What Is Race Realism?

“Once one has realized that innate racial differences exist, one begins to suspect a whole hidden reality beneath the surface of things that explains phenomena that are so mysterious to the talking heads on the news programs. To be a race realist is to constantly sense this monster in the depths.”

That “monster in the depths,” is Marxism; the great Red leviathan that has destroyed so much of Western Civilization and continues to do so in its latest “evolution,” multiculturalism. It is a vested interest of lies and deceptions, that seemingly both amuses and benefits the elites of this nation and throughout the West to perpetuate, in a twofold manner.

First, is the realization that they have nothing but contempt for the white populations that they “govern.” They are for the most part given to arrogance as a group, with the need to “validate” their existence through the dominance of their “fellow citizens” by way of their “superior intellectual” and economic advantages. By perpetuating the racially egalitarian myth and others (such as “humane” wars or building “democracies” within an Islamic society) they feel that they are “pulling one over on us,” and thus are proving us for the fools we are in their jaundiced eyes.

To an extent this is not a perception without merit, as viewing the enraptured faces of the mostly white heifers, that make up the rotating congregations of the Cult of Oprah attests to. One must accept for a fact, that at least 25% to as high as 33% of American whites are culpable of perpetuating this perception on the elites parts, as they have witlessly accepted the “dream.” So too, are the other 40% to 50% that uneasily accept the twilight state of indifference to the problem as a whole, but do “awaken” from time to time with regard to the problem; if anything they fuel this maddening drift toward the abusive hand of the “elite” because they create an endless state of frustrated ambivalence regarding their positions as a whole, that causes the “elite” to strike out with a vindictive glee.

Second, is the terror that must be felt by the “elite” holders of the ears of the rainbow paper tiger upon which they ride, no matter how arrogant and contemptuous they may be of the population that they openly deceive and abuse with its swatting paws. That 40% to 50%, that constantly drifts between lucidity and stupor on racial realities only inflates these ambiguous concerns of the “elitists,” because they are both affirming and discerning to the cause of multiculturalism as our “shared” ideology of “commonsense and sanity.”

Why?

That would be because they are the fulcrum upon which the whole game gets played out. If they should suddenly lurch toward the right, toward the other 17% to 35% that is awake, the house of Uno cards might just be swept aside?

In fact, that is the likely outcome as “diversity” begins to “enrich” more and more of their numbers in the expected manner. Revolutions, do tend to be a middle class sport, played in a dawn that abruptly fires a twilight?

And consumes “elites” and rainbows alike!

We are all equal in the eyes of God: Galations 3:28 “There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus.”

That said, In my opinion the biggest reason the secular ruling elites are denying racial differences—empirical evedence notwithstanding—is for the purpose of promoting international and intRAnational racial harmony (for economic and governing purposes[not religious]). The sophistic arguments they use to sell their ideas coupled with the incoherent policies used to achieve the ‘appearance’ of equality are what racially-aware people ardently object to. All these policies and social experiments have come at the expense, detriment, and the likely, eventual, dissolution of White nations ONLY!

Bud Miller certainly has the basics down.

Conventional wisdom can be challanged if the challange is based on evidence and facts. The problem with the conventional wisdom on race is that it simply isn’t true. Because conventional wisdom is supposed to be based on facts, and not ideology, I would say its time to “replace” this wisdom with the truth. To do so will require a shift in public opinion, and will have to happen one person at a time. But the fact that evidence points to our position will aid this process.

As for the last issue, the same cannot be said about DD’s views on jews.

Race realism = spreading the belief in racial differences. People may disagree in how to cope with these differences, but at least realists let people know that they are there and we all can’t “just get along” or ignore them. A black person can be a race realist. A black person can’t be a white nationalist

White nationalism is the opposite of black nationalism, it is making a new white nation with new geographic boundries. There is nothing “real” about white nationalism. There is nothing “realist” about the kkk or neo-nazis etc, or “whiteland,” many of these people are too delusional to be described as “realist.” I would argue that many “white nationalists” have views of “reality” and “race” that are completely irrational, Christian Identity freaks, Neo-Nazis, Jew conspiracy theorists, and Klansmen come to mind. Those who support such nonsense and simultaneously call themselves “realists” do harm to “realism.” It is imperative that neo-nazis are not accepted into the inner circles of racial realism. It imperative that there is division, without this division, the best movements will be destroyed by the lower quality ones, eaten from the inside.

