IQ's of Nazi Criminals
Pyro Ink
I picked this up from Darryl Miyaguchi's website. He's a pretty cool guy
who runs a page with uncommonly difficult IQ tests.
In 1945, an army psychologist named G.M. Gilbert, was allowed to examine the
Nazi leaders who were tried at Nuremberg for war crimes. Among other tests,
a German version of the Wechsler-Bellevue was administered. Here are the
results:
1 Hjalmar Schacht 143
2 Arthur Seyss-Inquart 141
3 Hermann Goering 138
4 Karl Doenitz 138
5 Franz von Papen 134
6 Eric Raeder 134
7 Dr. Hans Frank 130
8 Hans Fritsche 130
9 Baldur von Schirach 130
10 Joachim von Ribbentrop 129
11 Wilhelm Keitel 129
12 Albert Speer 128
13 Alfred Jodl 127
14 Alfred Rosenberg 127
15 Constantin von Neurath 125
16 Walther Funk 124
17 Wilhelm Frick 124
18 Rudolf Hess 120
You may find these data in The Nuremberg Mind: The Psychology of the Nazi
Leaders by Florence R. Miale and Michael Selzer, as well as in The Reich
Marshal: A Biography of Hermann Goering by Leonard Mosley.
In his page, Darryl points out that there are no towering IQ's. However,
one must keep in mind that many of these war criminals were being tortured;
others were stressed knowing they were about to get hanged. Stress can
adversely affect one's IQ score. Julius Streicher, who is said to have an
IQ of 106, was repeatedly tortured while he was held in custudy. Was his IQ
really 106? C'mon! He obviously had other things on his mind than scoring
high on an IQ test, as he was getting beaten on a daily basis.
Joseph Goebbels, the propaganda minister, was obviously a genius. He is not
on the list, but there is reason to believe his IQ was at least 160. The
intellectuals who were supportive of Hitler are also not on the list.
Ezra Pound was no idiot, neither was Salvador Dali. Freidrich Neitzsche was
no idiot, neither was Richard Wagner. Mark Twain was no idiot, neither was
Francois Marie Arouet. Yet, PC'ers would have you believe that fascists are
necessarily ignorant, that they can never make a good point, because they
have "psychological problems", or perhaps they are "brainwashed", or maybe
they are "shallow", or maybe they are just "ignorant". C'mon, you have
heard these cliches. Being a National Socialist means you have no points,
it means you are _automatically_wrong_; however, being PC means you are
right at least 99% of the time. Let's just take the easy road and not think
for ourselves, eh? Who wants trouble when we can just spout mushy-headed,
snuffy, smug bromides, and then get easy acceptance, right?
The PC'ers would have you believe being syrupy equates to intelligence; that
saying "racism is bad" or "hate is evil", and the like, means you have some
sort of wisdom in you. They would have you believe that blathering about
the horrors of Negro slavery means you automatically are worthy of more
attention; that talking about the Holocaust means your IQ just might be a
bit higher, etc. These are stupid MYTHS, and even reasonable people have
come to believe them. I have observed it.
For example, I frequent a chatroom in which a young female who goes to
Stanford hangs out. Her SAT is supposedly in the 1450 range. She is kinda
cool, I mean, while she is not racist, she's not a pushy PC'er either.
She's just reasonable and recognizes how lame the PC platitudes are,
although she does her fair share of Nazi-bashing, which is okay.
Her thinking ability is pretty good, but even she is given to spewing
garbage, I suppose out of a desire to impress. For example, the movie
Amistad once became the topic, and her opinion of the movie was very high.
To paraphrase her:
"Most people don't realize just how terrible it was for the slaves...
"While this movie might not have been completely accurate from the angle of
a historian, I think intelligent people can distinguish between the
feel-good parts and reality."
Most people don't realize how terrible it was for slaves? This comment is
just plain dumb. Do most people believe slavery was some sort of ball?
That people enjoy being slaves? Of course not! The slave owners obviously
had to maintain a threatening and intimidating environment to deter the
slaves from trying to escape or from fighting back. I don't think she
realized the extent of the inaccuracy of the movie; even Afrocentrists have
called it "an insult to blacks" and "the Jewish answer to Jewish enslavement
of blacks." Afrocentrists have called the movie a piece of garbage,
literally. Yet, Jew PC'ers and self-hating, obsequious goyim suck up to
these types of movies. If Spielberg makes a movie it means the movie is
_automatically_ worthy of praise. It's PC, after all. (Just to note, in
ancient Egypt women and children were repeatedly whipped.)
Darryl goes on to suggest, based on the IQ scores (and perhaps his bias),
that the Nazi leaders lacked originality. Hello, wake up! IQ tests don't
measure creativity. Above the threshold of 115, IQ and creativity don't
correlate much. Many people with cognitive impairments and defects have
excelled in the arts.
It is believed by IQ test observers that the optimum IQ for military leaders
(generally) is about 125. While some degree of analytical ability is
important, the ability to relate to the common people is also needed.
Not long ago a study was conducted to find the average IQ of Ph.D'.s I
don't remember who conducted the study, or what test was used. However, I
know that the average turned out to be 127. Keep in mind that most people
tend to exaggerate their scores; the score you have in your head which you
believe represents you may be inflated, due to your own ego! The online
tests, with the exception of those in Darryl's website, are trash. The test
at www.iqtest.com will overrate you by 20-30 points, for example.
jum...@my-deja.com
In article <#fPeR3t3#GA.429@cpmsnbbsa02>,
"Pyro Ink" <Vald...@email.msn.com> wrote:
> IQ's of Nazi leaders tried for war crimes ...
If they led Germany into ignominous defeat, and were tried on
"war crimes" how can anyone claim they had a high-IQ ?
> Yet, PC'ers would have you believe that fascists are
> necessarily ignorant, that they can never make a good point,
> because they have "psychological problems", or perhaps they
> are "brainwashed", or maybe they are "shallow", or maybe they are
> just "ignorant".
Could you respond to the discussion rather than bringing up your
"strawman" arguments? As a matter of record, it was instead the
Nazis who were trying to rid themselves of folks labelled as having
"psychological problems" -- the "mentally ill" and "infirm" -- while
denying that any of those problems could possibly apply to themselves.
Eventually the forms of political extremism self-destruct: it's as
if almost _by_definition_ they -must- self-destruct since they became
unstable on account of their extremism.
- regards
- jb
.
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Share what you know. Learn what you don't.