Social Trust in Romania IV: the IQQ, the EQ, the FQ, the EUQ and the GQ

hold on don't go let me explain

Last time I imparted a choice autobiographical titbit EXPOSING the absorption of Romania's rural police forces into Gypsy clientage networks, resulting in anarcho-tyranny in the provinces¹. The time before that I declaimed as to the pernicious effect of Gypsy moral particularism on Romanian social trust. I suggested in addition—no doubt to the delight of all you cuckporn freaks out there—that the wasting of interpersonal trust is exacerbated by the post-communist increase in Roma/Romanian miscegenation, a drear circumstance to which I attached extravagantly pessimistic estimates of frequency. I also conjectured in passing as to the growing influence of Gypsy anti-culture on a culturally and aesthetically decapitated society.

Towards the end of this poast I will resume my expatiation on the last of these subjects. But my chief interest herein is needlessly to violate the sensibilities of my few Romanian readers by introducing the topic of GROUP MEAN INTELLIGENCE QUOTIENTS (sorry but a recent survey indicates it’s below 90 and falling but it gets worse read on). In the course of doing so I intend to fulminate impotently against both the EU and rassenmischung.

IQ and the GQ

It is understandably a source of immense irritation to patriotic Romanians that past measures of their nation’s mean IQ have landed unfeelingly in the sub-95 range, in the company of countries like Albania and Turkey. The ‘famous’ Lynn & Vanhanen survey puts it at around 91.

SOURCE

If this were not suficient de rău, how’s this as a fresh insult: according to more recent data, based on IQ-proxy PISA scores, the Romanian mean has since declined to the extent that it now occupies the 85-90 range².

SOURCE Observe that even Hither Turan has pulled ahead of Romania; the Vlachs’ Illyrian homeland (sorry uncalled for), ‘Kosova’ and Albanoid-rich ‘NoRTh MaCEdoNIa’ are still behind though…so that’s something!

It gets still more dire. Romania is equal ‘second’ worldwide—suntem doilea din lumea!—as an exponent of dysgenic fertility (i.e. there’s a negative correlation between the number of children born and national average IQ). This casts deep shade on Romanian satisfaction at occupying second place in EU fertility statistics with a sub-replacement rate 1.65 children per human-with-uterus: suntem doilea din EUropa!

SOURCE

What’s going on here? In summary it’s pretty simple. Consistent with my earlier observations about miscegenation—as well as the intense kin-orientation of Gypsy society—the relatively healthy ‘Romanian’ birthrate is not driven chiefly by fertile pair-bondings of snow-(off-)white Romanians. It’s the Gypsies, with or without a Romanian ‘partner’, who are really pumping out the spawn—and an increasing number of them are enrolled in the schools whose pupils produce the test scores that are the source of the data above.

HOORAY FOR aSSiMiLaTiOn!

THE EUQ

Before expanding on the above, I want to introduce you to The EU Effect. I may—but then again I may not—have more to say on the subject in a future polemic. For the time being, keep in mind the following.

Many (most?) Romanians belonging to the ‘smart fraction’ have gone west: to Germany, Belgium, The Netherlands, Italy, Spain and so forth. In addition, a large quantity of grugs of the distinctively Romanian non-specialised manual worker type—fortified by their boundless and usually unwarranted self-assurance they will give just about anything a try for money, no matter whether they really know anything about it—are la occident too. Moreover, a huge number of Gypsies are also there, contributing as usual to intercommunal harmony³. Finally, it’s a fact that those left behind in Romania tend to belong to…the not-so-smart fraction, or at least the not-so-smart fraction of the smart fraction.

Recently, however, evidence that Romanian citizens are returning in considerable numbers from Western Europe has occasioned much excitement—and Romanians are very excitable—alike among nationalists and midwit line-go-up types, a coalition of interests not nearly as uncommon as you might think. The assumption they make, of course, is that most returnees belong to the aforementioned smart fraction: brain-drainul se inversează!

Yet caution is warranted on this score, for three reasons. First, even though anecdotal evidence indicates that some of the returnees are doctors and lawyers and engineers, as far as I know there are no statistics showing that most (let alone all) of them are members of the *cognitive elite*. Some will in fact be grugs, outcompeted abroad by newer sources of even cheaper labour⁴.