Race realism is simply part of my conservatism. I’m pro-white in terms of fighting double standards and insuring white survival because I think it’s the right thing to do morally, not because I automatically follow whites just because they are white, in fact I’m going against most whites. By rejecting the liberal nonsense spewed at you, the logical result is that race realism will lead to racial preservation, as even the lowest form of life promotes its own survival. This will require some government policies to change.

A few things automatically disqualify you from being a race realist:

If you literally believe Jews are an evil “non-white” imposter, you are not a race realist. Case closed.

If you believe in a homogenous “European race” despite proven divisions within Europe you are not a race realist.

If you go against scientific studies of race and deny race, you are not a race realist.

If you have a problem with me saying any of this, you definitely aren’t a race realist.

I’ll make the frank an honest comment, in realist fashion, that anyone who harbors scientifically intact viewpoints for 98% of the population and not the other 2% is not quite a race realist. In other words, if your views on Jews are delusional, by definition, you aren’t a realist because delusionality contradicts reality. Realism means reality for everyone, Jews too.

To what end?

This is my question to all race realists. To what end, all this research? I am a black immigrant living in the United States and I have been reading articles calling for more research into this subject. I myself have absolutely no problem with this research, since I think anyone has the right to pursue any scientific enquiry they deem fit. But I am not clear where all this is going to lead. So let’s suppose you and your ilk are correct and persons of African/black descent are statistically intellectually inferior than Whites and Asians, what would you like to do with these findings, policy wise? What is your dream scenario. Is it the steering away of black students from Math or Science courses toward more “practical” subjects? Should this affect the West’s approach to Africa, and if yes, how so? I really would love to know where you would like these findings to lead American society and more generally the West. I know you may not understand this being a member of one of the more superior races, but myself (being a cynic and misanthrope) am rather uneasy at the thought that as your inferior, my status in society would rest solely on you and your equals benevolence. History, if it is any kind of a teacher, teaches that men will seize upon any reason they can find to give in to their baser natures, the idea of others being his genetic inferior seems to me as good a reason as any.

I am a young woman not yet given the opportunity to become a mother, but I must say if and when I have a child, I am going to have to work extremely hard, no radio or t.v. etc., to make sure that he or she does not become saturated from an early age with the idea that his or her inferiority. What a crippling notion! (and thankfully for myself, one I was never exposed to) I fear for my unborn children.

k. in MA.

“So let’s suppose you and your ilk are correct and persons of African/black descent are statistically intellectually inferior than Whites and Asians, what would you like to do with these findings, policy wise?”

1)Blacks ought to be prohibited from immigrating into the US.

2)Any “program” of black uplift predicated on disproven theories of environmental influence upon black IQ, criminality, fecklessness and so on ought to be ended.

3)White people should regain their common-law rights of freedom of speech and association; that is, they should be free not to hire, live near or rent or sell homes to blacks. They should not have to send their children to school with blacks or be subject to the relentless anti-white propaganda that passes for “education” in American public schools.

“Should this affect the West’s approach to Africa, and if yes, how so?”

The West ought simply to leave Africa alone. Well-intentioned meddling in the affairs of Africa by the West has created a continent-wide class of feckless, overbreeding mendicants.

“I know you may not understand this being a member of one of the more superior races, but myself (being a cynic and misanthrope) am rather uneasy at the thought that as your inferior, my status in society would rest solely on you and your equals benevolence.”

Your “status” is beside the point and you’re free to think as highly of yourself as you like. You have no right whatsoever to determine what white people think of you. For some reason blacks rarely understand that.

If you’re so worried about your status no one will keep you from returning to the African nation of your choice.

Kayla wrote:

“To what end, all this research?”

If you are sincerely interested in ameliorating race relations, you should seek to know the true cause of the race acheivement gap. If the cause is genetic, the best policies may be the exact opposite of what they would be if the cause is environmental.

