Like "I, Claudius" or "I, Robot," only even more pompous!

That's "Steve Sailer, evolcon," not "evilcon," dammit!

E-mail me



My Blog Archive




Click Here to Pay Learn More Amazon Honor System

Steve Sailer

Live not by lies. - Solzhenitsyn

To see what is in front of one's nose needs a constant struggle. - Orwell

Knowledge is good. - Animal House

Truth is better for humanity than ignorance, lies, or spin. And it's more interesting. - Sailer

All My Articles in Chronological Order      Immigration      Darwinism      Race      Sports      Gender      IQ      Mexico      Genetics
Politics      Crime      Interracial Marriage      iSteve Blog Archives      My UPI Articles      Book Reviews      Movie Reviews      Contact

Who is Steve Sailer? I'm a journalist, movie critic for The American Conservative, columnist, and founder of the Human Biodiversity Institute, which runs the invitation-only Human Biodiversity discussion group for top scientists and public intellectuals. 

iSteve Blog

iSteve.Blogspot Archives & Comments

E-mail me




For technical reasons, I'm no longer blogging at this website.


I am now blogging at:


Please go to and bookmark it.


I will continue to maintain my archives of my published articles here, and will eventually get around to adding the 100 or so most recent articles. But no more blogging here! Go to to read my latest blog postings.




Well, I'm not dead yet - Instead, I just disappeared from blogging for the last six days because of computer problems that are much too tedious to describe. Anyway, my current plan is to simplify my Rube Goldberg scheme and only blog on my Blogspot location:


So, click above to get my latest bloggy goodness. 


Of course, as with anything involving computers, this simplification involves many complications. For example, I ought to transfer my list of links, since I know a lot of bloggers depend upon being on my list for a lot of their traffic. On the other hand, there's no quick way to do that. And, while I'm at it, I ought to try to bring some order to the list, grouping sites in intuitively obvious categories, promoting some to more prominent positions and demoting others to less attractive positions, pruning those who have stopped posting (but not deleting those who, like me, are merely going through a bit of a slump), and so on and so forth. Oh, man, what a headache ... especially for a world class bad decisionmaker and all-around procrastinator like me. So, yes, I will fix up the links eventually, but don't expect anything write away. If your site still isn't on the new list by, say, September 20, then email me.




My review of James R. Flynn's What Is Intelligence? Beyond the Flynn Effect -- On I offer the first review of the new book on the Flynn Effect by Flynn himself:


Despite hysterical politically-motivated attacks on them that have sometimes turned violent, researchers into human intelligence have by now produced a coherent and compelling scientific picture, as explained in books such as the 1994 best-seller The Bell Curve by Richard Herrnstein and Charles Murray.

With one exception.

For uncertain reasons, all over the world, raw IQ scores have been rising, on average at the rate of about 3 points per decade. Thus, a test performance that a half century ago would have ranked at the 84th percentile (a score of 115) now is only good enough for the 50th percentile (a score of 100).

When IQ test publishers revise and renormalize their exams every decade or two, they have to make scoring tougher to make the mean stay at 100.

This is very strange. One of the more dubious-sounding implications is that if you go far enough back into the past, the average person would have been a complete dolt, and the greatest genius of that earlier age would have been no smarter than George W. Bush or John Kerry.

Rising test scores were pointed out by Reed Tuddenham in 1948, when he compared the better performance on the U.S. military's IQ tests of the draftees of WWII compared to WWI.

In the early 1980s, James R. Flynn, an American-born political scientist at the University of Otago in New Zealand, began to call this phenomenon to academic and then public attention. In his honor, in The Bell Curve, Herrnstein and Murray christened rising IQ scores the "Flynn Effect".

Mainstream IQ researchers, who are used to being demonized when they are not being ignored, admire Flynn, who is politically a man of the left, for his fairness, geniality, insight, and devotion to advancing knowledge. The Flynn Effect has often been seized upon to dismiss IQ testing in general, especially by race-deniers who assume that it will cause racial gaps in IQ to converge out of existence. Flynn himself, however, has never joined the mob in unfairly attacking psychometrics—or psychometricians.

Nevertheless, the Flynn Effect did leave Flynn skeptical about IQ tests. Ulric Neisser wrote in The American Scientist in 1997: "Flynn concludes that the tests do not measure intelligence but only a minor sort of 'abstract problem-solving ability' with little practical significance."

But Flynn has now written a book offering his considered explanation of the Flynn Effect: What is Intelligence? Beyond the Flynn Effect. (The Psychometrics Centre at Cambridge University has posted online a lecture by Flynn summarizing his book.)

Strikingly, Flynn has changed his mind. He now sees the Flynn Effect not as undermining IQ testing, but as validating it. After decades of reflection, Flynn believes people really are more intelligent in some ways today — just as their raw IQ scores suggest. The reason: we get more mental exercise now than in olden times.   [More]




If this AP "news" article had been an online debate, Godwin's Law would have been invoked in the first 100 words. 

The Associated Press reminded us on Saturday, September 1, the 68th Anniversary of Nazi Switzerland's invasion of Poland, that the Swiss are still a bunch of Nazis. Let us never forget how the Swiss Nazi juggernaut steamrollered across Europe and is just waiting to pounce once again:


Swiss deportation policy draws criticism

By FRANK JORDANS, Associated Press Writer 
Sat Sep 1, 8:17 AM ET

GENEVA - The campaign poster was blatant in its xenophobic symbolism: Three white sheep kicking out a black sheep over a caption that read "for more security." The message was not from a fringe force in Switzerland's political scene but from its largest party. 

The nationalist Swiss People's Party is proposing a deportation policy that anti-racism campaigners say evokes Nazi-era practices. Under the plan, entire families would be expelled if their children are convicted of a violent crime, drug offenses or benefits fraud.

The party is trying to collect the 100,000 signatures needed to force a referendum on the issue. If approved in a referendum, the law would be the only one of its kind in Europe.

"We believe that parents are responsible for bringing up their children. If they can't do it properly, they will have to bear the consequences," Ueli Maurer, president of the People's Party, told The Associated Press.

Ronnie Bernheim of the Swiss Foundation against Racism and Anti-Semitism said the proposal was similar to the Nazi practice of "Sippenhaft" — or kin liability — whereby relatives of criminals were held responsible for his or her crimes and punished equally.

Similar practices occurred during Stalin's purges in the early days of the Soviet Union and the 1966-76 Cultural Revolution in China, when millions were persecuted for their alleged ideological failings.

"As soon as the first 10 families and their children have been expelled from the country, then things will get better at a stroke," said Maurer, whose party controls the Justice Ministry and shares power in an unwieldy coalition that includes all major parties.

He explained that his party has long campaigned to make deportation compulsory for convicted immigrants rather than an optional and rarely applied punishment.

The party claims foreigners — who make up about 20 percent of the population — are four times more likely to commit crimes than Swiss nationals.

Bernheim said the vast majority of Switzerland's immigrants are law-abiding and warned against generalizations.

"If you don't treat a complicated issue with the necessary nuance and care, then you won't do it justice," he said.

Commentators have expressed horror over the symbolism used by the People's Party to make its point.

"This way of thinking shows an obvious blood-and-soil mentality," read one editorial in the Zurich daily Tages-Anzeiger, calling for a broader public reaction against the campaign.

So far, however, there has been little popular backlash against the posters.

"We haven't had any complaints," said Maurer.

The city of Geneva — home to Switzerland's humanitarian traditions as well as the European headquarters of the United Nations and the U.N. Refugee Agency, or UNHCR — said the campaign was likely to stir up intolerance.

The UNHCR said the law would run contrary to the U.N. refugee convention, of which Switzerland is a signatory.

But observers say the People's Party's hardline stance on immigration could help it in the Oct. 21 national elections. In 2004, the party successfully campaigned for tighter immigration laws using the image of black hands reaching into a pot filled with Swiss passports.

"It's certainly no coincidence that the People's Party launched this initiative before the elections," said Oliver Geden, a political scientist at the Berlin Institute for International and Security Affairs.

He said provocative campaigns such as this had worked well for the party in the past.

"The symbol of the black sheep was clearly intended to have a double meaning. On the one hand there's the familiar idea of the black sheep, but a lot of voters are also going to associate it with the notion of dark-skinned drug dealers," said Geden.

The party also has put forward a proposal to ban the building of minaret towers alongside mosques. And one of its leading figures, Justice Minister Christoph Blocher, said he wants to soften anti-racism laws because they prevent freedom of speech.


Clearly, their support for freedom of speech proves that Nazi blood still runs thick in Swiss veins.




What we're really interested in: Science is in the business of making predictions, but the better it gets at predicting anything, the more boring those predictions are for us. For example, I predict that the sun will set at the O'Hare Airport in Chicago today at 7:26 pm CDT. When you think of all the effort that has gone into astronomical observation and prediction over the millennia (for example, Stonehenge), that's an incredible feat the human race has achieved to be able to accurately predict that. 

It's also phenomenally boring.

Now, here's a different prediction: Republican nominee Mike Huckabee will outpoll Democratic nominee Bill Richardson 51%-47% in the November 2008 Presidential election. "What an idiot!" you say, "Don't you know that the Clintons will stop at nothing to get back to the White House? Richardson and Huckabee? You obviously don't know anything about the election!" And you're right. I don't. I'm not even sure where Huckabee is from. I think it's that state, you know, the one you drive through to get to that other state.   

Now, here are some more predictions. USC will not finish #1 in college football this season. Instead, Rutgers will bring the national title home to Delaware. (Or maybe to Connecticut, depending on where, precisely, Rutgers is located. Assuming it's located somewhere. Maybe it's like the DeVry Institute and is located everywhere. But I digress.) On the other hand, USC will win the NCAA basketball championship next spring behind frosh sensation OJ Mayo.

"What a jerk!" you exclaim, "Everybody knows that USC's linebacking corps is the most devastating in college football since Penn State's back in 1987." Well, I don't know that. In fact, I know barely anything about college football these days. 

But the point is that, unlike the sunset forecast, these predictions are interesting, as brainless as they are. The reason that making up nonsense off the top of my head about elections and sports is interesting is because nobody can predict accurately sports and far-off elections with a lot of candidates. Sports, especially, are designed to be hard to predict just so that they will keep our interest. The same with gambling. Randomness isn't natural in the world, at least above the subatomic level. It takes a lot of work to develop gambling devices that are close to random, but a roulette wheel is more interesting than betting when the sun will go down because it's hard to predict.

You often hear that the social sciences aren't real sciences like astronomy because they can't predict anything. But that's not true. Indeed, I'll make a social science prediction for 25 years into the future. I predict that in the year 2032, the students at the schools in Beverly Hills will enjoy higher average scores on statewide and nationwide standardized tests than the students at schools in Compton. Anybody want to bet against me?

I've got a million more predictions like that. For example, in 2032, the children of today's unskilled immigrants will be more of a burden on society than the children of today's skilled immigrants. (That seems like an important use of social science -- to make predictions extremely important for choosing the optimal immigration legislation, right?)

"Well, sure," you say, "Of course. But those predictions are boring. And depressing. In fact, it's in bad taste to mention things that we all sort of know are true but that we really don't want to think about. Who wants to hear predictions like that? Tell us something interesting."

Okay, on December 31, 2032, the Dow Jones Average will stand at 107,391. But just one year later it will have crashed, in the wake of Black Wednesday, all the way to 33,828. But by 2042, during the bubble following a major breakthrough in cold fusion, the Dow will have reached the 201,537 barrier.

"Now that's better! That's the kind of prediction we like: specific and exciting. Of course, you're probably just randomly punching numbers on your keypad, but we forgive you because you're not boring and depressing us anymore."




 My old movie reviews: Here are reviews of three 2006 Oscar winners from The American Conservative that have never appeared online before:


- The Lives of Others

- The Last King of Scotland

- The Queen 




Designer color names: One of the challenges faced by fashion designers is coming up with new names for the same old colors. For example, here is a sandal whose strap color an unfashion-forward individual like myself might describe as "blackish" but a professional designer describes as "Ballistic Anthracite." What the hell is that? It sounds like a weapons system from one of those sci-fi alternate histories of the Civil War in which the War Between the States finally ends in 1887 when Pennsylvania wipes out Virginia's fleet of steam-engine tanks with a salvo of coal-powered missiles.




Carol M. Swain: My new column is a review of the anthology she edited:


Yale Law School Professor Peter H. Schuck observes:


"In a polity in which only 17 percent of the public thinks that immigration levels should be higher and 39 percent thinks they should be lower, one would expect that at least some legal scholars who write about immigration issues would favor restriction. If so, one would be wrong. In over two decades of immersion in immigration scholarship, I have not encountered a single academic specialist on immigration law who favors reducing the number of legal immigrants admitted each year." ...


So, Carol M. Swain, a law and political science professor at Vanderbilt, has done the academic world a service (although one it probably won't appreciate) with her new book Debating Immigration. She brings together 16 chapters from academic and think tank luminaries such as Nathan Glazer, Amitai Etzioni, Douglas S. Massey, and Steven A. Camarota, along with lively essays from journalists Peter Brimelow and Jonathan Tilove.

is one of the more unusual and admirable scholars in public policy. Growing up black and poor in rural Virginia, one of twelve children, she dropped out of 9th grade and married at 16. In her mid-20s she started back to school. Eventually, she earned tenure at Princeton as an expert on how Congress operates.

Her views are difficult to categorize politically. I would say she's an advocate of black enlightened self-interest, left of center on economics, right of center on culture. For example, her 2002 book The New White Nationalism sensibly advocated depriving white nationalists such as Jared Taylor of their best issues by restricting immigration and cutting back on affirmative action, especially for immigrants and affluent blacks. Needless to say, that hasn’t happened.  




Best ... scientists ... ever -- Anthropologist John Hawks offers some good suggestions:


Don't get me wrong, I like physics as much as anybody. But once your list includes Newton, Einstein, and Maxwell, and then you throw in Galileo, well there's not much room for anything else. None at all if you take Darwin as a given.

