Does one’s religion affect one’s IQ? Does the IQ Test writer customize questions to favor certain ethnic groups? Does the power to write the IQ Test ultimately rest on one’s willingness to assassinate the competition? Why is an IQ Test, or any standardized test score so important, even when the numbers are manipulated? Does the group with false bragging rights automatically achieve economic and political rights over others? If Jews can be singled out for IQ test results, then shouldn’t Catholics also be separated out from Protestants and followers of Hanoman the Monkey God to see who has the greater ability to solve problems?
Couldn’t all religions be compared to each other in terms of IQ? This would include the religion of Humanism which is our present Union of Church and State through the Federally mandated Common Core Curriculum.
As the late Msgr. William Smith, Professor of Moral Theology, often said, “All social engineering is preceded by verbal engineering.”
More on the verbal engineering through BerGOGlio’s Synod of the Family.
|
In 1905, the Frenchman Alfred Binet developed and administered the first standard “intelligence” test. Seven years later, psychologist Henry Goddard, at the invitation of the United States Public Health Service, was sent to Ellis Island immigrant receiving station at New York Harbor. He administered a translated and adapted version of the Binet test and screened the new immigrants (Kamin, 1974: 16).
Goddard did not actually administer the tests fairly. When he wasn’t fair, he stated clearly how and why he changed the test to favor Jewish immigrants. He was scrupulously concerned with fairness and applicability of his findings, evidenced by the following passages of a report that he published in 1917 summarizing his results:
“Confining our study to the Jewish group for the present, we find in addition to these above tests, tests that consist of ‘75 per cent passed questions’…They are therefore valid tests. (Goddard, 1917:247)” What Goddard is saying is that certain questions asked on the test were failed by 75% of the Jewish population. So to give the Jews a better chance, those questions were simply taken out of only those tests given to Jews:
“The Binet-Simon Scales gives a person a chance to make a rating of XII. But the usual scale is shown by these data to be not valid for this group of immigrants, because certain questions are not passed by 75 per cent of them and so these questions are termed ‘non-valid”. Nevertheless after omitting these “non-valid” questions, there is still enough left of the scale to give the examinee the chance to make a rating of X. More than 40 per cent of the Jewish immigrants fail to do even this.
According to this criterion more than 40 percent of Jews would be considered feeble-minded. It must be admitted that this gives the Jewish immigrant the benefit of every doubt. (Goddard, 1917:249)”
So subtracting the unknown percentage of questions that were failed by more than 75% of Jews, there still remained more than 40 per cent of the Jewish immigrants tested who showed up “feeble-minded” from this research…the attribution at that time was that this inferiority was genetic. A book written today reverses these facts and instead of dealing with the truth, the author writes “…it has long been known that Jews do better in school than gentiles, and they also do better on IQ tests (Terman and Oden , 1947;Belth, 1958; Vincent, 1966; Synnott, 1979; Karabel, 1984).”
IQ tests were used initially to determine immigration quotas. During the first part of the twentieth century, Jews did so poorly on IQ tests that scientists testified as to their “genetic inferiority” before the U.S. Congress (Kamin 1974: 16-26). In fact, using this as a rationale, Congress passed restrictive legislation in the 1920’s that drastically reduced the immigration of Jews from a flood to a mere trickle (Lieberson, 1980:7-12).
Suddenly, in 1949 and 1954, new IQ tests found 117.8 average IQ for Jewish children and 100.00 for white children. This drastic change in results was explained by ‘cultural’ and not genetic factors (Vincent, 1966: 103-107), “whereby a group with more power but lower IQ and lower entrance test scores finds a way to get their members into training to become brain surgeons and heart surgeons and judges and lawyers.” It sounds like they’ve gotten themselves into the IQ test business as well. One wonders then, what is the group with the original high IQ doing now that the ones who originally had the low IQ are running everything. And if the source of this ‘power’ is not originally intellectual, then what is it based on? One must assume that it is based on violence that eliminates intellectual competition. What other kinds of power are there?