“So let’s suppose you and your ilk are correct and persons of African/black descent are statistically intellectually inferior than Whites and Asians, what would you like to do with these findings, policy wise?”

Different measures would have to be taken depending on whether whites are a minority or the majority of the American population by the time they are willing to pursue policies that reflect their ethnic interests. Supposing whites to be the majority of the population, I would advocate

(a) the assimilation of legal nonwhite immigrants who can be assimilated into white American culture,

(b) the humane and voluntary repatriation of legal but unassimilable nonwhite immigrants,

(c) the humane and voluntary segregation of legal but unassimilable nonwhite immigrants who have no desire to be repatriated,

(d) the abolition of anti-discrimination laws so that (c) above may be achieved,

(e) the compulsory deportation of illegal immigrants regardless of race, and

(f) the reassertion of white values and culture.

“Should this affect the West’s approach to Africa, and if yes, how so?”

Yes. If the natural and human resources of Africa are incapable of being worked to the full due to a dearth of native intelligence, the productivity of the region should be increased through Western colonial administration. Philanthropists should seek to increase the average intelligence of the black race through the application of the laws of heredity to African conditions. Such measures should be supported by the black educated elite.

“I know you may not understand this being a member of one of the more superior races, but myself (being a cynic and misanthrope) am rather uneasy at the thought that as your inferior, my status in society would rest solely on you and your equals benevolence.”

I don’t think you have anything to fear. Blacks have historically benefited from the assertion of white rule. Why is that the most prosperous Africans have always been those in closest proximity to whites? Why is it that 20,000 blacks were illegally entering Apartheid South Africa every year, whilst very few were leaving?

Why believing in race realism and asserting that it be an internationally or nationally held idea is a waste of time.

You give evidence that, in a study, the environment was the same, the parents or adoptees were the same and the schooling was the same, but the children’s IQ were drastically different. But, like most race realist studies, it:

1) Didn’t include how the parents treated the two children. There couldve been favoring of one child over the other or different disciplinary actions used.

2) Who the real parents were. For all we know, a healthy child’s IQ was pit against another child’s IQ who was born with drugs in their system.

3) Whether the teachers treated them the same and by this I mean that at suburban, generally white schools, teachers tend to look at black students as already failed at the time of enrollment as well as checking progress on white students and informing white parents of their child’s academic behavior but not doing this for black students. This was stated by a white woman who was raising a black child and a white child and sending them to the exact same school on an American Renaissance post.

The two biggest problems I have with race realism is that 1) It is usually geared at proving the IQ gap between black people and white people, and 2) no one ever really thinks about how it will affect children.

1) If race realism really wanted to be objective and look at the whole picture instead of subjective in thinking that it’s a hopeful way that white people will be genetically superior to something, they would include all of the other races as well. Personally, if I were even going to concede to the fact that any race from the gitgo were intellectually superior to mine, it would be people of asian decent, not european.

2) When I hold my little sister and brother and cousins or any child for that matter, I let them know that they can be anything or do anything regardless of what anyone says, where they come from or what they were born with. Accepting race realism means that this is not entirely true. Accepting race realism means that I tell them that they, by no fault of there own, start at the back of the class from birth. Does no one stop to consider what this could do a child’s self-esteem or development. Anyone who is prepared to tell a child this is a monster.

Can anyone tell me just who race realism benefits? Black children, most of them at least, are already told that society has already reserved at the back of the bus and that everything that they need to do means that they have to be three times a good as their white counterpart.

For most of you, especially cassiodorus and theopsyche, you are racist, you just don’t know it yet.

Racism, by its simplest definition, is the belief that race is the primary determinant of human traits and capacities (IQ) and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race. It is impossible to be a race realist in thinking that your european, asian or whatever genetic traits make your entire race superior over another. Point blank.

Some sociologists have defined racism as a system of group privilege. In Portraits of White Racism David Wellman (1993) has defined racism as “culturally sanctioned beliefs, which, regardless of intentions involved, defend the advantages whites have because of the subordinated position of racial minorities,” (Wellman 1993: x)

Race Realism or Scientific racism denotes the use of scientific, or ostensibly scientific, findings and methods to support or validate racist attitudes and worldviews. It is based on belief in the existence and significance of racial categories, but extends this into a hierarchy between the races to support political or ideological positions of racial supremacy. Scientific racism can refer to both obsolete and contemporary scientific theories, and includes the use of anthropology (notably physical anthropology), anthropometry, craniometry, and other disciplines in the construction of typologies and the classification of humans into distinct biological races.

