If all the lowest 30% were magically gone...

[FatalTater]

We wouldn't need to worry about not having anyone to do lowly jobs, because the smart people are bright enough to realize that those jobs still need to be done.
Maybe they'd invent a better way to do it, but the toilets would not go unscrubbed.

I do think TikTok might go away though.

 

[Overly Serious]

Barring major unforeseen technological changes, everything would return to normal, just with somewhat smarter people at the bottom of the hierarchy. Somebody has to dig the ditches and mop the floors no matter how intelligent everyone is.

There are many interesting responses here but this is the only one so far that I outright reject. Such a fundamental realignment of mean intelligence would have profound consequences. It would all just be the same like sand settling in a bucket.

And to be clear, given the heritability of intelligence has been shown for sometime now, this wouldn't some generational blip.

The other question is how you measure IQ, and whether or not you're failing to consider other elements of intelligence that are situational. E.g. someone living in the deepest Congo jungles might have an IQ of 65 by Western standards, but they're very capable of surviving and thriving in an ecosystem that would be an utter deathtrap for you or I.

Stanford-Binet or whatever is most in vogue these days. And yes, your hypothetical 65 IQ jungle dweller is gone as well. I say hypothetical because a 65 IQ is actually retarded in a medical sense.

 

[KSachiko77]

have you visited detroit or a similar city ? the damage they can do is massive

It's massive because the damage isn't really contained. Strict policing can keep things fairly orderly even amongst the low IQ. What we saw with places like Detroit and most inner cities was the moderate to high IQ largely giving up on them alongside the failures of their policies.

 

[Otterly]

Well in England you’d see a significant racial demographic change. Groups like Somalis would be gone. Most of the inbred West Yorkshire ghettos are going. And others. Page hall gets a lot of free real estate
A big change in the sex ratio as you say - the very low IQs are often X linked retardation syndromes so there’d be an imbalance of women and men.
Having said that, some of the best people I know would probably score below average on an IQ test but I prefer their company to the insufferable crowd I knew when I worked at a major uni. If I wanted to do this to make Britain better I’d add some kind of additional factor, or reduce the percentage - 93 IQ encompasses as awful lot of decent people.
Globally is interesting too. You’d be driving a very significant selection pressure. The places it would the biggest effect would be those with the lowest mean IQ. You could see some very surprising changes in odd little faraway places going from orc hordes and forever war to suddenly realising they have a small population who aren’t savages and a land chock full of rare earth metals …..
And we are all assuming we’d survive the cull. How many have had their IQ actually tested in adulthood? Maybe mine’s 92.

 

[Karen of Human Resources]

Having a certain IQ is not indicator of morality or work ethic.

There are plenty of dumbasses who are loyal and industrious. There are similarly some very intelligent people who are lazy and malevolent.

Crime might become better thought out, we'd probably see less of Florida man but beyond that probably not much.

There would be some demographic changes which could be interesting. some would be hard hit, and some others perhaps less so but would this shift be felt in long settled diaspora communities?

Source: My ubermensch Rick and Morty level IQ. I just also happen to also be kind of a bitch.

 

[wtfNeedSignUp]

have you visited detroit or a similar city ? the damage they can do is massive

Besides the fact that I already said that ignoring racial status. Detroit wasn't destroyed by idiot niggers, it was destroyed by corruption, overconfidence and greed caused by people who were probably close to the top of the Gaussian.

 

[RandomTwitterGuy]

This place would be empty. So that is a win, I guess.

 

[Fascist Frederick]

Well, fast food would instantly cease being an industry, the demand and the workers would be gone. So that's a plus I guess.

 

[KSachiko77]

Well, fast food would instantly cease being an industry, the demand and the workers would be gone. So that's a plus I guess.

There would still be a demand for fast food, actually. It's taken a hit because of pricing and quality concerns but it's not tied to IQ except maybe loosely.

 

[Zashaiba]

I’d be dead. Feels good man

 

[Prophetic Spirit]

I got 106 IQ years ago in a specific test done.
And i don't got more INT than that.

