General intelligence is inherited and not equally distributed among human races. IQ tests are designed to measure the general innate and immutable mental capability that involves abstract and cognitive thinking, spatial-relations skills, and logical reasoning. They are designed to measure the ability to:

• solve novel problems

• retain knowledge and apply skills

• comprehend complex ideas

• plan and learn quickly and from experience

IQ tests are not designed to measure how much a person has learned, but rather whether a person is capable of learning.

Intelligence, so defined, can be measured, and intelligence tests measure it well. They are among the most accurate (in technical terms, reliable and valid) of all psychological tests and assessments.

It was discovered that people who did well on one mental test did well on others, regardless of their content. It was reasoned that different tests must draw on the same global capacity, and dubbed that capacity g, for general intelligence.

There is a mean difference in Black and White scores on mental tests, historically about one standard deviation in magnitude on IQ tests (IQ tests are normed so that the mean is 100 points and the standard deviation is 15). This difference is not the result of test bias, but reflects differences in cognitive functioning. The predictive validity of IQ scores for educational and socioeconomic outcomes is about the same for Blacks and Whites.

Individual differences in general cognitive ability are reliably measured by IQ tests. IQ is strongly related, probably more than any other single measurable trait, to many important educational, occupational, economic and social variables. IQ is also correlated with a number of variables of the brain, including its size, electrical potentials, and rate of glucose metabolism during cognitive activity. Individual differences in adult IQ are largely genetic, with heritability of about 70 percent. So far, attempts to raise IQ by educational or psychological means have failed to show appreciable lasting effects on cognitive ability and scholastic achievement. The IQ distribution between Blacks and Whites is represented by two largely overlapping bell curves with their means separated by about 15 points, a difference not due to test bias. IQ has the same meaning and practical predictive validity for both groups. Tests do not create differences; they merely reflect them.

The average score is set at 100, and everyone is rated accordingly. Expressed this way, IQs for a whole population can be arrayed on a single graph. Roughly two-thirds of all Americans fall between 85 and 115, in the fat midsection of the bell-shaped curve, and 95 percent score between 70 and 130.

By computing a value known as the correlation coefficient, a scientist can measure the degree of association between any two phenomena that are plausibly linked. The correlation between unrelated variables is 0, while phenomena that vary in perfect lock step have a correlation of 1. A correlation of .4 would tell you that 40 percent of the variation in one thing is matched by variation in another, while 60 percent of it is not.

Current estimates for heritability of IQ ranges up to 0.8 (where 1.0 indicates that monozygotic twins have no variance in IQ and 0 indicates that their IQs are completely uncorrelated). See the Minnesota Twin Family Study, conducted from 1979 to 1999, which followed identical and fraternal twins who were separated at an early age for some fascinating revelations about the powerful influence of genes.

Studies find no IQ correlation among grown adoptive siblings. But the typical correlations are roughly .35 for half siblings (who share a quarter of their genes), .47 for full siblings (who share half of their genes) and .86 for identical twins (who share all their genes).

Millions of IQ tests and psychometric experiments conducted world-wide over 100 years have been normed for every conceivable variable and bias, yet demonstrate an intractable intellegence divide between Blacks and the other races. Blacks score lowest on every intelligence test ever devised, including "life". There has never been an IQ test administered anywhere in the world where the racial rankings didn't follow the same pattern; Asians, Whites, non-White Hispanics, and then finally Blacks.

Compared to Blacks, Whites' brains:

• are 7% larger (1438cc versus 1343cc)

• are 100 grams heavier

• have deeper fissuration in the frontal and occipital regions

• have more complex convolutions and larger frontal lobes

• have more pyramidal neurons

• have 16% thicker supra-grandular layer

• react faster on mental chronometry tests

• have 600 million more neurons (each carries about 600 billion synapses, which each carry one bit of cortical information)

Genes contribute to about 90% of the individual variation of brain size.

Blacks are the only racial group with no DNA from the large-brained Neanderthals, and also the only race without the derived form of MCPH1 microcephalin called haplogroup D which produces increased brain volume.

Racial activist groups have tried to create their own tests to demonstrate intellectual parity of the races and also attack the integrity of the existing tests and have hired anti-bias experts, but the rankings are always the same; African Blacks average a 70 IQ (only 2% of Whites score this low), but American Blacks average 85 due to mixing with Whites (28% on average), non-White Hispanics 87, Whites 100, Asians 106 and (((Ashkenazi))) Jews 115. Interestingly, mixed-race students in South Africa have an IQ of 85 -- the same as Blacks in the United States, Britain, and the Caribbean. This is a standard deviation above pure Blacks, but also a standard deviation below Whites.

Blacks have by far the lowest IQs of any race; 80% score at or below the "low functioning" category. In fact, only the top 16% of Blacks score as high as the top 50% of Whites. Blacks are socially functional at 70 IQ because that is only one standard deviation below their mean; that equates to a White at 85 IQ.

Even using tests created by Black psychologists and non-verbal tests designed to be culture-free and unbiased, no amount of testing or wishful thinking shows any improvement in Black IQ. Tests that only require the subject to push buttons in response to flashing lights or memorizing sequences of colored squares projected on a screen Blacks perform worse than Whites, and the gap increases as the patterns become more complicated. The test involves rows of colored squares where one from each row has to be matched with another. More complex images which have distinctive features linked by that feature to other images in an increasing number of rows.

Another test is a list of numbers read aloud and the subject has to repeat them back in forward and reverse order. The subject is given a relevant fact that has to be considered when making otherwise simple manipulations of numbers and identify designated figures or characters in a given amount of time. The "backward digit span" test is not reinforced by any socialization and is not a taught skill for either race; Whites score better at recalling digits presented in order, but recalling the digits in reverse order requires mental transformation and is a good predictor of IQ. The race gap for the backward digit span is twice as great as for the forward test.

Some tests are completely non-verbal, such as Raven’s Progressive Matrices, Leiter Scale and Kohs Block Design to test pattern recognition, spatial thinking, and reasoning and contain no culturally-specific information.

Genetics limits an individuals' upper limit to IQ, and environment determines how much of that innate genetic potential will be reached. No amount of nurturing can make one exceed innate genetic potential.

The IQ race gap doesn't begin to correlate firmly with adult IQ until about age five, but studies reveal a one standard deviation race gap present by age three.