So I decided to do something a little different: What five scientists have had the greatest impact on human life? Yes, Newton was great, but gravity goes on without him. 

Many later discoveries stood on his shoulders, but Newton's achievements were far more intellectual than practical. I'm looking for people whose accomplishments saved lives, prevented wars, stopped hunger, or released people from endless drudgery. This isn't a list of inventors -- if it were, there would be a lot of ancient inventions like the moldboard plow that deserve more attention than anything modern. It's a list of scientists whose impact stretched across many fields, and without whom life today would likely be worse.

1. R. A. Fisher. His work in population genetics laid the foundations for the vast productivity increases of twentieth-century agriculture. He was far from alone in this, but he stood apart from his contemporaries by inventing many of the statistical methods that would come to define scientific hypothesis testing. Without Fisher's innovations in statistics, large-scale medical research studies would be meaningless. All this after he established the basis for Mendelian inheritance of continuous characters.


Fisher strikes me as the Newton of the 20th Century: the scientist / mathematical innovator.

For the rest of Hawks' list, click here.




Will the NYT ever report anything bad about their blogger Steve Levitt? Here's the abstract of a paper in press by economist Ted Joyce, followed by Joyce's cogent explanation of why it's important to keep harping on this subject.


A Simple Test of Abortion and Crime
Ted Joyce
Baruch College and Graduate Center
City University of New York
National Bureau of Economic Research

Forthcoming in Review of Economics and Statistics

A Simple Test of Abortion and Crime


I replicate Donohue and Levitt’s results for violent and property crime arrest rates and then apply their data and specification to an analysis of age-specific homicide rates and murder arrest rates. The coefficients on the abortion rate have the wrong sign for two of the four measures of crime and none is statistically significant at conventional levels. In the second half of the paper, I present alternative tests of abortion and crime that attempt to mitigate problems of endogeneity and measurement error. I use the legalization of abortion following the 1973 decision in Roe v. Wade in order to exploit two sources of variation: between-state changes in abortion rates pre and post Roe, and cross-cohort differences in exposure to legalized abortion. I ind no meaningful association between abortion and age-specific crime rates among cohorts born in the years just before and after abortion became legal.

I. Introduction

The debate as to whether legalized abortion lowers crime leaped from academic journals to mainstream discourse with the huge success of Freakonomics.1 In the Chapter titled, “Where Have All the Criminals Gone?” Levitt and Dubner summarize academic work by Levitt and coauthor John Donohue, which shows that a one-standard deviation increase in the abortion rate lowers homicide rates by 31 percent and can explain upwards of 60 percent of the recent decline in murder.2 If one accepts these estimates, then legalized abortion has saved more than 51,000 lives between 1991 and 2001, at a total savings of $105 billion. But the policy implications go beyond crime. If abortion lowers homicide rates by 20 to 30 percent, then it is likely to have affected an entire spectrum of outcomes associated with well-being: infant health, child development, schooling, earnings and marital status. Similarly, the policy implications are broader than abortion. Other interventions that affect fertility control and that lead to fewer unwanted births—contraception or sexual abstinence—have huge potential payoffs. In short, a causal relationship between legalized abortion and crime has such significant ramifications for social policy and at the same time is so controversial, that further assessment of the identifying assumptions and their robustness to alternative strategies is warranted.


The New York Times more or less sets the agenda for the rest of the news media. If the NYT decides a story is fit to print, much of the the rest of the press will soon decide, what do you know!, that the topic deserves coverage. But if a tree falls in the forest and the NYT doesn't cover it ... This means the NYT has a particular responsibility to avoid giving in to conflicts of interest, which they have clearly succumbed to over the last two years in their refusal to report on any of the controversies swirling around their star columnist turned blogger Steven D. Levitt. 




Graduate Record Exam scores by graduate field of study: A reader sends along this table from the Graduate Record Exam from ETS giving average scores by intended field in study in grad school. He includes an estimate of IQ from one of the popular conversion tables, although he didn't tell me which one. 

One problem I saw was that the mean score for the Quantitative section is so much higher than for the Verbal section, and the standard deviation is also larger for Quant, that the combined scores were biased in favor of highly quantitative fields. So, I added three more columns on the right that show difference fro the mean in standard deviations and just take the average for verbal and quantitative compared to their separate means. That seems fair, since there's no evidence that verbal intelligence correlates lower with general intelligence, and it may well be the best surrogate for the g factor. So, that's how I sorted it, which moves philosophy up into second place behind physics.

That reminds me of how I wrote a review of a book by David Stove in 1999 making gentle fun of philosophy (well, maybe not that gentle: I referred to the "uselessness of philosophy"). I received a number of superbly articulate and intensely argued emails telling me I didn't know what I was talking about. You'll notice I've drawn in my horns on this topic ever since!

This table may not be fair to business students since perhaps the better ones tend to take the GMAT to apply to MBA schools. 


Graduate Record Examination Scores
Mean 465 584
Standard Deviation 117 149
Verbal Quant Sum IQ Verbal SD Quant SD Avg. SD
Physics & astronomy 533 736 1269 133 0.58 1.02 0.80
Philosophy 590 638 1228 129 1.07 0.36 0.72
Mathematical Sciences 502 733 1235 130 0.32 1.00 0.66
Materials Engineering 494 727 1221 129 0.25 0.96 0.60
Economics 503 706 1209 128 0.32 0.82 0.57
Chemical Engineering 485 726 1211 128 0.17 0.95 0.56
Other Engineering 493 714 1207 128 0.24 0.87 0.56
Mechanical Engineering 469 724 1193 126 0.03 0.94 0.49
Other Humanities & Art 563 599 1162 124 0.84 0.10 0.47
Physical Sciences 486 697 1183 125 0.18 0.76 0.47
Engineering 468 719 1187 126 0.03 0.91 0.47
Electrical Eng 459 726 1185 126 (0.05) 0.95 0.45
Banking & finance 467 711 1178 125 0.02 0.85 0.43
Chemistry 486 680 1166 124 0.18 0.64 0.41

[To read the rest, click the "Permalink" below ...]




What's the opposite of the sunk cost fallacy? The famous sunk cost fallacy is a particularly popular justification for throwing good money and blood after bad in a war like Iraq. But the U.S. abandonment of South Vietnam during Watergate and its aftermath is a clear example of of the lesser known converse to the sunk cost fallacy. 

In 1974, it was clear that South Vietnam's survival hadn't been worth the sunk cost we had expended during 1961-1973. Yet, sunk costs are sunk. What we needed to think about were marginal costs. The events of 1972, in which American airpower (finally made effective by the mass use of laser-guided smart bombs) and South Vietnamese manpower had turned back a massive North Vietnamese mechanized invasion (which, in itself, showed that we had finally largely defeated the indigenous guerilla movement) at the cost of only 300 Americans killed in action for all of 1972 would seem to show that the marginal cost to America of giving South Vietnam a fair shot at surviving the next North Vietnamese offensive would be relatively low. Yet, being sick of Vietnam, we failed to focus on the affordable marginal cost and got hung up emotionally on the catastrophic sunk cost.

The NVA tried a tentative offensive in December 1974, following the Democrats midterm election triumphs, found that the US wouldn't provide air support, so launched a massive offensive in March 1975. The South Vietnamese collapsed about as quickly as France in 1940.




A job Americans just won't do! It dawns on Matthew Yglesias that if border enforcement succeeded in driving up wages for the unskilled, some jobs wouldn't be economical to do anymore. But, he doesn't go far enough:

An early scene in "The Man Who Would Be King" takes place in the office of an English colonial administrator in India. To stay cool, he had a big fan over his head flapped by a servant via a string attached to the sitting servant's toe. That's pretty awesome! If wages weren't so damn high here in America, I could have my own Untouchable toe-fanning servant too, instead of having to use my boring, totally unawesome electric fan. I could impress all my friends. (Well, maybe not the friends I already have, but if I had enough servants, I could assign some of them to get me new friends who would be impressed.)

Think of all the other hundreds of millions of jobs that could be created in America if wages fell to 19th Century Indian levels!

Of course, I couldn't actually afford to pay my toe-fanning flunky the full cost of what it would take for him and his family to live in America, but I believe the externalities of my servant's cost of living should be borne by the public at large, not by me. Thus, my worker's kids should get free schooling, the whole family should get free health care at the emergency room, his tenement should get fire and police protection, he should drive without car insurance, etc. Why shouldn't I cost shift my conveniences on to everybody else?




Law School Affirmative Action: Gail Herriot writes in the Wall Street Journal: 


Affirmative Action Backfires
Have racial preferences reduced the number of black lawyers?

Sunday, August 26, 2007 12:01 a.m. EDT

Three years ago, UCLA law professor Richard Sander published an explosive, fact-based study of the consequences of affirmative action in American law schools in the Stanford Law Review. Most of his findings were grim, and they caused dismay among many of the champions of affirmative action--and indeed, among those who were not.

Easily the most startling conclusion of his research: Mr. Sander calculated that there are fewer black attorneys today than there would have been if law schools had practiced color-blind admissions--about 7.9% fewer by his reckoning. He identified the culprit as the practice of admitting minority students to schools for which they are inadequately prepared. In essence, they have been "matched" to the wrong school.

No one claims the findings in Mr. Sander's study, "A Systemic Analysis of Affirmative Action in American Law Schools," are the last word on the subject. Although so far his work has held up to scrutiny at least as well as that of his critics, all fair-minded scholars agree that more research is necessary before the "mismatch thesis" can be definitively accepted or rejected.

Unfortunately, fair-minded scholars are hard to come by when the issue is affirmative action. Some of the same people who argue Mr. Sander's data are inconclusive are now actively trying to prevent him from conducting follow-up research that might yield definitive answers. If racial preferences really are causing more harm than good, they apparently don't want you--or anyone else--to know.

Take William Kidder, a University of California staff advisor and co-author of a frequently cited attack of Sander's study. When Mr. Sander and his co-investigators sought bar passage data from the State Bar of California that would allow analysis by race, Mr. Kidder passionately argued that access should be denied, because disclosure "risks stigmatizing African American attorneys." At the same time, the Society of American Law Teachers, which leans so heavily to the left it risks falling over sideways, gleefully warned that the state bar would be sued if it cooperated with Mr. Sander.

Sadly, the State Bar's Committee of Bar Examiners caved under the pressure. The committee members didn't formally explain their decision to deny Mr. Sander's request for these data (in which no names would be disclosed), but the root cause is clear: Over the last 40 years, many distinguished citizens--university presidents, judges, philanthropists and other leaders--have built their reputations on their support for race-based admissions. Ordinary citizens have found secure jobs as part of the resulting diversity bureaucracy.

If the policy is not working, they, too, don't want anyone to know. ...

As a result, there is now a serious gap in academic credentials between minority and non-minority law students across the pecking order, with the average black student's academic index more than two standard deviations below that of his average white classmate.

Not surprisingly, such a gap leads to problems. Students who attend schools where their academic credentials are substantially below those of their fellow students tend to perform poorly.

The reason is simple: While some students will outperform their entering academic credentials, just as some students will underperform theirs, most students will perform in the range that their academic credentials predict. As a result, in elite law schools, 51.6% of black students had first-year grade point averages in the bottom 10% of their class as opposed to only 5.6% of white students. Nearly identical performance gaps existed at law schools at all levels. This much is uncontroversial.

Supporters of race-based admissions argue that, despite the likelihood of poor grades, minority students are still better off accepting the benefit of a preference and graduating from a more prestigious school. But Mr. Sander's research suggests that just the opposite may be true--that law students, no matter what their race, may learn less, not more, when they enroll in schools for which they are not academically prepared. Students who could have performed well at less competitive schools may end up lost and demoralized. As a result, they may fail the bar.

Specifically, Mr. Sander found that when black and white students with similar academic credentials compete against each other at the same school, they earn about the same grades. Similarly, when black and white students with similar grades from the same tier law school take the bar examination, they pass at about the same rate.

Yet, paradoxically, black students as a whole have dramatically lower bar passage rates than white students with similar credentials. Something is wrong.   

The Sander study argued that the most plausible explanation is that, as a result of affirmative action, black and white students with similar credentials are not attending the same schools. The white students are more likely to be attending a school that takes things a little more slowly and spends more time on matters that are covered on the bar exam. They are learning, while their minority peers are struggling at more elite schools.

Mr. Sander calculated that if law schools were to use color-blind admissions policies, fewer black law students would be admitted to law schools (3,182 students instead of 3,706), but since those who were admitted would be attending schools where they have a substantial likelihood of doing well, fewer would fail or drop out (403 vs. 670). In the end, more would pass the bar on their first try (1,859 vs. 1,567) and more would eventually pass the bar (2,150 vs. 1,981) than under the current system of race preferences. Obviously, these figures are just approximations, but they are troubling nonetheless.

Mr. Sander has his critics--some thoughtful, some just strident--but so far none has offered a plausible alternative explanation for the data. Of course, Mr. Sander doesn't need to be proven 100% correct for his research to be devastating news for affirmative-action supporters.

Suppose the consequences of race-based admissions turn out to be a wash--neither increasing nor decreasing the number of minority attorneys. In that case, few people would think it worth the costs, not least among them the human costs that result from the failure of the supposed beneficiaries to graduate and pass the bar.

Under current practices, only 45% of blacks who enter law school pass the bar on their first attempt as opposed to over 78% of whites. Even after multiple tries, only 57% of blacks succeed. The rest are often saddled with student debt, routinely running as high as $160,000, not counting undergraduate debt. How great an increase in the number of black attorneys is needed to justify these costs?


A friend of mine wasted a decade of his life going to law school and working as a hospital orderly while flunking the bar exam nine or ten times before giving up. If he'd become a salesman out of college, he might have been making six figures by then.

For blacks, the 43% of black law students who never pass the bar exam represent a well-above average group who could have used their 20s to do something more productive. 