Having a high IQ does not automatically mean that you’re going to contribute some great invention or discovery to society and having a low does not mean that you can’t. IQ generally excludes creativity, so what if that person with an IQ of 85 contributes great words of wisdom, a beautiful painting, a great film or maybe that person becomes a teacher whose greatest gift to the world is inspiring a student who goes on to accomplish great things.

You give evidence, you don’t consider how people especially minorities won’t stand for it, how it will tear the nation apart or that there are black people with high IQ’s or that have contributed great things to society. You just say kick them out, they aren’t worthy of being here. Not to mention that it was black people whose whipped backs helped lay the foundation of this nation, black struggles for freedom and rights that expanded civil rights and freedoms for all people, even poor white people, black people that successfully did the first open heart surgery, invented peanut butter, the drip cup, the traffic light, the gas mask, the almanac and even designed the city that is the heart of america, Washington, D.C.

You don’t get the right to kick us out and share in our spoils. We may have come on different ships, but we’re all in the same boat now. If you try to purposely drown black people, the nice ones will lift themselves to air just fine, the ones that believe in retributivism will lift themselves to air, pushing your head under the water.

You know how I can tell that this is racist, is because low IQ’s aren’t your primary focus. Black people with low IQ’s was the jist of this discussion. If your problem is with people with low IQ’s wasting your time then kick everyone of all races that don’t make the cut, kick out the mentally handicapped, kick out the old, if low IQ’s are the problem then don’t stop at black people.

The problem with accepting racial differences is that when you are a minority that is not asian, people automatically treat you as the worst of your stereotypes and they never consider that you are an exception. This is the ignorance that always underscores racism. Call this by whatever name you want, but the motives, intentions, reasons, desires behind it are inherently racist.

and just because you have black friends does not mean that you’re not racist.

“For most of you, especially cassiodorus and theopsyche, you are racist, you just don’t know it yet.”

Why on earth should I care that you can attach a meaningless label (“racist”) to me? Either what I and others have written about racial differences is true or it is not. That is all that matters. Your objections to the studies this article discusses are frivolous and irrelevant. What reason is there to believe that teachers or adoptive parents treated these adopted children differently? People don’t adopt children, generally, in order to treat them badly, and if you think schoolteachers do not go out of their way for black students, you’re not living in contemporary America. Your notion that these black children are the offspring of drug addicts concedes a great deal. In any case these are textbook examples of special pleading; unless you can show that they are true, there’s no reason to believe them. It is worth noting that many of these studies (eg. Scarr-Weinberg) were undertaken with the expectation that they would demonstrate the innate intellectual equivalence of blacks and whites, but proved exactly the opposite point.

“The two biggest problems I have with race realism is that 1) It is usually geared at proving the IQ gap between black people and white people, and 2) no one ever really thinks about how it will affect children.”

These “problems” are irrelevant and have nothing whatsoever to do with the truth or falsity of a statement. A true statement does not become false because someone’s feelings are hurt, even if that person is a child.

“If race realism really wanted to be objective and look at the whole picture instead of subjective [???] in thinking that it’s a hopeful way that white people will be genetically superior to something, they would include all of the other races as well.”

There is much discussion of other races here and elsewhere. You haven’t read very closely.

“When I hold my little sister and brother and cousins or any child for that matter, I let them know that they can be anything or do anything regardless of what anyone says, where they come from or what they were born with. Accepting race realism means that this is not entirely true.”

It ISN’T entirely true. If they are average blacks, with IQs of 85, most of the professions will in fact be closed to them, just as they are closed to whites, Asians, or anyone else with an IQ of 85. That is simply a brute fact. I don’t know what is more cruel, or a greater waste of time and money, than trying to make scholars or scientists out of people manifestly unfit for those professions. Saying so is no more cruel than telling the average Korean kid that, because of his height, he ought not to plan on a career in the NBA.

