[Paleopsych] A review of the book "Eugenics: A Reassessment by Richard Lynn, released 2002.
checker at panix.com
Sat Apr 2 15:58:05 UTC 2005
A review of the book "Eugenics: A Reassessment by Richard Lynn, released 2002.
Eugenics: A Reassessment by Richard Lynn, 2001. Published by Praeger
Press as part of the "Human Evolution, Behavior, and Intelligence"
series edited by Seymour W. Itzkoff.
This book is a remarkable achievement because it brings back eugenics
at a time when it has already arrived; but no one is admitting to its
triumphant return. Richard Lynn has finally announced its arrival and
has produced a remarkable work that is complete, a pleasure to read,
and leaves no doubt that we are entering a new era: humans are about
to go through the most rapid genetic transformation imaginable, and
the outcome of this apocalypse cannot even be imagined. Is this just
hype like the Y2K scare? Hardly: it is real and it is here to stay
and Lynn's book shows just how profound it will be. New human species
will be born, and a racial/species war will precede the ultimate
victory for those who have the ego-strength to see what is coming.
The Left, led by Marxists like Montagu, Boaz, Gould, Lewontin, Rose,
Kamin et al., captured the reins of ideological propaganda and
convinced the West that "race" did not exist and that eugenics was
pseudoscience. They managed to do this through sheer force of
character and the willing passiveness of the public to believe what
they were told. Repetition and deception along with moral duplicity
allowed these intellectual terrorists to neuter Western society into
believing in an egalitarian and false human nature. We are just now
freeing ourselves from those shackles that were placed upon us to keep
us from challenging the very concept of racial differences and group
The book covers eugenics from top to bottom so I will discuss just
some of the most interesting or informative aspects of the book.
First, Lynn finally puts to rest the notion that equates Nazism with
eugenics and eugenics with the Holocaust. Many scholars have
corrected this misinformation, and Lynn summarizes it elegantly. In
short, Nazi Germany did not have a sterilization program for the
mentally retarded or insane that was any broader in scope than other
countries at the time. Per capita, Sweden had sterilized far more
people, as did many other Western countries. When it came to
euthanasia, there was basically one purpose when beginning in 1939
they needed to free up resources and make room in the hospitals for
the war effort. Euthanasia had nothing to do with eugenics. And with
regards to the Holocaust, the Jews were killed because they were seen
to be behind the spreading of communism and they were viewed as a
highly intelligent and capable race of people who would compete with
Germany's goal of world domination. So as it turns out, Germany's
eugenics' program was never very developed or aggressive: they had war
on their minds. Other countries were much more assertive as eugenics
was supported by socialists as well as the general public. But to
make a case for Marxism in the last few decades, it was very
beneficial to link the defeated and hated Nazis with eugenics and
racism. When this stuck in the public's mind, radical
environmentalism was on its way to being largely unchallenged.
Today, this mindset is still in place. In numerous articles and
surveys, different racial groups are compared and typically the status
of Blacks is compared to that of Whites, and the disparity is blamed
always on racism or the government's failure to act strongly enough to
make everyone equal. Never is the point made that different racial
groups have incomes equivalent to their average IQs, with Blacks on
the bottom and Jews and East Asians at the top. It is always taken
for granted that different racial groups are on average equally
intelligent, and yet only sociologists and cultural anthropologists
still embrace this myth and perpetuate it through the media by
routinely issuing new studies and surveys that ignore genetic
differences. Lynn shatters the racial equality myth summarizing
succinctly what is known today. He even includes a formula for
estimating the expected intelligence of your children based on the
parents IQ and the average IQ of the general population that the
parents belong to.
He also tackles the "if everyone is intelligent, who will mow my
lawn?" argument. With numerous examples, explanations, and hypotheses
about a future world of geniuses, he puts this conundrum to rest. In
short, even geniuses are capable of doing the dishes and mowing the
lawn. If highly intelligent Jews can share the manual workload on an
Israeli Kibbutzim, then a eugenic state of geniuses can also. I would
also venture a guess from the evidence that the only intelligent
people who would resist doing their share of the more tedious tasks
would be those with the behavioral trait of low conscientiousness.