Speaking of academic affirmative action, a reader writes regarding Barack Obama's fluctuating personality:


I would be willing to bet a small amount of money that Obama's book was an outgrowth of his college and grad school admissions essays rather than a reflection of reality and hence of cognitive issues. However, I also agree that if you do not take into consideration the fascinating warping of reality that the college admissions process engenders, he might seem like a basket case.


That makes a lot of sense. That reminds me of an earlier reader's comment on Obama's book:


Everyone who gets into Harvard Law School has to have The Rap.

They have to have the story of teen angst, commitment to healing the world, good deeds, and preferably a healthy dose of some sort of conflict in the real world that gave them some special insight into human nature that makes them unique and diverse. Not TOO conflicted, however, since a felony conviction will prevent you from becoming a lawyer.

In my class, a year after Obama arrived, there was The Photojournalist from Nicaragua, who saw human suffering and experienced Life and Death first hand. There was also The Fly Fisherman, a guy who graduated from college and fly fished across the USA for a couple years, hitchhiking, living in the wilds, experiencing Water and the Land closehand and coming to a more true and full appreciation of Man and Nature.

Obama's autobiography is a book-length Harvard Law School Rap. It has the manufactured conflict, the manufactured struggling, the manufactured multiculturalism with a smidgen of Tragic Mulatto and Man Torn Between Two Cultures, etc. Of course no one in the admissions office ever challenges any individual's Rap since no one has the time, energy or enthusiasm. Think of it the same way you think of a fifty word High Concept movie pitch, like those studio scenes at the beginning of The Player.

Having expanded his Rap with more local color to make his book, all he has done is dig himself a deeper hole of deceit. Harvard won't fact-check student admission essays, but reporters will.


Let's try to re-engineer the getting into the Ivy League process from Obama's point of view. He wants to get into all these fancy colleges with affirmative action programs, such as Occidental, Columbia, and Harvard Law School. But is he really authentically African-American enough to get a boost from the Admissions Committee? 

Although everybody talks about diversity in general all the time, the only kind of diversity that really interests white people are blacks. Look at the faltering Presidential campaign of Bill Richardson. He's a governor, he has a resume a lot like the first George W. Bush's, and he's 3/4ths Mexican (the other 1/4th is upper crust WASP) and grew up in Mexico City for the first 13 years of his life. And nobody in the media cares because he's not black like Obama.

If Obama was growing up today, he'd figure out that although the elite colleges talk about diversity as if they mean they're lifting up out of the ghettoes the great-great-grandchildren of the slaves, the truth is that they've pretty much given up on urban African-American males who aren't athletes, as  -- as Harvard's Jamaican and Jewish Lani Guinier (who herself looks like the late Gilda Radner's half-sister) has documented. Ivy Leagues blacks are increasingly West Indian or African or European or mixed race or all of the above. For example, when Princeton decided to boost their African-American studies reputation, they expensively raided Harvard for philosopher Anthony Appiah, who is the grandson of the famous 1940s British Chancellor of the Exchequer Sir Stafford Cripps. But, hey, he's sorta black (via his Ghanian prince father), so that's good enough!

But back then, Obama might well have worried that he wasn't really "black" enough to impress the admissions committees. First, his Mom was white. Second, his Dad wasn't the descendent of slaves, he was the son of a prosperous Kenyan landowner. Third, his Dad abandoned him as an infant and he was brought up by white relatives and a little bit by an Indonesian guy. (Now, you might think that Indonesia is really diverse, but, trust me, nobody in America cares about Indonesia at all.) Fourth, he was a preppie from paradise. Hawaii is one place where the one-drop rule of determining race doesn't apply, so -- horrors! -- Honolulu Obama might actually think of himself more as being mixed than as being black!

So, you could imagine the thoughts going through his head when sat down to write his Columbia and Harvard Law application essays.

On the other hand, he really did walk the black activist walk, moving to Chicago for a few years to try to organize inner city blacks to get more goodies out of the government. And he has spent 20 years sitting in a pew at a leftist Afrocentrist church listening to the Rev. Wright stick it to whitey in his sermons. I've never seen much evidence that Obama, who spent his early 20s reading Nietzsche, believes in all that "I am the redeemer and the life" business. He's pretty upfront about his having to join a church because blacks don't trust ambitious atheists. And, he genuinely seems to get a major charge out of the racial exclusiveness and solidarity that he finds at his racialist church.




Did Obama undergo Cognitive Behavioral Therapy? A reader has sent me a theory about why Barack Obama's personality seems so different today than when he wrote his first autobiography in 1995, that, while highly speculative, sounds not implausible.

Since I don't watch television news, I'd never seen Barack Obama on video until after I read his 1995 autobiography Dreams from My Father: A Story of Race and Inheritance. Thus, I developed a rather different perspective on Obama's personality than the multitudes whose opinion was molded by seeing him on TV. Rather than seeing him as "comfortable in his own skin" (a phrase common among those who know him from TV), his memoir showed a supremely uncomfortable 33-year-old who was "a literary artist of considerable power in plumbing his deep reservoirs of self-pity and resentment, an unfunny Evelyn Waugh. ...Obama has a depressive’s fine eye for the disillusioning detail. ... The book’s chief weakness is that its main character—Obama himself—is a bit of a drip, a humor-impaired Holden Caulfield whose preppie angst is fueled by racial regret. (Obama has a knack for irony, but of a strangely humorless flavor.)"

Now, Waugh was an infinitely more interesting person than the man who was Prime Minister three times during Waugh's early career from 1925-37, yet who is barely remember today. (Can you name that Tory PM? Waugh is now mentioned about 3.5 times more on the Internet than that Prime Minister.) Waugh was a man of near genius, but I've never heard of anyone ever considering him as a potential Prime Minister. The idea seems ludicrous. And that's about the same impression I took away from Obama's first memoir -- a talented and highly interesting man, but not at all what you'd look for in a President.

Lots of people who hadn't read Obama's autobiography were outraged by my article about his book. They'd seen him on TV, where he looked very Presidential, so his book couldn't possibly be like I said it was.

Kevin Drum of the liberal Washington Monthly, however, plowed all the way through Obama's first book and reported back similarly, although Drum was less sympathetical and more distrustful than I was, but we seemed to be in agreement that twelve years ago Obama hadn't portrayed himself as the kind of emotionally stable individual you'd want in the White House. Drum wrote:


Obama routinely describes himself feeling the deepest, most painful emotions imaginable (one event is like a "fist in my stomach," for example, and he "still burned with the memory" a full year after a minor incident in college), but these feelings seem to be all out of proportion to the actual events of his life, which are generally pretty pedestrian. Is he describing his real feelings? Is he simply making the beginning writer's mistake of thinking that the way to convey emotion is to use lots of adjectives? Or is something else going on?... 

There's just something very peculiar about the book. I can't put my finger entirely on what it is, but for all the overwrought language that Obama employs on page after page, there's very little insight into what he believes and what really makes him tick. It was almost as if Obama was admitting to his moodiness and angst less as a way of letting us know who he is than as a way of guarding against having to really tell us. By the time I was done, I felt like I knew less about him than before.


But, clearly, Obama isn't today the person portrayed in his first book. For one thing, he now has a mild sense of humor. Perhaps he never was who he claimed in 1995 to be -- we now know his depiction of his Hawaiian days was quite distorted. 

Or, perhaps he has changed. One possibility is that he goes through moderate hypomanic and depressive cycles. This is quite common among high achievers. The secret to winning your place in history is often to have an up cycle coincide by luck with a time when intense action is needed. 

But, another possibility is that he's done something to improve himself. A reader writes:


You should catch the Daily Show at 11. Not so much what Obama has to say, but just watching how comfortable he is in his own skin. I thought about you when Stewart showed him the headline, "Angry Obama the Pothead Is Not How They Remember Him In Hawaii", his reaction was deep and genuine laughter, with no sign of self-consciousness or defensiveness.

From use of a throwaway use of the phrase, "push back against the habits of thought", I think I know why "Angry Obama" seems so mellow, he's gone through therapy (Cognitive Behavioral Therapy I'd guess-- who knows, maybe he did it Cary Grant style) and I think his shrink did the trick.

Habits of thought is a buzzword that you'll hear from CBT and Positive Psychology terms just as (to put it in California terms) someone talking about Thetans is probably a Scientologist. …

As for "habits of thought", here's how the CBT folks use the term, "But Dr. Seligman believes that explanatory style can be changed. In a recent study of depressed patients he found that cognitive therapy - a technique that identifies and corrects erroneous habits of thought -changed the style of the patients from pessimistic to optimistic, and that the change persisted one year after therapy ended."

A google of "habits of thought" and "Obama" shows he used the expression in his second book, The Audacity of Hope


"each successive year will make you more intimately acquainted with all of your flaws - the blind spots, the recurring habits of thought that may be genetic or may be environmental, but that will almost certainly worsen with time, as surely as the hitch in your walk turns to pain in your hip."


It seems to me that between book 1 and book 2, Barry had his head worked on and it took. In this interview, he comes across as a good guy.


CBT isn't Freudian witchdoctoring. It has a good track record of helping people with moderate emotional problems get themselves out of the ruts they're stuck in. The Wikipedia article on it says:


A Cognitive Behavioral Therapy (CBT) is a psychotherapy based on modifying cognitions, assumptions, beliefs and behaviors, with the aim of influencing disturbed emotions. The general approach developed out of behavior modification, Cognitive Therapy and Rational Emotive Behavior Therapy, and has become widely used to treat neurosis psychopathology, including mood disorders and anxiety disorders. The particular therapeutic techniques vary according to the particular kind of client or issue, but commonly include keeping a diary of significant events and associated feelings, thoughts and behaviors; questioning and testing cognitions, assumptions, evaluations and beliefs that might be unhelpful and unrealistic; gradually facing activities which may have been avoided; and trying out new ways of behaving and reacting. Relaxation and distraction techniques are also commonly included. CBT is widely accepted as an evidence and empirically based, cost-effective psychotherapy for many disorders and psychological problems. It is sometimes used with groups of people as well as individuals, and the techniques are also commonly adapted for self-help manuals and, increasingly, for self-help software packages.


If Obama has been helped by Cognitive Behavioral Therapy, or something else, he should tell the public. His endorsement could do a lot of good by encouraging others to try it. 

If he had therapy, the most likely point was in the 18 months following his defeat by Bobby Rush when he challenged the Congressman in the 2000 primary. Obama's Harvard credentials had played well in the Hyde Park district he represented in the Illinois legislature, but more typical blacks in Rush's South Side district found Obama stuck up and unlikable. In his latest book, in the next sentence after mentioning "habits of thought," Obama goes on:


In me, one of those flaws had proven to be a chronic restlessness; an inability to appreciate, no matter how well things were going, those blessings that were right there in front of me. It's a flaw that is endemic to modern life, I think -- endemic, too, in the American character -- and one that is nowhere more evident than in the field of politics. Whether politics actually encourages the trait or simply attracts those who possess it is unclear. Lyndon Johnson, who knew much about both politics and restlessness, once said that every man is trying to either live up to his father's expectations or make up for his father's mistakes, and I suppose that may explain my particular malady as well as anything else.

In any event, it was as a consequence of that restlessness that I decided to challenge a sitting Democratic incumbent for his congressional seat in the 2000 election cycle. It was an ill-considered race, and I lost badly -- the sort of drubbing that awakens you to the fact that life is not obliged to work out as you'd planned. A year and a half later, the scars of that loss sufficiently healed ...

Denial, anger, bargaining, despair -- I'm not sure I went through all the stages prescribed by the experts. At some point, though, I arrived at acceptance -- of my limits, and, in a way, my mortality. I refocused on my work in the state senate and took satisfaction from the reforms and initiatives that my position afforded. I spent more time at home, and watched my daughters grow, and properly cherished my wife, and thought about my long-term financial obligations. I exercised, and read novels, and came to appreciate how the earth rotated around the sun and the seasons came and went without any particular exertions on my part.


Sounds like Obama was doing some emotional therapy -- either self-directed or with a counselor. From a Google search, it doesn't seem like anyone has ever raised the topic of whether Obama has had therapy, but it hardly seems unlikely in someone so introspective. 

We have a destructive prejudice in America against politicians admitting to getting any help for emotional problems, even though roughly half of all Presidents appear to have had one kind of mental problem or another (e.g., Lincoln and depression).

Indeed, perhaps Obama's beautiful but disturbing first book chronicling his obsession with his father was written under the influence of some quasi-Freudian therapist who demanded that he obsess at vast length over his parents, while his more bland but reassuring second book is the outcome of a quick, practical course of Cognitive Behavioral Therapy or something similar. This is 100% speculation, of course, but it would help answer the basic question about why Obama's self presentation of his personality changed so much from age 33 to age 42.

Obama goes on:


And it was this acceptance, I think, that allowed me to come up with the thoroughly cockeyed idea of running for the United States Senate.


Obviously, the BS meter here is running about 9.5 on a 1 to 10 scale: Obama talks about how he had come to realize one of his flaws was "restlessness," how he had learned to accept his limits and the satisfactions of his limited life ... and then almost immediately he decides to run for the U.S. Senate! And then for the Presidency! And when he's term limited out of the White House after eight years, he'll convert to Catholicism and run for Pope (unless there's an opening in the Galactic Overlord job). 

But there's nothing unique among politicians about Obama's overweening ambition. They're all like that. Fifteen years ago in The United States of Ambition, Alan Ehrenhalt asked about our political leaders: Who chooses these people? His answer was: They choose themselves.

And we like that. As Gen. Patton said, Americans love a winner. We pay lip service to having our heroes lead a balanced life, but we mostly just want them to win, damn the consequences. I've seen a million movies in which the hero is striving so hard that his wife complains that he's missing all his son's Little League games. So, then, there's a montage of him playing catch with his son and cheering him on when he hits a homer in Little League, and then our hero goes back out and wins the really big prize and gets a standing ovation. 

Same with Obama -- he inserts a montage in his book about spending more time at home watching his daughters grow while exercising and appreciating how the earth rotates around the sun ... and then he's off on the Road to the White House! We love that kind of hypocrisy in our heroes.

