, so to speak. They can come up with their own goals, even if they contradict evolution’s “goals”. So high IQ people will be less likely to reproduce because they’re smart enough to figure out what they personally want, not be a slave to what evolution “wants” or get beyond their more primitive wants They will also vote in their personal interests, even if it contradicts genetic interests, and their personal interests will often be abstract interests, not pragmatic ones. They will vote for what’s correct in an abstract sense, even if it’s wrong in a concrete sense.
But if liberalism is correct in an abstract moral sense, and also, in the personal, and ethnic (allegedly) interests of blacks, they have not one, not two, but three good reasons to be liberal, and if they still fail to do so, that might be equivalent to failing an IQ item despite being given many hints.
However, if Swank is correct that black conservatives are disproportionately libertarian, then they might in fact be smarter than black liberals.
One thing I’ve noticed is the most light skinned blacks are the most liberal, This might be because they’re more intelligent, or it might be because they are trying harder to prove their blackness by moving to the left.
Yes, if genes program us to behave a certain way through primitive impulses, the more intelligent will be able to think beyond those impulses, and outsmart evolution, so to speak. They can come up with their own goals, even if they contradict evolution’s “goals”.
I’m not quite sure if I agree with that. Evolution caused intelligence; intelligence can’t “outsmart” evolution. Even intelligent people behave in ways that serve evolution’s “goals” (boy, I hate describing evolution as if it has a purpose). They just do so in different ways than the dumb. However, Satoshi Kanazawa argues something similar to what you’ve argued, that high intelligence causes people to behave in ways that may hurt their genetic fitness (perhaps in post-industrial/post-modern environments).
I personally think the intelligent take on concerns about more abstract causes, like the environment and “the commonweal”, which may not benefit them in the short-run but ostensibly will benefit them in the long-run. That’s also why the high IQ reproduce less; in the long-run, having fewer children may increase survival advantage of your genes if there’s limited resources. The high IQ aren’t just having fewer children because they’ve determined their “personal interests” contra evolution’s.
But if liberalism is correct in an abstract moral sense, and also, in the personal, and ethnic (allegedly) interests of blacks, they have not one, not two, but three good reasons to be liberal, and if they still fail to do so, that might be equivalent to failing an IQ item despite being given many hints.
I hope you’re not implying that EGI exist still. But I agree that it makes more sense for the vast majority of black people to vote Democrat rather than Republican.
However, if Swank is correct that black conservatives are disproportionately libertarian, then they might in fact be smarter than black liberals.
I’m not sure if black cons are libertarian. A lot of black conservatives I know personally (and people like Clarence Thomas and Bill Cosby and Thomas Sowell) are socially conservative, not just economically so, making them more neoconservative or Christian Right than libertarian. But they’re still pretty smart. I’m guessing that among blacks religion doesn’t have the strong negative correlation with IQ the way it does with whites. In fact, I know some pretty intelligent blacks that are pretty religious. I don’t usually see that with intelligent white people.
One thing I’ve noticed is the most light skinned blacks are the most liberal, This might be because they’re more intelligent, or it might be because they are trying harder to prove their blackness by moving to the left.
There might be some truth to that. Even when controlling for IQ, darker-skinned blacks seem to gravitate towards conservatism while the lighter-skinned ones go towards liberalism (with the exception of Colin Powell and Ward Connerly). I’m sure if I thought about it though I could think of a lot exceptions, though. Maybe darker-skinned blacks prefer the strong, masculine authoritarianism of conservatism versus the fluffy “Save the World” idealism of liberalism.
Higher IQ seen as an ability for greater differentiation between “self” and evolutionary impulse would become maladaptive the more divergent the two became.
I hope you’re not implying that EGI exist still.
I hope you’re not still denying they exist.
I’m not sure if black cons are libertarian. A lot of black conservatives I know personally (and people like Clarence Thomas and Bill Cosby and Thomas Sowell) are socially conservative, not just economically so, making them more neoconservative or Christian Right than libertarian
Actually neoconservatives tend to be socially liberal. They’re not even conservatives at all, they’re basically just members of the liberal intelligentsia who joined the Republican party because the Democrats weren’t hawkish enough on Middle-eastern issues. Some of them are even Marxists.
