In honor of HBD Chick’s wildly popular linkfests, I am going to do a piefest, (^_^) ’cause i hate piefasts, too. (*^_^*)
The first pie I’m going to show you is of the racial distribution of the U.S. population. This will be followed by pies showing the racial distribution of America’s three main power elites: the super-popular (those with the power to win American hearts), the intelligentsia (those with the power to win American minds), and the super rich (those with the power to win America’s wallets).
First, the racial distribution of America as a whole:
Now compare it with the distribution of America’s three major power elites below: The super popular (those who win hearts), the intelligentsia (those who win minds), and the super rich (those who win wallets). Click for larger view.
The first thing we notice is that blacks are over-represented among the super popular, yet very under-represented among the intelligentsia and severely underrepresented among the super rich. My theory is that in Africa, sexual selection favored those who had the popularity to compete for mates (reproductive output), but outside Africa, natural selection (survival of the fittest) favored those who could compete for resources, so blacks evolved to be good at getting popularity, but are really bad at getting resources (i.e. money).
The next thing we notice is that Jews are over-represented among all three power elites which makes sense given their high IQs, but their margin of superiority varies enormously from one domain to another. They are are only moderately over-represented among the super popular, but they are extremely over-represented among the rich, and they are spectacularly over-represented among the intelligentsia (i.e. top pundits, columnists, bloggers).
My theory is that as a nomadic people, Jews were considered outsiders in whatever society they joined, so they had trouble winning the hearts of the tribal locals directly, thus they evolved an ability to win the minds of the leaders of these societies and creatively change the culture. Thus Jews who were really good at making verbal arguments and abstract theories disproportionately survived, making Jews especially good at creating social movements and shaping the narrative and the national debate, in whatever country they enter.
Lastly, where are all the Asians? Despite an above average IQ, East Asian Americans are under-represented in all three forms of power, but they are least under-represented in wealth, probably because in the ice age, they evolved to compete for resources instead of mates, but being highly evolved. their low testosterone and low psychopathy may impede their success in many domains.
South Asian Americans are under-represented among the super-popular, but slightly over-represented among the intelligentsia, and proportionately represented among the super-rich. So on balance, they are neither over or under represented among America’s super elites. It’s surprising that they’re not doing a lot better since by some estimates their IQs are as high as American Jews, and their work ethic is probably even higher. Perhaps their extremely dark and hirsute complexions, combined with an easily mocked accent and exotic culture creates barriers to their success in America, and unlike blacks, they don’t have as much charisma and affirmative action to compensate.
Another possibility is that although Indian Americans may have a high average IQ, they might not have much cognitive variability since these immigrants were so highly selected from India’s IQ distribution. If their IQ distribution is both high and homogeneous, it would explain why Indians are over-represented among the moderately successful, but not over-represented among the spectacularly successful
PP, you’re right about East Asians being least underrepresented in wealth. Plus, as this Business Insider article from today seems to indicate, maybe they won’t be that under-represented in the ’Winning Hearts’ department either: https://www.yahoo.com/finance/news/retail-ceo-worth-840-million-150612518.html.
This kid, Tony Hsieh, built a billion dollar company yet lives in a trailer park with his rich buddies-one of the zany and often ridiculous ideas he’s always dreaming up that he’s somehow able to get other influential people to go along with. He wrote a NY Times bestseller, then transformed the poor section of Vegas with his Downtown Project by convincing hundreds of entrepreneurs to relocate from all over. So he certainly knows something about self promotion which is not often associated with E Asians. The interesting part is, he started out as a typical nerd (Harvard computer science grad). Is he an exception? As I’ve noted before, E Asians simply haven’t been here long enough in large numbers to amass exceptional wealth or popularity, most having come here after the 70s. So only time can tell-it’s noteworthy that arguably the most influential Asian Canadian-David Suzuki, who finished #5 on CBC’S poll of Greatest Canadians-is third-generation Canadian (born 1936). Most of the other Asian Canadians came here like two days ago.
