Suppose scientific racism is correct. How will you react? How will society?

[Canard DuJour]

The one I live in. White working class males have the lowest educational attainment (blacks in the same demographic do better) here. Primarily, according to an Education Dep't eniquiry, because they're the least likely to come from homes where education is valued (and that's discounting pikeys - "travellers" of mostly Roma and Irish descent - who don't even send their kids to school). The immigrant groups with highest and lowest educational attainment here are Asian.

As has been pointed out to you before and dismissed by you because it didn't chime with things you've read in the 'scientific racist' literature. Which is fine because it makes you look like a crank.

I think you are right about Africans having higher educational qualifications in the UK, and I give you credit for that, in spite of your personal hostility.

They aren't "the lowest," which was your claim. "Higher" could be misinterpreted (and there are always people looking for things to misinterpret). I'm apathetic about you personally and don't particularly care about the topic. I have a problem with b/s argumentation like I have a problem with crookedly hung pictures.

I downloaded the 2011 census data from http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/rel/censu...vellers-in-england-and-wales-/rft-table-5.xls and I calculated the percentages. Lynn's data on educational achievement by race was from 1990, and I expect the main change was increasing income and educational thresholds for all immigrants from outside Europe (selecting mainly the most intelligent immigrants). Whatever the cause, it does seem to be an exception to the general pattern, and I can no longer assert universals.

Which is the least of your problems.

Your main problem is characteristics covarying indepenently of the correlations you're obsessed with by the same amounts or more, and over far too short a time for innate genetic differences to have evolved. That doesn't rule out innate genetic differences, but ruling them in for inter-group correlations because they correspond to your preconceptions isn't "scientific" anything. It's plain old racism.

A lesser problem is that when others examine the evidence of your supposed authorities, they find that it either doesn't support their conclusions on its face, or that correlations disappear (or even reverse!) when they compensate for normalisation effects and environmental differences in samples. Yer "scientific racists" appear to have been actively looking for the effects they tout rather than checking for them. Doesn't make them wrong, but it does mean they're not to be trusted.

It's by no means certain that gene science will be able to either confirm or deny your claims. If the environment acts as a multiplier of tiny genetic differences and/or switches groups of genes on or off during an individual's lifetime, it'll be impossible to determine whether anyone's intelligence is n% genetic, therefore 100-n% environmental. The problem is compounded with differences between races as population genetics increasingly finds that race isn't even a properly biological categorisation.

And drop the persecution complex. The idea that scientific racism should be assessed in contradistinction to some oppressive "scientific Marxism" just sets peoples' crank alarms off. The idea that the general public are devout blank-slaters, afraid to even raise the subject, is patent rubbish. The average London cabbie makes Richard Lynn sound like Steven Jay Gould.

 

[AthenaAwakened]

I have already posted this. Here it comes again.

---------

The notion that economic deprivation necessarily leads to lawlessness is widely believed but is not supported by empirical evidence. Human history is replete with examples of impoverished people—of all racial and ethnic backgrounds—who have endured extreme poverty without descending into criminal activity. During the 1960s, for instance, the residents of San Francisco's Chinatown were among America's poorest people—with the most unemployment, the worst housing conditions, the least education, and the highest rate of tuberculosis in their city. Yet despite such hardships, only five people of Chinese ancestry went to jail in the entire state of California in 1965.[1]

You have it bass-ackwards here. I don't think anyone is saying that being poor leads to lawlessness. Rather, the cultural problems that lead to lawlessness also lead to poverty.

Loren,

Lack of wealth and/or insufficient income leads to poverty.

This ain't deep.

 

[Trodon]

You have it bass-ackwards here. I don't think anyone is saying that being poor leads to lawlessness. Rather, the cultural problems that lead to lawlessness also lead to poverty.

And what leads to these "cultural problems?"

Also, why has the black culture become more dysfunctional since the civil rights legislation was signed?

Consider the music blacks have composed. Soul music was about love, even unrequited love. Rap music is about sex and lust.

A point I keep making is that as the black alibi of "white racism" for black social pathology becomes less justified, it becomes more necessary.

