Information icon.svg Please vote in the 2017 board of trustees election. The cabal thanks you for your service.

John Fuerst

From RationalWiki
Jump to: navigation, search
The colorful pseudoscience
Icon race.svg
Hating thy neighbour
Divide and conquer
—John Fuerst[1]
To be blunt, Fuerst is an intellectually dishonest racist, who I no longer regard as worth interacting with at all. I'm sure he has written a 100+ page article -- he really seems to have nothing but time and racist animosity driving him.
—Professor of Philosophy Jonathan Kaplan[2]

John Fuerst (online alias: Chuck) is a research fellow at the Ulster Institute for Social Research, a controversial think-tank that publishes the Mankind Quarterly that supports hereditarianismWikipedia's W.svg, described by one contemporary scholar as "a pugnacious journal conceived by right-wing intellectuals as a reaction against the liberal antiracism of postwar anthropology"[3] and a "racist... pseudo-scholarly journal" by the Southern Poverty Law Center.[4]

Several contributors to the Mankind Quarterly (including its assistant editor Richard Lynn) have been bankrolled by grants from the Pioneer Fund, an organisation based in the US dedicated to promoting eugenics and racialism, whose founding members in the 1930s had Nazi sympathies.[5][6]

Fuerst has published in the pseudo-journals Open Behavioral Genetics and Open Differential Psychology[note 1] set up by Emil O. W. Kirkegaard.

Straight from the horse's mouth


John illustrates an argument shared by nationalist, anti-Semitics who think Jews are behind "massive non-white immigration" to US and destroying "white Christian" America:[7][8]

The founders of "neoconservatism" were primarily jewish leftists who felt that the democratic party was not sufficiently supportive of Israel as an ethno-nationalist state. The jewish element explains why they are utterly hostile to all forms of populism and nationalism except in the case of Israel. Trump is dangerous to them because he is a genuine American patriot, one who isn't indebted to Republican Jewish Coalition/Israel lobby.
neoconservatives: wars for Jewish nationalism (Israel) while a war against a coherent American nation, tax cuts for mostly progressive billionaires while open borders to keep wages down, dog whistling to while moral signaling against a mostly White Christian base. IMO, the party deserves to be destroyed.
Excellent article, from Counter Currents, on Jewish moral hypocrisy. One might make more explicit the implicit modifiers e.g., "a disproportionate number of", but ... "Jews are, of course, deeply hypocritical in their political behavior. A Jew who advocates open borders for Western nations while supporting the preservation of a Jewish state in Israel is clearly guilty of failing to practice what he preaches. Since the vast majority of Diaspora Jews and all major Jewish organizations both support Israel as an apartheid ethnostate and also favor the dissolution of their host nations through massive non-White immigration, we can justly call Jews a hypocritical race on this important subject.

Blacks and race

In this quote, Fuerst justifies colonialism by pointing to the indigenous African's lesser intelligence, which constitutes as a racist argument. Fuerst backs up intelligence differences through IQ tests, however, IQ tests are not an absolute determinate for intelligence. Also, Fuerst does not factor in class oppression and poor education given to minorities.

Because Blacks are cognitively less apt, colonialism was a net good; it jump started African societal development. As for cognitive tests, whether they are predicatively biased or not is an empirical question. The issue of predictive bias is distinct from that of whether scores differences have the same meaning within and between groups. For example, cognitive tests are about as predictive of job performance for first generation Hispanics as for third generation (non-Hispanic) Whites. I can guarantee, though, that the first generation Hispanic/ third generation Whites gap is partially due to linguistic bias. Separate issues. Causation is yet another.

Is a test equally predicative for group A and B? Does the between group score difference have the same psychometric meaning as within group differences? Does the score difference have the same causal antecedents as the within group differences? Separate questions.As for education, it probably counts for a significant portion of the Black American-Black African Achievement/IQ gaps. One can see that it explains little of the White-Black American one simply by looking at the differentials within schools controlling for attendance selectivity. I did this here using department of defense schools. As for regional performance on IQ tests, I would be surprised if there wasn’t gene-environment co-evolution. If North Eurasian cultures socially and materially rewarded intellectual performance, then, pre-welfare state, there should have been selection for more intelligent individuals. Biology shapes culture; culture shapes biology.

Maybe read up on the issue some more. Start here.[9]

Why Racialism is Sensible: A Pithy Rejoinder to The Prussian[1]


Simple realpolitik strategy for actual conservatives: shut the borders and outbreed liberals. GSS Fertility rates: Extremely liberal (2.5%) -- 1.61 Liberal (12.7%) -- 1.72
Slightly liberal (11.3%) -- 1.58
Moderate (39.9%) -- 2.14
Slightly conservative (15.6%) -- 2.03
Conservative (14.3%) -- 2.34
Extremely conservative (3.7%) -- 2.62 Instead they are cowered and cucked into inviting 10s of millions of foot soldiers for the other side.[10]

Simple realpolitik strategy for actual conservatives: shut the borders and outbreed liberals
This just screams for a Great Wall of America. Don't cuck out Ohio!
Going to early vote for Trump now. Will see if I can do it multiple times.[7]

View of RationalWiki

They finally created an entry for me, specifically: I wonder if I can get an SPLC entry, too. These guys are losers. Real pathetic.[7]
apparently, it's only "real science" when it confirms radical leftist biases.[7]

See also

External links


  1. Although both journals purport to be peer-reviewed, they aren't. Formal peer-review involves independent referees providing detailed critiques of article submissions, usually taking between two and four weeks to fully scrutinise; sometimes longer. In contrast referees for Open Behavoural Genetics and Open Differential Psychology review submissions within days and referees are not independent; instead they communicate with each other on the same message board (Open Psych) and are not impartial. Referees for Open Behavioural Genetics are strongly biased towards racialism, in other words the journal is not scientific since referees support the advocacy of racialist pseudoscience before even reviewing submissions. This explains why no submission has ever been published by the journal that argues against racialism.


  1. 1.0 1.1
  3. Dubow, Saul. (2015). "Racial Irredentism, Ethnogenesis, and White Supremacy in High-Apartheid South Africa". Kronos. 41: 236-264; Dubow is Smuts Professor of Commonwealth HistoryWikipedia's W.svg at the University of Cambridge.
  4. [ Richard Lynn: Southern Poverty Law Center.
  5. Lombardo, Paul A. (2001). "The American breed: Nazi eugenics and the origins of the Pioneer Fund." Alb. L. Rev. 65: 743-830.
  6. Tucker, William H. (2002). "A closer look at the Pioneer Fund: Response to Rushton." Alb. L. Rev. 66: 1145.
  7. 7.0 7.1 7.2 7.3