A powerful, subtle component of the new acceptable racism has been the acceptance of Jewish intellectual superiority. Every Europeoid ("European" or "Euro") on the internet who gets upset at blacks raping white girls or killing cops is told to study HBD, and presented, inevitably, with the panoply of studies that compliments the Euro--"You are definitely higher than Africans"--and vindicates him in his belief that he is rational, and not prejudiced, since northeastern Asians score higher than he does. By accepting those results--and by accepting anecdotally and statistically low northeastern Asian rates of perpetrating rape and assault--the European also accepts, as sort of a side-note, that Jews are the most intellectually superior people on the planet. If Europeans demonstrate a 100 IQ mean, Chinese and Jews a 105, and Africans an 85 or lower, the European feels he is not racist or narcissist in trumpeting those results, given that he has placed himself lower than other groups.
Unsettling Quandaries with IQ Results
The implicit conclusion, after the violent and high-time-preference individuals are eliminated or controlled--the necessary steps in the cessation of mass rape and slaughter--is that any advancing society will further improve itself through the control or elimination of the lowest-performing groups. As removing Africans from European areas will vastly reduce the rate of rape and murder for Swedish women and children, subsequently, removing the next available lower-performing group will have a further positive impact on the numbers. Since the same research which shows Jews to be the smartest people on the planet also shows that individuals of all groups tend to revert to their racial mean, the only conclusion is that Jews and northeastern Asians, to enjoy the prosperity only possible in an average-IQ-105 society, should eventually eliminate the comparatively dangerous European untermentsch and its average-IQ-100 ways, just as the European must cleanse Europe of the average-IQ-85 group. (85 for Africans is quite generous in some of those studies, so replace it with whatever number you've read.)
Ergo Chinese should be in charge of China and Jews should be in charge of any region where they can claim genetic membership via diaspora mixing. The conclusion to which nationalist Europeans are being led, toward which they're fighting so hard, is one in which membership in a high-IQ group dictates outcomes, therefore the only logical, rational thing to do is to defer to the higher-IQ group. Because of reversion to the mean, any extraordinary individual must accept that his progeny shall revert, ergo the higher standard must lead. Dazzled by easily-obtainable stories of African or Islamic violence, the European is vulnerable to accepting this fundamental logic, this normative, which is akin to enjoying a cushioned conveyor belt which leads into a slaughterhouse. Similarly to how another plot from the same mold encourages worship of the Risen Rabbi as its rallying point, this IQ normative is designed to create Europeans who paint themselves into a corner of subservience to the Chosen. Acceptance of the Torah, or of any other hierarchy where Europeans are ahead of almost everyone except the Chosen, leaves the Chosen on top. Just as with believing in holy books edited by Turkish Semites, Europeans who come to rely on post-industrial IQ methodology to explain their superiority over Africans have tacitly accepted Jewish superiority over Europeans. Under the IQ version, whoever controls the testing system--like control of any dogma, whether political parties or news or movies, the "testing system" determines whether or not an idea is permissible, cost-effective, worth sharing, valid, invalid, et cetera--controls present, past, and future.
Arguments based on the aforementioned IQ results fail the first-glance, "common sense" test. Why are Europeans advocating for their own subordination and their own inferiority? "You might not be as smart as me, but at least you're smarter than Tyrone." Perhaps it is the European's vulnerability to flattery that has caught him in this net.
Methodological Problems with IQ Results
The European invented civilization. At least, the European kind of civilization; what the European calls "civilization," he invented. So too were fine art and technology European inventions. Since the advent of Semitic media, Jews have suddenly become renowned as great inventors, disproportionately filling the citations of science and culture in the way that, since the Turkish Gospel gained a hold on the European mind, Jews have filled Europe's courts, banks, legislatures, and judiciaries.
If IQ is such an accurate predictor of success and achievement, why did the Chinese not develop the steam engine, the printing press, the car, the airplane, or nearly any other invention of European note (which, today, we take as the default "of note," whether or not we're correct in doing so)? Similarly, why did the Jew not? The answers that IQ-result-loving European nationalists are told to accept are, "Prejudice," "Racism," and "Sociology." And, amazingly, the European nationalist accepts them! His entire philosophy, whether reaction or neoreaction or traditionalism or conservatism, et cetera, is about how those latter three claims, and their variants, are complete and utter bullshit designed to obscure the genetic differences in intelligence that explain history and civilization. It is supposed to be the "liberal" who claims that Otherism prevented lower-IQ groups from developing written language or the cotton gin. And yet, today's European nationalist still believes that the Jew, who invented none of these things, is smarter? And that it was European racism that prevented the Jew from carving, composing, designing, testing, et cetera?
