The "Far-Right" Genius:

An Investigation into the Intelligence

of the "Far-Right".

Telegram Archive

November 2024

Johan Oosthuizen
Key words: Far-Right Politics, Intelligence, Race and IQ, Race, IQ, Religion and IQ, Religion, Sex, Gender Studies, Sex and IQ
Intelligence and Ideology, Political Psychology, Cognitive Ability, Political Extremism, Far-Right Ideologies, Cognitive Biases,
Radicalization, Radicalisation, IQ and Political Views, Extremist Movements, Neo-Nazism, National Socialism, Fascism, Neo-
Facism, Far-Right, Sociopolitical Trends, Social Studies, Ideological Frameworks, Education and Ideology, Behavioral Analysis,
Behavioural Analysis, Demographic Correlations, Psychometric Analysis, Quantitative Research, Qualitative Studies, Ideological
Profiling, Cognitive Science of Politics, Authoritarianism, Populism, Nationalism, Identity Politics, Polarization, Polarisation, Right-
wing politics, Left-wing, Right-wing, Leftist politics, Left wing politics, memetics, Social conservatism, liberalism, economics.
 Contents
Declarations & Disclaimers
Figures & Tables
Abstract
Highlights
Background & Introduction
Themes
Materials & Methods
Validity Checks
Results
Discussions
Conclusions
References
 Declarations & Disclaimers
Declaration of Authorship
This is to declare that this research is the sole work of the author.

Declaration of Interest
This is to declare that this research has not been funded by, supported by, or undertaken
under any institution, corporate body, or other interest.

Declaration of Peer Review

This is to declare that this research publication has not been peer reviewed.

Declaration of Research
This is to declare that this research is not academic, nor is it institutional. It is personal and
amateur.

Declaration of Consent
This is to declare that all individuals who partook in this research gave informed consent
regarding the use and publication of their data as it has been used and published in this
research publication.

Declaration of Copyright
This is to declare that the figures in this research publication are free to use and are in the
public domain. Attribution is unnecessary in non-research or less "formal" contexts, but is
appreciated.

Declaration of Liability
This is to declare that the author of this study accepts no liability for any errors, omissions,
or inaccuracies in the information, results, methods or otherwise of this research.

Declaration of Risk
This is to declare that the information provided is done so without warranty and viewers/
users assume all risks.

Declaration of Bias
This is to declare that work has been done to ensure that biases, whether they be related to
sampling, religion, politics, race, et cetera, were mitigated and eliminated from this
research, but it must be stated that the author cannot confirm the extent nor the effectiveness
of these efforts, and accepts no liability in the unlikely case that they have been ineffective.
 Figures & Tables
Figure 1:
a
b
Figure 2:
Figure 3:
a
b
c
d
 Abstract
This study investigates the relationship between cognitive ability and affiliation with "far-
right" ideologies, analysing 139 IQ samples collected from self-identified "far-right"
individuals through Telegram, a known hotspot of the online "far-right," with intelligence
scores derived from calculating a Full Scale IQ from various verified online IQ tests,
including but not limited to RPAM (Clinical Edition). Previous research highlights a general
trend of declining intelligence with increasing "right-wing" ideological orientation,
particularly among socially conservative, racist, and authoritarian individuals. However,
findings from this study challenge this narrative, demonstrating an average IQ of 125.7
among far-right participants, significantly above global averages. Demographic analysis
revealed entirely negligible racial differences in IQ, which alongside an analysis of the
memetics of the "far-right," suggests that high intelligence may actively predispose
individuals toward "far-right" ideologies. Notable internal variation was observed, with
significant differences based on sex and religion. These findings offer novel insights into the
cognitive traits of the "far-right" and their potential role in shaping ideological beliefs.
 Highlights
High IQ Among the "Far-Right": The "far-right" individuals had an average Full Scale IQ
of 125.7 (SD = 14.1), markedly above population averages.