Based on the low IQ scores of Jews, Congressional action in 1924 almost completely shut the door to immigration from eastern parts of Europe, from 250,000 in 1913 and 1914, down to 21,000 in 1923, then to 1000 per year for the next fifty years. (Lieberson, 1980:9)
In 1920, there were already more Jews in New York City than any other ethnic group. By 1950, Northern cities began to be home to larger and larger populations of blacks. It is in the 1950’s that we find the differential between white and black IQ scores closing. This is also the point in time when Catholicism is enjoying the heights of success in the United States thanks to such great speakers as Bishop Fulton Sheen and his popular television show.
It’s popular to blame failures of certain racial groups on ‘segregation’, but segregation of races had always been in voluntary existence in New York city, with each group displaying unique cultural characteristics.
The book by Jacob A. Riis (1849–1914), titled “How the Other Half Lives” was written in the year 1890. As a professional observer, he describes each racial group and he details their different lifestyle patterns as exhibited on the East Side of New York City, apparently an area where recent immigrants settled. The great influence and complete control that Jews have had on America finds its root in New York City. Riis writes with the most refreshing political incorrectness:
| X. Jewtown |
| THE tenements grow taller, and the gaps in their ranks close up rapidly as we cross the Bowery and, leaving Chinatown behind, invade the Hebrew quarter. Baxter Street, with its interminable rows of old clothes shops and its brigades of pullers-in…The jargon of the street the signs of the sidewalk, the manner and dress of the people, their unmistakable physiognomy, betray the race at every step. Men with queer skull-caps, venerable beard, and the outlandish long-skirted kaftan of the Russian Jew, elbow the ugliest and the handsomest women in the land. The contrast is startling. The old women are hags; the young, houris. Wives and mothers at sixteen, at thirty they are old. So thoroughly has the chosen people crowded out the Gentiles in the Tenth Ward that, … There is no mistaking it: we are in Jewtown. | ||||||||
| It is said that nowhere in the world are so many people crowded together on a square mile as here. The average five-story tenement adds a story or two to its stature in Ludlow Street and an extra building on the rear lot, …In this house, where a case of small-pox was reported, there were fifty-eight babies and thirty-eight children that were over five years of age. In Essex Street two small rooms in a six-story tenement were made to hold a “family” of father and mother, twelve children and six boarders. The boarder plays as important a part in the domestic economy of Jewtown as the lodger in the Mulberry Street Bend. These are samples of the packing of the population that has run up the record here to the rate of three hundred and thirty thousand per square mile.
The densest crowding of Old London, I pointed out before, never got beyond a hundred and seventy-five thousand. Even the alley is crowded out. Through dark hallways and filthy cellars, crowded, as is every foot of the street, with dirty children, the settlements in the rear are reached. Thieves know how to find them when pursued by the police, and the tramps that sneak in on chilly nights to fight for the warm spot in the yard over some baker’s oven. They are out of place in this hive of busy industry, and they know it. It has nothing in common with them or with their philosophy of life, that the world owes the idler a living. Wherever they are in the tenements the tramp will skulk in, if he can. There is such a tramps’ roost in the rear of a tenement near the lower end of Ludlow Street, that is never without its tenants in winter. By a judicious practice of flopping over on the stone pavement at intervals and thus warming one side at a time, and with an empty box to put the feet in, it is possible to keep reasonably comfortable there even on a rainy night. In summer the yard is the only one in the neighborhood that does not do duty as a public dormitory. |
||||||||
| A MARKET SCENE IN THE JEWISH CHARACTER. | ||||||||
| Bitter as are his private feuds, it is not until his religious life is invaded that a real inside view is obtained of the Jews who come to hear the Christian preacher. A certain well-known minister of an uptown church to me, after such an experience, “They kept still until I spoke of Jesus Christ as the Son of God. Then they got up and fell to threatening me, until it looked as if they meant to take me out in IIester Street and stone me.” As at Jerusalem, the Chief Captain was happily at hand with his centurions, in the person of a sergeant and three policemen, and the preacher was rescued. | 8 | |||||||
| Attached to many of the synagogues, which among the poorest Jews frequently consist of a scantily furnished room in a rear tenement, with a few wooden stools or benches for the congregation, are Talmudic schools that absorb a share of the growing youth.