Second, the smart fraction is notorious for its low fertility, which means that their return is unlikely to reverse the dysgenic trend observed above. On the upside, what with many of these geniuses already having had their only child, their homecoming won’t lead to a collapse in the vaunted second-in-EU Romanian birthrate; the ‘Roma’ will take care of the national interest there…

Third, as I said above, we’re talking about Romanian citizens here. There is no data whatever on how many of the returned are actual Romanians. In other words, what proportion of returnees are in fact Gypsies? Are the frequent peregrinations of the Roma between Romania and occidentul—take a Wizz Air flight from a yookay airport to Bucharest or vice versa and you will see what I mean—being counted among the highly contingent and impressionistic figures elatedly quoted in support of the reverse brain-drain hypothesis? Amidst the intoxication of wishful thinking, nobody’s telling. Nor, it seems, are they much interested in finding out.

But so much, for now, for the EUQ. Let us continue our examination of the interaction between the GQ and the IQQ by introducing the EQ (Edumakayshun Question) and the FQ (Fertility Question).

Gypsy IQ in brief

I won’t beat around the bush. Gypsies are extremely cunning and brazen—but they’re dumb as dogshit. One measurement of ‘Roma’ IQ in Romania found an average of 60, comparable to that of Australian Aborigines. Oddly (one explanation might posit stochastic variation within significant ceiling and floor effects), mean scores for Gypsies elsewhere are reportedly higher: 85 in Slovenia, 83 in Slovakia and 70 in Serbia.

Fertility, education and IQ statistics

As I said above, Gypsies are extremely fertile at the population level, evincing a reproductive/child-rearing pattern that KMac and other Rushton-appreciators refer to as a low-investment/r-type strategy (as an Anglo-Chinaman, just so you know, you’re what’s known as a K-strategist…like a lion my friend).

KMac:

For the Rom, high fertility is something of a social obligation. Having large numbers of children gives prestige to a family, while a woman who cannot have children is a failure.

The most estimable F. Roger Devlin:

Pregnancies are one week shorter than among European women, and children are smaller at birth–both biological traits associated with a high-fertility, r-type reproduction…local figures [include]: 3.0 children per woman in Bulgaria, 3.03 in Serbia, 3.12 in Hungary, 3.2 in Bratislava, 3.3 to 3.7 for “some” groups in Romania, 3.9 in Croatia, and 4.3 in Eastern Slovakia.

Both the Gypsies and the problems associated with them will multiply in the coming years. The Minister of Education of one unspecified EU state reports that already “in his country [which country I wonder…], every third child entering school is Roma.”

But you needn’t take the hateful words of these racists as good coin. According to the fact-checked and disinformation-free Balkan Insight:

Romania‘s average 2022 results were about the same as in 2018 in mathematics, reading and science, but in mathematics, average scores were lower than those observed in 2012 and 2015. The overall trend since 2012 in reading and science can be described as flat – neither improving nor declining.

However, the trend is more positive when the expansion of secondary education to previously marginalised populations in the country is also considered. Between 2012 and 2022, the number of 15-year-olds eligible to sit the PISA test increased in Romania. “This suggests that secondary school enrolment increased significantly,” the report said.

 NB: MaRGinALiseD POpULaTiONs wat means

In addition to what all this says about the raw demographics of Romania (i.e. brain-drain + Romanian grug exodus = more Gypsies as share of total population than ever), the recent increase in school attendance among Gypsies represents a qualitative break with the past. Traditionally, Gypsy taboos on intercourse with the gadje, as well as their occupation of ‘ecological niche activities’ involving, frankly, crime of various kinds, have been accompanied by a somewhat minimal emphasis on formal education. But this is apparently changing.

Devlin again:

Traditional Gypsy education is informal and oral…in the typical Roma family, “verbal communication is characterized by the absence of abstract or subtle concepts.” Many Gypsies are illiterate, and though most Gypsy children now start school, their attendance is irregular.