“Can anyone tell me just who race realism benefits?”

Rebuilding a society on a falsehood—that all racial groups are equal in all ways—is immoral and destructive. America has spent five decades trying to reconfigure reality to square with a groundless theory, and we see the disastrous results. The virtue of race realism is that it is true.

“Black children, most of them at least, are already told that society has already reserved at the back of the bus and that everything that they need to do means that they have to be three times a good as their white counterpart.”

This is simply a lie. Every academic and professional standard is lowered for blacks.

“Racism, by its simplest definition, is the belief that race is the primary determinant of human traits and capacities (IQ) and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race. It is impossible to be a race realist in thinking that your european, asian or whatever genetic traits make your entire race superior over another.”

This is a childish game. That races differ with respect to IQ and myriad other things is a biological and genetic reality. Charges of “racism” are merely an attempt to squelch serious discussion of these differences. A more interesting question than “Who benefits by race realism” is “Who benefits by accusations of ‘racism’?” The obvious answer is blacks, mestizos, and social engineers in the political and academic classes, whose material well-being depends upon the utopian notion that race can be made not to matter, and that brute reality can be made to conform to utopian theories.

You are of course wrong about anyone claiming that an “entire race” is “superior over another.” The races differ with respect to many quantifiable things; people of African descent are, on average, faster runners than whites or Asians. Is that fact “racist?” Not at all. It is merely a fact, and so is the IQ differential between Asians, whites and blacks.

“Scientific racism can refer to both obsolete and contemporary scientific theories, and includes the use of anthropology (notably physical anthropology), anthropometry, craniometry, and other disciplines in the construction of typologies and the classification of humans into distinct biological races”

Nice cut and paste from Wikipedia. It is irrelevant, however. Of course theories about racial differentiation include, necessarily, racial categorization. The only question is whether the science advanced is sound. Sewall Wright, one of the founders of population genetics, remarked that if the genetic variation shown to exist among human races were found in any other animal species the races would be classified as different sub-species. See Nicolas Wade, Before the Dawn.

“Having a high IQ does not automatically mean that you’re going to contribute some great invention or discovery to society and having a low does not mean that you can’t.”

Half true. A high IQ does not guarantee inventiveness. On the other hand, no one with an IQ of 85 is going to make a contribution to any serious intellectual pursuit, regardless of his race. Stupid people do not contribute to the advancement of the arts and sciences (I am not including “hip-hop”).

“You give evidence, you don’t consider how people especially minorities won’t stand for it, how it will tear the nation apart or that there are black people with high IQ’s or that have contributed great things to society.”

Whether evidence is true has nothing to do with what someone will “stand for.” How will the plain fact that the races differ in IQ “tear the nation apart?” Do blacks riot because of IQ studies? That blacks and whites differ by slightly more than a standard deviation in IQ is not disputed even by the American Psychological Association (you ought to consult their response to Murray and Herrnstein’s The Bell Curve. Your reaction—a not-so-veiled threat of violence—is sadly typical of blacks and reveals more than I suspect you understand.

“Not to mention that it was black people whose whipped backs helped lay the foundation of this nation, black struggles for freedom and rights that expanded civil rights and freedoms for all people, even poor white people, black people that successfully did the first open heart surgery, invented peanut butter, the drip cup, the traffic light, the gas mask, the almanac and even designed the city that is the heart of america, Washington, D.C.”

Blacks picked cotton and tobacco. They did very little else, as they generally proved inept at other forms of labor. The black “struggles for freedom” were stage-managed by white Marxists and destroyed the common-law rights of white people and criminalized the traditional freedom of association. The ghettos that sprawl over every large American city are the legacy of that “movement.”

As for the traffic light, the gas mask and the rest, virtually everything asserted about black inventors in discussions like these is false. Consult the following at your leisure:

http://www33.brinkster.com/iiiii/inventions/

“You don’t get the right to kick us out and share in our spoils. We may have come on different ships, but we’re all in the same boat now. If you try to purposely drown black people, the nice ones will lift themselves to air just fine, the ones that believe in retributivism will lift themselves to air, pushing your head under the water.”