It was of such a school in Eldridge Street that the wicked Isaac Iacob, who killed his enemy, his wife, and himself in one day, was janitor. But the majority of the children seek the public schools, where they are received sometimes with some misgivings on the part of the teachers, who find it necessary to inculcate lessons of cleanliness in the worst cases by practical demonstration with wash-bowl and soap. “He took hold of the soap as if it were some animal,” said one of these teachers to me after such an experiment upon a new pupil, “and wiped three fingers across his face. He called that washing.” In the Allen Street public school the experienced principal has embodied among the elementary lessons, to keep constantly before the children the duty that clearly lies next to their hands, a characteristic exercise. The question is asked daily from the teacher’s desk: “What must I do to be healthy?” and the whole school responds:
|
9 | |||||||
| It seems little less than biting sarcasm to hear them say it, for to not a few of them all these things are known only by name. In their everyday life there is nothing even to suggest any of them.
It is surprising to see how strong the instinct of dollars and cents is in them. They can count, and correctly, almost before they can talk. |
10 | |||||||
| Within a few years the police captured on the East Side a band of firebugs who made a business of setting fire to tenements for the insurance on their furniture. | ||||||||
A later observer in New York City writes: “Ever since the war (WWII) New York has been receiving the overflow of colored population from the Southern cities. In the last decade this migration has grown to such proportions that it is estimated that our Blacks have quite doubled in number since the Tenth Census. Whether the exchange has been of advantage to the negro may well be questioned. Trades of which he had practical control in his Southern home are not open to him here. I know that it may be answered that there is no industrial proscription of color; that it is a matter of choice. Perhaps so. At all events he does not choose then. How many colored carpenters or masons has anyone seen at work in New York? In the South there are enough of them and, if the testimony of the most intelligent of their people is worth anything, plenty of them have come here. As a matter of fact the colored man takes in New York, without a struggle, the lower level of menial service for which his past traditions and natural love of ease perhaps as yet fit him best.”
| Riis wrote of the newly arrived blacks in the 1800’s that “There is no more clean and orderly community in New York than the new settlement of colored people that is growing up on the East Side from Yorkville to Harlem. | 3 |
| Cleanliness is the characteristic of the negro in his new surroundings, as it was his virtue in the old. In this respect he is immensely the superior of the lowest of the whites, which is to say, the Polish Jews, below whom he has been classed in the past in the tenant scale. |
There is method in the maxim, as shown by an inquiry made last year by the Real Estate Record. Here is the testimony of one of the largest real estate firms in the city: “We would rather have negro tenants in our poorest class of tenements than the lower grades of foreign white people [this means Jews]. We people find the former cleaner than the latter, and they do not destroy the property so much.
The amount of “style” displayed on fine Sundays on Sixth and Seventh Avenues by colored holiday-makers would turn a pessimist black with wrath. The negro’s great ambition is to rise in the social scale to which his color has made him a stranger and an outsider, and he is quite willing to accept the shadow for the substance where that is the best he can get. The claw-hammer coat and white tie of a waiter in a first-class summer hotel, with the chance of taking his ease in six months of winter, are to him the next best thing to mingling with the white quality he serves, on equal terms. His festive gatherings, pre-eminently his cake-walks, at which a sugared and frosted cake is the proud prize of the couple with the most aristocratic step and carriage, are comic mixtures of elaborate ceremonial and the joyous abandon of the natural man.
With all his ludicrous incongruities, his sensuality and his lack of moral accountability, his superstition and other faults that are the effect of temperament and of centuries of slavery, he has his eminently good points. He is loyal to the backbone, proud of being an American and of his new-found citizenship. He is at least as easily moulded for good as for evil. His churches are crowded to the doors on Sunday nights when the colored colony turns out to worship.