But they’re still pretty smart. I’m guessing that among blacks religion doesn’t have the strong negative correlation with IQ the way it does with whites. In fact, I know some pretty intelligent blacks that are pretty religious. I don’t usually see that with intelligent white people.
Well blacks get far more social approval by being religious so in a pragmatic sense it’s quite intelligent for them to try to be so. Also black culture revolves more around religion and smart people learn their culture. Lastly, I believe blacks have more of a risk for schizophrenia while whites and especially East Asians have more of a risk for autism. People who are closer to the schizophrenic end of the spectrum are probably more religious
Actually neoconservatives tend to be socially liberal. They’re not even conservatives at all, they’re basically just members of the liberal intelligentsia who joined the Republican party because the Democrats weren’t hawkish enough on Middle-eastern issues. Some of them are even Marxists.
It depends. According to Wikipedia, the first generation of neocons, under the tutelage of Leo Strauss, were anti-Stalinist leftists who supported the New Deal but wanted a more aggressive foreign policy against the Soviet Union. One of the fathers of neoconservatism, Barry Goldwater, was very socially liberal and hated how the Republican party was taken over by the Christian Right (incidentally he was religiously agnostic and ethnically Jewish).
Modern day neoconservatives, since Ronald Reagan, have been more varied in their social and economic beliefs, although they tend to be to the right of Democrats. Ronald Reagan consciously courted Southerners during his election campaigns and endorsed supply side economics. George Bush played up his religious values during his election. Although the only thing really uniting neocons is their aggressive foreign policy and Zionist beliefs, they still tend to be to the right of Democrats on most social and economic issues.
But all of that is beside the point. I really just meant that black conservatives tend to be just as religious as black liberals, if not more so, and aren’t really libertarian.
Well blacks get far more social approval by being religious so in a pragmatic sense it’s quite intelligent for them to try to be so. Also black culture revolves more around religion and smart people learn their culture. Lastly, I believe blacks have more of a risk for schizophrenia while whites and especially East Asians have more of a risk for autism. People who are closer to the schizophrenic end of the spectrum are probably more religious
Maybe. But I’ve often wondered if the negative correlation between religiosity and IQ only held true for whites, and not for other races. I’ve only personally seen that correlation amongst whites I’ve known.
Black Republican guys like Ben Carson and Alan West are significantly smarter than most blacks. But they are the exception rather than the rule. One also needs to understand that these 2 men are racially mixed, as with many black americans of varying degrees. Alan West looks like he has a dash of Asiatic in him, hence the more intelligent factor.
Actually, in an episode of “African-American Lives” with Henry Louis Gates that came on a few years ago, it was revealed through DNA testing that Ben Carson is about 80% Sub-saharan, 20% European- about average for African Americans
https://books.google.com/books?id=0cralRa6tlYC&pg=PA196#v=onepage&q&f=false
Allen West has one very strange look daughter that looks East Asian. But not very surprising, given the fact that he does not look like your typical black man, where I see traces of mongoloid or native ancestry in his face.
Some black americans have chinamen genes, from the intermixing between these 2 groups in the south, especially blacks from Georgia, where chinamen took black women as female companions. Allen West is from Georgia.
And Ben Carson doesn’t even look “White” in anyway. There are other examples of black americans that indicate White admixture, and Mr. Carson facial features is not indicative of that. I also sense Mr. Carson might have those East Asian physician genes, which allowed him to become a neurosurgeon. And by the way, Carson’s ancestry comes directly from Georgia.
Ben Carson probably has a high spatial IQ to be such a good surgeon. This makes him unique because usually blacks do worst on spatial tests because they did not have to survive the ice age, so there was little natural selection for building shelter, fire, sewing, navigation, making clothes, etc.
It wouldn’t shock me if Carson had East Asian genes. Even his quite humble personality seems a bit East Asian.
Since when have there been that many chinamen in Georgia? There’s a few now in the big cities like Atlanta, but prior to 1980 hardly any lived in the state.
And Ben Carson seems humble now but he frequently tells a story about how he got into an argument with a friend over a radio station and almost stabbed him. Ben Carson supposedly had a terrible temper as kid but then started praying to Jesus so he could change. I guess it worked?
Bruce Lee had Caucasian Ancestry. He was a hot head, and would start a fight at the slightest offense. He doesn’t represent your passive aggressive East Asian.
