There has been some value created by Jewish intellect, as there has been by every group that ever existed. But there are some strange things about the nature of much Jewish intelligence.
First, I think the issue of intelligence gets emphasized because ... well what else are you going to focus on? Jewish beauty? Jewish athletic prowess? Jewish kindness? When you are a one-trick pony, that one trick is all you can talk about. So, I suspect the issue of IQ gets a bit overhyped.
Second, a lot of Jewish intelligence expresses itself as a kind of useless parlor game. Take the discipline of psychology. The field appears to have been on a productive path toward the end of the 19th century, supported by both American and German psychologist. It was informed by biology and Darwinism. Then, came Freud and the whole field went off into never-never land for several generations.
Freud and other Jewish psychologists created a dense, complex, challenging, but <b>false</b> system of thought. This lasted until at least the 1960s ... so three for four generations were lost. Then, we have another group of largely Jewish intellectuals (Pinker, etc) that come along to help us <i>refute</i> all the Jewish psychology we had been taught. This process has taken a couple of generations.
So now, over a hundred years later, here we are back where we started! Thousands of Jews charging tens of billions of dollars in psychiatric fees, inflicting guilt on millions of mothers, wasting years of patients' lives, only to be told - oh sorry that is not true anymore - by another group of highly paid Jewish thinkers.
It reminds me of the old joke about a spouse . A spouse is a person who helps you solve the problems that you wouldn't have, if you didn't have a spouse in the first place. Jewish intellectuals, at their best, usually help us solve problems we wouldn't have if it wasn't for other Jewish intellectuals .
+++
"Obviously, we are little the richer for all of this alleged "Jewish brainpower". Quite the opposite, in fact. Which, of course, raises the following question: given that everything the Jews have done can be explained by a combination of ethnocentrism, street smarts and ethnic networking, why should we pretend that it exists at all?"
eurodele, I'm strongly in your corner on this subject. In my extensive experiences dealing with Jews both professionally and personally I have yet to discover a single truly original thinker. NOT ONE!
All the Jews I have known have been better-than-average STUDENTS of their professions but NOT A SINGLE ONE OF THEM has ever excelled in the ways that only the truly gifted often can and do. It has always been their well-coordinated, if undeserved, INFLUENCE over events and organizations because of their Jewishness that has led to their material success and not their supposed superior intellects. It has been my experience that when a Jew needs something really creative done, he hires someone from outside the tribe, and then unashamedly steals the credit for their hireling's ingenuity and creativity at the first opportunity.
I believe their undeserved reputation for superior intelligence comes more from their never-ending tribal self-promotion and their penchant for deliberately ignoring the accomplishments of their betters, (at least until they can abscond with the credit for those accomplishments as I mentioned above), than it does from any real evidence of innate intellectual superiority.
We would do better rid of their supposed "contributions" to our society. Imagine the music that has been written but remains unheard because the person choosing what gets performed or recorded is a Jew. Think of the brilliant books that would have remained unpublished if it had been up to a Jew to publish them! Think of the laws of the land that would never have been written if a Jew was the one assigned to approve them. And then think of the laws, books and music they endlessly flog now that they do do all the choosing!
…Think of the movies we could make if Jews didn't control the ways and means of distribution...
I'm not suggesting for a minute that we ignore the contributions Jews have made in their chosen professions. What I am suggesting is that there must surely be a torrent of even more brilliant work that remains ignored or unrecognized because the creators of that even more brilliant work are not Jews writing with a Jewish sensibility, attuned to Jewish prejudices.
Think about how much more developed our societies would be if we were allowed to sample the Best of the Best instead only the best the Jews have to offer, much of which is third rate crap held up as brilliant ONLY by the fraudulent oohs and ahhhs emanating from the well-organized Jewish Mutual Admiration Society.
Think about it...
+++
Reginald: Out of all the things there are to get on the case of the Jews for, them allowing carriers of the gene for hemophilia to breed seems a very strange choice. If this indeed was a foible of the Jews, it's a foible they shared with Europeans.
Perhaps. But the book being discussed here classifies Jews, and not Europeans, as "eugenicists". My point is that the kind of "eugenics" practiced by the Jews has never extended to the propagation of desirable physical traits, and even by intellectual criteria has not produced the "master race" that many Jews evidently think they are.
Reginald: What they did was suspend a specifically Jewish selective pressure against Jewish hemophiliacs, which would only have had the effect of making the Jewish hemophiliacs as reproductively disadvantaged as European hemophiliacs.
Any "specifically Jewish" selective pressure remains a selective pressure after all. This selective pressure is called "bleeding". Scholarly Jews who are exempted from the hazards of injurious physical labor (aside from paper cuts), and also exempted from circumcision, are at least partially exempted from the standard selective pressure of bleeding ... but not, unfortunately, from breeding. Hence, the Jews have deviated from sound eugenic principles.
Reginald: Even if a directive came down from the Sanhedrin telling all Jews to forsake other Jews and concentrate on interbreeding with Europeans, the degree to which the European populations of the world would take on Jewish genetic characteristics would be extremely limited.
Not necessarily. Jews have almost all the real money these days, and that constitutes a generous breeding advantage. Very generous indeed, especially when we limit discussion to the highly desirable White-Euro females who tend to be targeted by divorced Jewish moneymeisters.
Reginald: Diluting Jewry with Euro genes and close Euro blood relationships could have the positive effect of lessening the fanaticism of the Jewish community's hostility toward Europeans.
Jewishness is matrilineal. Jewish males do not have the power to "dilute Jewry". Only Jewish females have that power.