 

[Trodon]

The average London cabbie makes Richard Lynn sound like Steven Jay Gould.

laughing out loud

 

[Tom Sawyer]

You have it bass-ackwards here. I don't think anyone is saying that being poor leads to lawlessness. Rather, the cultural problems that lead to lawlessness also lead to poverty.

And what leads to these "cultural problems?"

Also, why has the black culture become more dysfunctional since the civil rights legislation was signed?

Consider the music blacks have composed. Soul music was about love, even unrequited love. Rap music is about sex and lust.

Ya, the damn kids with their rock and roll music. I wish they'd just get the hell off my lawn.

 

[Perspicuo]

If scientific racism were true the bellicosity gene could be deleted from the genome by neutering the people in countries with biggest armies and most wars fought.

And while we're at it, we can neuter those with the poverty gene.


The Icelanders will inherit the Earth.

 

[Trodon]

This quote seems to be saying that crime is caused by broken families. So even if there's a biological factor for illegitimacy rates (something even you admit you have no explanation for), crime rates themselves don't appear to have a direct and immediate biological basis.

So you have an "explanation" (although one that remains pseudoscientific wishful thinking, as previously explained) for how one phenomenon (crime rate differences) could be caused by selection, but according to your own sources, that phenomenon appears to be environmental (growing up outside an intact family). If you want to maintain a biological basis for the difference (in crime rates) at all, you'll have to provide a explanatory theory for how the behaviour that leads to that environmental difference is based on biology, something you admit you don't have.

What you said about strong emotions and logic indeed seems to apply.

I do have a biological explanation for different illegitimacy rates among the races. In cold climates a woman had a greater need for the help of a man to raise her children. For one thing, cold climates require plows. Plows require more strength to use than women have. (I am of course thinking of non mechanical plows.)

Also, I do not have to explain everything to explain anything. Agriculture and civilization each began in the Mid East about a thousand years before they began in the Far East. Nevertheless, Orientals have higher average IQ's and lower rates of crime and illegitimacy than do whites.

Although civilization began in what is now Egypt and Iraq, and only really began in Scandinavia during the high middle ages, average IQ's in Scandinavia are higher than they are in Egypt and Iraq.

I explain the higher IQ averages in Scandinavia two ways. First, frigid winters require more intelligence to survive. Although American Indians created civilizations and Eskimos did not, Eskimos have higher IQ averages than American Indians, even American Indians who are descended from the Mayans, the Aztecs, and the Incas.

Second, Arabs are about five percent negro. Negro genes entered the Arab genome through the African slave trade. Arabs castrated male slaves, but had children with their female slaves.

Other factors that I am not aware of are also important. Environmental factors are of little importance. Racial differences in intelligence persist across time and space. This would not be the case if social reform and social welfare spending had the importance liberals attribute to them.

One factor that gives Orientals an advantage over whites in biological qualities congenial to civilization is the fact that the Orient never experienced something equivalent to the dark ages that descended on most of Europe with the fall of the Western Roman Empire. Also, war was less of a factor in the far east than in Europe. Finally, the Imperial Exam System made it possible for intelligent Chinese peasant boys to enter the Scholar Gentry, where they were expected to have several wives, and many children. In most of Europe intelligent peasant boys entered the Roman Catholic priesthood, where they were not allowed to have any children at all.

 

[Jokodo]

If scientific racism were true the bellicosity gene could be deleted from the genome by neutering the people in countries with biggest armies and most wars fought.

And while we're at it, we can neuter those with the poverty gene.


The Icelanders will inherit the Earth.

I don't think Trodon considers the bellicosity gene undesirable. He'd probably first go for the illegitimacy gene, which is bad news for ~70% of recently born Icelanders.

 

[Trodon]

And what leads to these "cultural problems?"

Also, why has the black culture become more dysfunctional since the civil rights legislation was signed?

Consider the music blacks have composed. Soul music was about love, even unrequited love. Rap music is about sex and lust.

Ya, the damn kids with their rock and roll music. I wish they'd just get the hell off my lawn.