Contradictory to General Trends: Unlike prior findings of a negative correlation between

intelligence and "right-wing" beliefs, this study found high cognitive ability among "far-
right" individuals.

Minimal Racial IQ Variation: Racial background did not at all predict IQ variation within
the far-right, contrary to global patterns, suggesting intelligence is a more significant driver
of ideological affiliation.

Sexual and Religious Variability: Substantial variations in IQ were observed, particularly

among sexes and religious subgroups, with Christian Identitarian & Kinist men scoring
highest (average IQ: 140.3) and Völkisch Pagan women scoring lowest (average IQ: 114).
Overall, "far-right" men had an average IQ of 126.9 (SD = 12.7), whereas "far-right"
women had a substantially lower average of 117.8 (SD = 19.8).

Ideological Implications: Findings and memetic analyses suggest high intelligence may not
only correlate with but potentially catalyse "far-right" beliefs.

Significant Internal Heterogeneity: Demographic and religious sub-groups within the

"far-right" showed substantial diversity, against the common perception of a White,
Christian, male "far-right".
 Background & Introduction
Previous research has identified many interesting, and occasionally contradictory patterns
with regard to intelligence and (specifically "right-wing") political belief/"leaning". For
example (not exhaustive):

A meta-analysis of 67 studies involving 84,017 participants found an average correlation of

r = -0.20 between cognitive ability and "right-wing" ideological attitudes (Emma Onraet et
al.). [1]

A study published in the journal "Intelligence" (Tobias Edwards et al.) found that, within
families, intelligence was a strong predictor of "left-wing" beliefs, DNA-based polygenic IQ
predictors also predict political beliefs within families, and that these results imply that
having a predisposition to intelligence predisposes one to hold "left-wing" beliefs. [2]

A meta-analysis of 20 studies involving 46,246 participants found an average correlation of

r = 0.07 between "conservative" economic positions and cognitive ability (Alexander
Jedinger et Axel M. Burger). [3]

A study published in the journal "Intelligence" (Noah Carl) found a correlation between
increased verbal intelligence and "Republican" identification in an American context (2-5
points higher). [4]

A study published in the journal "SageJournals" (Gordon Hodson et al.) found that in two
British and American sample sets, lower general intelligence in childhood predicts greater
"racism" in adulthood. [5]

A research article published in the journal "SageJournals" (Satoshi Kanazawa) analysed the
National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent Health and the General Social Surveys, showing
that adolescent and adult intelligence significantly increases adult "liberalism," atheism, and
men’s (but not women’s) value on sexual exclusivity. [6]

The general trend suggests a negative correlation between cognitive ability and "right-wing"
ideological attitudes, particularly those associated with "social conservatism,"
"authoritarianism" and "racism".

Although the impact of/link between cognitive ability/intelligence and "right-wing"

ideological/political beliefs or attitudes has been thoroughly examined, there has been little
to no research on its link to "extreme" or "far-right" ideologies and attitudes, although there
are some broadly related examples:

A study published in 2022 by S. H. R Ramussen et al. found that increased cognitive ability
was a powerful predictor for tolerance of "Neo-Nazis" and the "far-right" in two sample sets
from America and Denmark. [7]
A study published in 2021 in the journal "Terrorism and Political Violence" (Chrisster
Mattson et Thomas Johansson) found that Sweden's "Neo-Nazi" movement(s) has
transitioned away from their earlier, anti-intellectual "skinhead era," having become more
intellectual in recent decades.