 

[AnimeSucksCopeAndSneed]

If it was global, there'd be a pretty big, brown purge since most non-Asian, non-White races are sub-93 iq on average. The population sink would create some pretty huge problems for the browns in these nations and opportunistic countries would probably snatch up most of their land.

For nations that would sustain more numbers like Europe and East-Asia, I'd guess things would actually remain pretty similar, however crime rates would drop a decent bit and businesses that rely on the low-iq would collapse. Fast food would stay around since they can still employ teenagers, but delivery food, Uber and hotels would all be in a huge pinch since they have no immigrants/ retards to employ now. Scam businesses, like those rent-to-own places would also get destroyed.

I don't think any big political change would come from this intelligence shift, if anything, political change would actually become far more difficult. Political change comes from what they call "great men", the types who can really rile people up. It's a lot easier to rile up the low IQ, you can more easily convince them to die for your cause since they have a bad understanding of the future and tend to just live in the present. A higher IQ population would be a lot more cowardly since they actually understand how dangerous it is to rebel.

Also, Africa would become a literal wasteland lmao.
View attachment 6295515

I mean this is pretty dead on the money. Nothing more to add, honestly.

 

[Audit]

I also recognize it would mostly be darkies, but would be heartbroken at the proportion of pretty girls that would likely be wiped out by this. The glasses and cankles crowd would likely be just fine, though.

Another thing to consider is that men have a larger standard deviation on intelligence. If we're taking the absolute dumbest 30% of the population, this will wipe out more men than women.


Globally, wiping out 30% of the dumbest people may not have a long lasting effect. If slightly less retarded people in Africa go back to have 6 kids per woman, you'll see their populations rebound with, probably somewhat smarter, people within a century. Unless non-African populations move into Africa, demographically it wouldn't change. You'd see a lot less "diversity" within the western world though, so that's a plus.

 

[Whatevermancer]

If we assume that low IQ people are the ones primarily working in low skill low education manual jobs, then we're fucked. Cause suddenly you have much fewer people doing actually essential jobs like working at farms, driving trucks, unloading said trucks and stocking shelves at stores, so now you can't grow enough food and deliver it to customers fast enough. Now you need armies of unemployed people willing to take on those jobs, cause already employed are overqualified for them and would demand much higher salaries.
After all, why would an engineer with a master's degree become a farm hand when he already has a job in better conditions with much better pay?

Over all I think it would it be a catastrophe, the society would plunge into chaos.

 

[Overly Serious]

See, @Pierre D'Olnique posted this in another thread earlier (don't know if he made it himself or not) and it's an example of the sort of thing I wonder if it would change. The sort of thinking in the image is how huge numbers of people actually think. If suddenly the 30% were gone, would the below actually still work or would it be greatly diminished? And so govern society more logically.

If we assume that low IQ people are the ones primarily working in low skill low education manual jobs, then we're fucked. Cause suddenly you have much fewer people doing actually essential jobs like working at farms, driving trucks, unloading said trucks and stocking shelves at stores, so now you can't grow enough food and deliver it to customers fast enough. Now you need armies of unemployed people willing to take on those jobs, cause already employed are overqualified for them and would demand much higher salaries.
After all, why would an engineer with a master's degree become a farm hand when he already has a job in better conditions with much better pay?

Over all I think it would it be a catastrophe, the society would plunge into chaos.

80% of middle managers serve no useful function. Frankly a lot of the time they hold things back. They can all be repurposed to pick the potatoes. Sure they'd be crap at it and moan but they could do it if they were hungry enough. I put that jokingly (not joking) because of course in the short term a sudden and unmanaged disappearance of so many people would cause disruption but is there any inherent reason why once that was gone through we couldn't right ourselves but with a higher IQ relative to what was before?

Also, that assumption may not hold as completely as you think. Whilst low-education correlates with low IQ because low IQ people have to do them, the inverse that someone doing them is low IQ is not the case. Nor is low-education job quite the same thing as low-skill. There are many more vocational education jobs that require quite a lot of skill.

And furthermore, the 30th percentile would remove nearly all of the unemployable.

 

[Male Idiot]

This is a really different theoretical beast depending if it is per country or the whole world.

If it is per country, it would be a great collapse. Loosing 30% population would be enough to smash even functioning societies.

