Blacks and IQ

[Mr S]

Blacks and IQ, Part 1

http://therawness.com/blacks-and-iq/

I personally don't care about race and IQ findings, but not because I myself am black. I am comfortable dealing with unpleasant truths about black people all the time. Sometimes I even wonder if I'm too comfortable with that actually. And it's not because it hurts my self-esteem and I want to sweep it under the table and not deal with it. And it's not because I think the concept of blacks having lower average IQs is untrue; on the contrary there is much compelling evidence to show that blacks do on average have lower IQs.

My problem is, I just don't think it's as important as many people think it is. If blacks have lower IQ averages than other races, now what? Say we all accept that fact, where do we go from here? How do we change our policies? Do we create low-IQ alternatives for all black people? Schools geared toward lower IQs? Vocations we funnel black people into due to their perceived lower mental capacity? Replace our current Ivy League-obsessed meritocracy with an IQ-based meritocracy where IQ tests become the norm for entry into all types of preferred endeavors? Good luck selling voters on those concepts. Not only would such initiatives never pass, they'd be political suicide for any mainstream politician that attached his or her name to them.

The other solution is to create a separate "slow track"￾ for blacks to compensate for their lower IQs, similar to Special Education. The problem there is that if you create a separate set of standards and expectations for blacks, this will just end up reinforcing the IQ and achievement gap, which will just keep widening generation after generation. If some people out there think blacks are in danger of becoming a permanent, entrenched underclass in this country for all time, measures like this will really speed the process along. Not to mention that selling black mental inferiority as inescapable and genetically unavoidable will do much to preemptively sap motivation among blacks who do have the capacity to achieve much intellectually.

For example, I think I'm damn bright, if I may toot my own horn, but if I was sold a bill of goods that I was destined to mental inferiority before I even got out of the gate, how much motivation would I even have had to achieve the intelligence I have? I've met people who were diagnosed with learning disabilities as kids who totally regret it as adults. A friend of mine who is very successful now said that he feels he would have achieved so much more if he was never diagnosed with learning disabilities as a young student, because it created a lowered set of expectations for him that he totally bought into. It wasn't until he met a teacher late in high school that refused to accept the learning disabilities excuse and forced him to conform to the same standards as other students that he realized that he was capable of the same results as everyone else, even if it did require him trying a little harder.

Accepting lower IQ in blacks as an unavoidable truth, I think, would have the same problem of causing both the black students who have the potential to intellectually excel and the people in charge of teaching them to achieve their full potential to conform to the lowered expectations and live them out.

I think of it like our legal system views guilt and innocence. Our legal system prefers to err on the side of innocence. Just like our legal system considers it worse to have one innocent man be imprisoned than to have a bunch of guilty people go free, our educational system should consider it a much worse evil to have one person squander his potential than to have a bunch of people be ambitious beyond their capabilities.

The other route you can take is eugenics, or genetic cleansing. It's not as far fetched or outdated or foreign a concept as you may think. Sweden, a very egalitarian and Western country had eugenics until as recently as 1976. This also would be a failure in the long run, even if it was remotely feasible for such a measure to pass politically (it's totally not). Much like stock markets do corrections, as we are now realizing with the current state of our economy, I believe human rights in societies do corrections much like stock markets do corrections. Outrageous speculation in the 20s lead to the Great Depression, a huge correction. The boom times in the 1980s with leveraged buyouts, hostile takeover cowboys and junk bonds lead to a huge panic. Same with the internet boom in the 90s and our latest real estate boom in the 2000s.

Societies and human rights work much the same way. I believe the extent of the welfare state and widespread entitlement system of affirmative action, hiring quotas and diversity initiatives that is currently undermining the initiative of blacks to achieve is a social correction that came about from this country's former excesses in the suppression of human rights for blacks in the form of slavery and in the accepted discrimination that followed. (The book Sundown Towns: A Hidden Dimension of American Racism by James W. Loewen discusses post-slavery racism in alarming depth, as well as any good book on the Reconstruction era of the South). I believe on some level Sweden and the rest of Europe's current path to cultural suicide though an obsession with diversity and openness at the expense of their own culture, borders and security is an extreme social correction of former inhumane and discriminatory policies (like eugenics in the case of Sweden or colonialism and perceived exploitation on the part of other European powers).

The pendulum of society always swings back, and the more you move it in a certain direction, the harder the eventual swingback in the opposite direction will be. If we suspend our disbelief and imagine that the more extreme of the "race realists"￾ who obsess over race and IQ to the point of pushing for eugenics ever get their way and actually get eugenics to become a political reality, all they are doing is paving the way for an eventual social correction in the direction of socialism in a generation or two that would dwarf our current welfare and entitlement system. If they feel they are currently getting ripped off thanks to paying for the welfare state and losing out on good schools and jobs thanks to affirmative action, that would be nothing compared to what their descendants would have to deal with in a world of post-eugenics entitlements.

Blacks and IQ, Part 2

http://therawness.com/blacks-and-iq-part-2/

Average IQ of a racial group is simply an indication of how hospitable that racial group's history has been to unintelligent people. That's it. It's all just a matter of how easy it has traditionally been for unintelligent members of that race to survive and reproduce.