During the Nuremberg trials, IQ tests were administered by American military psychologist
G. M. Gilbert on the National Socialist (Nazi) leaders who were on trial. The average IQ of
the Nazi leaders tested was 128. This suggests that there may be a correlation between high
intelligence/cognitive ability and "far-right" political ideologies/beliefs/attitudes/opinions.
The average of the Nazi leaders is somewhat higher than the average of political leaders
overall, who usually have an IQ between 1-1.5 SD above the average of their constituents
(in Western contexts, this is around 115-122). The individual scores of the Nazi leaders,
ordered from highest to lowest, are below: [8]

1. Hjalmar Schacht: 143

2. Arthur Seyss-Inquart: 141
3. Hermann Goering: 138
4. Karl Doenitz: 138
5. Franz von Papen: 134
6. Eric Raeder: 134
7. Hans Frank: 130
8. Hans Fritsche: 130
9. Baldur von Schirach: 130
10. Joachim von Ribbentrop: 129
11. Wilhelm Keitel: 129
12. Albert Speer: 128
13. Alfred Jodl: 127
14. Alfred Rosenberg: 127
15. Constantin von Neurath: 125
16. Walther Funk: 124
17. Wilhelm Frick: 124
18. Rudolf Hess: 120
19. Fritz Sauckel: 118
20. Ernst Kaltenbrunner: 113
21. Julius Streicher: 106

The Telegram channel "Politically Incorrect Polls" (a reference to the 4chan board /pol/)
asked its subscribers to provide their "IQ score". This relies upon self reporting and is
therefore obviously flawed but can act as a good predictor of the distribution of far-right
intelligence. Ignoring dishonest results at either end of the poles (140-150+ and <70) an
almost perfect distribution curve is observed, with the average self-reported IQ being 125.
[9]
 Themes
Theme 1: The overall trend of decreasing intelligence observed in the mean of individuals
who hold "right-wing" beliefs/opinions continues decreasing as one moves further "right".
In this scenario, the "far-right" will broadly have an intelligence that is "inferior" relative to
their respective individual averages.

Theme 2: The overall trend of decreasing intelligence observed in the mean of individuals
who hold "right-wing" beliefs/opinions inverts as one moves further "right". In this
scenario, the "far-right" will broadly have an intelligence that is "superior" relative to their
respective individual averages.

Theme 3: The overall trend of decreasing intelligence observed in the mean of individuals
who hold "right-wing" beliefs/opinions is static as one moves further "right". In this
scenario, the "far-right" will broadly have an intelligence that is "typical" relative to their
respective individual averages.

It is the opinion of the author that Theme 2 is more likely. This is due to a multifaceted
range of factors, notably:

The sociocultural environment within "far-right" communities often emphasises a rational,

data-driven approach to interpreting the world. This intellectual posture involves focusing
on "objective" realities, as perceived through statistical analysis, historical patterns, and
logical reasoning. These traits are closely tied to cognitive ability, particularly in areas such
as:

Analytical Thinking: Higher cognitive abilities correlate with a greater capacity for
abstract reasoning and the ability to challenge mainstream narratives. This challenges the
stereotype of the "far-right" as irrational or purely emotional actors.

Numerical Literacy: Many "far-right" narratives explicitly incorporate statistical reasoning,

requiring familiarity with concepts such as rates, proportions, and correlations. For example,
interpreting demographic data on crime rates or immigration patterns requires cognitive
sophistication, even if the conclusions drawn are ideologically biased.

Pattern Recognition: High cognitive ability often involves recognising complex patterns
over time, such as recurring historical themes or correlations within datasets. Whether these
interpretations are accurate or ideologically skewed, the process itself requires intellectual
engagement.

Memes serve as a medium for communicating and spreading ideologies, and the complexity
of many "far-right" memes demonstrates cognitive engagement. Unlike many political
memes designed to elicit an emotional reaction, "far-right" memes often rely on intellectual
rigour to decode.
Examples and Cognitive Skills Required:
13/52 (or 12/60): This meme references FBI crime statistics showing that black people in
America (roughly 13% of the U.S. population) are disproportionately represented in violent
crime statistics. Understanding this meme requires:

- Knowledge of per capita analysis to contextualise population size versus crime

contribution.
- Proportional reasoning to compare demographic groups fairly.
- Pattern recognition to link crime rates to perceived societal outcomes.