If it is the whole world, than Africa would literally cease to exist as a human habitat save for some arabs. The dumber asian regions and south america would be soaking up whatver damage is left over from Africa, and some lolcows would be gone.

The rest of the world would be economically hit, but collapse level hit.

Also China would improve the Ganges's sanitation by only dumping heavy metals and pesticides into it.

You would still need to deal with midwits, you just wouldn't be mugged by gyppos and other assorted darkies.

 

[Zbk3VmLfujjzjxBd43tL]

Correct. The CCP cherrypicks people for tests and cherrypicks results in order to make their country and their race look better. I'd like to remind everyone that the Chinese are so retarded that they believe everything is some kind of magical medicine, as though the alchemy system of Oblivion applies to real life. I can't fucking stand Chinese cooking documentaries because the chefs will ramble about mushrooms cleaning the eater's blood or some shit. They think that consuming powdered rhino horns is like taking a magic dick pill, just because the horn is hard and erect. They believe that drinking milk will make their breasts grow, because milk comes from breasts. They're so retarded that they wiped out their native bird population to 'protect' their crops, causing nationwide famine when along came the bug population that was no longer kept in check, and they did similar shit while wiping out the tiger population.

That's not intelligence, but culture, just like white people used to believe that drinking cocaine wine would cure everything or today white people believe that gene therapy drugs are totally safe and can cure a seasonal cold.

Reality is the Chinese don't biologically differ much from Koreans or Japanese, although China is a lot more diverse so large segments of China with more Southeast Asian genes will have lower IQ. China also has populations that self-selected for intelligence like the Jews, several in fact like the Hakka (Chinese gypsies with the intelligence of a Jew) or the Min Chinese (merchants).

Barring major unforeseen technological changes, everything would return to normal, just with somewhat smarter people at the bottom of the hierarchy. Somebody has to dig the ditches and mop the floors no matter how intelligent everyone is.

The other question is how you measure IQ, and whether or not you're failing to consider other elements of intelligence that are situational. E.g. someone living in the deepest Congo jungles might have an IQ of 65 by Western standards, but they're very capable of surviving and thriving in an ecosystem that would be an utter deathtrap for you or I.

Some of the studies used to show Africans have such low IQ are based on extremely small samples, like those involving malnourished, stunted refugee populations which aren't representative of the average African. The realistic number is probably somewhere 75-80, a little lower than black people in the US who are about 85. Afro-Brazilians I think are 80-85 and they're way blacker than US negroes.

 

[byron]

"it's not feasible for this to happen"

It’s funny that you have to head-off the sub-93 replies like this. “But that’s not feasible” is logical identical to “but I did have breakfast this morning” - so you know that someone is going to go there.

We wouldn't need to worry about not having anyone to do lowly jobs, because the smart people are bright enough to realize that those jobs still need to be done.
Maybe they'd invent a better way to do it, but the toilets would not go unscrubbed.

Yeah. People like to point to, for example, janitorial jobs. But they forget that most trash is dropped by low-IQ people who don’t care about the commons.

The trash trucks come by just as often in upper-class neighborhoods as they do in poorer neighborhoods, but the former always looks cleaner. The difference is that one group puts their trash into the bins.

If you got rid of lower class people, there’d be fewer problems that need fixing/maintenance.

 

[The Ugly One]

93 IQ isn't smart. Some things to keep in mind:

• At most colleges & universities, the cutoff score for admissions correlates to 100 IQ, meaning 93 IQ is dumber than the dumb majors, like English and communications.
• IIRC, the average IQ for some of the most bottom-tier jobs is in the 90s. Sub-90 IQ isn't a mailman or trash truck driver, it's a mouth-breathing retard who lives on welfare and/or petty crime.

Losing those people would be a massive improvement. It wouldn't fix white birth rates, but our social energy not revolving around idiots and their problems would be great.

 

[Pool's Closed Due to AIDS]

To save people some arithmetic, the 30th percentile would mean anybody with an IQ of less than 93.

It would be a total global population collapse.
Children of Men scenario.

You never specified adults in your hypothesis so the "lowest" IQ would be majority children and infants with a sprinkling of retards.