I read excerpts from a book in the 90s called Guns, Germs, and Steel: The Fates of Human Societies by Jared Diamond, and although it's been a while since I've read them, I recall it gave some convincing theories regarding the causes of Eurasian innovation and world domination throughout history. A good summary of the book can be found here:

[T]he book is not merely an account of the past; it attempts to explain why Eurasian civilizations, as a whole, have survived and conquered others, while attempting to refute the belief that Eurasian hegemony is due to any form of Eurasian intellectual, moral, or inherent genetic superiority. Diamond argues that: the gaps in power and technology between human societies originate in environmental differences amplified by various positive feedback loops; and that, if cultural or genetic differences have favored Eurasians (for example Chinese centralized government, or improved disease resistance among Eurasians), it is only so because of the influence of geography.

For a real dumbed-down, oversimplified example, consider the following. In a civilization that is developing in a continent like Africa where its warm and sunny, it's easier for people who are not too bright to survive since it doesn't take much innovation and resourcefulness to figure out a way to survive in an environment like that. In a place with harsh climates with radical environmental changes accompanying the changes in seasons, and prolonged periods of bitter cold, it is much harder for a stupid person to survive. Thus significantly more stupid people will be weeded out of the gene pool in the latter example in comparison to the former example, which would probably raise the average IQ in the latter society more. This is just one example of how the environment a civilization develops in can affect its average IQ.

Level of concentration of different organizations such as city-states in a given space can affect average IQ too. For example say two continents have areas of equal size. In one continent, the given area is occupied by one society, a monolithic empire of shared language and culture with very little warfare and fear of invasion and few natural barriers. In the other continent, the given area is filled with numerous city-states formed by the separations caused by natural boundaries like mountain ranges, and the competition and warfare among all these groups forced Europeans to encourage innovation. More conditions to weed the less innovative out of the gene pool.

Here's another example of how environments can influence cultural and genetic development: Sparta and Athens. Both countries probably started out with similar genetic stock (if anyone knows otherwise, please feel free to correct me). Why did one city turn into such an intellectual center of innovative knowledge while the other became a master of physical combat and warfare? Are Athenians simply inherently smarter than Spartans through genetics? No, the reason is this: Sparta was situated on fertile soil, very good for farming. This made it very attractive to invaders. Invaders would frequently attack Sparta over and over again to get some of that good soil. Spartans had to adapt, and survival favored those who were physically stronger and were better fighters and tacticians over those who engaged in purely intellectual pursuits like philosophy. An uberintellectual philosopher probably had little value in Spartan society while great warriors and leaders probably enjoyed the most status. Also, they weeded out weakness from birth:

Everything was now dedicated to making each Spartiati a superb and unquestioningly loyal soldier. The Process started at birth. Newly-born babies were inspected by a committee of elders, and, if considered too weak , they were left to die by exposure on the sloped of Mount Taygetos. Those who survived were carefully brought up as Plutarch describes:

"The women did not bathe the babies with water, but with wine, making it a sort of test of their strength. For they say that the epileptic and sickly ones lose control and go into convulsions, but the healthy ones are rather toughened like steel and strengthened in their physique."

So as you can see, the environment influenced the culture in terms of what traits were valued, how they chose to improve themselves, how they raised their children and how they structured their society. These cultural factors in turn influenced who survived to pass on genes and who didn't, as weak children were allowed to die even. Genetics influence behavior as well (for example, societies with lots of tall men with high testosterone will probably be more hostile and have more competitive values). Which in turn influences culture, and the cycle goes on. These are called positive reinforcing loops.

Meanwhile, Athens was situated on land that was too shitty to grow anything. Because of its poor soil, it was less desirable and therefore less prone to invasions. Being relatively unmolested and left alone allowed Athens to prosper intellectually and devote more time to intellectual and athletic pursuits. Being intellectual requires a lot of free time to read, write and ponder deep thoughts for their own sake. One simply cannot become intellectual without having free time, and since Athens didn't have to constantly fight and depend itself, it had exactly that.

Spending time obsessing over the IQs of Spartans versus Athenians in an effort to shape policy would be pointless, because as shown above the relationship between environment, culture and genetics is very complicated and intertwined. Sure one society may have ended up with a higher IQ than another, but all that shows you are the traits that society historically needed for survival, not what that society is forever capable of. If somehow conditions got reversed and Athens suddenly was attacked incessantly while Sparta entered an era of unbroken peace, within a few generations the situations could end up reversed with Sparta becoming a society that favors intellectual pursuits and Athens focusing on developing military prowess and battle toughness.

This is why I have a problem with the idea many antileftists push that society is shortchanging itself by not paying more attention to the race and IQ issues put forth in The Bell Curve. Even if blacks do have a lower IQ, all that shows us is that the history of blacks is one that wasn't harsh enough to weed out more unintelligent people from the gene pool. If you subjected blacks to environment and cultural conditions that rewarded high intellect, competition and technical innovation first and foremost and made it hard to survive and thrive without these traits, you'd see a positive change in average IQ, much like if you devalued intellect, competiton and innovation in the culture and environment of whites and made it easy for them to survive and thrive without these traits, their average IQ would drop in time as well.