I agree that the lack of East Asian American wealth can be largely explained by their short time in America; however I think East Asians are too evolved to acquire popularity because charisma is largely a primitive trait.
their low testosterone and low psychopathy may impede their success in many domains.
Also, East Asians tend to do poorly in cities that encourage via indirect psychopathy like Wall St (or Lion’s term value transference). American Alpha Cities such as New York City, DC and Hollywood-Los Angeles, where a form of degeneracy is needed to become the top of the heap. Even Silicon Bay Area Alley, East Asians lack the charisma to become CEOs and make $$$ through VT.
I would also assume East Asians would thrive in countries like Canada, instead of the USA, where higher testosterone levels are not as emphasized.
I for one believe in individual motivation where one can override any general stereotypes about their race. However, blacks are a lost cause in this regard, due to their lower IQs and high impulsiveness.
East Asians can thrive successfully in Canada, but not so much in the USA, where aggressiveness, extroversion, pro-activeness, and popularity are emphasized.
I don’t completely disagree with you. It’s just that in the US especially these polls have to be taken with a grain of salt because the media picks and chooses winners. Sure the public votes with their wallets but the media plays a big role by getting behind certain people. Others who may be more talented just never make it onto the radar screen of the public. That said, I can’t prove that the demography of the list would be very different, but I’m willing to bet many of the names would be different and, as is the case in your land, there might even be a Dave Suzuki or two some time from now. Maybe not, though-we don’t seem to be as open as you Canadians.
Canada seems have less sociopathic culture than US. Introverted people maybe can be more succesfull in Canada.
Correct, Santo, which is why East Asians do better in Canada. I say this here before reading your post.
Yes JS,
Canada, seems, a better place to live than Jewass off murrica.
So Jews havent a relatively so high social IQ (still quite high) but a very high verbal IQ ?
And this because they had to manipulate elites who have higher IQs and its more difficulte to manipulate high IQ people with a good education by only playing and their emotions.
I would add that Jews are the most K population on the world so they didnt have to mate all the time, and thats also why that Jews have relatively a not so high social IQ and appear sometimes to be nerds.
Jews are quite a puzzle. On the one hand, there’s the antisemitic stereotype that Jews are master manipulators pulling strings behind the scenes. If so, that would suggest very high social IQ.
On the other hand, some people argue Jews tends to have Aspergers syndrome (which indicates very low social IQ):
http://shazwellyn.hubpages.com/hub/The-Jewish-Social-Ostracisation-and-The-Aspergers-Autism-Connection-A-Theory
”On the one hand, there’s the antisemitic stereotype that Jews are master manipulators pulling strings behind the scenes. ”
Stereotypes is a leftoid language.
Jews are successful in America for very simple reasons. Notice a lot of blacks often complain about other blacks not helping the poorer blacks. Jews are great social networkers among their own. They put their own kind above others, sort of like nepotism.
After “how to imitate HBDchick”:
How to imitate Pumpkin ?
-Start your article by As a celebrity…
-And close it with something which indicate that you have empathy and a sense of morality.
And Pumpkin, so where do Euro Whites fit in? The most talented and the smartest are the Euros. And notice the cream of the crop Whites tend to have a more pleasant disposition than the other successful groups that are mentioned here. White privilege or White superiority?
One of the golden rule in hbdsphere for bloggers is never talk about white ”””’superiority”””’ you know** Follow patterns and you will see a lot of posts about jewish (mentally retard but very creative ones) and east asians.
As PP is black, here in this blog, you will see posts about ”black advantages” but based on popularity&income, the only two things that’s PP give value.
China’s richest man has a huge head.
He was bad at math but he seems to have great verbal skills
http://www.idigest.com.cn/en/2014-10/24/content_7321090.htm
And Marc Andreessen is a conhead
The ethnic composition of American davos attendees tells more about who runs the country.
