(This article was originally written in December 2019, since which my views on IQ and especially those who have conducted research on intelligence and psychometrics have somewhat changed, even if a good deal of what is stated below remains, in my opinion, rather sensible. My opinion still holds of the “IQ” concept and its associated literature as laden with Jewish propaganda, and often overrated as a standard for the social worth of individuals, though by no means can it be regarded as valueless.
(Amendment April 23, 2022: I am now also uncertain as to whether Terman was a Jew. From what reading I have done subsequent to this post, Terman’s work and research seemed to have been of a quite objective nature, contrary to the racial spirit of the Jews, and was perhaps not entitled to the sort of criticism of which I have charged him here. Furthermore, that John Raven and Alfred Binet were Jews, as previously asserted, is at best dubious. And though David Wechsler was Jewish, his work on intelligence and his IQ test, the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale, seem to be respectable; perhaps he was a respectable Jew. The research these men did appeared to have been of an honest and valid nature.)
IQ is a Jewish invention that is partly used to convince people that Jews are more intelligent than everyone else. The concept of IQ is a concept of psychology and psychology is dominated overwhelmingly by Jews. Of course the IQ tests are no exception to this. The IQ tests are developed by Jews; and as will be shown in this article, even the notion of “IQ” was constructed by a Jew.
The psychologist who developed the first widely-used intelligence test in 1905 was the Frenchman Alfred Binet.
Binet collaborated with Théodore Simon to develop the Binet-Simon intelligence test. Simon was a Jew. Simon’s father was an engineer at a railway company, and all the railway companies have been owned and managed by Jews. He was a medical doctor (physician), and most medical doctors in Europe and North America are Jews. Besides all this, “Simon” is a clearly Jewish name.
A Jewish psychologist by the name of William Stern coined the term “Intelligence Quotient”, which is often shortened to “IQ”.
David Wechsler, who developed some of the most widely-used IQ tests, the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale and the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children, was also a Jew.
The work of Binet and Simon was adopted by Lewis Terman, a psychologist at Stanford University. Terman became one of the first to develop a derivation of the test for people in the United States. His version of the test was the Stanford-Binet Intelligence Scale. Terman embraced the Jew Stern’s concept of “IQ” immediately. Terman himself may have been a Jew. The name “Terman” is carried by Jews. Lewis Terman’s mother was Martha Cutsinger. “Cutsinger” may be a Jewish name.
Terman’s works contributed to racial segregation policies in schools. He claimed that IQ was highly heritable, and he was involved in numerous eugenic organizations in America, including the Eugenics Records Office, the American Eugenic Organization, as well as the Human Betterment Foundation, which was founded by Ezra Gosney in 1928 and had as part of its mission the promotion of California’s compulsory sterilization laws.
Terman contributed to developing the first mass-group intelligence testing with the US Army Alpha and Beta tests for World War I recruits. His IQ testing was wide-scale, and naturally, it exposed him to many groups. After administering his test on Negro Americans, on Spanish-speaking immigrants (mainly Spanish-Amerindian hybrids), and on Portuguese and Italian (mainly Southern Italian?) immigrants in California, he concluded that intellectual deficiency was very common among these groups, and stated that “children of this group should be separated into separate classes”, as they constituted from a eugenic manner of consideration a “grave problem because of their unusually prolific breeding”.
It must be admitted that such claims as to the low average intelligence of the aforementioned groups may have been true.
Terman’s studies on orphans, especially twin orphans, continue to be used in contemporary arguments of behavioral genetic studies on biological, hereditary, and racial and sex differences in IQ.
The question should be asked: Why do the people who claim to be aware of the Jews and racial differences among humans use Jewish IQ test results by Jewish psychologists to try to “justify” their claims as to differences between groups of humans? Shouldn’t these people be aware that the field of psychology is dominated by Jews?
Since psychology is dominated by Jews, one perhaps shouldn’t expect the information provided by the Jewish psychologists to be entirely forthright and honest.