13/90: This meme builds on 13/52 but extends to interracial crime statistics. Interpreting
this requires not only numerical reasoning but also familiarity with sources like the Bureau
of Justice Statistics, requiring engagement with primary data.

109 (or 300-1000+): This meme refers to the expulsions of Jewish communities throughout
history. This meme presumes historical literacy and pattern recognition. To comprehend its
underlying claim (that this high amount of expulsions lays the blame upon the Jews for their
hatred, rather any supposed unjust prejudice of their hosts) individuals must:

- Synthesise historical knowledge across diverse periods and regions.

- Critically analyse causal factors, even if simplistically or inaccurately framed.
- Interpret large-scale sociopolitical trends over centuries.

The Cookie Monster Analogy: This Holocaust denial meme references the logistical
infeasibility of cremating Holocaust victims within the timeframe of World War II. Though
the figures provided are sometimes in inaccurate, grasping this requires:

- Mathematical modelling of time, resources, and logistical systems.

- Critical reasoning to evaluate historical narratives, albeit with a predetermined
conclusion.

Conversely, ”leftist” memes often prioritise emotional appeals, such as solidarity,

compassion, or outrage, using straightforward imagery or slogans. In contrast, "far-right"
memes necessitate a cognitive engagement level that involves deciphering statistics,
understanding analogies, or synthesising historical narratives. For these memes to be as
popular as they are in the “far-right”, the cognitive abilities to understand must be equally as
prevalent, which leads the author to have accurately predicted Theme 2 as the most likely
outcome.
[10] [11] [12]
 Materials & Methods
Definitions:

For the purposes of this study, an individual was defined as "far-right" and fit for inclusion
into the data set used for this research, if they believed that the "typical person" would
classify them or their beliefs/opinions/ideology/politics as such, ignoring their own opinion
on this often libellous classification, and if they identified with the "Chud" meme. The
"Chud" is a caricature of the average "4chan" user (4chan is an anonymous messaging board
that had a large "far-right" presence in the past, particularly in the mid to late 2010s) that
certain "far-right" individuals and groups have reclaimed in both an ironic and unironic
manner. The "Chud" caricature is commonly featured with statements such as "It’s over, the
West has fallen, millions must die.," "Millions, no… billions must die." and "Total N*****/
[any other group] Death.". [13] [14] [15]

Identification:

139 individual IQ samples were collected from the encrypted, free-speech, messaging app
"Telegram". Telegram is known to be favoured by "far-right" individuals and groups for the
purposes of general, light-hearted and friendly communication, dissemination of "hate
speech," "disinformation" and "conspiracy theories," as well as political or other
organisation (Alexandre Bovet et Peter Grindrod) [16]. The administrators of popular "far-
right" Telegram pages and discussion groups were contacted regarding the research and
asked to share a short post requesting individuals who met the aforementioned criteria to
partake in the research. The data request and research information were undoubtedly spread
beyond the initial groups and pages contacted by the author, as a result of the individuals
subscribed to/following/members of the aforementioned groups/channels/pages sharing the
posts elsewhere. Individuals who self-identified as meeting the criteria provided were
required to agree to a consent form. Thereafter they provided their sex, race, religion, and
ethnicity. Political ideology was not required, as the individuals were broadly the same,
though certain individuals did provide it. Finally, they were requested to either complete and
send a screenshot of their results in the Mensa IQ Challenge/Practice Test (25-35 minutes)
[17], the FSIQ Online Test (15-25 minutes) [18] and RAVEN’S 2 Progressive Matrices

Clinical Edition (40-60 minutes) [19], the results of which would be used to calculate a Full
Scale IQ score, or send a picture of their results in any physical, valid IQ test they had
previously undertaken. Individuals who simply quoted a figure without proof were ignored.
Steps were taken to ensure bias did not negatively impact the data collection (see "Validity
Checks").
 Validity Checks
Addressing biases:

In order to ensure there was no sampling bias, individuals were encouraged to share the
research data request across relevant Telegram groups. This also ensured a representative
and diverse sample set. A wide variety of Telegram page administrators were initially
contacted. To ensure there was no reporting bias, especially in cases of average or below
average IQ, individuals were reminded that there was nothing to be ashamed of in having an
average or below average IQ, that their data was specifically necessary to ensure the sample
dataset was accurate, valid and representative, and that their individual results would not be
made public.