Reginald: do you have any evidence that the products of Jewish male/Euro female pairings are financially worse off than the products of Euro male/Jewish female pairings?
That's not what I said or what I meant. What I meant was that Jewish ethnic networking on behalf of the offspring of such pairings relies on paternal nepotism and cannot benefit their future descendants.
Reginald: Seriously, has Ben Stiller had his career suffer in Hollywood because his mother was not Jewish, but instead of Irish descent?
Ben Stiller looks about as "Irish" as Woody Allen. He's slightly better looking than Woody, but still obviously Jewish. If he benefits from ethnic networking, it is clearly through the offices of daddy and/or because he's plainly Jewish in appearance.
Reginald: You have to understand that just because the word "intelligent" has positive connotations doesn't mean that a group of intelligent people isn't going to be a nightmare for everyone they come in contact with.
Right. But what I'm saying is that "intelligence" is not one of the primary traits responsible for Jewish socio-economic ascendancy. Those traits would be ethnocentrism, tribal loyalty, psychological aggression, and sheer cunning (which is not strictly equivalent to intelligence or IQ). Mildly above-average Ashkenazi intelligence plays a merely supportive role.
Reginald: Really, it's thanks to intelligent people (disproportionately Jewish but not entirely by any means) that all those poor civilians were incinerated by a nuclear bomb in Japan.
That's for sure. However, as I explained on this board long ago, the groundwork for an understanding of nuclear fission had already been laid by White scientists. The Jews piled into the field strictly because they wanted a weapon to use against their many enemies, real or imagined. Then they used their tribal influence to pressure the United States government into building and using that weapon.
Reginald: It's thanks to intelligent people (disproportionately Jewish but not entirely by any means) that the continued existence of the European genetic cluster is threatened by sophisticated media/propaganda campaigns encouraging race mixing and liberal attitudes toward immigration.
On the contrary, it was Jewish pressure that made the difference in changing US immigration law to our everlasting disadvantage and laying bare the White genome to rampant low-IQ contamination. Sure, the Jewish lobby had help from treasonous garbage like Teddy Kennedy, but "immigration reform" was a kosher imperative from day one.
Reginald: For one thing, I doubt that everything the Jews have done can be explained by a combination of ethnocentrism, street smarts and ethnic networking.
Doubt it all you want to. But in the social, political, and economic spheres, Jewish intelligence has played a merely supportive role. The driving force has been provided by ethnic cohesion, entitlement, aggression, and undying race hatred of non-Jews.
Reginald: What about [the] impressive per capita achievements [of Jews] in the hard sciences?
This is almost entirely due to the systematic Jewish displacement of Whites from academia. Even Einstein was open to accusations that he stole his ideas from scientists of White Euro descent. In any case, White men would surely have found the theory of relativity in short order had Einstein failed to take credit for it. After all, Whites built Western science from the ground up with only negligible Jewish participation.
Reginald: The fact that we are little the richer for all of this alleged Jewish brainpower is no argument against its existence.
Sure it is, when much of the evidence cited for it is the supposed value of alleged Jewish intellectual contributions to modern society.
Look, nobody here is denying that Ashkenazi Jews have a (slightly) above-average IQ. But they're not significant contributors to our intellectual or technological wealth, and should not be regarded as "more intelligent" than Whites. Our most valuable geniuses in virtually every field of intellectual endeavor have been genetically European, and rabid inbreeding and Talmudic eugenics were unnecessary to make that happen.
(Unfortunately, being the victims of protracted genetic attack, we may now require some amount of careful eugenic manipulation to repair the damage.)
+++
A bit of a tanget based on what Michael Santomauro said - I often wonder about jewish influence in academics, specifically the area of science, and how it influences us psychologically, often in ways we aren't aware of. Science and technology have such a profound impact on everyone's life in modern times, and it seems to me that some elements of the language and mindset of science have filtered down to most of us who are laymen. Those of us who aren't scientists often try to talk and act or even think like scientists, to one degree or another, even if we're salesmen or accountants or factory workers. We seem to be giving tribute to the most highly valued thinkers of our time through some sort of weird mimicry. Talking scientifically is seen as intelligent, and "elevates" us above our current station, so we give it a try. (It's a bit like when poor people used to wear gaudy clothes because they couldn't afford fancy clothes…like rich people. )
What's my point? Scientists like Stephen Gould or Jared Diamond go on TV (or write books for pop culture) and indoctrinate the masses on how to think "scientifically" (through example.) This usually involves disposing of everything anecdotal in your experience. A good scientist NEVER trusts outward appearances…a good scientist never trusts personal experience…in science, things are NEVER as they seem to be…you can't trust your eyes or ears or your sense of smell, you can ONLY trust "data", especially in social/racial/ethnic matters.
Think about it…even today, it's not all that uncommon to talk anecdotally with family, friends or neighbors about how rotten black neighborhoods are or how rude and pushy and greedy some east coast jews are. But outside those circles, forget it…you have no "proof" such things exist. You haven't "surveyed" a large enough population to come up with an "informed" opinion. Anecdotes are a no no, a sin in the religion of science.
At the risk of trying to sound scientific (I'm not) anthropologist Clifford Geertz contrasted the scientific from the "commonsensical" . With the commonsensical, things are accepted as being what they seem to be. I think it's safe to say that a good many scientists view common sense with contempt, as well as PEOPLE with common sense. But people's common sense can be overcome…by appealing to their "scientific" side.
And agendas can be fulfilled…and intelligent people can be made to do things that aren't in their best self-interest.