IQ has been used to promote the claim that psychology has proven that differences in intelligence among varied groups are based on genetic heritability. Works by Arthur Jensen, Richard Herrnstein, Michael Levin, Hans Eysenck, and other Jews have tried to reinforce such suppositions. These “eugenic-based sciences” are central to race arguments promoted by “White supremacy organizations” and in “White supremacy” publications, which are all managed by Jews.
With the help of the Jewish IQ test results, the Jews will sometimes attempt to direct hatred and contempt towards other races to divert attention away from themselves. Jews (?) and Jew-sympathizers (?), including Georges Cuvier, Josiah Nott (“in intellect … [the Jews] ranked among the first of the human family”), Louis Agassiz, George Gliddon, and Earnest Sevier Cox, wrote and advertised texts directed against Negroes and other races and extolled the alleged accomplishments of the nonexistent “White” or “Caucasian” race. This abetting of antipathy towards all other races except Jews was no new strategy among them. The Jews themselves have, throughout history been the fomenters of most, if not all, the so-called race conflicts that have taken place. Jews promoted the idea of a “Yellow peril” throughout Europe and America during the 1800s and 1900s. The same was proposed in regard to the Negroes, and, indeed, all the other races except one.
Arthur R. Jensen, who was a Professor of Educational Psychology at the University of California, unleashed his “bomb-shell” in 1969. An article published by Jensen in The Harvard Educational Review, entitled, “How much can we boost IQ and scholastic achievement?”, attracted immediate and world-wide attention. Jensen was Jewish from his mother’s side.
As with the case with Terman, the Jews are trying to bring back the association of Nazi politics with eugenics to discredit eugenic ideas.
Jensen’s article became one of the most widely cited studies in psychology. The effect of Jensen’s work on fascist groups throughout the world was immediate. According to Martin Webster, the National Activities Organiser of the National Front, “The most important factor in the build-up of self-confidence amongst ‘racists’, and the collapse of morale among multi-racialists was the publication in 1969 by Professor Arthur Jensen in the Harvard Educational Review” (Spearhead, April 1973).
Jensen’s article represented a reversal of post-World War II trends in psychological theory. He argued that intelligence was largely (about 80 percent) determined by genetics and that IQ differences represented genetic differences. As with Terman, Jensen addressed the problem of compensatory education in the sense that, since intelligence was largely determined genetically, efforts to raise the intelligence of low IQ scorers by intensive educational efforts were mostly wasted.
Jensen focused on racial differences in IQ scores and offered a genetic explanation. According to Jensen’s argument, Negroes on average do not possess the same innate intellectual qualities as “Whites”. Such arguments appealed to “right-wing” politicians and those who favored decreasing educational budgets.
As well as finding political allies, Jensen also quickly found himself with support from within the “scientific” (Jewish) establishment. Hans Eysenck, Professor of Psychology at the Institute of Psychiatry in London, and “undoubtedly Britain’s most influential psychologist”, soon published a book defending Jensen’s viewpoint, titled Race, Intelligence and Education. Eysenck stated that differences in IQ were about 75 percent the product of heredity. Eysenck, like Jensen, was Jewish from his mother’s side. His maternal grandmother spent time at a concentration camp during World War II.
Fascists saw Eysenck and Jensen as vindicating their basic assumptions on race. Eysenck’s popular books, including Race, Intelligence and Education and The Inequality of Man, are on the recommended reading lists of fascist groups like the National Front. Fascists of the post-World War II period make constant reference to Jensen’s and Eysenck’s work.
In common with the “White supremacist” Mankind Quarterly, the journal Neue Anthropologie combines older racial theories with psychological data from Jews like Jensen and Eysenck. Eysenck was an Honorary Adviser of Mankind Quarterly, and Jensen was on the editorial Advisory Board of Neue Anthropologie.
Both Mankind Quarterly and Neue Anthropology have clear links with the modern psychological research of Eysenck and Jensen. With the scholarly appearances of these journals are linked the open approval by their editors of policies enacted by the Jew Hitler and his Nazi Party. There are those involved with both journals who are attempting to relate those traditions again to fascist and Nazi political activity.