There is a massive flaw, then, in our approach to IQ. Either IQ is only a small component of importance (as we would define "important" for moral or personal or civilizational purposes), or IQ isn't important and some other factor or factors is needed to explain what is going on, or IQ is important and the data we're being given is flawed. We know that one or more of these explanations must be the case because we're covering human history, and even in the past 100 years, after the supposed centuries of Talmud-memory-based breeding that supposedly produced more articulate Jews, the super-vast super-bulk of new technologies come from Europeans, not Jews (or Chinese).
(Ashke)Nazi Jews tend to be extremely good at memorizing things, ergo they appear to be wonderful physicians, lawyers, professors, screenwriters, et cetera: they can ably recall a hundred different studies, cases, publications, or plots, as the case may be. While this produces an excellent quantity of detail on standard of care, the state of the field, or standard of entertainment, it is worthless in the realms of creativity, including not only designing new things artistically (Rothko's works are a great example of attempted novelty/creativity), but designing new things technically. Before webmd.com, before the internet, in the absence of an encyclopedia, a Jewish physician could provide a simple version of the state of the art, and communicate this well to someone who had just asked the question, "My nose makes this weird sound." Presented with the scientific method--like reading Berossus--the Jew can become a "creator" in the sense of running tests on a bunch of stuff until something works. "Market research" is now an axiom of the biblicized remains of European society, where merchants no longer produce things that they know people need or things that they love, but things which data shows will sell.
What is the answer, then, to this seeming gap between the way IQ predicts things now--lifetime academic and/or professional achievement, crime rates, corruption perceptions, offspring metrics--and the lack of the Han, or the Jews, inventing and producing in equivalency, let alone superiority, to the European?
Corrupted IQ Results
The answer likely lies in the data that generates the consensus on IQ. The data say that IQ matters to some degree. European achievements say otherwise: a lower-performing group outperformed multiple higher-performing groups, even higher-performing groups which were more numerous, socially stable, and geographically unified (China). So the racial IQ differences we've been shown have to contain faulty data. Given that part of the data correlates sensibly--African IQ versus European IQ correlating with African v. European achievements--and given who stands to benefit from the portions of the data that do not correlate--a civilizationally low-achieving group with implausibly superior scores--we may reasonably surmise from where the flaws in the data originate.
Let us consider the following explanation: Jews and Chinese (and/or other northeastern Asians as appropriate) may or may not have a 105 average, but Europeans of the lineages that produced what Jewish-dominated ("European-dominated" or "Western") cultures now call "civilization" have a higher average.
How so? Well, if you're going to IQ test people by group, imagine that you call everyone with paler skin "white." Ergo whites who are part Semitic, 1/8 African, 1/8 "Cherokee Indian," and so forth, test as white. After years of Mediterranean piracy and rape, millennia of Mongol invasions and rape, colonialism and mission-going, humanitarian interventions, and uplifting orphaned or adopted/enslaved foreigners, these non-fully-European whites represent some percentage of the "white" population. Nonetheless, all of them count toward the "white" average.
Now, take "blacks" or "Africans," and assume some inter-breeding with whites in the New World. This theory would assume that Africans in America score higher than Africans in Africa, and indeed, they do--significantly higher.
Next take the Chinese, who have violently protected their borders and genome. Okay, 105. With a much higher chance of being "just Chinese" (or "just Korean" or "just Japanese" et cetera), this group has average IQ numbers more reflective of its historical sub-species. Because a substantially reduced portion of its population has been conquered and Christianized compared to Europe, the Chinese group did not interbreed with places it colonized, or keep Africans as slaves for generation. Its sample therefore contains less variation than the European one. Its average test scores would then be a more accurate representation of its historically evolved IQ prowess than would be adjudging historically evolved European test scores based upon their post-colonial, more-mixed descendants.