Another threat. Always the response of blacks when they’re confronted with facts that don’t flatter them. No one here has said anything about “kicking out” blacks, though we have pointed out that blacks who feel their every problem is caused by whites are free to relocate to Africa. Nor are we in the “same boat.” We’re doing the rowing while you sit in back, legs up, arms folded, boom box blazing.

“The problem with accepting racial differences is that when you are a minority that is not asian, people automatically treat you as the worst of your stereotypes and they never consider that you are an exception.”

Saying that one is an exception makes no sense unless the generality is true. Blacks really don’t seem to understand that.

“This is the ignorance that always underscores racism.”

What “ignorance?” Ignorance exists only in relation to some object of knowledge. What demonstrable fact with respect to racial differences am I unaware of? What empirical data support your position? You have in fact conceded most of the race-realist argument.

“1) Didn’t include how the parents treated the two children. There couldve been favoring of one child over the other or different disciplinary actions used.”

Are you suggesting that the white parents discriminated against their adoptive black children in favour of the white children, and then discriminated against their adoptive white children in favour of the Asian children?

“3) Whether the teachers treated them the same and by this I mean that at suburban, generally white schools, teachers tend to look at black students as already failed at the time of enrollment.”

1.) They were measured for IQ, not academic achievement.

2.) There is no evidence that low self-esteem or teacher’s expectations can cause a 15 point IQ deficit. And it has been consistently shown that blacks actually have higher self-esteem than whites.

3.) Race differences in IQ emerge before children enter elementary school.

“Having a high IQ does not automatically mean that you’re going to contribute some great invention or discovery to society and having a low does not mean that you can’t.”

High IQ is a necessary but not sufficient condition. Originality and perserverence are also essential to creative achievement, but they are useless unless combined with intelligence.

“What reason is there to believe that teachers or adoptive parents treated these children differently? People don’t adopt children, generally, in order to treat them badly.”

Well if there are teachers that follow your train of thought, that it is a waste of time and money to teach black students, though IQ’s of 85 have never before meant that you couldn’t finish highschool +, then they would treat the black students somewhat lackadaisically and there are some that do. Some people only adopt children to get money from the state and don’t really care about them, but I didn’t say they were treated badly, only differently maybe even unfairly.

Not all teachers feel the moral obligation to teach fairly. And the teachers that do, help students because they need help, not because they are black.

There is a quote that says that people always find what they are looking for. If someone is looking for inferiority, they’ll find it by any means necessary.

Since when was an IQ of 85 such a handicap? According to the international high iq society, 85 is average. I think with an average IQ you can do most anything in the America let alone the world. If that Korean kid wants to be in the nba, he could take growth hormones or make it so he’s got a wicked jump shot or whatever. Everything is exclusive until different people refuse to take no for an answer.

It is a waste and time to teach children? Never. Unless you plan on administering IQ tests as entrance exams to high schools, how do you know that the student you’re teaching is average, above average or beyond? Part of being a great teacher, part of being a great person is taking chances on people without knowing for sure what the end result will be. This is what it means to have faith, not religious or spiritual faith, but faith in people.

You say that “building a society on a falsehood- that all racial groups are equal in all ways-is immoral and destructive.” For who? How does this “secret,” this “conspiracy hurt people in their day to day lives? How does seeing people as equals throw the world off its axis? It only hurts those who want to be superior, who want to be proud of something innate (which any individual who has a talent of some sort) so that even if they fail in life they feel that they still have someone lower than them to look down on. It hurts no one else. This falsehood fallacy is a load of bull that race realist tell themselves to justify what the real motives are, because in reality, equal rights does not hurt anyone except for those who wish to deny them. But then again, the cost of fighting for justice and obtaining it has always been less than the cost of denying it.

No, when I ask who benefits from race realism? I mean, who benefits from race realism? When I see these arguments, I can only think back to animal farm when we switch from “all [people] are equal” to “some [people] are more equal than others” and who benefits? The pigs. The faithful laborer (the horse) gets shipped off to the glue factory and the brain (snowball the pig) who describes that life should be otherwise is killed by dogs. I’m sure that race realism only benefits people of a certain race, not a certain genius. If race realist really thought they were being so objective then they would study all the races and ethnicities out there and not just publish racial differences pertaining only to IQ.