Average IQ of a racial group is simply an indicator of that racial group's historical tolerance for the survival of unintelligent people, not an indicator of that racial group's future potential for the rest of its existence.

Blacks and IQ, part 2.5

http://therawness.com/blacks-and-iq-part-25/

I was going to put up pt. 3 of Blacks and IQ later this week, but I got a comment on Part 2 of the series that I thought needed addressing. The response got so long I decided to make it a bonus post rather than a comment.

Basilransom commented:

T,

The topic of racial differences in IQ must be discussed, because it has real consequences. For instance, the differences account for some portion of the disparity in black-white academic performance. If you refuse to discuss race differences, you will have to look elsewhere to explain the gap, and overextend other possible causes to explain the entire gap.

And this has happened -- people who refuse to acknowledge IQ and such are prone to blaming the difference on widespread if concealed racism. Or on poor upbringing. And then they try to eliminate the racism, or improve child-rearing, and their success, if any is nothing like they had imagined.

In short, silence causes misplaced blame and inflated expectations.

I just read your first post though, and I share your sentiments to a degree. Charles Murray, when asked "say what you write is all true, what do you propose to do?"￾ He always responded that he would treat people like individuals, eg, assess their IQ and track them accordingly.

I'm sure you could work it to avoid torpedoing kids prospects? before they start. Eg, say with a kid's given IQ, there's a 30% chance that he?ll complete a calculus class, or graduate from college, or what have you. There's an arbitrary balance to be struck, as to how "generous"￾ or "optimistic"￾ you want to be, a balance that would be decided democratically. What with the frequent demands that every kid go to college, we're on the generous side of the spectrum.

[Not that the difference accounts for all of the gap]

I still don't buy that the topic of Race and IQ must be discussed in order to explain the failings of social policies directed at blacks or to figure out how to proceed with future social policies. A discussion of IQ is irrelevant to why policies for blacks fail. I'll give you examples to show you why:

India went through a socialist period where everything was centrally planned and free market principles were abandoned and wealth redistributed and property rihts compromised. The country went into the shitter. People became lazier, no accountability was set, the economy and productivity went down, work ethic went down the tubes. Free-market capitalism was introduced and the country thrived and is now a powerhouse. Same race in both scenarios, same relative IQs.
China in its early communist days tried collectivization of farms and changing private ownership in favor of communal ownership and central planning and redistribution of property. People became lazier, no accountability existed, the economy and productivity went down, work ethic went down the tubes. Free-market principles were reintroduced into agriculture and other areas, even though the country maintained a communist front and the country thrived and is now a powerhouse. Same race in both scenarios, same relative IQs.
East Germany and West Germany were once one country with the same culture, genetics, family histories, race, etc. For several decades they were split into a West and an East, with capitalism in the West and communism in the East. Only decades of living apart under different governments and social policies, yet over that time the character and culture of both sides of Germany became radically different. 1 in 5 Germans polled actually wish the Berlin Wall would be rebuilt, and even more surprisingly most of those wishing it would be rebuilt are former East Germans. Only 3% of relationships are between a east and west Germans, showing a strong social divide still remains almost 20 years later. From this article:

The poll by the Forsa institute showed that 73% of those from the east believed that socialism was a good idea in principle, but had been poorly implemented. Over 90% argued that they enjoyed better social protection during the GDR era.

The overwhelming majority of people originating from West Germany who took part in the survey said that if the wall was rebuilt they would prefer to live in West Germany, while around 36% of former East Germans said they would prefer to live in the communist east

These people were once genetically and culturally one and the same before, yet a few decades of central planning and redistribution of wealth on one side versus more free-market principles on the other side has made them severely incompatible to the point they can barely function or form relationships with each other today.

The point is that government social planning and nanny states and redistribution of wealth didn't fail in the black community because people misjudged their IQs and the policies failed as a result. THOSE POLICIES FAIL IN JUST ABOUT EVERY CULTURE, REGARDLESS OF RACE AND IQ. Whites, Asians and Indians, despite their superior average IQs, did not thrive under a nanny state either. This is just human nature, if you give people something for less effort, reduce competition, shield people from the full consequences of their actions and hold them to lower standards, they will underperform, regardless of the IQ involved.

In each of my examples, the nanny state scenario and the free market scenario all happened in the same groups of people with the same common culture, genetics and average IQ. No IQ and racial differentials to point to. By pointing to the history of failure of handouts, wealth redistribution and radical egalitarianism, you can make a strong case against the current welfare states without ever even getting into race and IQ at all.

My suspicion is this: to a certain degree, it strokes white people's egos to believe that they are magically and inherently smarter than many other races. A lot of the supposed social good they claim will come from acknowledging race and IQ to me is a backwards rationalization that comes later. Much like there are ego reasons that make many blacks from wanting to discuss race and IQ, there are many ego reasons that make whites want the issue to reach the forefront.