Ensuring the accuracy of the Full Scale IQ score:

To ensure that the Full Scale IQ scores calculated were accurate, individuals who reported
not speaking English as a first language did not have their verbal IQ from the FSIQ Online
Test considered/included in the calculation.

Validity of testing methods:

As per the creator of the Mensa IQ Challenge/Practice Test, Olav Hoel Dørum, it is valid:

"The test is normed after supervised results from Daniels Figure Reasoning Test and Ravens
Progressive Matrices. The correlation between the online test and these two supervised tests
are higher than between two attempts on the same test or change of test. The correlation is
around .90+. It is, however, not unusual to hear claims that the test is manipulated some
way, or that the scores are inflated. Some claims are based on online surveys, others by own
results. Any deliberate manipulation would only hurt Mensa."

As per the host of the FSIQ Online Test, Open-Source Psychometrics Project, the test is
somewhat valid on an individual level (relative to other tests such as WAIS), and strongly
valid on an average level (relative to other tests such as WAIS). [20]

RAVEN’S 2 Progressive Matrices Clinical Edition is a well-established, widely used test to

assess general intelligence. It has repeatedly been found to be reliable (John Carlyle Raven
et al.) (Inês Queiroz-Garcia et al.). [21]

A small minority of individuals (those around the 150 IQ mark) reached the "ceilings" of
these tests. Unfortunately, the results were not particularly valid in these cases (due to being
too low). Nonetheless, they remained in the sample dataset.
 Results
The average calculated Full Scale IQ of the 139 "far-right" individuals was 125.7
(125.661870504), SD 14.1 (14.0735754), supporting the author’s predictions. Figure 1.a
presents a frequency bar chart, with each bar being 9 points wide. Figure 1.b presents a
frequency bar chart, with each bar being 4 points wide (excluding bars "99-90" & "89-80").
Figure 2 shows a standard distribution curve made to fit the results.

Figure 1.a
Full Scale IQ

50
R² = 0.8883 48
40

30 32

20
21
19
10
9
6 4
0
>145 144-135 134-125 124-115 114-105 104-95 94-85

Figure 1.b

Full Scale IQ

30
30
R² = 0.7966
24

18 19 18

12 13 13
10 11
6 7
6 6
4 2
0
>145 144-140 139-135 134-130 129-125 124-120 119-115 114-110 109-105 104-100 99-90 89-80
Figure 2

Demographics and IQ:

The "far-right" encompasses a greater diversity than is commonly perceived. Figure 3

includes the demographic makeup of the "far-right" and various sub-demographic IQ-related
statistics. N/A in a demographic sub-group IQ related column indicates that sample
coverage was too low to justify reporting. Figure 3.a reports the division of the sexes in the
"far-right". Figure 3.b reports the racial makeup of the "far-right". Figure 3.c reports the
ethnic makeup of the ("White or in combination with…" individuals "in" the) "far-right".
Figure 3.d reports the religious makeup of the "far-right".