[46.41%] 46.69% Northwestern European
[27.29%] 27.43% Jewish
6.05% Southern European
5.49% South Asian
[4.08%] 3.80% Middle Eastern
3.38% Latin America / Brazil
3.23% East Asian
2.25% Eastern European
1.55% Black
[0.28%] 0.14% North American Indian
The Indians are still over represented but not at Jewish levels. I’m deeply surprised at why east Asians aren’t more represented, considering how well run they run businesses in their own countries and in America (there’s nothing more American than Toyota or sony nowadays)
Toyota and Sony aren’t examples of direct personal competition where charisma and others psychopathic-like traits ”are” needed. East asians because higher introversion, if they were compared with whites, will be in the same disadvantages than introverted white people in societies which are dominated by extraverts.
Scholastic skills favour introverts while social network conveniences favour extroverts ( and psychopathic skills) and it’s decisive to the be well succesfull. Modern jewish-dominated western world works based on appearance.
Santo – True, but also untrue. Jews tend to act like East Asians in several areas, like the scholastic domain. But you’ll see, Jews have dominated this area and made a lot of money from it. Think media and publishing.
I think quite a number of Jews fit the profile of Steve Jobs, who had a very cerebral profile, but could also become an extrovert, and act very sociopathic and charismatic, hence his big success in America. Apple computers is a testament to this. Apple is all about being popular to the masses, and Steve Jobs was very cerebral in making sure it appeared that way.
East Asians are passive at all domains!
In America, Jews dominate the universities and colleges. When I say dominate, they are the top professors, top writers, top contributors in scholarly works.
East Asians just dominate the schools in student population, but fail to take their cerebral abilities to the next level and capitalize it like the Jews.
What a big difference!
Even in the tech oriented field with so many East Asians, Jews and Whites dominate the top of the food chain as CEOs and Founders. The East Asians’ contribution of their technical skills are like that of a bureaucrat, as you’ve said this before.
JS,
yes, i agree with you but it’s wrong because is not the real talent who move the world but the talent to self-promotion. Propaganda is the soul of business, indeed.
Santo – You do understand that East Asia is less dynamic and far behind the West in many things. My belief is that East Asians are rather incurious about the world, and less motivated to change it. Psychopathy can be a good thing, if all parties involved, have higher functioning IQs.
Yes, my theory is that east asians evolved to fast to be excessively ”perfect” in scholastic-(=) bureacratic prototype.
Genius is not the same than higher intelligence. Higher intelligent people have lower mutational load like east asians, but geniuses generally tend to have health problems, giftedness costs or higher mutational load.
Psychopathy spectrum have their value but the problem is this desmensured progress that caucasians are more engaged.
And this…
http://faculty.washington.edu/gmobus/TheoryOfSapience/SapienceExplained/5.evolutionOfSapience/evolutionOfSapience.html
In my university encounters, I find westerners who study STEM have a strong passion for it. The East Asians study science in large numbers, because of their vocational endeavors. “I study science, because I can get a job”.
JS,
I think something similar happens with driving. You would expect East Asians to be the better drivers than whites given their high IQs and even higher spatial IQs, yet the stereotype is that East Asians suck at driving.
I suspect the lack of psychopathy makes them overly cautious without the aggression & risk taking that driving requires.
Although my blog creates the impression that IQ is everything, the underperformance of East Asians in areas like creativity & driving shows that temperament can be even more important than intellect
Given the fact that many blacks have a bad temperament, you have a point, pumpkin.
I find East Asians lacking in curiosity at the higher levels of learning, when the opportunity arises for them. blacks on the other hand, are generally less intelligent to dwell into such topics, where they go to college, as if it was playschool.
http://www.brasilpost.com.br/2015/07/21/australia-matar-gatos_n_7845144.html?ncid=fcbklnkbrhpmg00000004
”white” (trash) ”criativiti”…
White trash destroy the land of other people and still continue to kill innocent creatures…
A dumbass ones who believe in stupid ”abstractions”.