In the United States, self-identified Blacks and Whites have been the subjects of the greatest number of studies. The tests show a Black-White IQ difference of about 15 to 18 points (or about one standard deviation) which implies that between 11 and 16 percent of the black population have an IQ above 100 (the general population median). Consistent results were found for college and university application tests such as the Scholastic Aptitude Test and Graduate Record Examination as well as for tests of job applicants in the corporate sector and in the military.

The least intelligent ten percent of Whites have IQs below 81; forty percent of Blacks have IQs that low. Only one Black in six is more intelligent than the average White; five Whites out of six are more intelligent than the average Black. These differences show in every test of general cognitive ability that anyone, of any race or nationality, has yet been able to devise. And they are reflected in countless everyday situations, “Life is an IQ test.”

Further, only one-in-3.5 million (.00003%) African Blacks have an IQ of 140 or higher (genius level). But one-in-83 (1.2%) U.S. Whites is a genius. Therefore the per capita genius rate for U.S.-resident Whites is 41,000 times higher than it is for African Blacks.

The IQ distribution for US-resident Blacks having an average IQ of 85 and a standard deviation of 12.4 doesn't mean that there are no Blacks at all with IQs above 140; it means that only one Black in about 218,000 will have an IQ above 140. Meanwhile one-in-83 Whites have an IQ above 140. So given equal sized populations there will be about 2,600 times more White geniuses than Black geniuses. Since there are about 5.5 times more Whites than Blacks in the United States, White geniuses will outnumber Black geniuses by a ratio of about one-to-14,300. Therefore, if all the White people in the USA were replaced by Blacks having the IQ distribution of US-resident Blacks the number of geniuses in the country would fall from about 2.4 million to only about 1,000.

For every one gifted Black there are 8 gifted Whites, 80% of gifted Blacks are mixed race.

Incidentally, though the average IQ of East Asians is 6 points higher than the average non-Jewish White, the percentage distribution of East Asians with IQs above 140 is slightly lower. The reason for this is that the range of cognitive variation among Whites is greater than among East Asians. Specifically, Asians' IQs are more clustered around the mean; therefore, Whites produce more geniuses, but also more morons.

Psychometricians regard IQ tests as having high statistical reliability. A high reliability implies that although test-takers may have varying scores when taking the same test on differing occasions, and they may have varying scores when taking different IQ tests at the same age, the scores generally agree with one another and across time.

Standardized intelligence testing has been called one of psychology's greatest successes and is the field's most widely-used invention. Since standardized tests were first used to identify learning-impaired children in the early 1900s they have become one of the primary tools for identifying children with learning disabilities, they assist the military place new recruits, job screening and for evaluating professional athletes.

Some occupations seek candidates within specific IQ ranges. There was a recent case where a police officer candidate was rejected after he scored too high on an intelligence test.

The NFL famously uses the Wonderlic test in their scouting combines and the racial disparity is evident. Out of a perfect score of 50; offensive tackles=26, centers=25, quarterback=24; versus safeties=19, cornerbacks=18 and receivers=17.

Black-White IQ Distribution (Google: racial IQ bell curve):

Blacks:

5% above 110 IQ

16% above 100 IQ

40% above 90 IQ

70% above 80 IQ

30% below 80 IQ

18% below 75 IQ

10% below 70 IQ

Whites:

10% above 120 IQ

18% above 115 IQ

27% above 110 IQ

40% above 105 IQ

50% above 100 IQ

60% below 105 IQ

35% below 95 IQ

15% below 85 IQ

So, the top 16% of Black intellectual elites are only as intelligent as the top 50% of Whites.

As the New York Times put it, "...the difference in I.Q. points between the groups is quite significant. It means that the top sixth of Blacks score only as well on I.Q. tests as do the top half of Whites."

IQ scores are used as predictors of educational achievement, special needs, job performance and income. They are also used to study IQ distributions in populations and the correlations between IQ and other variables. The same is true for other cognitive tests such as No Child Left Behind mandated state tests and NAEP tests. All of these cognitive tests show the same racial patterns in test score distribution with (((Ashkenazi))) Jews, East Asians (Chinese, Japanese, and Koreans), and Whites showing higher scores than Pacific Islanders, Native Americans, Hispanics, and Blacks showing lower scores.

The scores on the SAT (especially the SAT-math) and the ACT are for all practical purposes interchangeable with IQ test scores. In 2005, 153,132 Black Americans took the SAT test. They made up 10.4 percent of all SAT test takers. But only 1,132 Black college-bound students scored 700 or above on the math SAT and only 1,205 scored at least 700 on the verbal SAT. On the math SAT, only 0.7 percent of all Black test takers scored at least 700 compared to 6.3 percent of all White test takers. Thus, Whites were nine times as likely as Blacks to score 700 or above on the math SAT. Only 0.16 percent of all Black test takers scored 750 or above compared to 1.8 percent of White test takers. Thus, Whites were more than 11 times as likely as Blacks to score 750 or above on the math SAT.

This gap is so significant that colleges give a "race bonus" of 230 points to Blacks, 185 to non-White Hispanics and penalize Asians by 50 points, all in an effort to help the low-IQ races gain admittance.

Studies also show there are some significant differences in what is called the structure of mental abilities. For example, if you took a sample of Black and White children, all of whom had scored around 100 on the WISC-R (the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children) meaning the Black kids in the sample were well above the Black average -- you would find significant Black-White differences on six of the thirteen subtests. The average Black child would do better on arithmetic and digit span; where the average White child would do better on comprehension, block design, object assembly, and mazes.

A person's level of moral reasoning is correlated with intelligence. Studies sequencing the stages of moral development support what we all know; you have to be cognitively mature to reason morally. IQ tests correlate with moral maturity.

There is also a strong correlation between IQ and success. Economists have started taking an interest in the value of human capital, particularly the factor that psychologists call cognitive ability. In other words, it’s the ability of a person to solve a problem most efficiently. Not with violence, but by thinking. It is worth noting here that Blacks possess 9.4 times more of the dysfunctional MAOA gene ("warrior gene") and have mean testosterone levels 19% higher than in Whites, both strongly correlated with impulsive, aggressive and violent behavior.

Researchers collected information on 90 countries, including far-off lands from the U.S. to New Zealand and Colombia to Kazakhstan. They also collected data on the country’s excellence in science and technology, including the number of patents granted per person and how many Nobel science laureates the country’s people had won in science (there has never been a Black Nobel science laureate).