- Low coverage or potentially unrepresentative values, groups or other items are

highlighted in red.
- Figure 3.c and 3.d include clusters created by the author to classify idiosyncratic
submissions.
- Note for Figure 3.d: many Christians did not specify their denomination.
Figure 3.a

Sex Average IQ SD Range Proportion

Male 126.9 12.7 155-94 86.3% (n=120)

Female 117.8 19.8 150-85 13.7% (n=19)

Figure 3.b

Race Average IQ Average Average SD Male SD Female SD Range Male Range Female Proportion Proportion Proportion
Male IQ Female IQ Range of Males of Females

White 125.7 127.1 117.1 14.6 13.1 20.2 155-85 155-94 150-85 90.6% 85.7% 14.2%
(n=126) (n=108) (n=18)

Non-White 125.5 N/A N/A 8.3 N/A N/A 135-110 N/A N/A 9.4% 92.3% 7.7% (n=1)
(NW) (n=13) (n=12)

NW: Mixed 124.3 N/A N/A 8.8 N/A N/A 133-112 N/A N/A 4.3% (n=6) 83.3% 16.7%
(n=5) (n=1)

NW: Middle 126.7 N/A N/A 5.1 N/A N/A 131-121 N/A N/A 2.2% (n=3) 100% (n=3) 0% (n=0)
Eastern

NW: Black 132 N/A N/A 4.2 N/A N/A 128-132 N/A N/A 1.4% (n=2) 100% (n=2) 0% (n=0)

NW: Asian 120.5 N/A N/A 14.8 N/A N/A 110-131 N/A N/A 1.4% (n=2) 100% (n=2) 0% (n=0)

Figure 3.c

Ethnicity Average IQ Average Average SD Male SD Female SD Range Male Range Female Proportion Proportion Proportion
(White or in Male IQ Female IQ Range of Males of Females
combinatio
n with…)

Western & 124.8 126.1 117.1 14.7 13.3 20.2 155-85 155-94 150-85 62.6% 79.3% 20.3%
Northweste (n=87) (n=69) (n=18)
rn
European
(WE)

Eastern & 126.5 N/A N/A 13.9 N/A N/A 141-85 N/A N/A 20.8% 96.6% 3.4% (n=1)
Northeaster (n=29) (n=28)
n European

Southern, 130.3 N/A N/A 12 N/A N/A 155-107 N/A N/A 16.5% 95.7% 4.3% (n=1)
Southweste (n=23) (n=22)
rn &
Southeaste
rn
European

WE: White 122.3 123.1 120.2 13.5 13.2 15 150-94 144-94 150-102 22.3% 71% (n=22) 29% (n=9)
American (n=31)
Figure 3.d

Religion Average Average Average SD Male SD Female Range Male Female Proportion Proportion Proportion Proportion
IQ Male IQ Female IQ SD Range Range of Males of of Non-
Females Whites

Christian 127.1 128.2 117.1 14.2 12.6 20.2 155-85 155-99 150-85 59% 85.4% 14.6% 3.7%
(C) (n=82) (n=70) (n=12) (n=3)

Athiest & 124 N/A N/A 14.2 N/A N/A 144-94 N/A N/A 19.4% 96.3% 3.7% 14.8%
Agnostic (n=27) (n=26) (n=1) (n=4)

Pagan (P) 122.5 124.8 114.8 14 11.6 19.3 141-85 141-102 138-85 18.7% 76.9% 23.1% 7.7%
(n=26) (n=20) (n=6) (n=2)

Muslim 128.8 N/A N/A 12.9 N/A N/A 139-110 N/A N/A 2.9% 100% 0% (n=0) 75% (n=3)
(n=4) (n=4)

C: 132.3 132.8 130.8 16.6 15.7 21.4 155-99 155-99 150-102 15.8% 77.3% 22.7% 0% (n=0)
Protestant (n=22) (n=17) (n=5)
(PR)

C: 127.9 N/A N/A 12 N/A N/A 155-107 N/A N/A 8.6% 91.7% 8.3% 16.7 (n=2)
Orthodox (n=12) (n=11) (n=1)

C: 130.3 N/A N/A 11.2 N/A N/A 149-116 N/A N/A 7.2% 100% 0% (n=0) 0% (n=0)
Catholic (n=10) (n=10)