Ben Carson’s eyes are very Asiatic in appearance. I don’t see much “White” in him. Allen West is probably more “White” than Carson. But West also looks Asiatic, and his younger daughter has an East Asian appearance.
There is some pseudo scholarship indicating that Northern Italians have East Asian genes, like Germans and Nordics, which came through the Mongols or the Chinese slave girls of the Italian Elite families, which took place in the beginning of 13th century, but I highly doubt it. Yet given the very tight and clean visual art of the Italians produced during the Renaissance, especially with the ceiling paintings in the big domes of the cathedrals, such skill would require a very high spatial IQ that one finds with the modern day Japanese. And Italians are the most impressive of all the Southern Euros with their visual creativity. Southern Euros are known for their artistic talent, but Italians seems to be the most impressive, maybe because of their higher visual IQ, plus Southern Euro creativity.
Neocons have a seemingly bizarre philosophical history lest one knows their very simple calculus: Is it good for the Jews?
Shit, they’d advocate cannibalism if the answer came back Yes.
Black non-socially conservative liberals would probably have higher IQs than non-socially conservative libertarians/classical liberals. Philosophies like Marxism are more abstract than libertarianism. If anything, libertarianism is just Marxism before discussing the interactions of things, i.e. just the ends (goods/completed service) rather than means. It’s a less complete model.
I’ve seen studies showing that higher economic conservatism = slightly higher IQ when controlling for social values, but I can’t find them right now. Meaning libertarian IQ > Marxist/socialist IQ.
There are no studies that differentiate “Marxist” from “liberal.” Socialism is not Marxism.
The 2 smartest Black Republicans are Allen West and Ben Carson, whose ancestry is likely to deviate from most blacks in terms of genetic makeup. Many White conservatives, Republicans, and the general public do not realize this. I for one believe these 2 individuals are tainted with Mongoloid genes, which Henry Louis Gates, the black DNA expert, sort of glance over on this topic with HBD in mind, because he’s a liberal with an agenda. And liberals dislike East Asians for the mere fact that they are grounded, perform well, and have no time for their BS antics. Notice liberals sound schizo, no surprise, why blacks and jews dominate the liberal ideology.
Here is some germane data from the GSS from several years ago. The usual precautions and admonitions about wordsum as an imperfect proxy for IQ apply, of course, but the data suggest that black Republicans aren’t more intelligent, on average, than black Democrats are.
It suggests they’re less intelligent. Thank you very much for linking to this. This is exactly what Judah-spere, Swank, and I were wondering about.
Pingback: Some actual data on black Republican IQ | Pumpkin Person
Is it true that heritability study is inherently flawed ? in studying of behavioral genetics I have been taught that heritability study is meaningless ultimately because the assumptions in it for distribution
but people like Scott Alexander when I ask them this they have no answer, pumpkin, do you know about these problems?
Not sure what you’re getting at specifically, but there have been criticisms of heritability studies made on this blog & I responded here:
https://pumpkinperson.com/2015/03/29/an-ideal-study-on-heritability-that-could-actually-be-done/
They are close to australoid cognitive level and thus, mental retardation.
It’s really hard to believe, but everything is possible.
Pingback: The IQ of Dr. Ben Carson | Pumpkin Person
Wow. The internet is blowing up with the facts that Clarence Thomas spoke out in court today. I read what he argued somewhere (I forget where) and it was very simple- yet they said the other justices hadn’t mentioned it. Perhaps Scalia would always argue things like that and they didn’t even bother.
Anyway, he’s no dummy. He’s probably not the slowest Justice after this.
I should have known the commenters on AmRen (AmRen) would never OVERestimate the IQ of a black… LOL
Larry Elder (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Larry_Elder) appears to be quite intelligent.
When working with someone on a specific task, the more complex, the easier it is to guess the IQ. But when I just listen to people, I’m not good at it. Bill O’Reilly looks brilliant to me. And Clarence Thomas looks to me a a mysterious genius . Like a magician . I ve watched some of his conferences, one at Harvard , and I was impressed . I prefer to feel that way . At work or school, I ve always found people extremely slow but at the same time I was impressed every time they had it right. I have mutatis mutandis the same admiration when I see domestic animals moving . I feel there is something wonderful happening inside them !
Pumpkin person, you are one stupid SOB.