I went through a brief period flirting with Libertarian ideas back in the 1980s. My girlfriend at that time worshipped Ayan Rand to the point she sat up nights smoking cigarettes and working on her writing projects. She was tall and beautiful and hot as hell, so I could put up with the cigarettes now and then. It didn't take but a few years for me to see the limitations of Libertarian thought and policy. If the entire population were your typical individualistic whites and all had IQs at least one standard deviation above the norm, then a Libertarian government might work, but considering the reality we live in it would be woefully inadequate. These are the people attracted to Libertarianism, and there are not enough of them to ever make it happen.

@skeptic99

Yeah self-responsibility-reliant systems like Libertarian systems are not for people with less than an adult mental development, but I don't think race is even a necessary factor, with empirics leaning in favor of one or more races, because brains and the rest of our anatomy are not purely racial, with a lot of overlap and mix-matching...in fact, people who are racially pure are very rare and thus fall out of distinctions like "white", "black" and move into the "mixed" distinction.

Unfortunately we are looking at IQ as a normally adjusted metric with vastly variant testing standards and methods, so we will never know who is truly smart, and get focused on the problem groups. We can use high-range IQ tests, but they are very different than the more popular ones, and they don't really present their data professionally to confirm their predictive power.

@DZhukovin I think you are flirting with the idea of modern libertarianism, which sees government as a non-consensual aggressive state as compared to classic libertarianism which is against all unjust hierarchy. I am really shocked by the way IQ has been normalized to measure an aptitude of a human being. I am sure it's a good tool to measure quick thinking and spatial thinking. I do not think it measures the ability to think outside of the box. Both you and I don't know top 5 people with the highest IQs that are alive today. But we can name the top five most intelligent people who are alive today. The interesting thing is the answer to that second question is subjective. I think the discussion of IQ in pop-culture politics is for justifying elitism. Something that people have been doing for centuries. I think you might want to read Mikhail Bakunin. He poses an interesting critique of Pareto's hypothesis and technocracy.

@ambesh18

Not in any necessary order. All of these people should be IQ 190+:

1. Terence Tao

2. Rick Rosner

3. Dr. Evangelos Katsioulis

4. Christopher Langan

5. Kim Ung-Yong

6. Marilyn Mach Vos Savant

7. Garry Kasparov

So no, I actually do know the top five highest IQ's right now, let alone people who scored a 162 on the WAIS, which is the maximum score on the most widely accepted test.

I am targeting Libertarianism, not necessarily "modern libertarianism" by the way. IQ is the only psychometric manifestation of intelligence with significant empirical backing right now, so for convenience I was using it. Certain tests like the WAIS are full-spectrum and can assess the entire higher brain, with minimal previous knowledge needed.

We can talk about a fluid definition of Libertarianism, but I really don't want to waste my time talking about something I currently have no curiosities about.

@DZhukovin I don't think you understood my point. The fact that you know these people are not because of their achievement but because of their score only. These people's IQs rank higher than Einstein and Newton but they have not made nearly a strong contribution like Einstein and Newton. This is the point that I am making. It might be the best tool we have but it still falls short in defining what is intelligence. There is so much more to it that we don't know. Hell, we haven't been able to synthesize a single cell. Plus, there are so many variables in the environment that have been proven to affect IQ.. There is also a study that shows that when people are being rewarded with money or gifts, they scored as much as 20 points higher. There is also a logical fallacy in grading human cognitive capacity and ranking them, which are best described by Mikhail Bakunin. By the way, I had heard of a couple of people myself, especially Terence Tao. Besides, Einstein would have ended up as an obscure figure if it was not for Max Plank. I didn't cite things that are self-evident.
Citations:
[blogs.scientificamerican.com]
[en.wikipedia.org]

@ambesh18

Okay so we are able to dethrone IQ as a measure of intelligence. What should be used instead?