His people own church property in this city upon which they have paid half a million dollars out of the depth of their poverty, with comparatively little assistance from their white brethren. He is both willing and anxious to learn, and his intellectual status is distinctly improving. If his emotions are not very deeply rooted, they are at least sincere while they last, and until the tempter gets the upper hand again.
The border-land where the white and black races meet in common debauch, the aptly-named black-and-tan saloon, has never been debatable ground from a moral stand-point. It has always been the worst of the desperately bad. Than this commingling of the utterly depraved of both sexes, white and black, on such ground, there can be no greater abomination. More than three-fourths of the business the police have with the colored people in New York arises in the black-and-tan district, now no longer fairly representative of their color.
The best sort of charity is fair play between owner and tenant. Here is described the ‘white Christian’ method of dealing with the poverty of the new arrivals:
| There is unfortunately enough of that kind in New York, often leasehold property owned by wealthy estates or soulless corporations that oppose all their great influence to the efforts of the law in behalf of their tenants. | 17 |
| There is abundant evidence, on the other hand, that it can be made to pay to improve and make the most of the worst tenement property, even in the most wretched locality.
The example set by Miss Ellen Collins in her Water Street houses will always stand as a decisive answer to all doubts on this point. It is quite ten years since she bought three old tenements at the corner of Water and Roosevelt Streets, then as now one of the lowest localities in the city. Since then she has leased three more adjoining her purchase, and so much of Water Street has at all events been purified. Her first effort was to let in the light in the hallways, and with the darkness disappeared, as if by magic, the heaps of refuse that used to be piled up beside the sinks. A few of the most refractory tenants disappeared with them, but a very considerable proportion stayed, conforming readily to the new rules, and are there yet. It should here be stated that Miss Collins’s tenants are distinctly of the poorest. Her purpose was to experiment with this class, and her experiment has been more than satisfactory. Her plan was, as she puts it herself, fair play between tenant and landlord. To this end the rents were put as low as consistent with the idea of a business investment that must return a reasonable interest to be successful. The houses were thoroughly refitted with proper plumbing. A competent janitor was put in charge to see that the rules were observed by the tenants, when Miss Collins herself was not there. Of late years she has had to give very little time to personal superintendence, and the care-taker told me only the other day that very little was needed. The houses seemed to run themselves in the groove once laid down. Once the reputed haunt of thieves, they have become the most orderly in the neighborhood. Clothes are left hanging on the lines all night with impunity, and the pretty flower-beds in the yard where the children not only from the six houses, but of the whole block, play, skip, and swing, are undisturbed. The tenants, by the way, provide the flowers themselves in the spring, and take all the more pride in them because they are their own. The six houses contain forty-five families, and there “has never been any need of putting up a bill.” As to the income from the property, Miss Collins said to me last August: “I have had six and even six and three-quarters per cent. on the capital invested; on the whole, you may safely say five and a half per cent. This I regard as entirely satisfactory.” It should be added that she has persistently refused to let the corner-store, now occupied by a butcher, as a saloon; or her income from it might have been considerably increased. |
18 |
| Miss Collins’s experience is of value chiefly as showing what can be accomplished by the sort of personal interest in the poor that alone will meet their real needs. All the charity in the world, scattered with the most lavish hand, will not take its place.
“Fair play” between landlord and tenant is the key, too long mislaid, that unlocks the door to success everywhere as it did for Miss Collins.
|
|
Number of persons to a dwellingin New York, 1880 (census): 16.37 |
|
Number of persons to a dwelling in London, 1881 (census): 7.9 |
|
| Archbishop Lefebvre, from the “Open Letter to Confused Catholics”, available online in English from the SSPX Asia, we read the following:
First, the late Archbishop sets the main points of the question:
Then, he proceeds to explain how proper Catholic doctrine is rightly interpreted:
As to salvation outside the Church, he takes all illusions away:
The Truth can be substituted with heresy or worse by the work of the bishops themselves:
|
Sumo Sacerdote 