So, if Obama had help getting his head screwed on right after his depressing pratfall in 2000, he shouldn't keep it a secret. Telling us about it could help a lot of people who need help.




Not from Across Difficult Country: Although it sounds like it's from Carter van Carter's website, this is from the BBC:


Monkey misery for Kenyan women villagers 
By Juliet Njeri BBC News, Nachu, central Kenya

A troop of vervet monkeys is giving Kenyan villagers long days and sleepless nights, destroying crops and causing a food crisis.

Earlier this month, local MP Paul Muite urged the Kenyan Wildlife Service to help contain their aggressive behaviour.

But Mr Muite caused laughter when he told parliament that the monkeys had taken to harassing and mocking women in a village. But this is exactly what the women in the village of Nachu, just south-west of Kikuyu, are complaining about.

They estimate there are close to 300 monkeys invading the farms at dawn. They eat the village's maize, potatoes, beans and other crops. And because women are primarily responsible for the farms, they have borne the brunt of the problem, as they try to guard their crops.

They say the monkeys are more afraid of young men than women and children, and the bolder ones throw stones and chase the women from their farms.

Nachu's women have tried wearing their husbands' clothes in an attempt to trick the monkeys into thinking they are men - but this has failed, they say.

"When we come to chase the monkeys away, we are dressed in trousers and hats, so that we look like men," resident Lucy Njeri told the BBC News website. "But the monkeys can tell the difference and they don't run away from us and point at our breasts. They just ignore us and continue to steal the crops."

In addition to stealing their crops, the monkeys also make sexually explicit gestures at the women, they claim. "The monkeys grab their breasts, and gesture at us while pointing at their private parts. We are afraid that they will sexually harass us," said Mrs Njeri.

The Kenyan Wildlife Service told the BBC that it was not unusual for monkeys to harass women and be less afraid of them than men, but they had not heard of monkeys in Kenya making sexually explicit gestures as a form of communication to humans.

The predominantly farming community is now having to receive famine relief food.


Thank God for famine relief! Otherwise, these women's husbands would have to get off their duffs and scare away the damn monkeys. And that just wouldn't be culturally appropriate.

Considering how frequently Bono, Bishop Tutu, Bob Geldof, Tony Blair, Angelina Jolie, Bill Clinton, Jeffrey Sachs and other worthies get together to bask in their collective celebrityhood discuss how to alleviate Africa's poverty problem, you might think that somebody, somewhere would have mentioned in the press the Sailer Solution: African men should start working as hard as African women already work. But it never seems to come up. (My wife suggests that Oprah, who has funded a school for girls in South Africa, might eventually spills the beans.)


(More on the Monkey Menace from Audacious Epigone.) 




Vietnam -- There has been a lot of talk this week about what would happened if the U.S had helped South Vietnam resist the North Vietnamese offensive of December 1974 with airstrikes. The Spring 1972 North Vietnamese offensive had been defeated by a combination of South Vietnamese soldiers and American air power, with few American deaths (only 300 were killed in Vietnam in the entire year of 1972). In the wake of Watergate, however, the now-dominant Democratic Congress didn't want to help any more, and South Vietnam quickly collapsed, along with anti-Communist governments in neighboring Cambodia and Laos.

Today, with American air power so unchallenged, it seems strange that the Democrats didn't want to allow air support of the South Vietnamese. After all, a couple of decades later, a Democrat President got involved in an internal dispute of negligible significance to America, and bombed Yugoslavia into ceding control of its internationally-recognized Kosovo province, at minimal cost in lost aircraft. The number of planes lost to enemy fire in both Iraq wars has also been tiny.

But, the American advantage in air war was much less overwhelming in the 1970s. We lost 3,322 fixed-wing aircraft in Vietnam, perhaps the majority of that number to enemy fire.
[To read the rest, click the "Permalink" below ...]




The Decline of Skull & Bones: My informant (who is not a member of the Yale secret society, but has reliable inside info) writes:


First, you observe that 5 of the last 10 major party candidates were bonespersons. Four of those five, however, were Bushes. It is more likely that Bones has benefited from the Bush dynasty than that the Bush dynasty has benefited from Bones. In fact, George H.W. Bush has complained that Bones was if anything a liability for him as a politician, and I would tend to believe him. As for Kerry, Bones membership may have conferred some modest benefit, but his rise to prominence in the early 1970s was largely his own doing. His also had helpful family connections and a talent for marrying rich women. I doubt that Bones was much of a factor in his career – although it probably didn’t have as much of a downside for him, as a Democrat, as it may have had for the Bushes.

Finally, on the current influence of the society, it has very little. The admission of women in the early 1990s was disastrous for the Skull & Bones and undermined the cohesion required to make secret organizations work. The relatively high degree of loyalty which the society once inspired depended on members’ ability trust one another, which in turn was based on members being encouraged to divulge their every secret. 


Tom Wolfe wrote in his famous 1976 article "The 'Me' Decade and the Third Great Awakening:"


At Yale the students on the outside wondered for 80 years what went on inside the fabled secret senior societies, such as Skull and Bones. On Thursday nights one would see the secretsociety members walking silently and single file, in black flannel suits, white shirts, and black knit ties with gold pins on them, toward their great Greek Revival temples on the campus, buildings whose mystery was doubled by the fact that they had no windows. What in the name of God or Mammon went on in those 30-odd Thursday nights during the senior years of these happy few? 

What went on was... 
[To read the rest, click the "Permalink" below ...]




Updated: An public service: improving Apache-Skull & Bones understanding: With all the stereotypes and prejudice in this world that divide groups of people, it's crucial to help clear up misunderstandings causing enmity amongst them. If the Israelis and Palestinians just understood the facts, I'm sure they'd all have a big laugh over it and get along fine from now on. Hmmhmmh ... well, maybe that's not the best example ... 

Okay, let me find a better instance of a misconception rather than reality dividing two sets of people ... All right, I've got one: the long-lasting but surprisingly seldom mentioned in the media rift between the Apache Nation and the secretive Skull & Bones Society of Yale. So, I shall do my part to heal it.

The President's grandfather, future Senator Prescott Bush, boasted than when training at Fort Sill in 1918, he had dug up the skull of Apache leader Geronimo and given it to the Skull & Bones society to display in their windowless redoubt on the Yale campus known as "The Tomb."
[To read the rest, click the "Permalink" below ...]




The inside history of intra-conservative immigration battles: In the cover story of the July 30 American Conservative, John O'Sullivan offers an extremely lucid recounting of conservative battles over immigration going back to his decision (with Bill Buckley's concurrence) to print Peter Brimelow's massive 1992 article on immigration:


Getting Immigration Right
By John O’Sullivan
It took 15 years, but conservative intellectuals finally deserted the Beltway establishment’s open-borders consensus. 


WSJistas have long jibed about O'Sullivan and Brimelow being English immigrants, so John concludes his article:


"Until the battle recommences, however, if any indignant xenophobe is thinking of writing an exposé of this conspiracy of English immigrants to impose an “un-American” system of immigration law on the American people, Steve Sailer has already come up with the perfect title: “The Protocols of the Elders of Albion.”"


[To read the rest, click the "Permalink" below ...]




I told you so about Karl Rove: From my new column "Rove Means Never Having to Say You're Republican," I review my six years of pointing out the widely acclaimed "Genius's" flagrant incompetence:


Even merely as a short-term political manipulator, Rove completely botched the immigration issue. And it's not as if our criticism of the electoral logic of the Bush-Rove dream of increasing Mexican immigration was only recently validated. Instead, Bush and Rove advanced their desire for more Mexicans in 2001, 2004, 2006, and 2007. And each time Congressional Republicans rejected it as bad for the country and bad for the GOP.

As I wrote back on September 10, 2001 (!!!) in the wake of strong Congressional resistance to the Administration's immigration mania:


"So why did Karl Rove and the rest of the Bush braintrust misread the political situation? Why did the White House fail to anticipate Congressional Republicans' concerns that amnesty would undermine the GOP? The Bush team appears to have been the victims of residing in an echo chamber with a mainstream media corps that—for reasons of innumeracy, fashion, self-interest, self-image and fear—failed to challenge the Bush advisers' sloppy thinking about immigration." [Analysis: Why Bush blundered on immigrants By Steve Sailer, United Press International September 10, 2001]


Luckily for Rove and Bush—there’s no other way to put it—3,000 Americans were murdered the next day. So the massive public humiliation of having Republicans in Congress decisively crush their dreams of a Hispanicized polity that would elect future generations of the Bush dynasty was postponed for six long, wasted years.

Rove's immigration strategy, along with the assumption in the press that it was a political masterstroke, was always based on the interaction of political correctness, smugness, and sheer laziness.

David Frum wrote recently in the New York Times:


"In my brief service as a speechwriter inside the Bush administration, I often wondered why it was that skeptical experts on issues like immigration could never get even a hearing for their point of view. We took the self-evident brilliance of our plans so much for granted that we would not even meet, for example, with conservative academics who had the facts and figures to demonstrate the illusion of Rovian hopes for a breakthrough among Hispanic voters." [Building a Coalition, Forgetting to Rule, August 14, 2007] 


The real problem for the GOP is less Hispanic voters than Hispanic leaders—92 percent of all elected Hispanic politicians are Democrats.

The reason for the 92% Democrats is obvious if you stop and think about it (which apparently nobody does): since most Hispanic citizens vote Democratic, most Hispanic-majority districts in the country are Democratic. And those are the ones in which Hispanics are most probable to get elected. So, it makes all the sense in the world for politically ambitious young Hispanics to join the party that's more likely to get them elected to office: the Democrats.

So, what Bush and Rove have been doing by not enforcing the immigration laws is helping create a new Democratic Latino elite that will plague the GOP for decades.

As politics, Rove's immigration ploy was negligent at the levels of simple logic and numeracy.    [More]




"The Simpsons Movie:" The Man Called Thursday argues that the show's peak was the second through fourth seasons way back in the early 1990s, which was when Matt Groening lost interest and control shifted to the Harvard Mafia (as my former neighbor, a screenwriter on the meat and potatoes sit-com "Married With Children," called them with fear and loathing in her voice). I can't disagree, although the show's consistency held up well through the end up the decade. Were the Simpsons' 1990s the greatest decade any television show ever enjoyed? I'd say so, but lots of people would vote for more recent hour long drama on cable, such as The Sopranos. The funny thing is that drama doesn't hold up as well as comedy. Stations paid a lot of money in the late 1980s for the hour long dramas thirtysomething and Miami Vice, and never got their money back. Meanwhile, "I Love Lucy" is still playing somewhere right now. 

The Simpsons Movie concentrated too hard on telling what we already knew -- the Simpsons may be dysfunctional, but when they pull together, they can triumph. I would have like to learn knew things. For example, we get to meet Nelson "Ha-Ha!" Muntz's mom. Why couldn't the backstory of other characters be covered? 




How many bullets are we firing in anger in Iraq? An AP article says:


Wars squeeze police ammunition supplies across US 
Shortage curtails officers' training

Troops training for and fighting the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan are firing more than 1 billion bullets a year, contributing to ammunition shortages hitting police departments nationwide and preventing some officers from training with the weapons they carry on patrol.


Last year, I tried to figure out how many bullets we are firing at people in Iraq every year. (This new AP article drops some hints, but never comes out and says.) 
[To read the rest, click the "Permalink" below ...]




Will be available on Mayor Villaraigosa's municipal free wi-fi? The mayor of Los Angeles, an energetic fellow, has proposed that the city provide free high-speed wireless Internet connections to every Los Angeleno. Sounds great! I could dump my expensive cable modem connection ... assuming Mayor Villaraigosa would allow me to look at my own website. 

Which is a big If. Colby Cosh recently pointed out that Saskatchewan's new municipal Wi-Fi networks ban citizens from visiting "sites associated with pornography or hate groups." One of the banes of my career is dealing with private censor companies that ban, such as the one that explained "The main goal of SiteCoach is to filter pornographic content and content glorifying violence, as well as right-wing and other so-called forbidden content that 'hits below the belt'." Who knows what Mayor Tony's taxpayer-paid service will allow? Free Wi-Fi and Free Speech are antonyms.




Peter Frost's explanation for high average Ashkenazi Jewish IQs: Attempts to come up with a Darwinian explanation for the high average IQ of European Jews go back at least to Norbert Weiner's 1953 autobiography, in which he argued that arranged marriages between the shetl's brightest young rabbi and the richest merchant's daughter would lead to large numbers of smart children having enough money to survive. In 2005, Greg Cochran, Henry Harpending, and Jason Hardy put forward a sophisticated theory pointing to selection for the mental demands of traditional Ashkenazi occupations such as moneylender. In Commentary, Charles Murray recently suggested the Babylonian Captivity could have played a role.

For a number of years, anthropologist Peter Frost has been privately advocating a fourth theory. Frost is the author of the 2005 book
Fair Women, Dark Men: The Forgotten Roots of Color Prejudice, which I reviewed in On Wednesday, Frost posted in the comments to Mahalanobis' item on economist Greg Clark's new book showing that the prosperous had many more surviving children than the poor in medieval and early modern England. The comment summarizes Frost's theory of the evolution of Ashkenazi intelligence:


The same process was going on in other European nations, but to varying extents. I commented on this point in the following letter to Commentary (which was never published):

In "Jewish Genius" [April] Charles Murray states that selection for intelligence has historically been stronger in some occupations than in others, being notably stronger in sales, finance, and trade than in farming. Insofar as he is right, the reason lies not in the occupation itself but in its relations of production.
[To read the rest, click the "Permalink" below ...]




College admission yields: Is the fix in? The two key numbers in the college admissions prestige game are selectivity and yield. For example, Harvard only accepts about 10% of all applicants, and about 80% of them choose to go to Harvard. 

Some specialty schools have very high yields without having very high selectivity, such as BYU and the Citadel military, but mostly selectivity and yields are closely related (inversely).

