A couple of years ago I floated the notion of an Arctic Alliance wherein people of north Eurasian origin (Europeans, Russians, Chinese, Japanese), with their 100-or-so mean IQs and low fertility rates, would pool resources to defend their demographics against inundation from Islamia’s ululating hordes (with their 90-or-so mean IQs and higher fertility rates) and Africa’s hungry masses (with their 80-or-so mean IQs and sensational fertility rates).
Having just spent a week in Arctopolis, the topic came back to mind. It collided with this news story, which is about American kids of Asian or part-Asian ancestry trying to game the college admissions system by checking the “white” box on application forms.
This is only an intelligent strategy if your surname is not a giveaway. Of mixed Asian-white marriages in the USA, however, three quarters feature a white husband, so mix-raced kids’ surnames are problematic only for the other quarter. (For adoptees, it is hardly ever a problem.)
Kids with Asian ancestry want to game the college admissions system because admissions officers discriminate strongly against them when not forbidden by law. As The Center for Equal Opportunity has noted:
In 2005…the combined median SAT scores for blacks [admitted to the University of Michigan] were 190 points lower (on a scale of 1600) than whites and 240 points lower than Asians. Similarly, blacks trailed whites in high school grade point averages by .5 and Asians by .4 (out of a potential 4.0). Over all the years analyzed, 8,000 whites, Asians and Hispanics were rejected who had higher grades and test scores than the median black admittee, including nearly 2,700 such students in 2005 alone.
Where colleges are forbidden by law to discriminate against Asian-ancestry applicants, those applicants are accepted in very disproportionate numbers. This has been the case in California since the passing of Proposition 209 back in 1996 (though not without protest). That law banned consideration of race in state-college admissions. The premier such college, U. Cal. at Berkeley, now has a 40 percent Asian student body. (Persons of “Asian alone” ancestry are 12.5 percent of California’s population. The state’s entire mixed-race population is 2.6 percent.)
Given that East Asians modestly outscore Europeans on mean IQ and have an “exam culture” transported to the USA as the Tiger Mom and crammer phenomena, this is all to be expected. So how much of a problem is this for the Arctic Alliance project? And for the USA?
For the project, not much. My suggestion was for an alliance, not a political union. Political unions of peoples of different cultures—never mind different races—are simply terrible ideas: Search Google News under “euro.” I believe the Arctic Alliance project can be saved.
Whether the United States can be saved is another matter. In a mobile world, there will be many people from different races living in each other’s countries. That does not make a case for mass immigration, though. As the late great Enoch Powell was wont to remind us, numbers are of the essence, and a thousand is not equal to a million.
Rodney King famously asked: “Can we all get along?” Where big minorities of Tropicals are settled among Arctics, the answer is plainly “No.” Incarceration rates, patterns of residential and educational segregation, and a score of other social indicators tell the tale very clearly. We dutifully mouth platitudes about equality and racial tolerance (often protesting too obviously much), but our deeds betray our lying tongues.
With fellow Arctics, though, there may be some hope. The USA has been here before. From 1880 to 1920 we permitted settlement of several million Ashkenazim, whose mean IQ advantage over white gentiles is two or three times that of East Asians.
This caused considerable stresses and strains in academia. In my book Unknown Quantity I noted the case of G. D. Birkhoff, Professor of Mathematics at Harvard, 1919-44, described by Albert Einstein as “one of the world’s great anti-Semites” for giving preference in teaching appointments to Depression-era Americans over European-Jewish immigrants. (Reuben Hersh has an informative, though anti-Birkhoff, essay on Jewish people in American math in The Best Writing on Mathematics 2011.)
On my aforementioned visit to Arctopolis I was in company with five other invited lecturers from the USA: David Remnick of the New Yorker, Richard Stallman of the Free Software Project, science writer Jonah Lehrer, and physicists Brian Greene and David Gross. I was the only Gentile in the group. What are the odds? On the assumption that ability is randomly distributed race-wise, and taking Jewish people to be four percent of the US population, I make it 0.000000589824, or about one in 1.7 million.
Yet I am accustomed to being the Shabbat goy at events like that. Five to one is quite normal. Everyone, including me, takes it for granted. The complete Jewish intellectual dominance in US society has not caused riots in the streets, only some low-level grumbling. Will East Asians get the same pass?
Possibly not. The Ashkenazim’s intellectual superiority extends into the persuasive arts: writing, acting, lawyering. East Asian superiority, as well as being lesser overall, is more narrowly focused on spatial-manipulation and deductive abilities—math and the hard sciences. It does not seem likely that they will be able to “control the discourse” to the extent the Ashkenazim have. Further, the Ashkenazim have centuries of experience living among unfriendly host populations and have developed keen skills to manage the situation. East Asians, by contrast, have always been dominant in their own areas. Even the overseas Chinese, as market-dominant minorities in southeast Asia, have been protected to some degree by the nearby presence of an ancestral superpower.
So will this domestic version of the Arctic Alliance work? I suppose we shall find out, though I wish we had spared ourselves the trouble of having to find out.
Copyright 2016 TakiMag.com and the author. This copy is for your personal, noncommercial use only. You can order reprints for distribution by contacting us at firstname.lastname@example.org.