I totally understand the antagonism some feel towards Martian's posts as they often come off really blunt in an offensive way, may seem like unsubstantiated boasting but I just take it as a black/white dissemination of more complex topics for ease of consumption and provocation for a conversation.
Essential ingredients for industrialization (based on observation):
- Willing to sacrifice short term gains for long term development. This can take the sacrifice of many generations without seeing fruits while early consumption will provide the illusion of gdp and development. Cultural depth helps in holding society accountable to do this and understand this process.
- Diligent working population
- Flexible, authoritarian and enlightened elites/political system
- Internal stability
- Meritocratic system, helps to have a strong intellectual base but is usually in the process of cultivation during industrialization. It is dependent on education quality and inherent intellectual potential of population
Some based on personal experience:
- USA, China, EU enjoys geographic advantages, if managed properly. Large useful landmass cluster enables greater scale.
- IQ is important for macro analysis but personal success is composed of much more nuanced factors (but still shows a correlation with intelligence). Average IQ (along with its distribution) is only one component for industrialization.
- IQ like other functions of biology can be improved, there are some short term fixes and slower long term improvements (ie, epigenetics and selection).
- A few developing nations are not at their mean biological potential (some countries cant even be understood as one cohesive people group), most apparent in per capita resource poor/under utilized (in terms of organization) nations.
- China is a developing country and will be one for a long time. I am not talking about gdp but society holistically, though certain provinces will likely become fully developed within 2 decades (again not based on gdp). China's success was the ability to promote, concentrate and provide resources for its brightest minds
- High IQ eases industrialization and results in a faster process (also contingent on other factors) but level of output performance is bounded by the intelligence requirement for that specific job/technology level. A garment factory worker with high IQ doesn't make much more garments than a person with average IQ. This difference is only accentuated further down the development timeline.
According to the figures Turkey has an IQ of only 90.
Why is it more developed than China and growing very fast that within 10 years it will
have caught up with supposed higher IQ countries like Italy?
China and Turkey are at different stages of the mean reversion process. Just like in physics you cannot release your potential energy all in one instant, thus some time is needed until mean reversion is complete.
Don't underestimate Italy, they have an immense cultural depth despite economic failings in the South. At a certain point some cultures value work-life balance over economic performance.
You cannot compare Turkey(80 million) with China(1.3 billion) in terms of technology.
Is Germany not a developed country like US is, even though US has far more technology as it is many times bigger?
We can compare Turkey (80 million, $900 billion) and Jiangsu province (78 million, $1.36 trillion). China is an entire civilization, like a collection of nations rather than a traditional European nation state. Europe's (includes European Russia) per capita gdp is $21,700 , China would have a similar distribution of advanced regions and backwards regions by that point, some provinces will concentrate more economic/industrial factors like Germany does with Europe. A good measure is technology density since a larger nation is likely to have larger aggregate technological output and higher technology diversity.
I find it quite amusing that a country which is not in this list is ruling over almost all of the countries in this list (some exceptions aside). Now rest is your guess work,
Are you referring to Israel and the Jewish conspiracy? Ashkanazi Jews have one of the highest IQs in the world, around 110-115 average though they remain the minority Jewish population in Israel. They also have the advantage of capital accumulation from living in the West for centuries, later in America. Their human capital had been already developed from centuries of high value white collar jobs (finance, trade, science, literature) and can be highly utilized in Israel with ample funding.
I think there are also a cultural/political factor.
Just look at the WWII Imperial Japan, they wanted to become a superpower, and they realized that their four tiny islands were simply too small to sustain this ambition. Therefore they tried to annex the land of their neighbors, but ultimately failed and got nuked twice.
In contrast, the US started with the 13 colonies in the northeast which was comparable to Japan in the landmass. However, the US had become a much more successful empire builder than Japan.
So I don't think Japan is really smarter than the US, since today the US is still their master, while they remain as the puppet.
Japan's strategists are smart but their elite culture is deficient in wisdom and cultural depth(not referring to the common man). Too much emphasis on the samurai spirit made them rash on occasions, though things have changed since then. US also had the advantage of a relatively empty contiguous continental landmass to expand upon. Japan wanted to do the same but faced resistance from Korea and China.
Is there a correlation between IQ and industrial development?And if it is could the latter be informing the other? And UK/Western Europe has lower IQ then East Asia. But then how do you explain the West prevailing over east Asia and tiny UK even force feeding high IQ Chinese opium?
I mean the fcukin IQ tables and success seem to be warped. Right?
There are a few cases where post WW2, poor nations escaped the middle income trap and became "developed". We won't count resource rich nations as they are not good models for most poor nations. They are: Singapore, Hong Kong, South Korea, Taiwan, Israel, Greece (might slip back), Portugal (might slip back), Spain, Ireland, Mauritius (just barely), and Japan (semi-industrialized previously). It's still too early to make definitive conclusions, give it a few more decades.