Here's a 2006 article from the Stanford Daily with some more numbers on yield:

[To read the rest, click the "Permalink" below ...]




Schools and neighborhoods:


Neighborhoods' Effect On Grades Challenged
Moving Students Out of Poor Inner Cities Yields Little, Studies of HUD Vouchers Say

By Jay Mathews
Washington Post Staff Writer
Tuesday, August 14, 2007; A02

Many social reformers have long said that low academic achievement among inner-city children cannot be improved significantly without moving their families to better neighborhoods, but new reports released today that draw on a unique set of data throw cold water on that theory.

[To read the rest, click the "Permalink" below ...]




Pancho Gonzales: African-American sports history (e.g., Jackie Robinson, Arthur Ashe winning the U.S. tennis title in 1968, etc.) is so heavily publicized that it's striking to notice how little attention is paid to Mexican-American sports history. [To read the rest, click the "Permalink" below ...]




"Sunshine:" From my review in The American Conservative:


"Sunshine" is a medium budget ($40 million) science fiction thriller with art house pretensions about eight astronauts on a last-chance-for-mankind mission to reignite the dying Sun with a "stellar bomb" the size of Manhattan. The movie falls uncomfortably between the grand heroism of the old sci-fi and the petty self-absorption of our reality television shows.
[To read the rest, click the "Permalink" below ...]




I review Michael H. Hart's answer to Jared Diamond at Hart's Understanding Human History is a better History of Everything than Guns, Germs, and Steel. Here's an excerpt:


A Real Diamond: Michael Hart’s Understanding Human History


Hart observes:


"Throughout history, most of the instances of people from one region attacking and conquering substantial portions of another region have involved 'northerners' invading more southerly lands."


(The biggest exception: the Arabs of the 7th Century A.D. And the Romans conquered in all directions.)

This overall pattern of north conquering south has long been apparent from the historical record—even though northern lands are generally less populous, due to shorter growing seasons.

[To read the rest, click the "Permalink" below ...]




A trillion here, a trillion there, pretty soon we're talking about real money: Now that the long predicted dubious mortgage crash has finally arrived, I keep remembering that going back to the early 1990s, the government has been twisting the arms of private lenders to get them to lend more mortgage money to minorities than the private firms believe was justified by colorblind principles of creditworthiness.  

Have the chickens finally come home to roost?

This history seems to have disappeared down the memory hole because it's all in the sacred cause of fighting discrimination, but I recall it distinctly from when I was daily reader of the Wall Street Journal in the 1990s. 

For example, poking around on Google, I find that there was a celebrated 1993 study by the Boston Fed showing that minorities' mortgage applications were rejected at a higher rate. Peter Brimelow pointed out in Forbes that minorities did not have lower default rates, suggesting that lenders were behaving in a rationally colorblind manner, but that was not a popular view at the time.

  [To read the rest, click the "Permalink" below ...]




Is there anything left to be said about Iraq? Anyway, since I don't have much left to say, what I'd like to do is invite your comments on Iraq.




Amazing fact of the day: 


"According to official statistics, Pakistan [population: 165 million] has produced only eight patents in the past 43 years."

Pervez Hoodbhoy,
Chair of the department of physics at Quaid-i-Azam University in Islamabad, Pakistan

Physics Today


Can this be true? If so, that's bad, really bad. Pakistanis in the US must come up with eight patents every, what, year? Month? Still, Pakistanis don't seem to to do that well in invention and high tech entrepreneurship in the U.S., ranking down around Mexican-Americans, but they sure do better than their cousins in Pakistan. In an inventing contest, the whole country of Pakistan could be matched up against Hedy Lamarr. It would be a close battle.




Movie critics v. movie box-office: I've long felt that the individual film critic's job isn't really to give you a thumbs-up or thumbs-down on whether a movie is good or not. You'd be better off looking up on Rotten Tomatoes an aggregation of critics' ratings to even out the random perturbations. 

Now, there are a tiny number of unjustly-overlooked movies that I've helped call to public attention -- "Idiocracy," of course, but also Stephen Fry's Evelyn Waugh adaptation "Bright Young Things," as well as the relevance of John Huston's "Man Who Would Be King" to forecasting the Afghan War. But, in general, I'm too old to care whether I'm succeeding in imposing my personal tastes upon the world. (Which is good, because I'm not ...) 

Instead, I see my job in my movie reviews as adding value. Some critics do this by being amusingly snarky, but I'm more earnest. I go read the book, Google the history, think about the issues the movie brings up. 

[To read the rest, click the "Permalink" below ...]




Nerds and Object-Orientation -- To me, one of the hallmarks of nerdishness is a cognitive tendency toward being "object-oriented," as opposed to seeing things in context. I consider object-orientation a masculine mental trait, in some ways the opposite of women's intuition, where a woman processes a variety of clues to come to a holistic insight, typically about social relationships.

I've also argued that East Asians tend to be more masculine-minded than white Americans on average, as shown by having higher SAT Math relative to SAT Verbal scores and being good engineers, and the like.
[To read the rest, click the "Permalink" below ...]




On the Internet, nobody knows you're a white guy: Liberals bloggers and readers of Daily Kos have been getting together at an annual convention, and it turns out -- surprise, surprise -- that when you see them in person, this latest manifestation of civil society consists of a whole bunch of white males. From the Washington Post:


A Diversity of Opinion, if Not Opinionators 
At the Yearly Kos Bloggers' Convention, a Sea of Middle-Aged White Males
[To read the rest, click the "Permalink" below ...]




My new column: I think this rather long column will help readers understand a little better why the "genealogical perspective" is so crucial but so overlooked in understanding human affairs: 


Two Cheers For Pinker On Genealogy…But What About Race?
By Steve Sailer

Genealogy—the study of who a person's ancestors are—is viewed by American intellectuals as a quaint hobby of only individual interest. But it's actually one of the most under-explored paths to better understanding humanity.

So I was quite pleased to see the cover story in the August 6, 2007 issue of The New Republic, "The Genealogy Craze in America: Strangled by Roots" [Free registration required, or read it here.] by Steven Pinker, the Harvard psychologist and author of the outstanding 2002 bestseller The Blank Slate: The Modern Denial of Human Nature.

Pinker has become perhaps the pre-eminent spokesman for the human sciences. His next book, The Stuff of Thought: Language as a Window Into Human Nature, will be out in September.

I was especially happy because Pinker's article cogently articulates many of the ideas about the overlooked importance of kinship that he and I kicked around via email in the late 1990s, and which have provided the basis for many of my articles ever since. ...





NYT says nerds are "hyperwhite:" From the New York Times:


Who’s a Nerd, Anyway? 

What is a nerd? Mary Bucholtz, a linguist at the University of California, Santa Barbara, has been working on the question for the last 12 years. She has gone to high schools and colleges, mainly in California, and asked students from different crowds to think about the idea of nerdiness and who among their peers should be considered a nerd; students have also “reported” themselves. Nerdiness, she has concluded, is largely a matter of racially tinged behavior. People who are considered nerds tend to act in ways that are, as she puts it, “hyperwhite.”

[To read the rest, click the "Permalink" below ...]




Education Insight: Here's an email from a new public school teacher in Pennsylvania. He is struggling with the pompous and inane jargon of the education school professors from whom he's taking courses to get accredited, and says it dawned on him that:


Those who can, do.
Those who can't, teach.
Those who can't teach get a Ed.D. in Education so they can implement instruction for instructional implementers.




Israel vs. Mexico in the media: Have you ever noticed how vastly much more attention is paid in the America press to Israel, a country of 6 million an ocean away, than to Mexico, a country of 109 million that shares a 1,952 mile border with us?
[To read the rest, click the "Permalink" below ...]




Michael Vick: The Atlanta Falcons quarterback who is facing trial on charges of horrific abuse of dogs while holding dog fights at his mansion, has one of the world's greatest bodies, but not, by most accounts, one of the world's greatest brains. 

A reader sent me a link to a Randall Parker Future Pundit item from 2006 that was prescient:


High Testosterone Men More Abusive To Dogs

[To read the rest, click the "Permalink" below ...]




Does this represent Steven D. Levitt's personal character? I hadn't been paying much attention to economist John R. Lott's defamation lawsuit against Freakonomist Steven D. Levitt: I don't like lawsuits. But now I've finally read the two 2005 emails at the heart of one count of Lott's suit. I'm sure I don't understand all the details of the situation, but they seem pretty eye-opening.
[To read the rest, click the "Permalink" below ...]




Request: I'm looking for well-known pairs of celebrities whose faces would be readily accessible on Google Images who are second degree relatives:

- e.g., Grandfather and grandson 
[To read the rest, click the "Permalink" below ...]n.




Back from camping: I am sorry about no postings, but the family went camping at the spectacular Montana de Oro state park just south of Morro Bay. I never announce ahead of time when I will travel because it's just an invitation to bad guys to come burgle my house. I'm especially sensitive about security because, back before our recent local move, some jerks put my old address on the web to try to intimidate me by threatening my family. 




Why the Axis of Amnesty coalition failed: My new column examines why what was wrong with the seemingly mile-wide coalition of special interests behind the Kennedy-Bush-McCain: It was only an inch deep. "What the Axis didn't have was any Americans below the elites who actually cared enough about the amnesty bill to write their Senators." For example, white liberals below the elite ranks did almost nothing to help the amnesty bill pass:


As Randall Burns has documented on, white liberals who are ordinary citizens showed negligible zeal for amnesty.    [More]




"Hitchens' Hubris:" In a review in Taki's magazine, Tom Piatak goes after Christopher Hitchens' bestseller God Is Not Great hammer and tongs in one of the few impolite reviews Hitchens has received. 

The widespread notion in America that Christopher Hitchens is a Major Thinker is a puzzling one. I have to imagine that much of the reception he gets on this side of the pond is due to the naiveté of us Colonials about British journalists. Hitchens has the Fleet Street knack for being able to churn out publishable prose fast and fluently despite spending a lot of time in fashionable watering holes getting well-watered, in which condition he conducts publicized feuds with other well-watered British personalities. Few American hacks can long function like that. But an ability to type while nursing a hangover does not make Hitchens the second coming of John Stuart Mill.




Study: "Night People" More Anti-Social: Well, all I can say is that we night people would be a lot more cheerful and well-rested if society would stop waking us up with inconsiderate early afternoon phone calls. 

Here's the Reuter's article.




My new column:


Sunday in the Park with Jorge

.   [More]




Barry Bonds -- With the San Francisco Giants slugger now only two homers away from Hank Aaron's career record of 755, much to the embarrassment of Major League Baseball, it's worth reviewing a few points and paradoxes:

- Bonds didn't start baseball's steroid problem. We now know from inside sources that Bonds did not use steroids for his first 13 years in the league, 1986 through 1998. 

- Bonds was clearly the greatest player of the 1990s, despite being clean for all but 1999.
[To read the rest, click the "Permalink" below ...]




How economists think: Tyler Cowen blogs:


IQ and the Wealth of Nations

How many more times will someone suggest this book in the comments section of this blog? I like this book and I think it offers a real contribution. Nonetheless I feel no need to suggest it in the comments sections of other peoples' blogs.

I do not treat this book as foundational because of personal experience. I've spent much time in one rural Mexican village, San Agustin Oapan, and spent much time chatting with the people there. They are extremely smart, have an excellent sense of humor, and are never boring. And that's in their second language, Spanish.
[To read the rest, click the "Permalink" below ...]




The NYT promotes a North American Union: My new column is about a little-noticed Fourth of July op-ed in the New York Times arguing that going down the path of integrating America, Canada, and Mexico a la the European Union would be good for America.




Bill James' All-Time Best Baseball Players by Ethnicity: There is a sizable quantity of academic theorizing that black baseball players are found most in the outfield and a first base because of nefarious stereotyping. For example a 2006 Ph.D. dissertation with the beyond-parody title of "RACE ON FIRST, CLASS ON SECOND, GENDER ON THIRD, AND SEXUALITY UP TO BAT: INTERSECTIONALITY AND POWER IN MAJOR LEAGUE BASEBALL, 1995 - 2005" by Lisa Doris Alexander says:

[To read the rest, click the "Permalink" below ...]




"Sicko" -- From my upcoming movie review in The American Conservative:


Michael Moore's comic polemical documentaries have done more for his net worth than for his political causes. [To read the rest, click the "Permalink" below ...]




My New Column: An excerpt:


How Carlos Slim, World’s Richest Monopolist, Provokes And Exploits The Mexodus

So, who is Carlos Slim, the new world's richest man? And why does he have $67.8 billion?





More from my review of Lott's Freedomnomics: Here's another excerpt from my review in the Washington Times of economist John R. Lott's Freedomnomics: Why the Free Market Works and Other Half-Baked Theories Don't. 


Dr. Lott is an even more fecund generator of plausible explanations than is Dr. [Stephen D.] Levitt [author of the bestseller Freakonomics: A Rogue Economist Explores the Hidden Side of Everything]. For instance, he suggests in Freedomnomics:





The Steve Sailer Independence Panhanding Drive! It's been a half year since I last rattled the tin cup under your noses. In other words, my friends, I need help, your help. and now we have a little something to celebrate with the demise of the McCain-Kennedy-Bush Axis of Amnesty bill. Click Here to Pay Learn More Amazon Honor SystemThe papers today say nobody is giving to McCain anymore because of amnesty, so maybe I can divert a little cash my way. 

If tax deductibility isn't relevant to you (e.g., you live outside the U.S.), you might find it simpler to donate directly to me. You don't need to have a PayPal or Amazon account already to donate, just a credit card. (Or you can E-mail me and I'll send you my P.O. Box number.)

Paypal and Amazon charge $0.30 per transaction and 2.9% of the total, so I only get to keep 41% of a $1 donation, but 96.8% of a $100 donation!

Anyway, it seems kind of nuts to hit you up while you are at the beach or the barbecue, but, then again, you might be a little drunk and in a mellow mood toward me.