And as I will discuss later, this is the only behavioral trait that
probably has no benefit to society and should be bred out of the
general population anyway.
Which brings us to psychopathy, conscientiousness and agreeableness.
Once we all agree that a eugenics' program should reduce genetic
disease and raise general intelligence, the only question left is
should we tamper with human behavioral traits? Psychometricians,
astonishingly, have settled on the use of the Big Five behavioral
factors: conscientiousness, agreeableness, introversion-extroversion,
open-mindedness, and neuroticism. Lynn puts to rest, as do many other
psychometricians, any notion that the last three have any consequences
in the workplace in general. That is, many different combinations of
these three factors can be of benefit or a hindrance depending on the
task. So Lynn concentrates on the first two that in combination
results in a psychopathic personality.
He demonstrates convincingly that from all the available research,
psychopaths along with low intelligence are responsible for society's
problems with crime, drug addiction, unwed mothers, drug abuse, rape,
child abuse, unemployment, etc. These people are the underclass. And
they result from the combination of two behavioral traits. They
almost universally have low conscientiousness and agreeableness or
altruism. (Lynn explains that altruism would be a better term than
agreeableness but that term has now "stuck" as the common descriptor
for this behavioral trait). That is, people who are both highly
unconscientious and disagreeable are pathological, and both of these
traits are highly heritable.
From this observation, Lynn softly recommends that a eugenics' program
should include a reduction of both unconscientiousness and
disagreeableness. But I have to take issue with this recommendation.
My interpretation is that only unconscientiousness has no value in
modern society, and that its elimination will eliminate the
psychopaths, especially in a nation state with an extremely high
average intelligence. Such a society should be able to deal with the
occasionally exceptionally disagreeable person. There is no need to
get rid of disagreeableness because a highly altruistic state may be
extremely vulnerable to indoctrination and subjugation. This seems to
be why the West is now in a dysgenic spiral downward, the more
Scandinavian races have a maladaptive level of altruism that allows
others to become parasitical towards them. This is a dangerous
combination and though the society may benefit internally from
altruism it can also be overtaken by other racial groups who are far
less altruistic and benevolent.
Lynn then deals with the mechanisms for reducing genetic disease and
increasing intelligence. First, he points out that detractors of
eugenics are correct in their pessimism of completely eliminating
recessive genetic diseases because as they are reduced they become
ever more difficult to select against. But he notes that in ten
generations, half of all recessive genetic disease alleles could be
eliminated. This in combination with genetic testing of the fetus
could make the complete elimination of the alleles unnecessary. The
genetic disease itself would seldom be expressed in a child.
With regards to increasing intelligence, he makes a good case for how
relatively easy it is. Since the heritability of intelligence is so
high at around 80% compared to say behavioral factors around 50% or a
little less, intelligence is a no-brainer for eugenics. And with new
technologies, remarkable jumps can be made in just one generation. He
shows how if a normal couple would just genetically select the
potentially most intelligent embryos for implantation, the
intelligence of the children selected would increase by 15 IQ points.
Yes, 15 IQ points in every generation up to the theoretical maximum of
about 200 without any new mutations. All we need to do is identify
the intelligence genes, and this should be possible in just a few
shorts years (Plomin's prediction -- not Lynn's). Eugenic selection
for intelligence via genetic testing of embryos followed by IVF is
just a few years away. And even if it would cost a couple say
$100,000 per child, it would be a bargain in terms of savings in
education and increased earnings potential. And the advantages would
be passed on to every generation that follows! Now that is one hell
of a rate of return on your money. Spend it up front before the child
is even born, and the returns are forever.
Up until the last two chapters of the book, Lynn just provides us with
what eugenics can do, the mechanics, and ethical foundations for its
use. In these final chapters however he states what I also think is
the obvious but he is much more sanguine about the outcome. Let me
try to summarize his perspective and then I will embellish it.
Basically the West is too weak morally (I can't think of any better
term) to institute an effective eugenics' program. But the East is
capable of making these tough-minded decisions, and especially China.