And don’t blame me because your race realist beliefs happen to line up with the definition of what it means to be racist.

I really would like to know about all these academic and professional standards that have been tailor made for black people. As I said, most of you, not all of you, race realists are so small minded. When you walk into somewhere like yale or Harvard or wherever, EVERY minority to you is the product of affirmative action, even in places that don’t even have affirmative action! Not one of them could possibly be smart and have gotten in there on their own skill and dedication, NOT ONE. And that is the major flaw.

“A more interesting question than “Who benefits by race realism” is “Who benefits by accusations of ‘racism’?” The obvious answer is blacks, mestizos, and social engineers in the political and academic classes, whose material well-being depends upon the utopian notion that race can be made not to matter, and that brute reality can be made to conform to utopian theories.”

What kind of ignorant bs is that? No one profits from racism. NO ONE. Is it profiting when my friend gets accepted to Yale and instead of just being congratulated on being top in the nation for her hardwork people congratulate her on being an acceptable candidate of affirmative action? Despite her 4.3 gpa, her hours of community service and involvement and even a letter of recommendation from Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsberg herself, she is to people like you, just black. It would have been one thing if when slavery ended, if people had just stepped aside and gave minorities equal access to employment and education, but to get there they had to fight and rather than letting people prove whether they could be a success or a failure without interference, people set up all these road blocks and institutions so that they would all fail.

“On the other hand, no one with an IQ of 85 is going to make a contribution to any serious intellectual pursuit, regardless of his race. Stupid people do not contribute to the advancement of the arts and sciences (I am not including “hip-hop”).”

What is a serious intellectual pursuit? Who says that it has to be splitting atoms to be brilliant? The atom bomb is deemed brilliant by many scientists, but in everyday life it is the stupidest thing ever created because it has the power to bring mankind to extinction. Something brilliant can be the invention of windshield wipers, the wheels on suitcase, or etc. but then again I am a person who was taught to see the greatness in everyone and everything. Stupid people do not contribute to the advancement of arts and sciences? Stupid people can love and how many love poems do we cherish? they can plot and how many movies and t.v. shows do we love and are influenced by? stupid people can make us think and how many stories are there about stupid people that did nothing more than change another’s life? Dance is not all about structure as is science, you feel the music and you let your body guide you to create choreography, or you simply bring someone else’s choreography to life with your own body. Just because it is not a widely held idea does not mean it should be disregard or that it is not worth noting. The practice and structure and grace that a ballerina has can be applied to breakdancing. It takes practice, structure and its own grace.

I’m not even going to use the word stupid anymore because in the context of this dialogue, we are talking about people with an IQ of 85 which is average.

I don’t threaten people, especially people I don’t care to or ever will meet. Force almost always has a way of rebounding back on oneself, so the “not-so-veiled threat of violence” is of course something that someone like you (who thinks that “violence is so typical of blacks”) would naturally assume. As I said before, people always find what they are looking for. You probably already had firmly held stereotypes about black people before race realism came to aid your way of thinking and don’t talk down to me like I’m not on your level, because I am. (“reveals more than I suspect you understand.”) People can break away or tear each other apart without ever laying a hand on one another, by awkward silence, quiet rage or simply by becoming emotionally distant. But of course your narrow mind as you assumed I was black, also assumed that I meant violence.

No, European slave traders disregarded all African culture as barbaric and beneath theirs and, after not being able to successfully enslave other races either because they would die to quickly from European diseases or die from being overworked, then they decided to enslave Africans. The mindset that they were doing the negroes a favor, spreading Christianity, civilizing them and etc, were the ideals that came afterward when they needed something to appease their consciences’ at night. Really, you shouldn’t put up a website that has no evidence or bibliography, it makes you look bad and uncredible. You should also no that brinkster is infamous for its articles only used to discredit people of note that are of African American descent and that it OFTEN attributes the actual accomplishments of many people of note to others who either never existed or have no connection whatsoever.