And to me, further proof of this comes from the reactions I get from people when I echo Jared Diamond's theory that whites evolved to have higher average IQs because of environmental conditions, population density, constant warfare and better livestock. Many of the "race and IQ"￾ crowd have a knee-jerk resistance to these ideas of how the higher white average IQ came to be, and it makes me realize that even though I'm acknowledging they have a higher average IQ, it's not enough for them. They don't just want to be acknowledged as having higher IQs, they also want to believe that this higher IQ is magically innate and a fundamental, immutable characteristic of their race and they eagerly need public recognition of it. The public recognition isn't the means to some more noble end they claim they are looking for, the public recognition of higher IQ is the actual end goal, period.

It's like the student who not only wants to do the best, he also wants people to know that he did the best without even trying hard, that he's a natural genius. If he did it by working the hardest, it kind of cheapens the victory because he's not gifted, he's just a hard worker. I think much of the race and IQ crowd treats race and IQ the same way, they need people to believe the IQ of their race is natural inherent genius and not just a result of hard work, natural selection due to environmental conditions and historical circumstances.

As for the kid with the lower IQ and the 30% chance of passing Calculus? There's an easy way to determine his chances of college success without touching upon IQ scores. The same way we judge it for white and Asian kids: his high school math classes and the grades he received in them.

Blacks and IQ, Part 3

http://therawness.com/blacks-and-iq-part-3/

I've already discussed Jared Diamond's book Guns, Germs and Steel, and the environmental explanations it gave for IQ differentials by race.

Another thing to keep in mind is that among American slave populations, there probably were not many selection pressures that encouraged high intelligence. In fact, high intelligence was penalized. A smart slave was a dangerous slave, so slave owners deliberately did what they could to keep slaves ignorant. If you read various slave codes from different US states and colonies, the illegality of slave literacy was a common theme. Slaves who showed initiative in trying to teach themselves to read or get smarter were severely punished. It was not an environment conducive to intellectualism. In fact, openly showing high intellectual potential would be more likely to get you killed and your genes weeded out of existence.

I think rather than outright intellectualism, the mental skills slavery selected for were a high-level cunning. For example negro spirituals on the surface where just inspirational hymns, but in actuality they were complex coded messages used to furtively convey messages the white masters wouldn't notice or decode. Examples can be seen here and here

We still see this particular verbal code aspect manifested in many aspects of black street life such as creating slangs that nonblacks can't understand, in the form of extremely street smarts, mastering high level con games, highly improvisational cognitive skills that can be seen in everything from off the cuff banter to improvisational jazz to freestyle rapping. Pimping "by the book"￾ (see my pimp week posts for an explanation) is another example of high level cunning.

I don't think IQ tests can properly test for these, but I think they're very valid cognitive abilities. For example one can claim that I'm being an apologist making weak excuses and that being high IQ is automatically better than any of these high cunning examples I'm giving, but is that really true? I've seen plenty of high IQ people who are useless in a situation that requires street smart and ability to recognize when they're being hustled. I've see socially inept high IQ people who would kill to be able to game women like many black players and pimps can. A great fictional example of this dynamic can be seen in season 5 finale episode of the Shield called "Postpartum,"￾ where high IQ genius and social misfit Dutch gets advice from a lowlife pimp he arrests on how manipulate and game a hot female rookie that he's unable to figure out how to get with. The pimp gives him the advice, Dutch puts it to use and it works perfectly.

Back to my original point, I think the existence of this cunning, or "hustle mindset,"￾ had much of its origin in American slavery. Even if a slave was very smart in terms of IQ, it had to be coupled with the cunning to use it to fullest advantage while simultaneously downplaying it and flying under the radar. You can see this in the life of Harriet Tubman, an escaped illiterate slave who returned to the south repeatedly to sneak out hundreds of slaves and transport them up north to freedom via her Underground Railroad, which was very dangerous and required a high amount of cunning and good instincts to carry out. Or take into account how Frederick Douglass learned to read:

Upon Frederick's arrival at the Auld Home, his only duties were to run errands and care for the Auld's infant son, Tommy. Frederick enjoyed the work and grew to love the child. Sophia Auld was a religious woman and frequently read aloud from the Bible. Frederick asked his mistress to teach him to read and she readily consented. He soon learned the alphabet and a few simple words. Sophia Auld was very excited about Fredericks progress and told her husband what she had done. Hugh Auld became furious at this because it was unlawful to teach a slave to read. Hugh Auld believed that if a slave knew how to read and write that it would make him unfit for a slave. A slave that could read and write would no longer obey his master without question or thought, or even worse could forge papers that said he was free and thus escape to a northern state where slavery was outlawed. Hugh Auld then instructed Sophia to stop the lessons at once!

Frederick learned from Hugh Auld's outburst that if learning how to read and write was his pathway to freedom, then gaining this knowledge was to become his goal. Frederick gained command of the alphabet on his own and made friends with poor white children he met on errands and used them as teachers. He paid for his reading lessons with pieces of bread. At home Frederick read parts of books and newspapers when he could, but he had to constantly be on guard against his mistress. Sophia Auld screamed whenever she caught Frederick reading. Sophia Auld's attitude toward Frederick had changed, she no longer regarded him as any other child, but as a piece of property. However, Frederick gradually learned to read and write. With a little money he had earned doing errands, he bought a copy of The Columbian Orator, a collection of speeches and essays dealing with liberty, democracy, and courage.