My review of Freedomnomics by John R. Lott Jr.: Here's a link. [LINK FIXED] Tuesday is the day my book review comes out in the Washington Times. The last time I reviewed an economics book for a daily newspaper, my review of Tim Harford's The Undercover Economist appeared in the New York Post on December 25, 2005, so the Third of July is a big improvement in terms of being a high traffic day when the public can't think of anything better to do than read about economists' spats.

Here's the opening:


Harry Truman longed for a one-armed economist who couldn't tell him, "But, on the other hand …" As the economic mismanagement of the 1970s is forgotten and the profession's confidence soars, however, the opposite has emerged: the two-fisted economist. These scholarly brawlers self-assuredly venture far beyond their traditional topics.

 [More]   [LINK FIXED]




Juan Pierre's bunt double and a new baseball statistic -- That reminds me of a baseball statistic that doesn't exist, but should. [To read the rest, click the "Permalink" below ...]




My new column on Robert D. Putnam's long-awaited paper on diversity and community:


Diversity is Disunity ... and Dumbness among Intellectuals

One striking aspect of the last six weeks' debate is how decisively patriotic immigration reformers won the intellectual battle. The inanity of the other side's talking points, based as they were on mindless sentimentalism toward illegal immigrants and mindless hatred toward patriots, was never more obvious.

One of the roles that VDARE.COM plays in the broad immigration restrictionist coalition is to be the Research & Development arm. By choosing this untrodden path, far from the highway of political correctness, we're able to follow logical connections all the way through - an opportunity denied to all those who heed the big signs in their heads flashing "Uh-Oh, Better Not Go There, Bad for My Career."

Nothing illustrates the vapidity of mainstream intellectualizing about immigration than the ironic story of social science superstar Robert D. Putnam.

Last month. Putnam finally published an article about his lavishly-funded 2000 survey of 41 American communities that found that ethnic diversity, especially immigrant diversity, damages trust and "social capital."

Putnam's data is important, but the spin he worked on for five years to prevent it from being used by "racists and anti-immigration activists" is in some ways even more significant. ...





Robert Heinlein week: The science fiction master was born July 7, 1907. I read all his books up through 1966's The Moon Is a Harsh Mistress (his most literary novel) as a kid, then reread them when I was on chemotherapy in 1997, then reread them again early in this decade. 

[To read the rest, click the "Permalink" below ...]




We Win, They Lose (Redux) -- Cloture fails to get 60 votes, in fact it fails to get a majority, and loses 46-53

Senator Ted Kennedy showed true class in defeat, "shouting" htat opponents of his bill were in favor of a "gestapo."

All in all, it's a proud day to be an American. The American citizenry rose up and wouldn't let the special interests have their way for once.

Now all we need, as the Turks say, is three more horseshoes, and a horse.

So, who should be punished? How about Senator Lindsey Lohan Graham (R-SC) for demonizing his fellow Republicans as racists? Suggestions, please.




Ted Kennedy's Iron Law of Wages: An excerpt from my new column "The Axis of Amnesty’s Ideology of Cheap Labor:"


Senator Kennedy is echoing, oddly enough, the fatalistic conventional wisdom of Dickensian England—the doctrinaire assumption that cheap labor is essential, and that the inexorable grinding of the dismal laws of economic science determine wages as immutably as the orbit of Mercury is fixed by Newton's Law of Gravity.

The main difference: while Sen. Kennedy assumes the need for unskilled immigrant workers, the early Victorians were convinced of the necessity of uneducated child laborers.





My American Conservative article on "Why the elite press won’t report seriously on immigration" is now up:


La Raza’s Lapdogs
By Steve Sailer
Straight talk about immigration: another job Americans won’t do.


Here are some more excerpts:


1. An aversion to working with numbers is common among intellectuals and media types. For instance, it’s of some relevance to crafting immigration policy to know that 5 billion people live in countries with lower average per capita GDPs than Mexico.  [More]




My new column:

The Axis of Amnesty Is Back, But So Is David "Unpatriotic Conservatives" Frum

By Steve Sailer

As Dr. Frankenstein used to say:

"It's alive!"

Just as I warned last week, the Kennedy-Bush-McCain Axis of Amnesty reanimated their patched-together monster in the Senate … although it's definitely not back by popular demand.





"La Vie en Rose" -- From my upcoming review in The American Conservative:


Why is the "struggle with inner demons" such a staple of movies about musicians and actors?

Part of the reason is selection bias: producers aren't dying to make "The Johann Sebastian Bach Story" because composing a new masterpiece for Sunday church services each week while raising 20 children didn't leave Bach much time for self-inflicted drama.

Nonetheless, on average, performers really do live more chaotic lives than the rest of us. The detective novelist and screenwriter Raymond Chandler explained in The Little Sister, his novel about a troubled actress: "If these people didn't live intense and rather disordered lives, if their emotions didn't ride them too hard -- well, they wouldn't be able to catch those emotions in flight and imprint them on a few feet of celluloid ..."

Nobody lived a more intense and disordered life than Edith Piaf (1915-1963), the Parisian chanteuse depicted in the melodramatic and moving French film "La Vie en Rose." While her contemporary Judy Garland became an icon to male homosexuals (the gay liberation movement began in 1969 when drag queens returning from Garland's funeral rioted at New York's Stonewall bar), Piaf was a national heroine, as French as Johnny Cash was American.




The Axis of Amnesty -- My new column is up. Here's an excerpt:


Fifth, the Achilles heel of the Axis of Amnesty’s putsch was that the bill had to be posted on the Internet.


The legislation was written in secret. Committee hearings on it were blocked. It was far too long for many busy Senators and their staffers to read.

But networks of highly intelligent citizens examined it carefully and emailed each other with what they found.





I told you so about George W. Bush: From my new column:


Bush Tries To Redefine Amnesty One Last Time
By Steve Sailer

Was this the straw that finally broke the camel's back?

On Tuesday, May 29, President George W. Bush declared that opponents of the Kennedy-Bush "comprehensive immigration reform" plan in the Senate "don't want to do what’s right for America," you unpatriotic curs

The response has been overwhelming, but not in the direction that the President had hoped.





"Once" -- From my upcoming review in The American Conservative:


Musicals won six Best Picture Oscars in the 1950s and 1960s, but only one since ("Chicago" in 2002). Why aren't movie musicals terribly popular amymore? [To read the rest, click the "Permalink" below ...]




George Borjas has a blog: The Harvard professor of economics who specializes in immigration emails:


Just to let you know that the current immigration situation has finally convinced me that I should go ahead and start a blog. I hope to have much to say about the bill in the coming days.




Deciding the fate of America in a Red Bull-filled room: The whole thing is now up at 


Under the leadership of Senator Ted Kennedy (D-MA), various Senators and Bush Administration officials pulled an all-nighter on Wednesday. By noon Thursday, the bleary-eyed politicos had concocted an illegal immigrant amnesty (a.k.a., "comprehensive immigration reform") bill behind closed doors.

I presume politicians don't have Smoke-Filled Rooms anymore, so you could call this the Red Bull-Filled Room approach to deciding the fate of America.

No committee hearings are to be held on what may well be the most important legislation of the decade.
[To read the rest, click the "Permalink" below ...]





The Virtues of Coastal Megalopolises: My new column is up a day early. Here's an excerpt:


Are the Americans who are being driven from the Coastal Megalopolises to the Interior Boomtowns better off because their old cities are filling up with immigrants who outbid them in the housing market—typically, because the foreigners don't mind living with an entire extended family under one roof?





Sailer on Jimmy Carter's Book (Part II): From Taki's Magazine:


A Separate Peace (Part II)
Posted by Steve Sailer on March 15, 2007

While hardly above criticism, former President Jimmy Carter’s bestseller Palestine Peace Not Apartheid offers Americans some useful insights into what it is like for Palestinians to live within the racial security state that Israel maintains in the West Bank. It’s equally important for us, of course, to understand why the Israelis feel driven to undertake such harsh measures against the Palestinians.

Indeed, to begin to grasp what Israel needs to do to preserve itself as the Jewish State, it’s crucial to comprehend how it arrived at its current impasse.

Like many Americans, I was for most of my life fanatically pro-Israeli and anti-Palestinian. What began to push me towards a more balanced view was, ironically enough, reading the enormously long article in the September, 1999 issue of Commentary by Justus Reid Weiner, “‘My Beautiful Old House’ and Other Fabrications by Edward Said.” It denounced the Palestinian-American intellectual for falsely implying that his father’s mansion in Jerusalem had been stolen by the Israelis during their War of Independence in the late 1940s.




My big Obama article is now fully online:


Obama’s Identity Crisis
Although he presents himself as a healer of differences, the presidential candidate’s own racial struggle paints a conflicted portrait.
by Steve Sailer

The American Conservative

March 26, 2007 Issue Copyright © 2007




Sailer on Carter: From Taki's Magazine:


A Separate Peace (Part One)
By Steve Sailer  

Jimmy Carter’s book Palestine Peace Not Apartheid has been highly controversial due to its title, and not just for its puzzling lack of punctuation. (Isn’t Palestine Peace Not Apartheid missing a colon and a comma?)  

When I heard it was being furiously denounced for anti-Semitism by all the usual suspects, I hoped that meant that the 82-year-old Carter had reached that highly entertaining stage of the Presidential life cycle identified in John Stewart’s America (The Book) as “The President as Angry Coot.” I was looking forward to another Plain Speaking, Merle Miller’s bestselling 1974 collection of the aged Harry Truman’s fascinating fulminations.  

[To read the rest, click the "Permalink" below ...]




"Changed the World" is the hottest phrase in titling books these days. We have books with titles like "The Map That Changed the World: William Smith and the Birth of Modern Geology."  I'm hardly the first to notice this. Richard Adams wrote in The Guardian in 2005:  


Anyone contemplating writing a book on current trends in the publishing industry might consider this as a catchy title - Book: the book about the book that changed the world about the fish that changed the world. It's the fault of American author Mark Kurlansky. In 1999 he wrote a book that set off the fashion for what Waterstone's categorises as "biographies of things", called Cod: a biography of the fish that changed the world…   According to the trade press, a whole army of "changed the world" titles is ready to be launched. In September we will be able to buy a book on concerts subtitled "gigs that changed the world". In June we can get our hands on a book about the sheep that changed the world. And next month there's the chance to buy a book on gunpowder, the explosive that changed the world (presumably by blowing up bits of it). The list goes on and on - anyone fancy a forthcoming text with the subtitle "the 1976 wine tasting that changed the world"?  


At last, though,we have a book where the subtitled is justified: The President, the Pope, and the Prime Minister: Three Who Changed the World by John O'Sullivan, the former editor of National Review and a long time aid to the Prime Minister in the title. It's a triple biography of Ronald Reagan, John Paul II, and Margaret Thatcher and how they won the Cold War, with a particular focus on Poland.  

O'Sullivan pays a lot of attention to the view from within the Kremlin. I hadn't realized how early the Soviets had felt the cold wind of doom blowing over them. O'Sullivan argues that at the time of Solidarity's rise in August 1980, the Soviets believed their economy too weak to absorb the sanctions that would result from an invasion of Poland in the style of 1968 or 1956. So they bluffed the West into thinking that eventual December 1981 crushing of Solidarity by the Communist Polish general Jaruslewski was an act of forbearance by the Soviets, when in reality it was the best they could have hoped for.  

There's lots more of interest in this fine, wide-ranging, quick paced book.




Taki's Top Drawer: The elegant new web magazine of Taki Theodoracopulos is up at, with short postings so far from Taki, Justin Raimondo, Paul Gottfried, and F.J. Sarto.




My New column:


Who is America's MVP (Most Valuable Politician)?  




My New column: It's a long one, but it unveils a lot of information I've never seen written up before. Everybody talks about how average SAT scores differ at colleges, but I review how they differ at high schools. It will be of most interest to people in Los Angeles County, but SoCal high schools have enough mythos attached to them -- Beverly Hills High, Hollywood High, Compton Centennial High, home of the Bloods gang -- that it should be interesting to everybody.  


What LA Schools Portend: A New, Unequal, People  




Fragmented Future: My long cover story in the January 15, 2007 issue of The American Conservative is now online. Here's an excerpt:


"In the presence of [ethnic] diversity, we hunker down. We act like turtles. The effect of diversity is worse than had been imagined. And it's not just that we don't trust people who are not like us. In diverse communities, we don't trust people who do look like us."  -- Harvard professor Robert D. Putnam

It was one of the more irony-laden incidents in the history of celebrity social scientists.

While in Sweden to receive a $50,000 academic prize as political science professor of the year, Harvard's Robert D. Putnam, a former Carter administration official who made his reputation writing about the decline of social trust in America in his bestseller Bowling Alone, confessed to Financial Times columnist John Lloyd that his latest research discovery -- that ethnic diversity decreases trust and co-operation in communities -- was so explosive that for the last half decade he hadn't dared announce it "until he could develop proposals to compensate for the negative effects of diversity, saying it 'would have been irresponsible to publish without that.'"




The NYT is catching up to on how to raise IQ in the 3rd World: The Times runs its second article of 2006 on how micronutrient fortification can help reduce the problem of low IQs in the Third World, equaling the number ran in 2004 (see here and here):  


Malnutrition Is Cheating Its Survivors, and Africa’s Future
By MICHAEL WINES SHIMIDER, Ethiopia —  ... Yet almost half of Ethiopia’s children are malnourished, and most do not die. Some suffer a different fate. Robbed of vital nutrients as children, they grow up stunted and sickly, weaklings in a land that still runs on manual labor. Some become intellectually stunted adults, shorn of as many as 15 I.Q. points, unable to learn or even to concentrate, inclined to drop out of school early.
[To read the rest, click the "Permalink" below ...]




Christmas Gift Idea:


The President, the Pope, and the Prime Minister: Three Who Changed the World

by John O'Sullivan




The art of golf course architecture: From the Wall Street Journal:

'That Was From the Artist's Green Period'
Just because players don't wax about aesthetics doesn't mean great golf courses aren't high art
by John Paul Newport




"Kiss Kiss Bang Bang" -- I forgot to post my AmCon review of the brilliant detective comedy (now out on DVD) earlier, so here it is, finally.




