This is something you can't say anything about without, without immediately being killed. So I'm hesitant to broach the topic, but I'll tell you one thing that I did in the last week that's relevant to this. So the, and this just shows you how complex the problem is. First of all, we should point out that race is a very difficult thing to define because racial boundaries aren't tight, right? So, and so when you talk about racial differences in IQ, you're faced with the thorny problem of defining race, and that's a big problem from a scientific perspective, but we'll leave that aside. And I wrote an article this week. Somebody stood up at one point, one of my talks, and vice, blessed their hearts, took this particular question and used it as an indication of the quality of the people who are my so-called followers. And by the way, the quality of my so-called followers is pretty damn high. And you can find that out quite rapidly just by going looking at the YouTube comments, which are head and shoulders above the standard set of YouTube comments. I can tell you that. So someone asked me about the Jewish question, right? And the implication, it was actually someone Jewish, and the implication was that Jews are overrepresented in positions of authority and power. And I was, had just spoken for like an hour and a half, and you know, this guy had an axe to grind, and I thought, there's no goddamn way I'm getting into this at the moment. And so I said, I said I can't answer that question. But that's not a very good answer. So I wrote a blog post this week, and I said, look, here's the situation, all right? Jews are overrepresented in positions of power and authority. But then let's open our eyes a little bit, hey? And then think for like two or three seconds and think, hey, guess what? They're also overrepresented in positions of competence. And it's not like we have more geniuses than we know what to do with. And if the Jews happen to be producing more of them, which they are, by the way, then that's a pretty good thing for the rest of us. So let's not confuse competence with power and authority, even though that's a favorite trick of the radical leftists who always fail to make that distinction. Well, why does this overrepresentation occur? Because it does. It also, there's also overrepresentation in political movements, including radical political movements. Okay, why? Well, answer one, Jewish conspiracy. Okay, that's not a very good answer. We've had, we've used that answer before. All right, but do we have an alternative? Well, here's an alternative. The average Ashkenazi IQ is somewhere between 110 and 150, which is about one standard deviation above the population average. And so what that means is that the average Ashkenazi slash European Jew has an IQ that's higher than 85% of the population. That's a lot higher. Now, that doesn't make that much difference in the middle of the distribution, okay? But geniuses don't exist at the middle of the distribution. They exist at the tails of the distribution. And you don't need much of a move at the mean to produce walloping differences at the tails. And the tails are important because a lot of where we draw, we draw exceptional people from the exceptions, right? So here's another example of the same thing. Most engineers are male. Why? Because men are more interested in things and women are more interested in people. And you might say, well, that's socio-cultural. It's like, no, it's not. And we know that because if you stack up countries by their egalitarian social policies, which you can do quite effectively, and then you look at the overrepresentation of men in STEM fields, the overrepresentation increases as the countries become more egalitarian. So it's not socio-cultural, okay? Now, men aren't that much more interested in things than women. That's one standard deviation, which is about the same difference by the way between the population norm and the Ashkenazi Jews. But if you're looking at the person, the one person in 20 or the one person in 50, who's hyper-interested in things, and thus likely to become an engineer, then most of them are men. Here's another example of the same thing. Men are more aggressive than women. Now you might ask how much? And I've been answered that. It's best place to look at that is in Sweden, where the egalitarian policies have been laid out for a long period of time. And you can get a more direct inference about biology. If you took a random man and a random woman out of the population, and you had to bet on who was more aggressive, and you bet on the man, you'd be right 60% of the time. So that's not that much, right? It deviates from 50, 50, but it's not like 1910, it's 6040. Okay. So what does that mean? Well, we've got a tail problem here again. Let's say that now you decide to go out onto the extremes of aggression, and you identify the most aggressive one in a hundred persons. They're all men. Guess who's in prison? Those people. That's why most of the people in prison are men. And so this is elementary part of the problem in our societies that we don't understand statistics. We don't understand that you can have relatively small differences at the population level that produce walloping consequences at the tails of the distribution.