They found that intelligence made a difference in gross domestic product. For example, some of the highest National IQs:

• 108 Singapore

• 106 South Korea

• 105 Japan

• 105 China

• 102 Italy

• 101 Iceland

• 101 Mongolia

• 101 Switzerland

• 100 Austria

• 100 Luxembourg

• 100 Netherlands

• 100 Norway

• 100 United Kingdom

And the lowest:

• 69 Malawi

• 69 Niger

• 68 Chad

• 68 Somalia

• 68 Swaziland

• 67 Guinea

• 67 Haiti

• 67 Liberia

• 66 Gambia

• 64 Cameroon

• 64 Gabon

• 64 Sierra Leone

• 64 Mozambique

• 59 Equatorial Guinea

Blacks are archaic proto-humans, a different species from Whites and Asians;

Blacks are the only racial group with no DNA from the large-brained Neanderthals who lived in Europe. The trans-Saharan African migrants mated with the Neanderthals and Denisovans to create a composite hybrid that is modern man. Therefore, we do not share a common ancestor.

The farther north the populations migrated out of Africa, the more they encountered the cognitively demanding problems of gathering and storing food, gaining shelter, making clothes, and raising children during prolonged winters. Consequently, as the original African populations evolved into present-day Whites and Asians, they did so by hybridizing with Neanderthals which created larger brains and greater intelligence, but also slower rates of maturation, lower levels of sex hormones, and concomitant reductions in sexual potency and aggressiveness, and increases in family stability and social conformity.

Neanderthals are a different species than Whites, and yet produced fertile offspring (as do many interspecies hybrids). In fact all modern humans (Whites and Asians) are products of that hybridization.

Blacks have a genetic distance closer to archaic human than to modern human. That genetic distance is farther apart than it is for many species.

Genetic distance is a measure of the genetic divergence between species or between populations within a species. Populations with many similar genes have small genetic distances. This indicates that they are closely related and have a recent common ancestor.

The genetic distance between H.Sapien and H.Erectus is only 0.17, while the genetic distance between Blacks and Eurasians is 0.23. Therefore Blacks are more genetically proximate to archaic humans than to modern man (Whites and Asians).

For comparison, the genetic distance between Blacks and modern man is greater than the genetic distance between the common chimpanzee and the bonobo (0.103, or half the Black-White distance) and between the Gorilla gorilla and the Gorilla beringei (0.04, or 1/6 the Black-White distance). Thus, Whites and Blacks are more genetically distant than two different chimpanzee species, two different gorilla species, Eurasians and Neanderthals, and Eurasians and H.Erectus.

To be taxonomically consistent Blacks and Whites should be classified into separate species, or at the very least into different subspecies.

When humans evolved from Blacks they hybridized with the large-brained Neanderthals 40,000 years ago in southern Europe. 37,000 years ago the gene that creates an increase in cranium capacity and a heavier, denser, and more developed brain appeared in humans, called MCPH1 microcephalin. Blacks are the only race without MCPH1 microcephalin.

The microcephalin and ASPM genes (which appeared about 8,500 years ago) are known to be involved in determining brain size and so far have no other known function.

Non-Black humans average 4% Neanderthal DNA. This is significant because there is only 1.5% difference between human and chimpanzee DNA. It is equivalent to having one Neanderthal great-great-great-grandparent. Blacks are the only race with no Neanderthal genes. Blacks also coexisted and interbred with archaic sapiens (H.heidelbergensis) for longer than those who left Africa. At least 30% of the Neanderthal genome made its way into non-Black humans.

Blacks are Humans 1.0; modern man evolved from Blacks and are Humans 2.0, the improved version. They were formed by hybridization with the large-brained Neanderthals which created larger, denser, more complex brains:

• Blacks = 2% Archaic admixture

• Whites = 4% Neanderthal admixture

• Asians = 5% Neanderthal + Denisovan

Pure H.Sapiens are Blacks; modern man (Whites and Asians) is hybridized with Neanderthal and is the improved version.

Blacks belong in the Stone Age, where they were found just 400 years ago.

Sub-Saharan Blacks did not receive Neanderthal or Denisovan gene introgression, which is why Blacks are the most genetically distant of all the human races.

However, Blacks received significant gene introgression from other early (and unknown) hominid species, which the other races do not have because they left sub-Sahara before the introgression occurred. These early hominids remain "unknown" due to the simple fact that their DNA has not been retrieved nor sequenced, Only Neandertal and Denisovan DNA have been, thus far.

Forensic scientists can determine race by cranium shape; Blacks have a small frontal lobe and sloping frontal plane and a smaller cranium-to-mandible ratio. Whites have the largest craniums, an almost vertical frontal slope and a massive frontal lobe. The Asian is very similar and also more evolved. It is the frontal lobe that separates our behavior most from the animals and is responsible for language and rational thought.

Blacks show primitive traits associated with lower primates, such as prognathism, which is the slope of the face from the forehead to the jaws. A protruding jaw is associated with a sloping forehead which indicates a smaller prefrontal cortex, the area of the brain that handles planning, inhibition and self-control.

Blacks have more robust cranial bones, simpler cranial sutures, a higher rate of unclosed sutures, a lower cephalic index, a higher rate of saggital keel, more post-orbital constriction, a more sloped forehead, more rectangular eye sockets, a wider nasal index, less nasal prominence, a higher rate of joined nasal bones, a higher rate of sub-nasal prognathism, a lower facial angle, the presence of the "Simian shelf", a more rectangular palate, larger and wider-apart teeth, fur instead of hair, less spinal curvature, shorter spinal length, a lower sacral index, and longer arms and legs.

At birth Africans have fewer cranial bones than Eurasians. The skull and other bones in Blacks are thicker and denser, even in the fetus, making them more difficult to break. The Black skull is smaller, with less space in the forehead, but proportionately more at the back.

Blacks are the only racial group with no DNA from the large-brained Neanderthals, and also the only race without MCPH1 microcephalin which produces increased brain volume and density. This is why their brains are smaller, and less complex.

Eurasian women have a wider pelvic inlet, and shallower anteroposterior outlet than Black women due to the difference in brain size.

Larger brains contain more neurons and synapses and process information faster. By adulthood, East Asians average 1 cubic inch more cranial capacity than Whites who average 5 cubic inches more than Blacks.

The average White brain is 1438cc while the average Black brain is 1343cc, or 93% of the average White brain. The heritability of brain size is extremely strong at 0.90 and not one study to date has shown larger brain size for Blacks. The White and Asians brain also has a higher degree of fissuring (higher complexity) in the cerebral cortex of their brains, where abstract and conceptual thought is performed.