The Long Lost 2002 Midterm Election Exit Polls: To help you with your election-watching on Tuesday, here are my five articles on the results of the exit poll data from the last midterms in 2002. The computer tabulation system crashed on election night, so the Roper Institute eventually released the raw data about 8 months later. As far as I know only Ruy Teixeira and I crunched the numbers.




"Borat" -- From my upcoming movie review in The American Conservative:

[For the rest, click the "Permalink" below ...]




The Steve Sailer Panhandling Drive is back from the dead ... Thursday was a nice day, with some very generous readers stepping forward. But I'm back for another day of nagging. Tonight, I took my older son to college night at his high school, and when I got home my wife mentioned the T-Word dreaded by all householders: "termites." (I can't say that for sure, though, because neither one of us really wants to know for sure yet what's going on with the house.)

In other words, my friends, I need help, your help.

If tax deductibility isn't relevant to you (e.g., you live outside the U.S.), you might find it simpler to donate directly to me. You don't need to have a PayPal or Amazon account already to donate, just a credit card. (Or you can E-mail me and I'll send you my P.O. Box number.)

Paypal and Amazon charge $0.30 per transaction and 2.9% of the total, so I only get to keep 41% of a $1 donation, but 96.8% of a $100 donation!

Now, if you've been thinking, gee, I just have too much income this year for tax purposes, do we ever have a deal for you! Peter Brimelow writes:


SPECIAL ANNOUNCEMENT FOR STEVE SAILER FANS: Our regular Sunday night columnist Steve Sailer is one of the jewels of contemporary science journalism and it’s a mystery to me (and to him) why he’s not been stolen from VDARE.COM by the Mainstream Media. Well, actually, it’s not a mystery. Steve pushes the envelope too much. That’s why we’re here at VDARE.COM—and why we have to develop our own funding sources a.k.a you.


We want to commission Steve to begin a major project, separate from his columns, the results of which will be published in longer pieces, working towards a possible book. The topic: the implications of modern discoveries in the human biodiversity area for the survival and success of the American nation. Donations to this project will be tax-deductible. You can make credit card contributions here; or fax credit card details here; you can snail mail checks made out to "Lexington Research Institute" and marked on the memo line (lower left corner) “Biodiversity/ National Project” to the usual address:


Lexington Research Institute
P.O. Box 1195
Washington CT 06793





My New article:


The One Word Grand Strategy for Westerners and Muslims: "Disconnect"




"Dynasty through Diversity: Why the Bush Administration is so adamant about amnesty" is my new article in the June 19th issue of The American Conservative (subscribe here). Here's an excerpt:

[For the rest, click the "Permalink" below ...]




Michael of 2Blowhards writes:


I don't know of any writer working today who does a better job of opening up dicey but pressing topics in humane and informed ways than Steve Sailer. Year after year, Steve has been bravely playing the role of the guy who's the first to bring up and examine loaded subjects -- subjects that I have a strong hunch we'll be hearing much more about in coming years. It's a heroic performance he has been putting on. (Steve's latest column is a topnotch example of his hefty and daring work.)

Needless to say, it's also an approach to a writing career that is probably pretty thankless in financial terms. Meanwhile, the cautious corporate journalists who take up the subjects Steve initially raised are doing very well for themselves indeed, thank you very much. Which makes it all the more important that those who value Steve's work show their appreciation. Steve is running one of his occasional fund-raising drives right now. If you enjoy and learn from Steve's writing, and especially if you're grateful that he's out there taking the big risks, please visit his website, click on the PayPal button, and send him a donation. 




"Americans First: What's best for the citizens we already have?" -- My American Conservative article outlining my "citizenist" philosophy is now on-line.   [More]




"Defining Conservatism Down" by Austin Bramwell of the National Review Board of Trustees is now up on The American Conservative website. My favorite paragraphs:


Second, a loose network of what John O’Sullivan has called “evolutionary conservatives” attempts to understand politics in light of genetic science. Unlike many conservatives, evolutionary conservatives remain undaunted by the apoplectic reaction of liberals to Charles Murray’s Bell Curve and Dinesh D’Souza’s End of Racism. Steve Sailer, for example, the most talented evolutionary conservative, writes with rigor and imagination on such scabrous topics as race, IQ, voting patterns, and national identity. Though other writers treat these ideas as taboo, perhaps because they seem to undermine American ideals of equality and self-reliance, evolutionary conservatives pride themselves on preferring truth to wishful thinking.




Tierney in NYT on the Sailer Theory of the evolution of golf's appeal:


The Golf Gene


New York Times

Published: August 20, 2005

Was golf the modern version of Pleistocene hunting on the savanna? The notion had already occurred to devotees of evolutionary psychology, as I discovered from reading Edward O. Wilson and Steve Sailer. They point to surveys and other research showing that people in widely different places and cultures have a common vision of what makes a beautiful landscape - and it looks a lot like the view from golfers' favorite tees....

For Further Reading:

From Bauhaus to Golf Course: The Rise, Fall, and Revival of the Art of Golf Course Architecture
by Steve Sailer. The American Conservative, April 11, 2005.


[For the rest, click the "Permalink" below ...]




Mickey Kaus blogs on


Steve Sailer has boiled down the explanation for why some states become red and others become blue to three simple words. ("God" is not one of them.) ... His equation sure works for San Francisco. ... 6:01 P.M.




Steve Sailer interviewed by Luke Ford on Race:




Blog archives since 3/05 at: 


For earlier blog commentaries, go to Exclusives Archives:

Feb 15-22  Feb 8-14  Feb 1-7 
Jan 23-31
  Jan 16-22, 2005  Jan 1-15, 2005  Dec 16-31, 2004  Dec 1-15, 2004  Nov 16-30, 2004  Nov. 1-15, 2004  Oct. 16-31, 2004   Oct. 1-15, 2004   September 2004  August 2004  
 July 2004  June 2004  May 2004
Apr 2004  Mar 2004  Feb 2004  Jan 2004  Dec 2003
Nov 2003  Oct 2003   Sep 2003   Aug 2003   Jul 2003
Jun 2003   May 2003   Apr 2003   Mar 2003   Feb 2003
Jan 2003   Dec 2002   Nov 2002   Oct 2002   Sep 2002
Aug 2002   July 2002   May-Jun 2002   Mar-Apr 2002
Feb 2002  Jan 2002  Dec 2001



  Popular Favorites:

- Thoughts on IQ and the Wealth of Nations

- Does Race Exist? It's All Relative: Race in Perspective

- Afghan Insights of Man Who Would Be King

- GOP Future Depends on White Vote

- Did Abortion Cut Crime?

- How Jackie Robinson Desegregated America

- "Is Love Colorblind?" - Interracial Marriage

- Thatcher Speech: Genetic Revolution

- Uselessness of Philosophy

- Why Lesbians Aren't Gay


- Links













Links: Daily Updates: VDARE  Gene Ex  Cosh  2Blowhards  NYT  Parker  Arts  WP  American Conservative  Pournelle  Scene  TakiMag  Inductivist  Marginal  AADAP  Kaus  FrontPage  Antiwar  NR  Slate  Drum  Carter  Ambler  Glaivester  LyingEyes  Hadar  Udolpho  Fourth  VFR  Dale  Surfeited  Larison  Audacious  Relapsed  Roach  Thursday  AmSpec  Wrong  Kalb  Joy  Kelly  Torrance  Tribalist  Mangan  Boca  L&G  Bodio  OC  Reform  GetReligion  Bolton  Malkin  Mahalanobis  Dose  Mencius  Sigma  Haspel  Andrew  IC  Lew  Chronicles  Douthat  Yglesias  Claremont  Thrasymachus  4Pundits  Hogtown  Dusk  Dienekes  Hawks  Chaos  Nusapiens  Tierney  Brand  Ray  TeamAm  Catallaxy  Julian  AFF  ESR  Hayek  Gideon  De Coster  Discrim  La Shawn  Rationale  BAD  Right  Manhattan  Military  NoSpeed  Stooksbury  Brave  Vols  Thinker  Men's  Russian  Snouck  HooverHog  Amritas  G&H  Pytheas  Our Way  Dodona  Luke  Luke-Fan  Carney  McCarthy  Spengler  Rozen  Rasmusen  Faceright  Lewyn  JeremyLott  Confucian  Oraculations  Beyond  Ruy  Pollkatz  Econlog  Friedman  Albion  Harleys  Zarko  Mankind  Robot  Weigel  BTP  NZ  Irish  Chicago  Opinionator  Vermont  Hsu  Ferengi  Yupson  Iectomorph  Pith  Joy  Judd  Fez  Top  Tariq  Bitter  Wife  GolfClubAtlas  Laban  Wicked  Weeklies: Onion  Cube  O'Sullivan  Derbyshire  Steyn  Pinkerton  Stove  Fulford  Poe  Independent  Zmirak  Hitchens  Sowell  Antle  Marcus  Plotz  Kurtz  Brand  Ilana  Overlawyered  War Nerd  Stiftung  Stix  SandalWarsh  Locke  Project USA  Dave Barry  Fred  JoeBob  Orlett  Sobran   Others: Griffe  Pinker  Hu's Diversity Index  Windschuttle  Gottfredson  Frost  Ed Miller  Scruton  Wild Taboo  Bailey  Borjas  Bloom  Edge  Unz  Entine  Rushton  Race FAQ  G.K. Chesterton  Satel  Frey  CIS  Paglia  Posner  Neo  D'Souza  de Soto  CrimeTimes  Prospect-UK  Andaman  Tufte  Galton  IQ

My Recent Articles & Old Favorites
Yellow bar above shows articles by category

What's the Matter with the Democrats?

American Conservative


While Democrats esteem themselves as more socially prestigious than Republicans, their electoral prospects are undermined by the faint whiff of personal failure that many Democratic voters exude, the impression that they resent their country and compatriots because they haven’t quite fulfilled their own potential.

Illegal Immigrant's triplets followed by quadruplets


Sam Quinones' July 28 article -- "6 + 4 = 1 Tenuous Existence: An illegal immigrant couple with six children were already living in poverty. Then the quadruplets arrived. They're still in a daze" -- just might be the best in the rather dull history of the Los Angeles Times.

Voting Rights Act of 2006


We can't afford anymore to pass laws that merely declare racial quotas illegal. We must provide detailed oversight processes to fight the inevitable massive resistance from bureaucrats.

Diversity Is Unity! It's Also Lebanonization.


One World Cup

American Conservative


Just as Brazil, soccer’s dominant nation, has been the "Country of the Future" for, roughly, ever, the quadrennial arrival of another month-long World Cup reminds us that, for Americans, soccer is the Sport of the Future and it always will be.

George Borjas vs. David Card's Unworldly Philosophy


The adulation with which libertarian economists have greeted a couple of studies by Card claiming that the Law of Supply and Demand does not, conveniently enough, apply to the effects of illegal immigration on wages is ironic. Many of the same economists have denigrated Card's other best known study. It alleged that the Law of Supply and Demand does not apply to minimum wage laws either.

What's the Matter with Economists?


Economists tend to assume the health of the political, institutional, cultural, and human underpinnings for our advanced economy. Thus they tend to be clueless about the long-term threats posed by immigration.

Socializing Costs, Privatizing Profits in The Age of the Fine Print


A Third Rigged Pro-Immigration Poll


Diversity's double whammy on good government


Immigration Polls: The Old Shell Game Continues


An Overlooked Problem with "Temporary" Workers


Bush's Immigration Speech


The Pete Wilson Myth

American Conservative


Nicholas Wade's Before the Dawn


The Duke Lacrosse Brouhaha and the Hunt for Tom Wolfe's 'Great White Defendant'


Richard Lynn's Race Differences in Intelligence


How to Rig an Immigration Poll


Four myths about immigration and voting


Mike Judge and King of the Hill


Undercover Economist Underperforms on Why Poor Countries Are Poor


Does Hispanic Immigration Actually Reduce Crime?


"The Return of Patriarchy"


On John Derbyshire's "Hesperophobia"


Cesar Chavez, Minuteman

American Conservative


Winter Olympics


The Larger Lessons of the Danish Cartoon Crisis


Americans First

American Conservative


Malcolm Gladwell Blinks Again


The Sinister "Plan of San Diego"


Boys Will Be Boys: Reviewing Sax on Sex

Claremont Review of Books


"The New World" v. the Real Captain John Smith


"It's the End of the World as We Know It"


American Gunfight


The Economist on Evolution


Playing the Holocaust Card


Everyday Economics: A review of Tim Harford's Undercover Economist

New York Post


French Lessons

American Conservative


“Human Directionals”—The Cheap Wage/Expensive Land Economy Personified


A Celebration of the Jewish Contribution to the American Christmas


Voting Rights Act should protect all citizens


Sailer Scheme for Muslim Immigrant Buyouts: Anybody have a better idea?


My "Citizenism" vs. Jared Taylor's "White Nationalism" - Part 2


France in Flames: Immigration, Not “Discrimination,” Is the Problem


A Buyout Option for Europe's Muslims


The Slow Suicide of the GOP


The Bush Bust


The Man Who Would Be Justice

American Conservative


Does the NFL Discriminate against Whites?




The Bill Bennett Brouhaha


Diversity Emasculates Free Speech Down Under


New Orleans and "The Color of Crime"


New Orleans, Race, and IQ,


The New Orleans Nightmare and Racial Reality


Charles Murray's "Inequality Taboo"


American Media Waking Up to Immigration Crisis


The Left Doesn't Like Darwin Either


"Mexican Evolution" or "Republican Devolution"


Diversity v. Freedom, Chapter CLXXXVII: The Case Of Andrew Fraser


Jared Diamond: The New King of All Media


John Podhoretz vs. Steve Sailer


The Five Billion


Today, almost one-fifth of all ethnic Mexicans live in the U.S. Almost five billion people (4,976 million to be precise) live in countries where the average per capita gross domestic product is lower than Mexico's mean of $9,600.