Also see this interview with a great-grandson of Frederick Douglass who describes how Douglass had to trick white kids into teaching him to read without knowing it:

[Jacquie]

I remember, I read some stories about Frederick Douglass, I remember one, I guess he would do things for some of the white kids on the street in return for them teaching him how to read.

[Fred]

Well, actually, he says many times that he had to steal his education, and so what would happen is many times, he never spent a day of his live in a classroom. But when the white boys would come home from school he would ask them questions like "Well, I bet you can't tell me what comes after P"￾ and they would mock him and make fun of him and call him ignorant and stupid and so on an so forth. And they'd say "Anybody knows, anybody who went to school would know that Q comes after P."￾ And so he would say "Well, then tell me, since you know so much then, what comes after W? And again they would mock him they'd say "Everybody who goes to school knows that X comes after W, don't you know that you idiot, you dummy?"￾ He would not say anything, but he would think, "Well, I do now."￾ And so that's what he would have to do, he'd have to trick people into giving him his education.

[Jacquie]

Cause they couldn't have told him that without him.

[Fred]

Well they wouldn't have told him that. They were not interested in his education so that's why he had to involve ... he had to think up situations to challenge people and extract the kind of information he wanted out of them because, he could just not simply go to them and say "I want you to teach me this"￾. They simply wouldn't have done that because they had picked up the prejudices and views of the day, so, no, that's not something they would have done. But, if he challenged them as he did, then they would reveal information, and so he would piece this together. After a period of time he was able, if he finished his work early, he might earn a few pennies and nickels doing some jobs for somebody he'd meet, or he might find some coins. And when he was able to get enough money together, he went and purchased a copy of the "Columbian Orator"￾. And that was really the beginning of his formal education. Self taught! Self-made man! But he was determined.

These stories illustrate how important was to many slave states to stamp out any form of intellectualism they found. Being discovered to have a strong drive to improve oneself intellectually was a great way to get yourself punished or killed. Not only was extreme cunningness a more important survival skill than intellectualism for a slave, the more intellectual a slave actually was, the more important cunning became as it became imperative to hide these smarts and desire to learn.

So during the duration of slavery, we've established there were many factors that would weed out intellectualism and make it counterproductive as a survival strategy. After slavery, there was rampant discrimination and segregation that played a big part in keeping black intellectualism low, and kept the IQ gap from getting significantly closer to getting bridged. Even then, despite the discrimination, blacks were improving their social situation and starting a long, uphill climb and showing much potential, as shown in this Sowell article. And then came the last blow that truly derailed any chance of bridging the achievement gap in the 20th century, the Great Society welfare state. A great post illustrating some of the ways in which the Great Society derailed black achievement can be found here.

Here are the things I feel need to be done to help bridge the achievement gap between whites and blacks. First, get rid of affirmative action, hiring quotas, diversity initiatives. For a black person to achieve the same thing as a white person, they would have to have the same credentials. They would need to have the same grades as white kids to get admitted to the same schools. They would need the same experience and credentials and transcript grades as a white person to get the same jobs. The flipside to this is that in addition to removing this diversity initiatives that promote blacks, a serious attempt has to be taken to curtail things that unfairly work against blacks as well, such as racial discrimination that may hurt qualified black applicants and legacy admissions that help substandard white students.

At first this will probably lead to less blacks in Ivy Leagues and top schools, but this will just mean that more of them will instead attend schools and get jobs that are more appropriate to their academic and employment track records. Studies find that putting black applicants into schools and career tracks they are underqualified for actually hurts them more than it helps them. Richard Sander has a 117-page in-depth study of how affirmative action hurts black lawyers that is very worthwhile reading for example. Not only do these policies routinely put blacks into situations they are unprepared for, the ensuing frustration often wreaks havoc on their self-esteem and emotional being, as described in Ellis Cose's book The Rage of a Privileged Class: Why Do Prosperous Blacks Still Have the Blues?

.

The black students who aren't ready for top four year colleges, rather than attending and dropping out or barely graduating, can enter the workforce, go to vocational school to learn a marketable trade, or they can go to a community college that will inexpensively give them the tools to compete in 4-year college they didn't receive in high school. Black students who aren't good enough to get into Ivy Leagues will instead attend respectable four year schools they are better suited for, where they will perform better. The only blacks who will get into Ivy League schools or white-shoe law firms or top investment banks will be the ones who could get in strictly on the basis of their credentials regardless of their race.