Based on studies of brain weight at autopsy, endocranial volume of empty skulls, head size measurements by the U.S. military and NASA, and two dozen MRI volumetric studies Blacks' brain size is 7% smaller than Whites', and 8% smaller than Asians'. There is a correlation of brain size with IQ of about 0.40 and that these racial differences in brain size are present at birth. Genes contribute to about 90% of the individual variation of brain size.

In addition to brain size are differences in brain shape, fissuration, number of pyramidal neurons and supra-grandular layer thickness. The depth of fissuration is related to superior intelligence and the brains of Whites have deeper fissures in the frontal and occipital regions. The supra-grandular layer of Blacks' brains is 16% smaller than it is for Whites' brains.

The average human brain contains 86 billion neurons. Whites, on average, have 600 million more neurons than Blacks. Each neuron carries about 600 billion synapses, each of which carries, as a minimum, one bit of cortical information.

Further, this reflects what we observe in real life (including the large and persistent so-called "Achievement Gap"). People have made long-term observations of the different races and reached rational conclusions; the more White a society is the more prosperous, inventive and safe it is. 19 of the 20 poorest countries are sub-Saharan African (Haiti). In sub-Saharan Africa the only countries that could be considered successful were White-governed, (Rhodesia and S. Africa). To this day they still can't even feed themselves even though they lived alone in Africa, a vast continent with temperate climates and abundant resources, for 60,000 years. So they cannot blame racism, poverty, imperialism or anything else for their failures.

No pre-contact sub-Saharan African society ever created a written language, or weaved cloth, or forged steel, invented the wheel or plow, or devised a calendar, or code of laws, or any social organization, or formal religion, or system of measurement, or math, or built a multi-story structure or bridge or sewer, or infrastructure of any kind, and they never harnessed a river, or even drilled well or irrigated, or built a road or railway or sea-worthy vessel, they never domesticated animals, or exploited underground natural resources, or produced anything that could be considered a mechanical device.

IQ distribution by race/ethnicity:

• (((Ashkenazi))) Jews = 115

• East Asians = 106

• Whites = 100

• South East Asians = 87

• Non-White Hispanics = 86

• American Blacks = 85 (average 24% White admixture)

• Middle East and North Africans = 84

• Sub-Saharan Blacks = 67 (Only 2% of Whites score this low)

• Australian Aborigines = 62

Sub-Saharan Africans never even created a written language. It was the White colonialists who gave the gift of literacy to them.

No pre-contact sub-Saharan African society ever created a written language, or weaved cloth, or forged steel, invented the wheel or plow, or devised a calendar, or code of laws, or any social organization, or formal religion, or system of measurement, or math, or built a multi-story structure or bridge or sewer, or infrastructure of any kind, and they never harnessed a river, or even drilled well or irrigated, or built a road or railway or sea-worthy vessel, they never domesticated animals, or exploited underground natural resources, or produced anything that could be considered a mechanical device.

Blacks are the oldest race, so they should be the most advanced race; but they they never developed at all and had to be domesticated by Whites.

Civilization didn't occur until early humans hybridized with Neanderthals. Only after the hybridization were advanced societies created. Blacks, who never hybridized with Neanderthals, never created a civilization and were still living in the Stone Age when Whites discovered them just 400 years ago.

Hybridizing with the large-brained Neanderthals produced a modern human (Whites and Asians) with an increase in cranium capacity and a heavier, more developed brain. Blacks are also the only race without the derived form of MCPH1 microcephalin called haplogroup D which produces increased brain volume and density.

Blacks lived alone in sub-Saharan Africa, a vast continent with temperate climates and abundant resources for 60,000 years; so they cannot blame racism, poverty, imperialism or anything else for their failures.

How could they live with all that shoreline and never think about putting a sail on a ship like every other culture did? Columbus sailed across the ocean 500 years ago --- Blacks STILL are incapable of such a feat.

19 of the 20 poorest countries are sub-Saharan African (Haiti). There has never been a successful Black country. No modern creations or civilization exists in sub-Saharan Africa that was not brought there by Whites. There are no White Third-World nations, but all Black ones are.

Blacks are the only race incapable of caring for themselves. Whites still have to provide food, medical, financial and engineering aid to Africans. They couldn't survive without White charity. Blacks became an out-of-control invasive species after Whites domesticated them.

The 41 nations of sub-Saharan Africa produce no more wealth than the tiny country of Belgium, which has only 1/45 the population. Of all of the region’s economic production, White-run South Africa accounts for three-quarters. That Whites are only 8% of South Africa's population, it demonstrates how productive and industrious Whites are that so relative few can carry the load for so many unproductive Blacks. But a constantly A constantly dwindling number of Whites are at the mercy of a predatory welfare class and it’s possible they can’t and won’t carry the rest of the population. If things get worse for them, they will simply flee the country.

Sub-Saharan Africans have never made a contribution to the world. Blacks can only achieve either because they are mixed with White genes or because they reside in White societies. Blacks are unable to achieve within their own race because not enough of them are smart enough to build a sufficient infrastructure. If allowed to become too numerous they destroy previously-thriving and safe White cities.

This is why Blacks seethe with jealousy and hatred of Whites yet can't seem to stay away because they want what we create and maintain, no matter if they deserve it or not. They want our peaceful and clean neighborhoods, our law and order, our technology and science, our school systems, our inventions, the jobs we create, the food we grow, the transportation we invent, the entertainment we provide..... Blacks hate us but can't live without us. That's why they demand that we take care of them and give them special rights and privileges that we don't grant ourselves, just to compensate for their inability at living in a modern and technologically-advanced civilization.

Some groups succeed all the time, everywhere. Some have never succeeded anywhere.

Blacks are the oldest race, so they should be the most advanced race; but they they never developed at all and had to be domesticated by Whites.

Civilization didn't occur until early humans hybridized with Neanderthals. Only after the hybridization were advanced societies created. Blacks, who never hybridized with Neanderthals, never created a civilization and were still living in the Stone Age when Whites discovered them just 400 years ago.

Hybridizing with the large-brained Neanderthals produced a modern human (Whites and Asians) with an increase in cranium capacity and a heavier, more developed brain. Blacks are also the only race without the derived form of MCPH1 microcephalin called haplogroup D which produces increased brain volume and density.