C: PR: 136.4 140.3 127.5 14.5 7.6 23.2 155-102 155-129 155-102 9.4% 69.2% 30.8% 0% (n=0)
Christian (n=13) (n=9) (n=4)
Identity
(n=10) &
Kinism
(n=3)
P: 118.7 120.5 114 14.7 11.8 21.5 138-85 138-102 138-85 12.9% 72.2% 27.8% 0% (n=0)
Völkisch (n=18) (n=13) (n=5)

P: Other 131.1 N/A N/A 7.2 N/A N/A 141-119 N/A N/A 5.8% 87.5% 12.5% 12.5%
(Zoroastria (n=8) (n=7) (n=1) (n=1)
nism: 2,
Cosmothe
ism: 2,
Buddhism
: 4)
 Discussion
The results observed are extremely interesting. "In" the "far-right," racial background is not
a predictor of variation in intelligence (White average: 125.7, Non-White average: 125.5),
as it is in the world as whole (whether these global patterns be coincidental or otherwise is
irrelevant) [22]. This lack of racial difference in intelligence suggests that high intelligence is
not coincidentally correlated with, but a cause of, or catalyst for "far-right" beliefs,
ideologies, attitudes, political opinions, et cetera. This is contrary to the trends observed in
other research publications and provides an entirely novel perspective on the relationship
between intelligence and political opinion. This opinion is expanded upon in "Themes".

It is commonly observed that females have a lower standard deviation (SD) in their IQ
(14.085) relative to males (15.235). It is also commonly observed that males and females
have an average mean IQ within 1~ point of each other (Richard Lynn et Satoshi Kanazawa)
[23]. Therefore, it comes as a surprise that, as a whole, and in many of the sub-groups

examined, the female cohort consistently had a much lower IQ and much higher SD than
their male counterparts (difference between the IQ average of all males and females in the
dataset: 9.1, difference between SD of all men and all women in the dataset: 7.1). A popular
memetic "inside" the "far-right," a male-dominated space, is that women in these spaces are
present there for the purpose of exploiting male desperation and/or "farming" male
attention, lacking any true ideological conviction or knowledge. Such a memetic is unlikely
to arise out of "misogyny," if one wishes to refer to this distrust of women as such, and the
preposterously high standard deviation of the female cohort may hint at the verity of this
memetic, with the dataset possibly being made up of one group of ideologically convicted,
"serious" women, who would be higher in intelligence as per the observed patterns in the
"Results" and the explanation of "Theme 2" in "Themes," and another group of
ideologically unconvicted, "unserious" women, pretending to be, or "LARPing" as "far-
right," for the purpose of exploiting male desperation and/or "farming" male attention, who
would be lower in intelligence as per the observed patterns in the "Results" and the
explanation of "Theme 2" in "Themes".