Finally, consider the Jews--the group who, through its presence in modern European government, academia, and medicine, is best positioned to assure a positive portrayal of its IQ. Imagine that a group of people take an IQ test, and that the Semites who have interbred more with Europeans, and called themselves Ashkenazis, are considered Jews, while the Semites who have interbred less are considered "Muslims" or "Arabs." The more-European group achieves results attributed to "Jews," while the less-European group achieves results attributed to "North Africans" or "Arabs" (depending on the test's categories). The power of Jews to identify who is and isn't a Jew, which has been codified down to a DNA test in Israel--like the power of the Chinese to select more-Han subjects for their reportable results, which they would be wise to do instead of sending a half-Vietnamese, one-quarter-Chinese, one-quarter-Siberian subject, if they wanted to inflate their scores--can guarantee that aggregate Jewish results include the best of their available subjects, measured against everyone who has paler-skin standing in for whites.
There need be no sneaking or "inflating" in this subjective system. It is the province of paler-skinned Chinese to be deemed real Chinese, and of paler-skinned Ashkenazi to be Jews, since they are, by circular logic, acknowledged by the community of acknowledged members. No one needs to skulk about when, say, eliminating less-intelligent, darker-skinned, chronically ill, or less-European Semites from the definition of "Jews" and fitting them into another group, since it is obvious to all true Jews who the Jews are--just as it is to the IDF when culling the population of a neighborhood in the West Bank. Who will have the title to the home? Why, a Jewish person, of course! A true Israeli, duh. It's obvious. No Muslim pretenders shall be allowed to steal the Jews' ancestral homeland!
As whites may select some children for advanced education, some for average, and some for remedial, so too can Jews select which of their community's children are authentic representations of Jews for purposes of standardized testing, and which are merely whites with some peripheral or distant Jewish relations. The selection of legitimate Israeli citizens and/or genetic Jews mirrors, unsurprisingly, the concealment of aristocratic embarrassments from family registers in biblicized Europe. If Lord Windsor spawns a child whose disability cannot be disguised, it is drowned, lost to a tragically unforeseen illness, farmed to a disavowing family, and never known as Lord Windsor's son; successful noble houses, therefore, attempt to eugenicize themselves, shifting lower-functioning or unhealthy children to convents or monasteries, spinster aunts, or burials in the bog, never to reproduce, let alone take standardized tests. Wise Jewish parents, children's teachers, school administrators, and community leaders today can take an active hand in any student's mindset of self-identification, ensuring that feelings of inclusion or exclusion are relevant to that person's identity later, when it comes time to check a box--be it "Jewish" or "White" or "Mixed Race" or "North African." As with Europe's post-Christian nobles, the decision to not disavow low performers is fatal, for groups who invest in children who do not, say, read as swiftly, are out-competed by groups who deny low-performers a slot in the peerage. Nicean-infected whites, by contrast, convinced they can uplift their mixed brethren, score accordingly; even if no other groups "cheat" by engaging in preferential selection or presentation, the deconstruction of whiteness ensures that every possible pale-skin will be measured as white, competing against carefully ancestor-vetted pools of competitors.
In submitting their own IQ test results, assisting international proctors in randomly selecting from among a select group of students, or in approving students for study and potential testing abroad, the Chinese would have achieved a higher score by sending pure or more-pure Han (the lighter-skinned group more genetically descended from the ancient red-haired Caucasoid kings whose mummies were found centuries later) to take tests, rather than a random sampling of everyone who lived in China at the time. Similarly, but more brutally, the Ashkenazi exterminated Palestinian Jews along with Palestinian "Muslims" or "Arabs" in part to achieve this apotheosis of Jewish intellectualism subsequent to the then-most-recent fall of Europe. The Jewish project of The Bell Curve was a subtle re-introduction of the idea of Chosen superiority after a few decades of phony universalism.
Like speculating that screenplays are made into movies through nepotism or backroom deals, this is only speculation, and anyone considering this subject should evaluate available IQ data in light of how fair and impartial they believe western universities are with regard academic studies.
The new nationalism's IQ-based compliment is now a poison deeply embedded within what passes for the European nationalist. It has crept in much the same way that Christianity did: as a barbed compliment. In each case, the traveling merchant tells the gullible buyer, "Congratulations, filthy customer! Your worth may well exceed that of the man-beasts of faraway lands! Reshape your society to an easier version of the exacting standards by which my people have already been chosen to excel, and you shall be first among slaves!"