One editor of Neue Anthropologie was Juergen Rieger. Rieger belonged to the post-war generation of European Nazis and was involved in neo-Nazi political parties. Rieger was a member of the Northern League, a Nordic supremacist organization founded by Roger Pearson. In elaborating their racial theories, Rieger and other neo-Nazis made use of the modern psychological research into IQ differences between races. These neo-Nazis cited especially the works of Eysenck and Jensen to support their basic assumption of fundamental genetic differences between races.
Besides these two journals, Nouvelle Ecole has claimed to be the first French publication to popularize the work of Jensen. A Jew named Alain De Benoist originally reported Jensen’s research in Nouvelle Ecole, September/October 1969 in an article entitled, “Intégration scolaire et psychologie raciale”. This article was translated into German and appeared the following year under the title of “Schulintegration und Rassenpsychologie: Jensenismus: Tabu, Rasse und IQ”. The term “Rassenpsychologie” is reminiscent of earlier research on race which was done under the Nazi regime.
More than just popularizing Jensen’s work, Nouvelle Ecole also claims to be “the first to give directly the words of Dr Jensen” in France. This it first did in 1972, when it published an exclusive interview Jensen gave to the Jew De Benoist. In the course of this interview, Jensen explained why he thought that intelligence was determined primarily by heredity rather than by environment. He also claimed to regret that the research necessary for establishing that there are racial differences in intelligence is no longer undertaken. Jensen also said that, “a large number of American and foreign thinkers have recognised the importance and truth in the questions which I have raised”. Nouvelle Ecole continued bringing the words of Jensen to the attention of the French public by reprinting Jensen’s article “Educability, Heritability and Population Differences”, in 1974. In 1973, Nouvelle Ecole also gave page space to Professor Eysenck’s words.
Roger Pearson was the chairman of the World Anti-Communist League (WACL), an organisation which links the activities of “racist” and “anti-Semitic” groups throughout the world. The Washington Post, on May 28, 1978, described the 11th annual conference of the WACL, which was chaired by Pearson and held in Washington. Among those present were representatives of the fascist party MSI, Liberty Lobby, an “extreme racist” and “anti-Semitic” group, and representatives of Nouvelle Ecole. The Washington Post report mentions that the Nouvelle Ecole group met during the conference with William Pierce, the Jewish founder of the “neo-Nazi” organization the National Alliance and a former leading member of the American Nazi Party. According to Pierce, the Nouvelle Ecole members “are working along lines very close to ours”. Under this association of a “scholarly” organization with that of an “extremist neo-Nazi” leader like Pierce, the Jews were clearly trying again to associate research concerning racial differences with that of Nazism and Hitler.
In an interview, Jensen firmly rejected the interviewer’s suggestions in favor of separating races. He declared racial segregation to be immoral and stated that it would be in contrast to the “essential values of freedom and liberty”. Jensen also declared that “people should be treated as individuals, not according to their racial, ethnic or social origin”. Jensen admits in the interview that Jews, including himself do not want people to be separated according to their racial origin, despite his previous research being suggestive of something entirely against this claim. The interview shows that Jensen was only another Jew who tried to discredit racial differences by associating race study with Nazism.
Eysenck, in a letter to The Times (March 16, 1978), attempted to argue that his scientific conclusions in fact disproved racism. Eysenck wrote, “To the racist all members of a given group are inferior to all members of another. The empirical work that Jensen and I have surveyed makes it quite impossible to maintain any such position; there is a great deal of overlap between any racial or national groups that have ever been studied …. Looked at from the rational point of view, therefore, the empirical studies of different races and national groups conclusively disprove the allegations of racists and destroy their fundamental belief.” In the quotation, Eysenck attempts to discredit evidence in favor of differences between races by suggesting that individuals of one race can be more intelligent than that of the average of another race. No reasonable person would argue against that! It is the average of each race and the differences distinguishing each race when viewed as a whole, and not individual differences, that is typically relevant in racial research. Eysenck and Jensen concerned themselves with averages in their studies on racial differences in IQ, and as regards such data, it should be fair to say that the individuals who come across these data ought also to think in this fashion.