Whether their school attendance is generally irregular or not, it would appear, based on Balkan Insight’s carefully fact-checked reporting alone, that a relatively large number of Gypsy children now remain in secondary education long enough to participate in formal aptitude testing. This fact may well be an explanation for Romania’s near Arab-tier national maths and science PISA scores.

SOURCE

Do you begin to comprehend why it might be that Romania is running equal-second in the world dysgenic fertility countdown, and equal second-last with Albania and Montenegro—all of them now behind Turkey!—in the European IQ stakes?

Oh ok I will spell it out then. As more children with two Gypsy parents abide unto graduation in the education system, their test results (PISA scores used as proxies for IQ) act as a drag on measured national mean intelligence; and this, combined with the high fertility of the Gypsies, accords Romania near-front running in world dysgenic fertility stats.

However, as prefigured, I’ve got in mind a second, complementary accounting: miscegenation. The ever-hastening interpenetration of Romanian and Rom—as you will remember, I have estimated the prevalence of mixed-race yoof at up to 20 per cent in the bigger cities—and the consequent introgression of Gypsy genes coded: stoopid, is further undermining national average IQ.

NOTICING: I’m not the only one who gets it; see also here, wherein Gypsies are described as ‘not entirely discrete from the general population’, and Romania is referred to half in jest as ‘The true postracial society’

Look at it this way. If my very conservative estimate of the Gypsy population is correct (see here), and they indeed comprise a mere five per cent of the Romanian total, then there are a million of them resident in Romania. But consider on the other hand that this must represent an under-accounting, because it classifies as Gypsies only people who respond to the Romanian census AND who self-describe as ‘Roma’.

How many more don’t respond to the Romanian census? How many are Gypsies in whole or in part but don’t describe themselves as such? How many are mostly resident in Romania but are characteristically peripatetic and pretend for one reason or another to be resident elsewhere?

If we put these three shadow categories together, their number must be pretty large. Maybe it’s another million—or is it a further two million? If we take the lower number it means that 10 per cent of the population has full or (recent) partial Gypsy ancestry. By taking the higher figure we arrive at 15 per cent.

Given these numbers, can there really be much doubt that Gypsy full-bloods are the main but not the only drivers of dysgenic fertility in Romania; AND CAN I GET A WITNESS TO TESTIFY that muh

MISCEGENATION EXPLANATION

for falling mean IQ and dysgenic fertility

in the NATION

has at least some prima facie plausibility as an additional driving factor?

Somebody please deploy THE SCIENCE!

INTERMARRIAGE WHY

Why do Romanian women—and it is mostly women—marry Gypsies? Perhaps, as the grug population has decreased through emigration to the west, ordinary lower-class chix have struggled to find Romanian husbands. At any rate there are always plenty of young Gypsy dudes about—and, thanks to the opportunities availed them by the EU, they’re bolder and all-round more salient than ever.

To the degree that SSH categories apply to TRAD societies, a Rom might be a beta or a delta in his vitsa, but to the gadje he always presents himself as an alpha baro baro. He xev meni bling, acquired by dint of his participation in the ‘shadow economy’ (see below!); he has the shiniest and hottest white car (for some reason it’s usually white); and he walks with greater swag and strains to drive faster and more dangerously than anybody else.

To many women, whether they admit it or no, these attributes—bespeaking a fast life-history strategy—are attractively masculine. They are especially so to the hairdressers, secretaries, shop assistants, manicurists and videochet girls who never made it to Verona, Leeds or Munich. This kind of female fast life-history strategist is also very susceptible to mass media messaging, which for quite some time has been replete with the products of Gypsy anti-culture.

KULCHAH and the wealth of nations

Yet it’s not only women, and not only the young, who are pulled into the orbit of Gypsy anti-culture. It’s common to observe peasants in their 60s driving a Dacia Logan, the locally-manufactured vehicle of necessity if not choice for the modest of means, with muzica manele blaring through open windows. This sort of thing is also played on the radios of taxis (SHOCKAH), as well as in restaurants of varying standards—expensive ones not widely excepted—at near conversation-precluding volume.