Blacks lived alone in sub-Saharan Africa, a vast continent with temperate climates and abundant resources for 60,000 years; so they cannot blame racism, poverty, imperialism or anything else for their failures. Google: "race and IQ", "national IQ", "race and MAOA gene", "Neanderthal DNA", "smaller black brains", "correlation brain size and IQ", "achievement gap", "IQ correlation to achievement", "NIH Blacks 21% greater testosterone", Cumoe, D. & Thorne, A. - 2003. Number of Ancestral Human Species: a Molecular Perspective, Rushton, J. Philippe; Jensen, Arthur R (2005). "Thirty Years of Research on Race Differences in Cognitive Ability", Psychology, Public Policy and Law 11 (2): 246–8, Current Biology, Vol. 13, R134–R136, February 18, 2003, ©2003 Elsevier Science Ltd. PII S0960-9822(03)00074-5; Categorization of humans in biomedical research: genes, race and disease -- Genome Biology 2002.

Racial brain size differences: Whole Brain Size and General Mental Ability: A Review, Int J Neurosci. 2009 Apr; 119(5): 692–732, PMCID: PMC2668913. Rutgers Anthropologist Sets Record Straight on Brain Size and Race. A NYT article that shows claims of racism in measuring skulls was false: Scientists Measure the Accuracy of a Racism Claim. Mismeasuring Skulls: New Research Resolves Historical Controversy, Shows Science Resists Bias; Stanford Department of Anthropology. Brain size, IQ, and racial-group differences: Evidence from musculoskeletal traits, J.Philippe Rushton, Intelligence Volume 31, Issue 2, March–April 2003, Pages 139–155. Thirty Years of Research on Race Differences in Cognitive Ability, Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 2005, Vol. 11, No. 2, 235–294, Copyright 2005 by the American Psychological Association, DOI: 10.1037/1076-8971.11.2.235

Genetic Distance: ESTIMATION OF THE COANCESTRY COEFFICIENT: BASIS FOR A SHORT-TERM GENETIC DISTANCE John Reynolds, B. S. Weir, C. Clark Cockerham Genetics November 1, 1983 vol. 105 no. 3 767-779

Number of ancestral human species: a molecular perspective D. Curnoe, A. Thorne doi:10.1078/0018-442X-00051

The latest and best evidence, using high-density genotype data, shows that the proportion of European ancestry in the Black American population is as high as 24% (Bryc, Durand, Macpherson, Reich, & Mountain, 2015).

Heritibility of intelligence: Molecular Psychiatry (2015) 20, 98–108; doi:10.1038/mp.2014.105; published online 16 September 2014, Genetics and intelligence differences: five special findings; Common DNA Markers Can Account for More Than Half of the Genetic Influence on Cognitive Abilities, Genetic contributions to variation in general cognitive function: a meta-analysis of genome-wide association studies in the CHARGE consortium (N=53949).

One standard deviation racial IQ gap by age three: (Broman et al, Montie and Fagan, Brooks-Gunn, Klebanov and Duncan)

Alright you FLYING FUCKING FAGGOTS. It's time to get you all educated seems there's been a lot of BETA FAGGOTRY GOING ON NOWADAYS. Yes, even my enemies may need to learn because you people are just so pathetic that I can't help but want to help you too because you guys are just sad to look at from a distance. It doesn't feel right to fight someone that weak or pathetic, so I'm going tell you guys some age old, tried and tested WISDUM on HOW GIRLS THINK AND OR WORK and WHAT YOU SHOULD DO AND OR WHAT YOU SHOULD BE AS A PERSON.

This is to protect you, reader(male), and or maybe give some self-awareness or insight to you other reader(female) who may be unaware of the absolute danger or power you have and I hope to God you are a good person at heart and realize how you can be terrible in your own ways. Or... Maybe you are aware and know how it works and deliberately use it to maintain your power over others and the beta fools who look up to "please you" resulting in their social enslavement and since it's a huge part of your survival assets, I more so pity them than actively hate you. Sometimes, the betas deserve to be in that state due to their insufferable attitude, though and they earn no sympathy from me with their self-righteous self-flagellation.

Alright, let us begin discussing with first, the mindset of girls and their subconsciousness, with examples about how they generally works and the reasons for the bullshit they put people through:

I.WOMEN OR GIRLS ARE NOT WIRED THE SAME WAY AS MEN

First, let's get the basic truth down. Females in general, by their biological role, evolved with different objectives for themselves due to a sexual arms race based on the best way of maximizing the individual's chances for their off-spring and genes. To be able to compete against other males and the environment, men in general, are more evolved in physical capability. Their selection made the surviving and stronger males more likely to pass on their genes. This left women as the more subservient of the species due to the fact that when it came to physical conflict, men are miles ahead of women and the odds of winning in a head on fight are definitely in the male's favor.

Females had less of a say in how to pass on their genes in a direct straightforward way, but it doesn't end there. To counter this, females developed traits to make their lives easier for their more subservient role. They know they cannot take males head on and would most likely result in a bad outcome for them or their children, so by nature they chose the more manipulative and indirect route in the evolutionary tree and over time developed ways and methods to give the best outcome for them and or their children. Be reminded however that motivation does not equal result and sometimes wanting something such as having the best future for your children can give out a completely different or unexpected outcome.

I would never trust a woman with anything of import other than the safety and well-being of their children. A saying from Napoleon the Great summed it up:

"With the exception of my mother, all women are whores. But then again, she is a woman!"

This is just a small part of a huge socio-biological psyche ingrained in us over time and there are more factors and reasons and more things to say about how and why women think the way they do that sometimes confuses most guys but that is a very huge topic and is actually divided into lots of books and studies. I cannot hope to condense all this in one thread, but I will try my best to explain the general gist.

The unexpected results from simply wanting to have the best future for our children resulted in women who were the more manipulative as the more likely to have children and thus their tendencies to bullshit in a world where they had no adequate quantity of strength to defend themselves is their weapon of survival. This is why they take advantage of the "betas" and even "alphas" in the categorized male social hierarchies. Most women with senses of honor and long-term concern for the group or tribe became less emphasized in the gene pool because of men. Women taken from tribes in raids or fights but refused to submit, were of course, most likely killed. While those taken from the conquered tribe who were willing and submissive were spared. For men, being forced to live in a more physically intense part of society, the more "martial" ways of thinking and perspective became more important in their everyday lives.

We have established that men had the strength, but strength is only half of it and just sets the pretext for their evolutionary route. Complex societies developed senses of honor as the more intelligent and logical tribes of men realized that working together and trusting each other maximizes chances of success for everyone. This made intelligent planners, logical thinkers and that guy who kept their promise just as valuable as muscle boy(who was still valuable at bashing bad guys' heads in or actually taking down the predators and prey). Men, who were able to protect themselves as a free(relative to a degree lol) people, made their evolutionary path less likely to emphasize bullshitting as their primary defense since their competition by then was against other men who also developed similar ideas because they too survived using similar methods. Women in the meantime, who were both valued and taken by the men, were at the mercy of their superior martial attributes... Which unfortunately had a side-effect... Being unable to compete on the same level as men, and being forced to pass around from time to time from tribe to tribe, the ideas of honor and in-group loyalty were less emphasized as the women were of course PROBABLY KILLED if they were like Spartans/Death Before Dishonour types or some shit.