In Audrey Shuey’s book, The Testing of Negro Intelligence, the Jews again try to make a connection between political controversies and acknowledgment of racial differences. The book is a compendium of the research conducted into Negro IQ. Shuey’s conclusion is that there are “native differences between negroes and whites as determined by intelligence tests”. In Race, Intelligence and Education, the Jew Eysenck praises Shuey’s work in most generous terms. His chapter on “The Intelligence of American Negroes” is based on Shuey’s work. Eysenck readily admits in his book, “In surveying the results of work in this field, I have done little but paraphrase the scholarly, extensive and very reliable summary published by Audrey M. Shuey, entitled ‘The Testing of Negro Intelligence’ … It would clearly be impossible to go into similar detail here, as well as being supererogatory – such a job needed to be done, but having been well done, requires no repetition. Readers who wish to consult the references on which my own summaries and conclusions are based can do no better than read Shuey”.
Rather than being held solely as a defender of the idea that differences in native intelligence between the races exist, the Jew Eysenck should also be known for his espousing of other controversial and less scientifically sound views. For instance, Eysenck claimed that smoking had not been shown to cause lung cancer.
Mankind Quarterly, Neue Anthropologie, and Nouvelle Ecole all have similar purposes and goals. All three journals have been active in promoting the theories of the Jews Eysenck and Jensen about racial differences in intelligence. Moreover, they have all been aided in this respect by the Jewish psychologists themselves (Eysenck was formally associated with Mankind Quarterly and Nouvelle Ecole, and Jensen with Neue Anthropologie).
Hans F. K. Guenther was a leading authority in anthropology before and during the Nazi regime. He contributed to prominent Jewish Nazi leader Alfred Rosenberg’s “anti-Semitic” congresses. The congresses were heavily politicized and supposedly coincided with Hitler’s attempt to carry “anti-Semitic” theory to its conclusion. Guenther was due to give his speech to the congress in 1944 but the event was canceled, with the war effort being cited as an excuse. Thus even before World War II ended with the conclusive victory of the Allies in 1945, Jews in Germany had been suppressing information concerning race and Jewdom by associating the honest study of race and Jewdom with the Jew Hitler and his Nazi policies. Racialism and eugenics, and Hitler and Nazism, became one in the eyes of the public. These terms became indistinguishable.
In regards to the validity of IQ tests at least as they relate to actual achievement, it is perhaps noteworthy that Terman’s Stanford-Binet test emphasized verbal fluency over other types of intelligence. It is easy to observe that such fields as law, public speaking, and advertising and propaganda are prominently commanded by Jews. The Jew is outspoken by nature. He naturally inclines towards persuasive speaking, and towards fields in which he can most readily deceive and exploit peoples and is able to express supremacy and dominance over others. If a Jew is “intelligent” enough to evade justice by exploiting the legal system, should we just allow him to continue living his life in such a manner in spite of his actions being morally wrong? Obviously not, but that’s what Jewish proponents of IQ suggest through their studies. The Jews completely disregard temperament and moral character as hereditary traits and insist only on improving a population’s “IQ”.
Without strong morals and character, “intelligence” is merely a dangerous weapon. It might even be more desirable to associate with people of good morals and strong character of a mediocre IQ than people who score high on IQ tests but are criminals and moral imbeciles, which is likely to be the case with many of the so-called prominent people today. Possibly all of the “prominent” people in society today are Jews or sympathizers of the Jews. While many of these prominent Jews may score high on IQ tests, in the moral faculty these individuals are wholly deficient as is demonstrated and proven by their actions.
Regardless how high they may score on IQ tests, moral imbeciles should be prevented from reproducing for the good of humanity – but it should be done so humanely, efficiently, sensibly, and free from any evil intentions, lest our claim to moral superiority over them be at the same time disgraced, thus making the action hypocritical. If sterilization were performed on all morally deficient persons, it would, perhaps, entail the complete elimination of the Jewish race on Earth. Naturally, since the Jews would never propose such an idea they instead must promote the idea of IQ to try to avoid other means of hereditary and societal improvement.
Leave a Reply