 

[Trodon]

If scientific racism were true the bellicosity gene could be deleted from the genome by neutering the people in countries with biggest armies and most wars fought.

And while we're at it, we can neuter those with the poverty gene.


The Icelanders will inherit the Earth.

I don't think Trodon considers the bellicosity gene undesirable. He'd probably first go for the illegitimacy gene, which is bad news for ~70% of recently born Icelanders.

Crime, illegitimacy, and IQ are each caused by a constellation of genes. I am sure they will be discovered soon. I hope that when they are discovered the taboos against genetic determination will come to an end.

 

[Jokodo]

This quote seems to be saying that crime is caused by broken families. So even if there's a biological factor for illegitimacy rates (something even you admit you have no explanation for), crime rates themselves don't appear to have a direct and immediate biological basis.

So you have an "explanation" (although one that remains pseudoscientific wishful thinking, as previously explained) for how one phenomenon (crime rate differences) could be caused by selection, but according to your own sources, that phenomenon appears to be environmental (growing up outside an intact family). If you want to maintain a biological basis for the difference (in crime rates) at all, you'll have to provide a explanatory theory for how the behaviour that leads to that environmental difference is based on biology, something you admit you don't have.

What you said about strong emotions and logic indeed seems to apply.

I do have a biological explanation for different illegitimacy rates among the races. In cold climates a woman had a greater need for the help of a man to raise her children.

This is bullshit. For one thing, there are scarce and plentiful environments in both cold and hot climates. But more importantly, even if women have greater need for help in some environments, its help of other people they need, not help of a man. By limiting this to help of a man, you're assuming the nuclear family as the basic economic unit to be the default throughout history - not only unwarranted but demonstrably wrong.

So your "explanation" fails a basic check against historical and anthropological evidence. Which is probably a good thing because, globally, whites have higher rates of illegitimacy than blacks, with rates in African countries mostly below 20% while few countries in Europe have less than 30% and (almost?) none in Latin America below 50%.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

You have it bass-ackwards here. I don't think anyone is saying that being poor leads to lawlessness. Rather, the cultural problems that lead to lawlessness also lead to poverty.

Loren,

Lack of wealth and/or insufficient income leads to poverty.

This ain't deep.

You still don't understand the difference between being poor (a lack of money) and being in poverty (a mental state.)

 

[Loren Pechtel]

You have it bass-ackwards here. I don't think anyone is saying that being poor leads to lawlessness. Rather, the cultural problems that lead to lawlessness also lead to poverty.

And what leads to these "cultural problems?"

Also, why has the black culture become more dysfunctional since the civil rights legislation was signed?

Consider the music blacks have composed. Soul music was about love, even unrequited love. Rap music is about sex and lust.

A point I keep making is that as the black alibi of "white racism" for black social pathology becomes less justified, it becomes more necessary.

Civil rights aren't the problem. The welfare system that traps people and makes it more sensible to be a single parent is the real problem.

The anti-discrimination movement is part of the problem--keep telling blacks that their problems are due to whites and there isn't the incentive to look for the hard answer: the problems are internal.

 

[Jokodo]

I don't think Trodon considers the bellicosity gene undesirable. He'd probably first go for the illegitimacy gene, which is bad news for ~70% of recently born Icelanders.

Crime, illegitimacy, and IQ are each caused by a constellation of genes. I am sure they will be discovered soon.

Let's stick with one topic at a time, shall we?

I'm sure there are genes that contribute to illegitimacy. For example, a gene that causes, or contributes to, irregular periods will make it more likely for a carrier to not notice her pregnancy until it's too late for a legal abortion. Assuming only that at least some unmarried women who notice their pregnancies too late would have terminated them had they discovered them earlier but are unwilling to undergo an illegal and dangerous late-term abortion, this will increase the rate of out-of-wedlock births among carriers. Similarly, any gene that contributes to a shape of the vagina that makes it more likely for a condom to slip off during sex will increase the number of unwanted pregnancies among carriers, and, as long as the number of people with principled objections against abortion is equally distributed among carriers and non-carriers, the number of unwanted births. (Both of these scenarios further assume that unmarried women are in aggregate less likely to want a pregnancy than married women, all else being equal; a reasonable assumption, I believe.)