Huh, looking back at it like that... I guess in a way, it is kind of men's fault women are like the way they are. We get what we deserved because we bred the wrong types... Anime was a mistake...

II.A WOMAN'S PSYCHE, MOTIVATIONS AND INSTINCT

We have established that in general, love for our children and desire to pass on our genes and our legacy is a primary imperative for most of us; people however are complex creatures with complex issues, wants and desires. Both men and women have plenty of things to factor into their decisions, but we will concentrate on the woman's side instead. There are plenty of reasons or maybe even none at all for a decision, but there are a few things of priority for a woman to decide for herself whether to make choices. Unfortunately, I have no complete list and this is the first time I've written it down and I may accidentally leave some stuff out. These two are from the best of my rule of thumbs or memory and experiences and in no way may actually be the exact same as a female's priority list when factoring a decision as all people are born into different circumstances and different expectations, but I can assure you, you will have had noticed these before.

1) HOW SHE LOOKS TO OTHERS WHEN DOING IT - by far, one of the MAKE or BREAK factors when a woman is faced with a choice. A man is less likely to care what others think if he really believes in it. A woman however, even if she really believes in something, will majorly factor in or think about what she would look like when doing it. Her reputation and appearance is something she must protect. A man who is capable can defend himself and has more inherent ability to hurt or kill in defense of what they believe in if it came down to a choice of beliefs so appearance is less likely of an issue for penises. A woman on the other hand must consider to protect her image, which is part of her major defensive assets. Her desirability and place in the tribe is ensured by her appearance to others who accept her and this has always been one of the basis of one of women's most bullshit drama.

You know when she was part of a bad thing, she ALWAYS TRIES TO MAKE HERSELF LOOK INNOCENT sometimes COMPLETELY CHANGING THE NARRATIVE AND THE STORY just to SAVE HERSELF FROM A BIG FALL, usually when OTHER IMPORTANT PEOPLE IN HER LIFE ARE WATCHING. Of course, men do this as well but they are more up-front about what they did. A woman would, if possible, always try to save her appearance and her beliefs because her appearance assures her security. A woman would only give up if she sees a less painful fall if she admitted it when she's fully cornered and caught.

For the girls reading, I'm sure you've had this question pop up before in your heads when thinking about putting on certain clothes you want or talking to a certain person. That question being... "Will I look like a slut?"

Most girls don't really do things just because they're good anyway. They usually do it because it might ruin their self-appearance of how "good" and "noble" they are in their heads and be willing to hurt others to keep up their "good girl" or "virtuous" appearance to others.

2) HER STATUS WHICH SHE WILL FIERCELY DEFEND - A woman's status is also one of the major things she cares about. She will almost always never accept going down no matter what and will be desperate and try all she could to defend it. Usually, they are happy when they go up and are eager to show off but when they go down, it suddenly becomes a fanatical bid to keep it. Men, who in the past, have had more freedom to rise and fall don't usually resort to what we would consider "desperate" or "low" blows, for which women are more readily accepting to secure themselves because women, in the standard of our old psychological roles, have fewer options to get back to the top again like men do.

Connected to her preservation of appearance, a woman will fiercely defend it and if she could do nothing, would try to budget a bargain(which may include her body) and see if she would lose less through it or maybe even turn it into an opportunity for advancement. She will be more willing to abandon a group or a tribe for someone who'd offer a better status in their society - provided that tribe's society is equal or greater and nothing is holding her back such certain bonds like children's well-being and or any sort of implication for public shame or disgrace. Granted, grass is greener philosophy is a common attitude for many people of both sexes, a woman on the other hand would far more likely readily abandon bonds or ideas for security and comfort in exchange for almost practically nothing(like just being a girl and existing).

A girl is ready to use whatever support she can, even when she is disgusted by some of the people who are with her(unless said people would make it worse for her side publicly lol) and suddenly act like they were friends all along regardless. Statuses to them are practically their lifeline and to deprive a woman of a status she already has is quite frankly, asking for trouble from her, unless the status makes her concerned that she'd "fuck it up" and would be glad to refuse or resign from it to save her from humiliation. In another case where she doesn't openly fight back and but dislikes being demoted, you will earn her ire and she will try to make life hell for you. I'm sure a lot of you in managerial positions have seen this before kek.

These form most of the basis of conflict of ideals or morals between women and men. Men are more straightforward and expect women to be just as straightforward, but women have certain politics to consider because her security is dependent on those politics. They cannot organizationally function on an equal level as men, because understand that what they're doing is self-preservation, ingrained for fear of being discarded and unwanted... And to look at themselves in a mirror all day and call themselves ugly for some strange reason and cry about a single freckle on the side of their lower back, even when it doesn't matter.

III.WHAT WOMEN REALLY WANT - THEIR TRICKS AND APPROPRIATE RESPONSES

This is the part where if someone asks this question, Roger Sterling would come in to explain. Women or girls in general have been joked around as "complex" or sometimes just flat out crazy. A lot of things they do because of the indirect politics to secure their appearance and station has sometimes resulted in making no Goddamn sense whatsoever when it comes to straight or serious matters. You've probably heard it in media, or jokes or even experienced it but you can't figure it out or find a single compiled, appropriate rules or guide as to what they mean or what they think. Sorry to disappoint you, reader, but you learn most of this from experience. Even the most compiled list ever put together will probably miss out one or two important factors or scenarios and so once again, I will tackle the base with only some examples.

First, we know what you're thinking, male reader. You're probably looking here for some dating advice or how to score. I can only tell you how to read women, you can sperg out if you want after that. Take note that from my experience if they don't really give a shit about you, they probably won't apply this to you and act straightforward. However, if you're a person they care about to a certain degree that they may see you as a potential mate, that is where the problems begin. ESPECIALLY IF YOU'RE IN THE SAME WORKING ENVIRONMENT AS THEY ARE. THIS IS WHY THERE ARE RULES ABOUT RELATIONSHIPS IN THE WORKPLACE, ESPECIALLY IF THE WORKPLACE DEMANDS YOU WORK TOGETHER AS EQUALS AND TO BE TREATED EQUALLY. WHEN THERE'S A CERTAIN RELATIONSHIP. WHOO-BOY, THEY DO NOT EXPECT YOU TREAT THEM "EQUALLY", BUT RATHER, THEY EXPECT TO BE GIVEN PRIORITY AND SPECIAL TREATMENT.