In the short run we will see less blacks in high profile schools and jobs, but they will be performing better because they will be in the environments they are qualified to be in based on their credentials. And with time, as blacks adjust to the new standards expected of them, they will start adjusting themselves to meet them. Think of all the industries where blacks outperform whites, and what do they have in common? They never had an affirmative action program in place for them. Entertainment and sports, in those fields blacks faced rampant discrimination, segregation and financial exploitation, and in the short run the early people who dealt with that system suffered. But they adapted to those obstacles, and when they realized they had to be better than whites to compete in those same fields, they worked harder. There were no programs that allowed them to have less skills yet get the same as white athletes. They couldn't even get a break if they were equally skilled. So they resolved to be better singers, comedians, and athletes than whites, to the point where white bosses couldn't ignore them anymore because they didn't want to leave that money on the table and they didn't want to pass up these gifted people and give their competitors a chance to profit. After getting exploited for a few generations, how often do we hear nowadays of a hot black entertainer or athlete getting exploited financially? They don't. They've adapted accordingly thanks to what happened to the early pioneers. Now we hear about poor mothers of high school NBA phenoms successfully being financially savvy in negotiations with the top colleges and big teams and hiring the necessary agents and lawyers to guard against any possible exploitation. You take away the affirmative action we give blacks in intellectual endeavors and with time the younger generations will be raised to adapt accordingly as well.

Another step I'd recommend is taking away any scholarships that are given just for being poor and/or black. I'm all for poverty-based financial aid if and only if the applicant is academically qualified, and regardless of race. if a black student is poor but has the right grades, it would be a shame for him to miss out on an education just because of money reasons. But if someone is poor and woefully underqualified, to give him a scholarship to a school that's beyond his abilities in hopes that you can bridge the gap after he arrives is doing him no favors.

Something else I support, but which some find pretty controversial, is to incentivize academic accomplishments for black children. Make the rewards instantly tangible for them. A similar program was suggested for New York by Michael Bloomberg (who as a successful business owner understands market forces and incentives much better than our usual policymakers, lawyers) and was immediately shot down:

Pop quiz: Why do you really show up at work every day? 1) They couldn't do it without me; 2) I enjoy the abuse; 3) I need the money to support my addictions, like wearing clothes, keeping a roof over my head and eating once in a while.

If your answer included the word ?money,? then you might appreciate New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg's plan to pay certain low- income students between $5 and $10 for taking a test and even more ? $25 to $50 ? for scoring top grades on them. Under the plan, which will begin this fall, older students can earn a maximum of $500 while participating schools receive $5,000.

Bloomberg, who sees the program as a way to motivate public schoolers, is no stranger to making money. Local government's only billionaire, Bloomberg is a businessman who is using his own money and donations from others in the private sector to pay the students. Why would businesses support paying people to excel? Maybe because that's what private enterprise already does. At least, the best companies reward employees for exceptional performance.

Many of the same people who support giving kids free scholarship money when they haven't done anything academic to earn it somehow were outraged at the idea of paying kids for tangible achievement, and I don't really understand why. As I've stated in this post, human nature responds much better to the Earn-Reward method than the Reward-Earn method.

[Killhoffa]

Thanks for the E-book

[Cornfed]

My problem is, I just don’t think it’s as important as many people think it is. If blacks have lower IQ averages than other races, now what? Say we all accept that fact, where do we go from here? How do we change our policies?

Expel them from technologically advanced societies. Where necessary impose discipline on them in more physical and direct terms than you would other races. In their own countries allow them to have traditional tribal systems geared to their needs rather than expecting them to be North Europeans with a tan.

Not only would such initiatives never pass, they’d be political suicide for any mainstream politician that attached his or her name to them.

Obviously with the current ruling elite in place, nothing good can happen in the West as they are traitors who intend Western society to fail. If on the other hand the entire ruling class and their collaborators were to be wiped out, then all manner of sensible things could "pass".

[Moretorque]

I actually like black people and respect them because they invented the human race but I also realize here in the US for whatever reason the type of behavior alot of them are engaged in means America is sunk for sure and there is no way to right the ship.

We had a slow track and it was called slavery, the best thing for all races to do is stop breeding until we get the planet to stop dying then we can go forward as a species from there. The American blacks are slowing down on breeding so that is a good sign.

From the reading on the statistics I have done I would have to say any place you have to alot of blacks if they are like the ones here in America there is no way to run a modern 1st world order highly technical society. A technical police state " baby sitting service for the mentally handicapped " yes and that is what the elites are building. THEY KNOW!

The whites brought the Africans here so the sins of our fathers will visit our son's n daughter's. I think the Elite are probably right and it is time to hit the reset button and from then on the animals who think they can just breed without being responsible for their offspring need to be controlled and closely regulated for sure.

I for one do not believe in angels and this world is a real angelic gem and we need to learn real quick to treat it as such.

[Contrarian Expatriate]

Expel them from technologically advanced societies. Where necessary impose discipline on them in more physical and direct terms than you would other races. In their own countries allow them to have traditional tribal systems geared to their needs rather than expecting them to be North Europeans with a tan.

Cornfed if you had a clue, you would realize that American whites are well behind American Asians, Indians, and even BLACK African immigrants in terms of IQ and technical acumen.

The typical white student wishes to study liberal arts and aspires to a management position at Starbucks these days. Should be expel whites then and leave the country to more advanced immigrant groups?

What an unmitigated dumbass you are

[Contrarian Expatriate]

IQ is grossly overrated. For example, let's say an upper middle class white kid with a 130 IQ had a comfortable upbringing and went on to a successful career as an attorney making 100,000 a year.

In my case as a black student, my IQ was lower than 130, but why was I able to outearn and outperform whites of so-called higher intelligence?