MUZICA MANELE SEXY PARTY 2024: note rassenmischung subtext

Put simply, the Gypsies are just a lot wealthier than they used to be, and being so advantaged they have a great deal more soft power over taste and culture than they ever did before. By now you doubtless think I have discoursed sufficiently, without real evidence, on the culturally deleterious influence of free movement of people, goods, money and services within the EU. You want DATA? Check this out.

Here, in figures collected about 10 years ago, Romania handily makes the all-European top-ten, and it’s top-three in the EU. What is the source of all this money? Can there be any doubt that a great part of it—in all likelihood the greatest part—comes from Gypsy enterprise in Western Europe?

I’ve previously given some examples of Gypsy endeavours la occidentul. Here’s another: a professional shoplifting ring run on a near-industrial scale. The principals, busted by yookay police (who says they never do their job?) after attempting the theft of over £40,000 worth of goods from a single supermarket, were these two:

The person on the right is very probably not of ‘Romani’ extraction. Perhaps Romanian readers can tell me what they think the ethnicity of the person on the left might be. Actually don’t bother; I know you’re hopeless at this.

Here’s another, likely a branch of the same operation. The three convicted, all obviously Gypsies, were busted after thieving £38,000 worth of crap from yookay ‘high street stores’.

So here you have the GDP-enhancing results of post-communist interethnic fraternisation EXPLAINED IN THREE EASY VISUALS: a Romanian woman working with a Gypsy man to run an immensely lucrative criminal enterprise in Western Europe, and three Gypsy women doing further ‘theft-on-order’ for the same operation.

Make no mistake: this is organised crime, coordinated hierarchically, and the economic power it yields is the source of Gypsy anti-cultural ascendancy in Romania. It is the Gypsy Big Man—the Rom Baro—who directs and administers the very considerable parts of the ‘shadow economy’ realised by this kind of activity. It is his outlaw code that most conspicuously produces wealth and accompanying cultural capital, expressed in the money-and-bitchez lyrics of muzica manele. At the crudest and most impressionable plebeian level, women want him. Therefore, men want to be him.

I’ve said something very similar to the below more than once before, and I’m gonna say it again now, and I’m probably gonna reiterate it at least once down the line.

In the middle of last century, the communists brutally extinguished the boyars who had formed Romania’s aristocracy and who had later, by the middle of the 19^th century, come to almost wholly comprise its first small native middle class. In the last decade or two, the EU has stripped the nation of a second incipient middle class, which had emerged from the professional and bureaucratic layers of the communist era.

Absent any other real social models, the plebeian mass of people who have not left for the west are receptive to the ethics and aesthetics of the newly cashed-up and culturally regnant Gypsy Big Man. The Romanian plebes, even they are not yet in most cases themselves part-Gypsy, have nevertheless via cultural inter-assimilation become like the Gypsies: uncivil, cocky, showy, opportunistic, low-trust, high time-preference, fast life-history strategists. I guess you could say that these are all adaptive traits in the relatively unstable ecology of contemporary Romania⁵.

But this is not the whole story. Communism, the Gypsies and the EU are properly responsible only in a proximate sense for shaping the Romanian character. Next time I turn to interrogate its deeper historical roots.

1. I've poured scorn on Romanian white-collar middle class corruption neurosis before, but corruption is certainly there and you can't blame em for wanting it gone. It’s how they want to get it gone that seems to me…unwholesome.

2. I’m relcutant to complicate matters by introducing the HQ (Hungarian Question). Yet there are 1.2 million Magyars in Romania—c. 12 per cent of the population—and the mean IQ of their trans-Hajnal coethnics in Hungary proper is in the 97-100 range. What is their effect on the average IQ of Romania? Does it counteract that of the Gypsies? Where does this leave the mean IQ of TRVE Romanians? As far as I know there’s just NO DATA on any of it.

3. Notice that in the yookay Gypsies are seen as too disrespectful of public goods even by Pakistanis ffs; I mean have you even seen the filthy streets in Pakistan I haven’t

4. Many grugs might be in for a nasty shock when they get home: 100,000 a year—and this is only the number of ‘Asiatics’! How many more admitted are Africans, Turks, Arabs etc?

5. But in which direction, I wonder, dominantly proceeds causality? Another time maybe…