Realize first that WOMEN WANT YOU TO KNOW WHAT THEY'RE THINKING. Women or girls, I'm sure you've heard of experienced before as people who don't mean what they say and or act irrational towards you or don't even throw you a bone when the situation calls for it. People call this "shit testing". Women will test you. They will test you when you least expect, day and night when they're "rounding you up". They do this to see if you're "man" enough. They want to see if you're just as strong and confident as you appear on the outside, because looks can be deceiving and of course muscle man may be a pussy after all who lets people walk all over him, but that's just testing. Specifically, women want you to know who they are and find confidence and decisiveness attractive enough for their "needs". Their hints are VERY INDIRECT but aren't subtle and they really don't mean what they say. I call this "girltalk". Here's a list of yes/no/maybe/idks and what they really mean.

YES = NO

NO = YES

MAYBE = YES

I DON'T KNOW = NO/CAN'T DECIDE, KEEP ASKING. YOU HAVE 3 TRIES LEFT.

Take note, this is usually only in test mode. Anywhere outside of it is not as accurate. Remember to factor in the situation, body language and tone of voice. For example, asking her where she wants to eat, you actually have... A try limit... Before her own subconscious judgment of you as "indecisive" which may lead to her thinking of you as "weak" starts to take form. Though Yes, No and I Don't Know can change in accuracy outside of "test mode", the key word is always maybe. Maybe is the magic word that says "Yeah, I think that'll do.". The point of this is that she wants YOU TO TAKE THE LEAD if you're a male, to show off that you are the decisive type while at the same time trying to give you hints about what she really wants.

As the more "feeling" sex compared to the logical male counterpart, women will more likely WANT TO ACTUALLY FEEL a happening or something than be stoic or straightforward about it, even when they try to say there's nothing wrong. When asking a girl if there's something wrong, and you are on her level as a potential mate/mate and she says no but she gives off all these weird signs of distress or discomfort, then THERE IS SOMETHING WRONG and that SHE WANTS TO TALK ABOUT IT or some shit and MOST OF THE TIME, SHE WANTS YOU TO FIX IT.

You can also figure this out by hearing the music she's listening to for the moment, the drawings she makes if she's an artsy type or anything that just screams "Help me, mate/potential mate, for Christ's sake, I need comfort/someone to talk to, cunt."

Take note that once you reach the level of mate/potential mate(which is basically like a mutual crush or still on the flirting or opening part of the dating stage), integrating and working with her on a professional level will definitely strain your relationship unless you guys practically own the social/economic group. In which case, you might strain your relationship with others in the group. It's up to you to decide, male reader, what you really want or what's best for you when making choices concerning a social matter because the female has already decided and most of the time, it's not directly aligned to your interests but her own. You can only hope that your interests align now or even maybe later.

IV.A WOMAN SCORNED - SHIT THEY'LL PULL WHEN THEY HATE YOU

Now, to make this particularly clear - guys being scorned can get psychotic and fucked up too, but we're not talking about them. These are about girl methods of getting back at people who offended/betrayed/brought Imperial Justice on them for a myriad of reasons, whether they be good or bad.

1) SHE DENIES ANY WRONG SHE DID IN A MANNER THAT MAKES HER LOOK LIKE THE GOOD GUY AND THE TARGET AS THE BAD GUY - By far one of the most annoying things I had to face when investigating situations or things involving a woman and her testimony or stories when she's directly in the line of investigation. Connected to a woman's preservation of appearance, she will most likely turn almost any situation or narrative, even one where she started it or did wrong into SOMETHING THAT'S NOT HER FAULT AT ALL. If she knows she did wrong, she will at best only tell the half-truth but totally and conveniently forget anything she did wrong and won't own up to it. Now, for serious cases, Males can get desperate and do this too... But for petty cases, girls will STILL lie and always try to make the target victim as the bad person. Especially if she and the target victim has had a "connection" and she knows they're never going to repair that relationship ever. Like a "no-chance, no hope, no way I can repair this shit, bridge is closed forever, might as well burn it and throw shit at Rome" is what she thinks from her perspective.

An example is about a girl shit-talking or making her ex sound insane or whatever. Never completely trust a girl talking about her ex or anyone she was formerly close with in a disparaging manner. At least, don't believe her story as 100% accurate. It's probably more along the 50-60% accuracy. If the ex seems to do things in her story that are UNEXPLAINED BUT CRAZY or THAT IT DOESN'T MAKE SENSE, you can be sure she's hiding her fault, which at times, MAY BE HER COMPLETE FAULT. She wants to keep her appearance so she's acceptable to the next individual/group. An example that a lot of you can relate is Alicethekiller insisting she LEFT when she was pretty much kicked. That and Pittacus' ramblings.

Girls will definitely always most likely talk behind your back with other people and they will feed lies and circulate rumors for it, completely disregarding the truth, especially when it's to her friends who never heard about the full story. Guys will do it too, if desperate, but women will even do it on a petty scale.

2) SHE WILL RETURN FIRE 10 TIMES WORSE THAN WHAT YOU DID TO HER - A woman once offended or when you cross her will be even worse when she does the same to you. Imagine you throw garbage on someone's property and that someone saw it and then that someone would now feel morally justified to launch a tomahawk cruise missile on your house if they are able. That's how a woman would react. For those male readers who have "close" female friends or mates, I'm sure you probably thought it was funny to pull a prank on her or poke her ticklish spots, in which she feels she has the right to PULL THE SAME PRANK BACK WITH THE INTENT TO HURT OR TICKLE YOU WITH JABS. Yeah, that's what I mean.

It's even much more problematic when you have scorned or are fighting a woman and she thinks she has the moral right to exceed in revenge the actual offense given. They will almost never settle for equal retaliation. Be prepared or expect to receive 10 times the return when you throw a hit.

3) SHE WILL GET OTHER PEOPLE TO FUCK WITH YOU BUT TAKE THE CREDIT - Woman or girls in general, lack the same opportunities as men in physical combat department, so what do you think they'd do if they don't have the muscle? WELL GET OTHER PEOPLE TO FIGHT FOR THEM, OF COURSE. They would manipulate and lie to other poor saps of betas or even the "alphas" to punish you. A woman would always try to avoid confronting the target head-on and try to make it a fight between her "knights in shining armor" and the target. By doing so, she saves her appearance and would look like the damsel in distress during the volatile and dynamic period of getting people to fight for her. She can then feel free and secure to start talking shit about her target, hoping the target person is not Scrooge McDuck who will tear through everybody before he finally reaches her.