It comes down to motivation, pragmatism, judgement, and exerted effort which are far more determinative of success than IQ. A student with a high IQ might have a higher vocabulary and more facility with mathematical concepts, but that does not translate into personal progression and achievement in any way.

Think of IQ as a starting point, but it is by no means an ending point.

[zboy1]

Contrarian, don't let Cornfed's racism get to you. He hates everybody non-White, so what do you expect, LOL?

[Contrarian Expatriate]

Contrarian, don't let Cornfed's racism get to you. He hates everybody non-White, so what do you expect, LOL?

I don't have a problem with his racism, it's his fallacious reasoning and lack and misrepresentation of facts that make me smack him down.

Also, he cannot evolve into a clear thinker; that much is clear. But there are others that read his posts that CAN ponder complex issues and become more worldly-wise.

Cornfed should have been fed a bit more than just corn over the years.

[Moretorque]

Expel them from technologically advanced societies. Where necessary impose discipline on them in more physical and direct terms than you would other races. In their own countries allow them to have traditional tribal systems geared to their needs rather than expecting them to be North Europeans with a tan.

Cornfed if you had a clue, you would realize that American whites are well behind American Asians, Indians, and even BLACK Africans immigrants in terms of IQ and technical acumen.

The typical white student wishes to study liberal arts and aspires to a management position at Starbucks these days. Should be expel whites then and leave the country to more advanced immigrant groups?

What an unmitigated dumbass you are

I don't want to call you out on this but I must, alot of your posts are BULLCHIT. Do not even try and put the blacks even remotely close to the Asians in stability in any area, I have read the statistics on alot of different race groups and the blacks always pretty much come up #1 in the degenerate department unless it's blackman chase the ball.

The one group of people I looked at the statistics on and said just forget it and there is no hope so let the social engineers have it was the blacks, the Asians are actually the ray of hope to defeat the socially engineered prison society our rulers are building.

I try to be open minded and understand but when I researched the statistics on the American Blacks I was quit alarmed to say the least, and the statistics don't lie and they said run for the hills.

[Attorney at Large]

Expel them from technologically advanced societies. Where necessary impose discipline on them in more physical and direct terms than you would other races. In their own countries allow them to have traditional tribal systems geared to their needs rather than expecting them to be North Europeans with a tan.

Cornfed if you had a clue, you would realize that American whites are well behind American Asians, Indians, and even BLACK Africans immigrants in terms of IQ and technical acumen.

The typical white student wishes to study liberal arts and aspires to a management position at Starbucks these days. Should be expel whites then and leave the country to more advanced immigrant groups?

What an unmitigated dumbass you are

Not that I'm with Cornfed on this one but pretty much all technology invented in the last 1000 years has been by white men. Not asian or Black. We all know that asian have a high IQ average but do not create new ideas or technology. IQ is important but creativity is even more important. I desire good things for all people but I have to ask, what have blacks contributed to the world outside of athletics, comedy and music?


I want

[Contrarian Expatriate]

Expel them from technologically advanced societies. Where necessary impose discipline on them in more physical and direct terms than you would other races. In their own countries allow them to have traditional tribal systems geared to their needs rather than expecting them to be North Europeans with a tan.

Cornfed if you had a clue, you would realize that American whites are well behind American Asians, Indians, and even BLACK Africans immigrants in terms of IQ and technical acumen.

The typical white student wishes to study liberal arts and aspires to a management position at Starbucks these days. Should be expel whites then and leave the country to more advanced immigrant groups?

What an unmitigated dumbass you are

I don't want to call you out on this but I must, alot of your posts are BULLCHIT. Do not even try and put the blacks even remotely close to the Asians in stability in any area, I have read the statistics on alot of different race groups and the blacks always pretty much come up #1 in the degenerate department unless it's blackman chase the ball.

The one group of people I looked at the statistics on and said just forget it and there is no hope so let the social engineers have it was the blacks, the Asians are actually the ray of hope to defeat the socially engineered prison society our rulers are building.

I try to be open minded and understand but when I researched the statistics on the American Blacks I was quit alarmed to say the least, and the statistics don't lie and they said run for the hills.

You are far from open-minded. You are an idiot that ignores presented facts. If you take a deep breath and re-read my post carefully, you will see that I said AFRICAN IMMIGRANTS not African Americans you moron. So yes, African immigrants do have higher educational credentials and higher income and higher IQ than White Americans (Gasp). I've written about this before and included references for evidence. Look it up in one of my previous posts or just look it up yourself.

I notice when people present FACTS that don't comport with the white supremacist worldview, guys like you get all butthurt and sling accusations of "bullshit" around. That does not make it any less true.

[Moretorque]

Expel them from technologically advanced societies. Where necessary impose discipline on them in more physical and direct terms than you would other races. In their own countries allow them to have traditional tribal systems geared to their needs rather than expecting them to be North Europeans with a tan.

Cornfed if you had a clue, you would realize that American whites are well behind American Asians, Indians, and even BLACK Africans immigrants in terms of IQ and technical acumen.

The typical white student wishes to study liberal arts and aspires to a management position at Starbucks these days. Should be expel whites then and leave the country to more advanced immigrant groups?