Interesting you bring up China's "century of humiliation". China over the course of history was either lead by Han or Northern minority groups (Mongol, Manchu/Jurchen, Khitan) and there were certain national tendencies with each. Han leadership tend to create a country that is initially very militaristic (consolidating ethnic han states) but eventually that eroded out of peace and out of that came technological and cultural flourishing. Northern ethnic minorities however are generally better at territorial expansion mainly due to horses, strong military culture and desire for geographically larger empires. Over time their militarism also decayed as their life style becomes more Han but there isn't much that replaces it due to lacking in
cultural depth. This is exemplified by the Manchu rule of Qing dynasty. Initially they were very successful in their military campaigns but as the centuries passed they didn't develop the civilian/technology/commerce/knowledge sphere as much (compare this with Song dynasty where natural gas drilling and piping it to homes was a thing) and proved inept in developing China in the later years, creating a vast gap with the Europeans. Mainly caused by lack of external competition/stimulus, very different from the European experience at the time or the "Spring and Autumn/Warring States" period in China which produced much of ancient China's cultural heritage.
How can we have a control comparison with the Han rule you may ask? There is no exact control but certain eras have similarities. During the Ming dynasty (the dynasty before Qing) ruled by Han, they were able to maintain parity (more of a race with changing of places) with Europe in terms of firearms and exceeded Europe in terms of firearm adoption rates at points. That ended due large famines, triggering a massive rebellion weakening the state. A Ming official opened the gates to allow the Manchus into the central plains, ending the Ming dynasty. While the Qing dynasty had little regard towards technology and its importance, consistently rejected learning from the outside and forced extreme isolationism. We can consider this a total breakdown of the meritocratic system. In many ways Qing regressed from the previous dynasty.
Many contemporary Chinese strategists have studied what you have brought up. The power disparity between Qing dyansty and European powers was the vast difference between qualitative aspect of gdp as the quantity of gdp was many times (estimated at 6 times bigger) Britain during start of the opium wars. China's gdp production mainly consisted of silk, porcelain, tea, crafts, paper, agriculture, and quite a developed service industry, all this in large quantities produced high gdp figures and economic activity. Contrast this with the smaller Western national economies who were focused producing steel, steam engines, warships, cannons, and firearms. This is exactly why Chinese strategists (the hardcore ones) give no damns about gdp but purely focuses on the real economy and highest tiers of technology as low tech in large numbers means less to them. North Koreans are similar (slightly more extreme manifestation in the current era), they would rather starve to death than not produce weapons/heavy industry and won't focus on satisfying the impulsive needs of the flesh due to experiences of history.
In the current era of globalization China will be bombarded with external stimuli to cultivate itself with. As long as China reaches out to the outside world, a reversal into the "century of humliation" is unlikely. The development of a country is very much hinged on its environmental dynamic and internal organization, potential is mainly a product of cultural depth and population intelligence, potential can only be manifested if it is properly cultivated.
I have no doubt about that and I know China will produce even more geniuses in the future. But out of curiousity where was this "genius production" in 1918? Hibernating???
It was both hibernating and uncultivated from the backwards and oppressive Qing dynasty, the genetic and cultural (depth) potential was there. After the Qing dynasty collapsed (1912) many intellectuals sprung up like Dr. Sun Yat Sen who mapped out China's future in many areas for the next century and beyond. By 1949 China only had 20,000 trained engineers nation wide, despite this they embarked upon various ambitious infrastructure projects.
Dr. Sun Yat Sen's rail and highway development map for China in 1919. Unfortunately Taiwan was controlled by Japan at the time.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Russians and Ukrainian intellectuals are some of the smartest people I know. I am not talking about the drunks you see in viral videos but educated and ambitious people (there are plenty). The USSR system managed to create an environment that produces some of the greatest minds but is unable to balance resources for the common man, especially apparent in Ukraine after USSR collapse causing severe brain drain. They were able to create a system that amplified human development for those on the far right side of the IQ bell curve by concentrating resources within institutions to promote this group but over stretched their resources due to a weak economic base.
Globalization is a catalyst for various population groups to revert to its mean potential, though it will take some decades/century.
Cultural depth is important for the furthering development of one's population. The classical cultures like the Arabs and Iranians have an advantage compared to some if they manage to improve upon old foundations. Personally I'm big on Iran due to its historic role in forming higher learning institutions, industrious attitude and abundance of cultural wealth. On a side note people often have the misconception that America is culture-less and rootless, it's not entirely true. It is true for the a portion of the masses but the educated ones and elites are a continuation of classical Europe with their own tangent, regional variation and absorption of other cultures.
Unless you have any evidence showing that people in countries like South Korea, Taiwan and China had a high IQ prior to industrialization, you're making a baseless argument.
Mongolia is not industrialized and has an IQ of 98-100. It is a very poor nation outside of the elites. As explained before their steppe culture is a barrier to industrialization and change is taking place amongst their elites, it will take a long time before this culture dissipates into the general population.
In Inner Mongolia of China where more Mongols live than in Mongolia (5vs3 million) has one of the highest concentrations of heavy industries in China.
...I myself would like to read much more, but the data collection I have seen "grounding" a lot of it hitherto on the subject is frankly appalling (given both political correctness from one end and atrocious jumping the gun from another...and all that lies in between) given the even greater depth in the realm of statistics I have read/studied/practiced (and that daisy chain keeps going for a while for me personally).
