does it help? Undoubtedly

a large population and high iq average means the right end of the curve is suited for great achievement

but genius is more than that, though high IQ is probably a necessity

actually I think first we have to address; is technology, progress etc. the product of scale effects or of individuals?

as far as I can see, history is a history of great men

not institutions

What is the Endogenous Personality? And why is he so important?
In a nutshell, we argue that the Endogenous personality is the type of a potential genius – a compound of abilities and attitudes, of intelligence and innerness. As a strong generalization: the true geniuses are Endogenous personalities; and it is from Endogenous personalities that geniuses arise.
The Endogenous personality is the ‘inner’ Man; a person whose outlook on life is ‘inward.’ He is inner-directed, inner-driven, inner-motivated; one who uses inner modes of thinking, inner evaluations, in-tuition; one who is to a high degree autonomous, self-sufficient; one who is relatively indifferent to social pressures, influences and inducements.
He stands in stark contrast to the Exogenous personality; that is, to most people. The Exogenous Personality is orientated toward the environment, particularly the social environment. These are people who want more than anything else social (including sexual) status, worldly success; people whose perceptions are directed outwards and who try to align their behaviour with group norms.
When described in such terms, the Endogenous personality might appear anti-social, uncooperative, a dreamer, not the kind of person we might wish to have to deal with on a regular basis. We would probably be accurate in perceiving the Endogenous Personality in this negative way. We probably wouldn’t want to go for a drink with him, let alone be friends with him.

But he is important; he is very important. Because the Endogenous personality is the archetypal ‘genius.’ He is the type of a genius – whether a large scale, world historical genius of the highest level achieved by humanity – a Shakespeare, a Beethoven or an Einstein – or a local, tribal, or town genius; a shaman, a sculptor, an inventor whose name is unrecorded (yet who might be the originator of some great but anonymous ballad, folk song, painting -- or a technological breakthrough such as the spade, spear-thrower, arch or stirrup).
Genuine ‘breakthrough’, world-impact creativity is so rare, so difficult (far more difficult than commonly imagined) that it requires a special kind of mind – a mind especially designed for this kind of work (inner work). There need not be many such men – indeed, there should not be too many, since the necessary mind is relatively unfit for the primary, day-to-day, activities of survival and reproduction of the species. But such men are needed – sooner or later, from time to time.
These are the people who (whether we know their names or not) will almost-certainly be behind the scientific and technical breakthroughs that are the motor of civilization, these are people whose can inspire and unite society moving it towards greater things or out of the depths of despair and ennui; these are the people who can rescue a society on the brink of catastrophe.

(I think there are some minor issues with the above, but other than that I can only agree)

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-40936334

post Marxists hate the great man theory

of history

but I'm not sure I've seen anyone else tie it to personality traits like that

its something many realize implicitly

consider the stereotype of the genius

basically, a kook

yeah

wait

so what happened

nothing

they shutdown the former altright server

init?

yeah

the altright.com server

https://twitter.com/discordapp/status/897170310348263426

ah i see

this place isn't really connected to that

yeah i get it

@UOC the basic idea:

Genius is a certain personality and certain traits

what are those traits?

The ability to become very good at something (in terms of deep understanding)

which requires higher than average intelligence, and dedication towards a certain field

Then the ability to be creative and innovate

partially that requires high IQ as well, but only up to the depth of understanding point

real creativity is psychoticism

clinical psychoses are the extreme end of a line that has genius and artist on it somewhere

this is easily proven, artists tend to have a preponderance of schizophrenia

it is my belief that there is no categorical difference between the artistic and scientific genius

nothing that divides them beyond just being involved in arts vs. sciences

Really? I would agree, depending on who you count as artistic geniuses. I think think "raw" creative genius often lacks the sort of Conscientious personality that seems necessary for other geniuses