>>5703

Let's use "Japan Type" or "Iceland Type" to denote tribally homogeneous high-IQ societies and "German Empire Type" or "Silicon Valley Type" to denote tribally diverse high-IQ societies. The former has much higher asabiyyah and has less social issues compared to the latter. Moreover the former type is in no danger of tribal civil wars while the latter may degenerate into such wars. However the latter is often better in innovation, tend to be more business-friendly and has ideological variance. Whether one chooses the former or the latter is up to personal choice. Reds obviously tend to prefer the former and Greys tend to prefer the latter. SVT societies can also be converted to JT societies by Czech-Slovak type splitting. In some cases it is a good idea. After all a high-IQ tribe can take care of its own affairs and maintain a high QOL. At least splitting is unlikely to cause serious harm.

That's pretty much the end of good and possibly good societies. The rest of the societies on the list are necessarily not-so-good or awful societies.

Some societies are diverse with a high-IQ tribe majority and a small low-IQ tribe minority. The best example for this kind of societies is America. Such societies are fairly common among Anglo settler colonies and more recently due to mass immigration, some European ones such as France and UK as well. Let's use the phrase "United States Type" to denote such societies. The most important property of UST societies is unsafety. Almost no true UST can actually be entirely safe, ever. As long as a society is UST no matter whether it is racially integrationist or racially segregationist it can never truly be safe simply because there is always a low-IQ underclass there. Tribalism tends to be rampant in UST societies and no amount of affirmative action can fix the problem of the underclass. In UST there is often a small amount of the territories that are no-go areas for the high-IQ majority that are basically lawless. UST societies inherently suffer from extreme inequality simply due to their cognitive diversity which inherently can not be fixed unless there is serious IQ-boosting.

UST societies are mostly at least functional even though they have dysfunctional parts and are inherently perpetually bogged down in tribal conflicts. The rest of the societies are even worse.

Some societies have a large low-IQ tribe majority and a small high-IQ tribe minority. Such societies tend to look very weird. The best example of such societies is Mexico though most of Latin America and many other societies have roughly similar properties. So let's use the phrase "Mexico Type" to denote such societies. Mexico-type societies tend to have a small high-functioning minority who either dominate the economy of the society simply because they are high-functioning or dominate both the economy and politics of the society. The high-functioning minority tends to be self-segregated, tends to have relatively high quality of life while the rest of the society has relatively low quality of life. Persecution of such a high-functioning minority due to jealousy tends to be rampant. Similarly the high-functioning tribes tend to dislike the low-functioning majorities and sometimes stable minority rule is possible. Most of the society tends to be very unsafe. Only a few rich people live in heavily guarded mansions. But at least such societies are more functional than the last two types of societies. MT societies tend to be either socialist or have extreme inequalities simply because they are cognitively diverse. They also often move from one to the other which can not really improve them.

Now we are at uniformly low-IQ societies. Again just like uniformly high-IQ ones there are two types depending on tribal diversity. There are homogeneous low-IQ societies and Somalia is one of the best examples. There are also diverse low-IQ societies. DR Congo is one of the best examples. So let's name them "Somalia Type" and "Congo Type" respectively. The only benefit the former type has over the latter is absence of tribal conflict.