The effects of each such gene are going to be minuscule, and while some of them might well be unequally distributed between "races", their combined signal is swamped by environmental factors. Comparing demographic indicators among current populations living in greatly differing circumstances gives us no indication in which direction those distribution are slanted, if at all. In other words, it would be unsurprising to find that alleles that contribute to criminal inclinations or susceptibility to give birth to a child out of wedlock are more prevalent among Caucasians than among blacks, but their tiny signal to be swamped by socio-economic and cultural factors.

Expecting the difference in illegitimacy rates between European Americans and African Americans to be reflective of the respective populations' genetic makeup when we know that the rates differ by as much between former Western and Eastern Germany is the essence of pseudoscientific wishful thinking.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Crime, illegitimacy, and IQ are each caused by a constellation of genes. I am sure they will be discovered soon.

Let's stick with one topic at a time, shall we?

I'm sure there are genes that contribute to illegitimacy. For example, a gene that causes, or contributes to, irregular periods will make it more likely for a carrier to not notice her pregnancy until it's too late for a legal abortion. Assuming only that at least some unmarried women who notice their pregnancies too late would have terminated them had they discovered them earlier but are unwilling to undergo an illegal and dangerous late-term abortion, this will increase the rate of out-of-wedlock births among carriers. Similarly, any gene that contributes to a shape of the vagina that makes it more likely for a condom to slip off during sex will increase the number of unwanted pregnancies among carriers, and, as long as the number of people with principled objections against abortion is equally distributed among carriers and non-carriers, the number of unwanted births. (Both of these scenarios further assume that unmarried women are in aggregate less likely to want a pregnancy than married women, all else being equal; a reasonable assumption, I believe.)

More likely would be a gene that contributed to anti-abortion feelings.

 

[Jokodo]

Let's stick with one topic at a time, shall we?

I'm sure there are genes that contribute to illegitimacy. For example, a gene that causes, or contributes to, irregular periods will make it more likely for a carrier to not notice her pregnancy until it's too late for a legal abortion. Assuming only that at least some unmarried women who notice their pregnancies too late would have terminated them had they discovered them earlier but are unwilling to undergo an illegal and dangerous late-term abortion, this will increase the rate of out-of-wedlock births among carriers. Similarly, any gene that contributes to a shape of the vagina that makes it more likely for a condom to slip off during sex will increase the number of unwanted pregnancies among carriers, and, as long as the number of people with principled objections against abortion is equally distributed among carriers and non-carriers, the number of unwanted births. (Both of these scenarios further assume that unmarried women are in aggregate less likely to want a pregnancy than married women, all else being equal; a reasonable assumption, I believe.)

More likely would be a gene that contributed to anti-abortion feelings.

How about no? Something like "anti-abortion feelings is pretty much a textbook case for a factor that's almost certainly entirely cultural. It sure is a larger contributor than any of the factors I brought up, but that only shows it's a largely cultural phenomenon. QED.

 

[Trodon]

This is bullshit. For one thing, there are scarce and plentiful environments in both cold and hot climates. But more importantly, even if women have greater need for help in some environments, its help of other people they need, not help of a man. By limiting this to help of a man, you're assuming the nuclear family as the basic economic unit to be the default throughout history - not only unwarranted but demonstrably wrong.

So your "explanation" fails a basic check against historical and anthropological evidence. Which is probably a good thing because, globally, whites have higher rates of illegitimacy than blacks, with rates in African countries mostly below 20% while few countries in Europe have less than 30% and (almost?) none in Latin America below 50%.

That is an interesting website, and an enlightening one. Thank you for posting it.

Low black average intelligence is easiest to explain in evolutionary terms. In a civilized country men with high intelligence are usually more prosperous than men with low intelligence. Historically they have been more prolific.

High rates of black crime can be explained by the fact that criminal justice systems of civilized countries have over the centuries removed those with criminal inclinations from the breeding population. Nevertheless, crime rates are more flexible than average intelligence.