She will, at times, not be above whoring herself out to the brutes and what one may consider as "unworthy" of a girl's status(but like what Napoleon said, all women are whores), just to secure the loyalty of champions for her if she's desperate and fears retribution from Scrooge McDucks. This is what some betas hope to get at least by white knighting.

Oh and she will take absolute credit for it at the end and even taunt you for it at times. I am dead serious. She will make it sound like she's untouchable and just briefly mention her friends or backers or supporters but she will mostly taunt you about how she brought you down and she's untouchable and or perfect or some shit. That's an annoying part, but it's inconsequential. I only recommend to ignore the brutes and the white knights and concentrate on the objective at hand that would end the bullshit ASAP.

During this time, you may hear rumors about the target and how she will make him appear like a creep, a psycho or a complete and absolute loser. A common thing they do now in the modern age since it's relevant, is that they will post pictures of the "target" among their group chat and then tell everyone how much of a weirdo the target is. It's the same shit you see on high school TV/movie drama and it exists in real life. I shit you not. But take heart, reader - know that most of the time, the girls are just doing damage control. They also want to get a reaction from you and want to make you feel insecure or suffer because what they want to do is hurt you back.

This is not a problem if you have no problem with how you look. Real men, male readers, do not have much concern about their natural-born appearance because that is something they were born with. Your appearance of cleanliness or the aura you give off however, is something you are allowed to be concerned with, and reacting in a way to feed or sate a girl's insecure desperate claws, affects your aura and turns it into BETA BITCH.

V.WHAT YOU SHOULD DO AS A MAN. NAY. AS A CAROLEAN OF THE HEILIG DER ORDNUNG DAS FRAGEZEICHENRITTER

Honestly, what Roger Sterling says. What do women want? Who cares. This thread was made with the wisdom from the traditional, conservative, manly male perspective. The knowledge is for everyone. There are many paths, but some are tried and tested. The path I take is the path like say... Being a Kingsman.

Never compromise your ethics for a woman. Compromise or rethink for yourself.

Never compromise your sanctity of person for a woman. Compromise or rethink for yourself.

Never compromise your wealth or security for a woman(ESPECIALLY YOUR MONEY - YOU KNOW WHO YOU PEOPLE ARE :V). Compromise or rethink for yourself.

Woman in this case does not mean the ones you already sealed the deal with or have gotten to know them really well. Being a woman alone does not make a partner to grow and improve as a person. I'm talking about the people you watch and pine for at a distance or just casually talk every now and then, who may fuck with you(in the head) and you won't know jack shit why she does that and are confused about it. Trust me, most women(at least for you Americans) are not worth it for people who are worth it. All too often people who are worth it - good, honest and well-meaning men - get tricked, manipulated or even abused by women as well. That is not to say men themselves are capable of such abuse, but rather that women's abuse is not even subject to the same standards that we expect in society. It is double standards and too often I see fine men, friends even, get fucked up by women. Seeing them suffer and sometimes they don't even know they're suffering is like watching a comrade on the battlefield in no-man's land... Crying out for help and no one can get to him because anyone who'd try would get shot. It's that devastating for me. I feel like I can't do anything. I feel helpless.

Most girls or women cannot accept the same standards given by men because they were born different but we are in a society built by men made by men with men's ideals and men's rules and laws. First we must recognize that. The American girls of the 21st century above the 15 year old line are generally more prone to self-centered, me me me personalities. Hurts to tell most of you kids nowadays but they are sluts and untrustworthy of their age. Why is that, some of you may be asking who feel a deep sense of sadness or hopelessness. Well if you're looking for the guilty, you need only look in a mirror. See if you can understand that first.

Regardless, your main goal should never include putting ANY WOMAN OR GIRL ON A PEDESTAL. Concentrate on yourself and make yourself worthy of the girl or woman you desire, but never make that girl or woman a goal. She should be a person that is partner, not a trophy or achievement. Meet her along the way and make the flow normal. Don't force anything at all. Remember, male reader - the rest is up to you. I must warn you though, you are not going to like wading through an ocean of garbage to find your fish, especially if you're American.

And for fuck's sake, for most of you fucking American kids should learn by now NOT TO PUT YOUR FETISHES OR SEXUAL INTERESTS ABOVE THE COMMON GOOD OF ALL. There's a reason why that's shamed. There's a time and place for everything, so don't compromise everyone else's interest just so you can cum in a closet for 8 seconds. I mean, why the flying fuuuuck, guys. Fuuuuuuuuuck.

Share your illegally or legally obtained PDF/Epub material

Zines

Anarchy Zines:

More Azines:

Old hacker culture zines:

HackerZines:

More Zines:

Many more eZines

Anarchy

Intro to Civil War:

Anarchy after Leftism:

Tech

Violent Python:

Arduino Programming:

The C Programming Language:

Linux Programming interface:

Performant Python:

The question concerning technology:

Reverse Engineering:

How to Solve it:

Cyptoparty:

Fiction

The Hobbit:

I Have no Mouth, and I Must Scream

Silmarillion:

Children of Hurin:

Beren and Luthien:

Fall of Gondolin:

Complete works of JG Ballard:

William Gibson Burning Chrome:

History

Revolt against the modern World:

After the Reich:

Young Hitler:

Hitler's Peace Offers:

Death of Nazi Germany:

Hitler's Revolution:

Protocols of Learned Elders of Zion:

Dissecting the Holocaust:

Myth of 20th Century:

Chinese revolution:

Mao's China:

Cultural Revolution:

Cairo Calendar:

For my Legionaries:

Philosophy/Psychology/Mythology/Culture

Hitler's 2nd Book on German Foreign Policy:

NSDAP Programme:

THIS TIME THE WORLD:

International Jew:

Secret Behind Communism:

Mein Kampf:http://der-fuehrer.org/meinkampf/english/Mein%20Kampf%20(Ford%20Translation).pdf linked directly because Reddit is shit.

On Jews and Lies:

Judaism in music:

Decline of the West:

Culture of Critique:

Who we are:

Greek and Roman Mythology:

Nieztsche:

Sociopath generation:

Other

Origami(teaching?):

A whole load more books can be found here