Free to Choose: The Genius Factory


The Wind from the South: Anti-White Populism


Hollywood's Other Obsession: Blond Bad Guys


From Bauhaus to Golf Course: The Rise, Fall, and Revival of the Art of Golf Course Architecture

American Conservative


2Blowhards: "I have a pretty broad conception of what "art" and "culture" can mean: Even so, I was taken up short when I read Steve Sailer's American Conservative article on golf course architecture as art. Silly me, I'd never given the topic a moment's thought. Yet there it is: landscape architecture, full of aesthetic qualities, there all around us, and in popular use. I'll take an eye-opener like Steve's piece over yet another run-through of conventional aesthetic theory any day."

Peter Frost's Fair Women, Dark Men


"The Natural History of Ashkenazi Intelligence" by Cochran and Harpending


Census Bureau Deflates "Latino Power" Voting Hype


Asian "Natural Republicans" vote heavily Democratic: Any more bright ideas?


Thomas Sowell's Black Rednecks and White Liberals


Important   "Affordable Family Formation"—The Neglected Key To GOP's Future


Mickey Kaus wrote on "Steve Sailer has boiled down the explanation for why some states become red and others become blue to three simple words. ("God" is not one of them.) ... His equation sure works for San Francisco. ..."

Genetic Engineering: How to Find Out What It Portends


The Freakonomics of Race and IQ


Pre-emptive Executions?

American Conservative


Did legalizing abortion in the early ’70s reduce crime in the late ’90s by allowing “pre-emptive capital punishment” of potential troublemakers, as Steven D. Levitt argues in Freakonomics? Or did the Supreme Court’s 1973 Roe v. Wade decision, by outmoding shotgun weddings, adoption, and respect for life, instead make more murderous the early ’90s crack wars fought by the first generation of youths to survive legalized abortion?

Click here for my follow-up responses on abortion-crime.

How Much Ruin in a Nation? Working Class Crime in the UK vs. US


Race Does Exist - New York Times


The White Guy Gap


Why Some Men Don't Support Larry Summers


The Education of Larry Summers

American Conservative


The Dirt Gap: A Tale of Two States

American Conservative


The fundamental geographical reality underlying the division of Red vs. Blue states.

We're Different. Get Over It.

National Post


What Larry Summers actually said.

How to Get Rid of White Racist Prison Gangs


The Larry Summers Show Trial


Richard Florida's Cities and the Creative Class

Washington Examiner


Mapping the Unmentionable: Race & Crime


Sailer's One-Point Plan for Lessening Racial Enmity


Malcolm Gladwell Blinks at Race


Autopsy of 2004 Exit Poll


Democrat Pollster Validates My Marriage Gap Red-Blue Theory


Reflections on Martin Luther King Day


Alberto Gonzales Tortured the Law to Preserve Racial Quotas


Tom Wolfe, I am Charlotte Simmons, and the Reality of Human Differences


The GOP’s Third Electoral Secret: Marriage, Fertility…And Cheap Housing


The Marriage Gap: The Baby Gap's Big Brother


My sequel to "Baby Gap:" I find a demographic measure that correlates even more outrageously with the 2004 election results.

NRO Rebunks the Hispanic Vote


Vindication on the Hispanic Exit Poll


The Baby Gap: Explaining Red vs. Blue States

American Conservative


Bush carried the 19 states with the highest white fertility (just as he did in 2000), and 25 out of the top 26. In sharp contrast, Kerry won the 16 states at the bottom of the white fertility list. Background data and graphs, along with reader responses, here.

What went wrong with the 2004 exit poll


Blue States More Inegalitarian


The 2004 IQ Wars: Kerry, Bush, and Red vs. Blue States


Bush's Brain

American Conservative


From the Folks who Brought You President Kerry ...


2004 Election Wrap-up


Does IQ Matter in a President?


Popular   This Just In: Kerry's IQ Likely Lower than Bush's!


Bush's scores on the Air Force Officer Qualifying Test have been briefly mentioned in the press. But nobody before now has fully explained what they mean. And, even more important, this is first article to publish Kerry's score on the Navy's Officer Qualification Test. The two tests aren't perfectly comparable. But they provide no evidence that Kerry is smarter. If anything, Bush is smarter than Kerry.

The Bush-Kerry Debate on Immigration


"You have to tell the truth:" The Bell Curve after 10 years


Where Richard Dawkins fears to tread: ethnic nepotism and the reality of race


Athens' Olympic Scorecard

American Conservative


On Richard Dawkins on Race


Why is the US pushing for the EU to admit Turkey?


Perils of Marijuana Decriminalization

The American Spectator


Opening the Black Box of IQ and the Wealth of Nations


To open up the black box, I've created a table displaying virtually all the information Lynn and Vanhanen provide on each IQ study they used—not just the overall national IQ averages you've seen so far. 

Importing a New Underclass: More Evidence


Michael Barone, Call your Office!


Michelle Malkin's In Defense of Internment


Michael Moore is Less

American Conservative


Latin America: The Cul-de-sac of Creativity


Olympic Human Biodiversity Preview


Thinking more about the unthinkable: The white-black IQ gap


Reporters Denounce Larry Bird for Being Interesting


"Copenhagen Consensus:" Help the Tired, Poor, and Dispossessed to Stay Home


Interesting India, Competitive China


The Brown discussion's two missing letters: IQ


Revolutionary Nepotism

The National Interest

Winter, 2004

Nepotism and dynasticism are on the rebound in politics, both abroad and at home. A major article in the prestigious quarterly The National Interest.

A Gypsy is haunting  Europe...


Bill Frist's First Priority: Medical Quotas


Limits of Libertarianism: Northern v. Southern California


Out of the Park: Baseball & Steroids

American Conservative


IQ: Truth can set us (and Africa) free


The UN reported on 3/25/04: "Few outside specialist circles are aware of the scale and severity of vitamin and mineral deficiency, or of what it means for individuals and for nations. It means the impairment of hundreds of millions of growing minds and the lowering of national IQs… And it means the large-scale loss of national energies, intellects, productivity, and growth."

The Claremont U. Reichstag Fire


Minority Outreach a Waste for GOP in 2004



Japanese Substitute Innovation for Immigration; NYT Shocked


The "Too Diverse?" Brouhaha


Occam's Claw: The Zorro of Statisticians, La Griffe du Lion.


"Stereotype Threat" (a.k.a. Occam's Butterknife)


The Bush Cult Crumbles


The Bush Administration's Malaise


The Battle of Algiers and the Battle of Baghdad

American Conservative


Invade the World! Invite the World!


Nothing Verboten: An Interview with Steve Sailer



Bernard Chapin interviews me on film criticism, what in the world happened to neoconservatism, and why the fix is in on immigration.

Remythologizing the Melting Pot


What Is Bush Thinking?


Sarich & Miele: Race: The Reality of Human Differences


Norquist & Rove Pursue The Muslim Falcon


Now We Know: What Happened in the Last Election


Culture's Bell Curve: Charles Murray's Human Accomplishment

American Conservative


The GOP's Southern Strategy Wins Again


No Excuses for Thernstroms' No Excuses


Decline of the Metrosexual

American Conservative


The Not-So-Secret Cause of Bad Schools: Bad Students


Mass Immigration vs. The Arts


Gay Gene or Gay Germ?


The Blonde Wars


Rove Means Never Having to Say You're Sorry


Cognitive Dissidence on Quotas


America's Scotch-Irish & Rove's Strategy


Thinking Quantitatively about ... Golf


Race Flat-Earthers Dangerous To Everyone’s Health


A Couple of Wild-Eyed Wackos: Me and the NYT


The Truth about Pim Fortuyn's Assassination


Immigration Can Spur Anti-Americanism


Is Love Colorblind? Updated


Ethnic Crime Mobs


The "Midget or Giant" Paradox


The Black Blank Slate Theory of African-American Culture


End of History or End of Posterity?


Will America Retain a "Market Dominant Majority?"


The Army's Race Relations Secret Weapon


Bush's Bakke II Brief: It's Déjà vu All Over Again


Cousin Marriage Conundrum

American Conservative


Selected by Steven Pinker for inclusion in The Best Science and Nature Writing 2004. About half of all married people in Iraq are married to their first or second cousins -- is this one reason nation building and democracy are so difficult in Arab countries? 

Unmentionable Root of Quotas


1986 Amnesty Set off a Baby Boom among ex-Illegals


Pinker's Progress


Whites, not Latinos, won it for GOP 

Washington Times


On Interracial Marriage


The “Whiteness Studies” Status Game


Vital   It's All Relative: Putting Race in Its Proper Perspective: "A racial group is a partly inbred extended family"


"Does race exist?" After years of debate over this crucial question, only limited progress has been made because neither side possesses a useful definition of "race." So, here is my General Theory of Race. This is probably my single most important contribution to contemporary thought.

Importing Anti-Semitism, 2002


Environmentalists Decide Country Worth Saving


Stephen Jay Gould, RIP

National Review Online


Fortuyn: Demonization Has Consequences


Thoughts on IQ and the Wealth of Nations


Highly popular: The strong correlation between IQ and the wealth of nations demonstrated by Lynn & Vanhanen is of world-historical importance. From now on, no public intellectual can seriously claim to be trying to understand how the world works unless he takes IQ into account.

Utah & the Paradox of "Diversity"


Pat Buchanan's Death of the West


Hispanic Cultural Conservatism a Paper Tiger


The Future of Multiculturalism

San Diego Union-Tribune


Seven Daughters of Eve


Afghan Insights of Man Who Would Be King



Originally published on Sept. 26, 2001 before the first American air strikes, this analysis of the wonderful 1975 Sean Connery movie argued that the Taliban could be beaten fairly easily, yet nation-building in Afghanistan is likely to prove difficult. Was I wrong?

Afghanistan's Family/Race Problem & Ours


Amnesty's Bad Math

National Review Online


Sullivan's Travails


Neo-Darwinism in Moscow

NY Press


A Major Review of Michael Barone's The New Americans


John Derbyshire, columnist for National Review Online, commented on this long essay: "Every once in a while I read something that makes me feel I ought to give up commentary altogether. This was one such. Why isn't Steve Sailer nationally famous? Rhetorical question--I know, I know..."

Libertarianism in One Country


GOP Future Depends on White Vote


How to Help the Left Half of the Bell Curve

It can be painful to speak honestly about such a sensitive topic as IQ. But only realism will allow us to do anything beneficial about it.

Will Vincente Fox be Dubya's Yeltsin?


Do Gays Want to Be Married or to Get Married?

National Review Online


Sociobiology at Age 25

National Review


The Reality of Race


"What is a 'race'? It is essentially a lineage, a family tree. A racial group is merely an extremely extended family that inbreeds to some extent. Thus, race is a fundamental aspect of the human condition because we are all born into families."

Seven Dumb Ideas about Race


Thatcher Speech: The Genetic Revolution

American Outlook

Spring, 2000

Part 2: Mexico's Insidious Color Continuum


Part 3: How Latino Intermarriage Breeds Inequality


A Better Way in Kosovo? 

National Post


Immigration vs. African Americans


The Future of Human Nature

National Post


The Unexpected Uselessness of Philosophy

National Post


A Miracle Happens Here: Darwin's Enemies on the Right

National Post


Why religion and Darwinism need not be mortal enemies.

Equality v. Truth: Darwin's Enemies on the Left

National Post


Great Slate Debate: Steven Levitt vs. Steve Sailer



I debate with the coauthor of the much discussed study claiming that legalizing abortion in the Seventies lowered crime in the Nineties.

Human Biodiversity Hall of Fame

Track & Battlefield -- w/Dr. Stephen Seiler

National Review


Everybody knows that women athletes are narrowing the gender gap separating them from male athletes' performance. Yet in running, the most quantifiable sport, everybody is wrong. 

For track buffs: additional in-depth analysis and statistics

The Words Don't Match the Pictures: Why the Polite Lies We Tell About Race & Sex Are Undermined by What We See on ESPN

National Review Online 


Is Love Colorblind?

National Review


Interracial Marriage -- Who Wins? Who Loses? While interracial marriage is increasingly accepted by whites, a surprising number of Asian men and black women have become bitterly opposed. Why?

More on interracial marriage: Readers' responses, Arthur Hu's funny article, etc.      5 graphs   

Great Black Hopes

National Review


Black Athletes triumph by toiling intensely at those games where they tend to enjoy not just cultural, but also physical and mental edges over whites. This suggests a new, pragmatic view of racial differences. 

How Jackie Robinson Desegregated America

National Review


Perhaps the least-learned lesson of the saga of Jackie Robinson is that competition can transform self-interest into an engine for racial fairness.

Where the Races Relate

National Review


Why do the U.S. Army and college sports teams do so much of a better job at managing race relations than elite colleges?

Why Lesbians Aren't Gay

National Review


From "Pervert" to "Victim:" the media's continued one-dimensional stereotyping of homosexuals; with handy table of dozens of ways gays tend to differ from lesbians.


Entire website Copyright Steve Sailer 1990-2007






















For the convenience of search engine users: Although the correct spelling of my name is "Steve Sailer," people looking for me often spell my name as Steve Sailor, Steve Saylor, Steve Seiler, Steven Sailer, Steven Sailor, Steven Saylor, Steven Seiler, Stephen Sailer, Stephen Sailor, Stephen Saylor, Stephen Seiler, Steven E. Sailer, Steven E. Sailor, Steven E. Saylor, Steven E. Seiler, Stephen E. Sailer, Stephen E. Sailor, Stephen E. Saylor, Stephen E. Seiler, Steve Seilor, SteveSailer, iSteve, David Sailer (as Tom Brokaw called me) and more. Please note, however, that I am not the Steven Saylor who writes well-regarded detective novels set in Ancient Rome. Nor am I my old friend Stephen Seiler, the sports scientist with whom I collaborated on a National Review article in 1997. Nor am I an Australian broadcaster of a similar name.