In the United States blacks have always been noted for having looser marital bonds than whites. It was once hoped that when blacks were given equal rights they would perform and behave as well as whites. This has not happened.

 

[Trodon]

Civil rights aren't the problem. The welfare system that traps people and makes it more sensible to be a single parent is the real problem.

The anti-discrimination movement is part of the problem--keep telling blacks that their problems are due to whites and there isn't the incentive to look for the hard answer: the problems are internal.

Another problem is the decline in the number of production jobs in the United States. From the mid 1930's to the mid 1970's it was possible for a man with an average to slightly below average level of intelligence to get a production job with a strong union that provided him with a decent income with good benefits. He could afford to support a wife who remained home with the children, and several children.

Since the recession of 1974 this has become increasingly difficult.

Unionized blue collar jobs increased the incentives for morally responsible behavior.

The expansion of the welfare system that followed the beginning of the War on Poverty in 1964 has reduced the disincentives for morally irresponsible behavior.

In his book Coming Apart: The State of White America, 1960-2010 Charles Murray has documented an increase in social pathology among lower income white men.

Our economy is no longer generating jobs that provide lower middle class incomes for men of lower middle level IQ's. Blacks and whites are suffering, but blacks are suffering more because of their lower average intelligence levels.

When hard work no longer leads to success a lot of men give up, and live for temporary enjoyments.

 

[Jokodo]

This is bullshit. For one thing, there are scarce and plentiful environments in both cold and hot climates. But more importantly, even if women have greater need for help in some environments, its help of other people they need, not help of a man. By limiting this to help of a man, you're assuming the nuclear family as the basic economic unit to be the default throughout history - not only unwarranted but demonstrably wrong.

So your "explanation" fails a basic check against historical and anthropological evidence. Which is probably a good thing because, globally, whites have higher rates of illegitimacy than blacks, with rates in African countries mostly below 20% while few countries in Europe have less than 30% and (almost?) none in Latin America below 50%.

That is an interesting website, and an enlightening one. Thank you for posting it.

Low black average intelligence is easiest to explain in evolutionary terms. In a civilized country men with high intelligence are usually more prosperous than men with low intelligence. Historically they have been more prolific.

Probably false. In most civilisations, your mother's husband's prosperity is and has been the best predictor for your prosperity - whether or not he gained his prosperity through his own wits, whether or not you inherited the genes responsible for it if he did, indeed whether or not he really is your biological father. It arguably takes more wits to rise to a high status in a society without solid hierarchies than it does to inherit a title to large swath of land complete with a few villages with several hundred serfs in total and not mess up immediately.

High rates of black crime can be explained by the fact that criminal justice systems of civilized countries have over the centuries removed those with criminal inclinations from the breeding population. Nevertheless, crime rates are more flexible than average intelligence.

You have not demonstrated that formal courts are more efficient at removing those with criminal inclinations from the breeding population than traditional modes of delivering justice - you simply seem to pretend that it's either a court system or nothing, so another no. If the picture were reversed, you could just as easily argue that cilivised countries have allowed crime genes to spread in the population by being too reluctant to kill off criminals if any doubt about their guilt remains, unlike tribal councils declaring who is to be stoned who don't bother as much with a few false positives. I've said it before and I'll probably have to say it again: A theory that can explain anything and its opposite is not a theory, it is pseudoscientific rubbish.

In the United States blacks have always been noted for having looser marital bonds than whites. It was once hoped that when blacks were given equal rights they would perform and behave as well as whites. This has not happened.

Formal rights are a minuscule subpart of opportunities and living conditions. Nobody in their right mind would mistake equal rights with eliminating environmental differences.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

More likely would be a gene that contributed to anti-abortion feelings.

How about no? Something like "anti-abortion feelings is pretty much a textbook case for a factor that's almost certainly entirely cultural. It sure is a larger contributor than any of the factors I brought up, but that only shows it's a largely cultural phenomenon. QED.

I don't think you would ever have a specifically anti-abortion gene but you could have a gene that made one more susceptible to the cultural factors.