The strongest demographic predictor for variation in intelligence among the "far-right" was
not racial background, as previously discussed, nor ethnic background (albeit minor
variation among the "White or in combination with…" ethnic clusters was observed), nor
sex (although as previously discussed, there is substantial sexual variation), but religion.
The variation (excluding low coverage results) between the racial averages had a range of
0.2, the variation (excluding low coverage results) between the "White or in combination
with…" ethnic averages had a range of 8, the variation between the sex averages had a
range of 9.1, and the variation between the religious averages had a staggering range of 17.7
(over 1 SD). The religious group with the lowest average IQ (118.7) were Völkisch Pagans
(mostly Norse Pagans), with female Völkisch Pagans averaging 114. The religious group
with the highest average IQ (136.4) were Christian Identitarians/Identity and Kinists
("racial/racist" Christians), with Christian Identitarian/Identity and Kinist men having an
astonishingly high average of 140.3. Religion divides the "far-right" to an equal or even
greater extent than minor political/ideological differences do, with a long-standing, multiple
decade-long, viscous "meme war" between "far-right" Christians and Pagans. As a result,
the difference in intelligence, although stark, is not unexpected, as a result of the isolated
nature (relative to each other, as contact is mostly limited to slander and conversions),
varied character, and varied appeal of these two religious sub-groups of the "far-right".
 Conclusions
In spite of common trends observed in generally "right-wing" individuals, the "far-right,"
regardless of what many individuals would consider their intellectually baseless, bigoted,
unintelligent, illogical, et cetera beliefs, stands out as an extremely intelligent political
cluster, with this intelligence not being a mere coincidence, but potentially a cause of "far-
right" beliefs, as explained in this publication. This intelligence is coupled with much
internal variation, particularly in the context of sex and religion.
 References
1. Onraet, Emma & Van Hiel, Alain & Dhont, Kristof & Hodson, Gordon & Schittekatte,
Mark & De Pauw, Sarah. (2015). The Association of Cognitive Ability with Right–Wing
Ideological Attitudes and Prejudice: A Meta–Analytic Review. European Journal of
Personality. 29. n/a-n/a. 10.1002/per.2027.
2. Tobias Edwards, Alexandros Giannelis, Emily A. Willoughby, James J. Lee, Predicting
political beliefs with polygenic scores for cognitive performance and educational
attainment, Intelligence, Volume 104, 2024, 101831, ISSN 0160-2896, https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.intell.2024.101831.
3. Jedinger, A., & Burger, A. M. (2022). Do Smarter People Have More Conservative
Economic Attitudes? Assessing the Relationship Between Cognitive Ability and Economic
Ideology. Personality & social psychology bulletin, 48(11), 1548–1565. https://doi.org/
10.1177/01461672211046808.
4. Noah Carl, Verbal intelligence is correlated with socially and economically liberal
beliefs, Intelligence, Volume 44, 2014, Pages 142-148, ISSN 0160-2896, https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.intell.2014.03.005.
5. Hodson, G., & Busseri, M. A. (2012). Bright Minds and Dark Attitudes: Lower
Cognitive Ability Predicts Greater Prejudice Through Right-Wing Ideology and Low
Intergroup Contact. Psychological Science, 23(2), 187-195. https://doi.org/
10.1177/0956797611421206.
6. Kanazawa, S. (2010). Why Liberals and Atheists Are More Intelligent. Social
Psychology Quarterly, 73(1), 33-57.
7. Rasmussen SHR, Ludeke S. Cognitive ability is a powerful predictor of political
tolerance. J Pers. 2022 Jun;90(3):311-323. doi: 10.1111/jopy.12667. Epub 2021 Aug 28.
PMID: 34386982.
8. https://history.info/on-this-day/1945-what-iq-did-the-nazi-leaders-have/
9. https://t.me/incorrectpolls/1768
10. https://www.adl.org/resources/hate-symbol/1352-1390
11. https://www.adl.org/resources/hate-symbol/109110
12. https://x.com/StopAntisemites/status/1597269242029559809
13. https://knowyourmeme.com/memes/chudjak
14. https://knowyourmeme.com/memes/chud
15. https://knowyourmeme.com/memes/tnd-kill-behead-roundhouse
16. Bovet A, Grindrod P. Organization and evolution of the UK far-right network on
Telegram. Appl Netw Sci. 2022;7(1):76. doi: 10.1007/s41109-022-00513-8. Epub 2022 Nov
PMID: 36408456; PMCID: PMC9667007.
17. https://www.mensa.org/mensa-iq-challenge/
18. https://openpsychometrics.org/tests/FSIQ/
19. https://ravens-2-progressive-matrices-clinical-edition.netlify.app/
20. https://openpsychometrics.org/tests/FSIQ/results.php
21. Queiroz-Garcia, I., Espirito Santo, H., & Pires, C. (2021). Propriedades psicométricas
da forma geral das Matrizes Progressivas de Raven numa amostra portuguesa. Revista
Portuguesa De Investigação Comportamental E Social, 7(1), 84–101. https://doi.org/
10.31211/rpics.2021.7.1.210.
22. https://www.worlddata.info/iq-by-country.php
23. https://personal.lse.ac.uk/kanazawa/pdfs/PAID2011.pdf