They have already fully embraced a eugenics' policy and as the ruling
totalitarian oligarchs shift from communism to nationalism, this lone
nation with over a billion people will arise as the world power. They
will use a combination of eugenics with a population that is already
second to none in intelligence (aside from the Jews) and along with
their size will grow in power and technology. But here is where Lynn
and I differ. He thinks that once China has dominated the world, we
will enter a period of peace even if it is without democracy.
I see a different outcome, based on human nature. There is no point
having power unless one can use it to dominate others. As the Chinese
eugenic nation state expands, they will not make peace with other
races but they will instead subjugate others for financial gain. In
addition, they will use the females of other subjugated races to raise
their children. That is, human slaves will be used as surrogate
mothers. This new elite race of East Asians will not tolerate their
own women having to suffer the pains of bearing children when there is
a plentiful supply of breeders available. These slave breeders will
be kept in perfectly controlled environments for this breeding
purpose, to assure that the elite women do not have to suffer any
inconveniences. And after birth, East Asian professional caretakers
will raise the children so that again, the elite will not have to be
bothered by the inconvenience of annoying children. Sound
impossible? Read Lynn's book and see which scenario seems more
But of course, the above plausibility is not really even relevant.
What is important is that once eugenics becomes commonplace, and it is
recognized that the most intelligent races will dominate the world,
then the arms race in eugenics will commence. It may happen within
one nation state, it may happen by way of secret cults, it may happen
by the wealthiest only using the technology. But it will happen and
it will not happen equally to all races or peoples. And this is what
an evolutionary arms race is all about. The next 100 years will see a
new human species arise --- or the destruction of all humans. But one
thing is sure; it will not be peaceably negotiated away. Eugenics is
happening now! And it will be accelerating at an exponential rate
over the next few decades.
Matt Nuenke, July 2001
"Important note: You can get 20% off Eugenics: A Reassessment
(and all other books published by Praeger) by telling the operator
the 'source code,' which is F238. You can order by phone by
Richard Lynn along with Tatu Vanhanen have a new book coming out in
2002 entitled IQ and the wealth of Nations. In the Summer 2001 issue
of Mankind Quarterly they have published some of the findings that
will be presented in that book.
Following I have provided the 81 nations where he has looked at the
average IQ and the Gross Domestic Product, and it is clear that just
like an individual's intelligence has an impact on how successful a
person will become, nations also die or succeed depending on their
average intelligence. But first a few notes of interest on the
The "fitted GDP" is a perfect correlation with the average IQ. That
is, compare the "fitted GDP" to the actual "GDP" and there will be
some anomalies. For example, Qatar has a low average IQ but a high
GDP---they are a small oil rich nation with foreigners extracting and
exporting the oil for them. Another of course is the once Communist
and still Communist countries. They were destroyed economically by an
environmental determinist ideology. And it shows in the numbers. Then
there is the low intelligence of Ireland and Israel that seems like a
mistake. In the case of Ireland, selective migration has caused the
more intelligent Irish to emigrate, leaving the poor and less
intelligent farmers behind. In the case of Israel, the authors
explain, that Jews from many areas are of low intelligence along with
Palestinians. However, the Ashkenazi Jews of Eastern Europe who
dominate the politics of Israel and are the dominant Jews in the
United States have an average IQ of about 115.
And one other observation with regards to the average intelligence of
a nation and its GDP should be considered. Is it a homogeneous nation
or is there a ruling elite? If there is a separate small racial group
of highly intelligent people who can direct the nation, the GDP may be
higher than one would expect.
Anyway, we will need to wait for the book length analysis to get more
information on this fascinating study. But it is just one more way
that we can use to show that intelligence is important, and that some
countries are just too backward to expect them to join in a common
bond with the rest of humanity.
The following table lists the country, then the average IQ, then the
gross domestic product (GDP), and then the fitted GDP. The fitted GDP
is just the theoretical straight line correlation between IQ and GDP.
For example, China should have a GDP of 16,183 based on the average
intelligence of the population, but because of Communism, they only
have a GDP of 3,105.
Country average IQ GDP fitted GDP
More information about the paleopsych