What an unmitigated dumbass you are

I don't want to call you out on this but I must, alot of your posts are BULLCHIT. Do not even try and put the blacks even remotely close to the Asians in stability in any area, I have read the statistics on alot of different race groups and the blacks always pretty much come up #1 in the degenerate department unless it's blackman chase the ball.

The one group of people I looked at the statistics on and said just forget it and there is no hope so let the social engineers have it was the blacks, the Asians are actually the ray of hope to defeat the socially engineered prison society our rulers are building.

I try to be open minded and understand but when I researched the statistics on the American Blacks I was quit alarmed to say the least, and the statistics don't lie and they said run for the hills.

You are far from open-minded. You are an idiot that ignores presented facts. If you take a deep breath and re-read my post carefully, you will see that I said AFRICAN IMMIGRANTS not African Americans you moron. So yes, African immigrants do have higher educational credentials and higher income and higher IQ than White Americans (Gasp). I've written about this before and included references for evidence. Look it up in one of my previous posts or just look it up yourself.

I notice when people present FACTS that don't comport with the white supremacist worldview, guys like you get all butthurt and sling accusations of "bullshit" around. That does not make it any less true.

Ok sorry, I just look at Africa as well and that tells me all I need to know. I am taking a world view on this. The immigrants are the top tier of Africans who come over to study. When you factor it all together blacks still do not compete in the sciences at all overall.

Like I stated in another post my stepfather is a Astrophysicist and his department never graduated one black in that field with even a masters in all 30 years he taught the subject at his university.

[Moretorque]

Expel them from technologically advanced societies. Where necessary impose discipline on them in more physical and direct terms than you would other races. In their own countries allow them to have traditional tribal systems geared to their needs rather than expecting them to be North Europeans with a tan.

Cornfed if you had a clue, you would realize that American whites are well behind American Asians, Indians, and even BLACK Africans immigrants in terms of IQ and technical acumen.

The typical white student wishes to study liberal arts and aspires to a management position at Starbucks these days. Should be expel whites then and leave the country to more advanced immigrant groups?

What an unmitigated dumbass you are

Not that I'm with Cornfed on this one but pretty much all technology invented in the last 1000 years has been by white men. Not asian or Black. We all know that asian have a high IQ average but do not create new ideas or technology. IQ is important but creativity is even more important. I desire good things for all people but I have to ask, what have blacks contributed to the world outside of athletics, comedy and music?


I want

Asians were isolationist for the most part and that plays a key role, Europe has been fighting like cats and dogs the last 1000 years and that has driven technology as well as going abroad and conquering new territory. The Asians are plenty smart and creative given a chance, look at what and where they are taking the new technologies. I find Asians to be highly informed and this coincides with the high IQ scores. A IQ test tells alot as far as being able to plain read, think and reason.

Iceland has a high IQ average and they had no problem figuring out who was taking them over with a - accounting gimmick book entry.

[SilverEnergy]

Expel them from technologically advanced societies. Where necessary impose discipline on them in more physical and direct terms than you would other races. In their own countries allow them to have traditional tribal systems geared to their needs rather than expecting them to be North Europeans with a tan.

Cornfed if you had a clue, you would realize that American whites are well behind American Asians, Indians, and even BLACK Africans immigrants in terms of IQ and technical acumen.

The typical white student wishes to study liberal arts and aspires to a management position at Starbucks these days. Should be expel whites then and leave the country to more advanced immigrant groups?

What an unmitigated dumbass you are

Not that I'm with Cornfed on this one but pretty much all technology invented in the last 1000 years has been by white men. Not asian or Black. We all know that asian have a high IQ average but do not create new ideas or technology. IQ is important but creativity is even more important. I desire good things for all people but I have to ask, what have blacks contributed to the world outside of athletics, comedy and music?


I want

WRONG!!!

White supremacy knows no bounds.

Whites learned math and science that the black Africans taught them and developed technology with it.

Asians have also been great inventors but I'm going to school you on the inventions of African Americans.

Do yourself a favor and read "African American Contributions To Science and Technology".

And also watch Tariq Nasheed's documentary "Hidden Colors 1 & 2".

Over the past 2 centuries, African Americans have had thousands of patents.

Dr. Mark Dean, invented the personal computer and color pc monitor and he's African American. Philip Emeagwali is the father of the internet and he's a black nigerian. Henry Sampson invented the cell phone and he's black, the list goes on and on and he's African American. Emmit McHenry, an African American wrote the code that allows you to surf the internet and check your email.

Nasa wouldn't be where it's at if it were not for an important invention by an African American.

Without black inventors, we would not be where we are at as a society.

Had blacks never been enslaved, they would have built computers and spaceships far more advanced than what we have today.

As a matter of fact, there's a lot of evidence that technology more advanced than our own was created in the ancient days.

For those who care about IQs, the black Nigerian mentioned above Philip Emeagwali has an IQ of 190.

It's so simple to look this stuff up.

You and Cornfed should be ashamed of your terrible ignorance.

I'm giving you important documentaries and literature to read, so READ IT and stop posting these lies.

[SilverEnergy]

Asian Inventors: http://inventors.about.com/od/astartinv ... entors.htm