“Many of the www33.brinkster.com links fly in the face of articles researched and posted by (the US) Federal Highway Authority, Massachusettes Institute of Technology, The Smithsonian, University of Houston, the US and British Patent offices. A quick Wiki search of www33.brinkster.com can follow the trail these bigots have left on the face of Wikipedia.

When following the source material for www33.brinkster.com it is often vague or unfounded material that dissipates within a link or two.

—The preceding unsigned comment was added by BFritzen (talk • contribs) 23:02, 13 May 2007 (UTC).”

How can you offer a website that chooses to disclaim every known black invention and yet not offer one source of citation. Many of those, I have never heard of before, but I defend mine. I find it hard that black people and white people sat down and agreed that some inventions will go to the credit of black history and others will go to European history. Besides, I live in Iowa and George Washington Carver attended Iowa State University. They keep the lab where he worked on soybeans, doing the experiment he transferred to peanuts after he moved to the south, open for people just like you. And if you’ve ever been to D.C., you would know that everyone, no matter what color your tour guide credits the design of the city to D.C. to Benjamin Banneker.

My first article, the one you’re responding to, was not a direct response to yours and in it, I addressed comments that other people had said on the discussion board. As for violence, I merely said that some will rise up on their own, refusing to purposefully partake in the unnecessary drama and others will do the same, except retaliate. I gave to possible scenarios and based on your assumption that I am black, you responded as if I only suggested one of violence, which I never even suggested that. You can manipulate your way up to the top on the backs of others which is seemingly an American tradition. You think I’m violent, therefore every statement I say to you that threatens you, you are saying that I am threatening you. Those are your feelings brought by your ideals and my words aren’t the direct cause of them. You feel threatened, you feel I am threatening you, that’s on you, but I am not threatening anyone and I don’t because I am a woman of peace.

You say that you are doing all the rowing, but really, is every white person doing the rowing? (And I don’t mean to offend anyone by wording it this way) No. You would be ignorant (willfully lacking knowledge) to say that every Caucasian person is doing his or her fair share in America. And if not, and it is not, how could anyone say that every black person is doing all the sitting? If every white person is not rowing then surely every black person must not be sitting. And what do you mean by sitting? Not all black people are poor, or on welfare, or uneducated, or on drugs, or in jail. If you actually go to a ghetto, you would know that most people there do not have time to sit and choose not to in order to better themselves. No matter what happens in science, there is always an exception and science cannot explain everything.

“Saying that one is an exception makes no sense unless the generality is true. Blacks really don’t seem to understand that.”

No. You can’t really generalize anything. All black people are black. Generalization, yes. True, no. Black people can be whitest white and the blackest black. I merely said that the problem with race realism was that IF (IF) (I want you to really understand that “IF” part) IF black people generally have an average IQ of 85 (IF), then it is still incorrect to assume that all black people you meet have an IQ of 85 because there is at least one, you just don’t know which one, that is above average. What I said was that people follow theories like race realism automatically assume that you’re the average IQ when there is the possibility that you’re dealing with above average IQ. I said that, in theory, people could hold this knowledge of race realism and treat everyone as above average as opposed to treating everyone as stupid (as you would). But people wouldn’t, because there’s a line of thinking that goes with race realism that tends to use negative prejudice against minorities before you even meet them. That’s what I said, so you can just nix the blacks part of you aforementioned quote and put “you,” because you really don’t seem to understand that.

“This is the ignorance that always underscores racism.” What “ignorance?” Ignorance exists only in relation to some object of knowledge. What demonstrable fact with respect to racial differences am I unaware of? What empirical data support your position? You have in fact conceded most of the race-realist argument.

What makes you ignorant (willfully lacking knowledge), actually it is more like denial, or NO. It is Orwellian doublethink. You hold in your head two ideas you know to be contradictory, but still believe both of them to be true.

You say that MOST black people are X, because you can’t say ALL, because this type of science and reality tell you that there are exceptions. Yet in still, you are intent in your belief that ALL black people are X. Which one is it? If you hold RR to be correct, then it is nothing to go about treating everyone as an exception, even if they turn out to be average. But if you believe that you can factually say that ALL black people are X and so there is no point in treating them different, then this science or any science based on statistical analysis is not for you.

OBSERVER: Obviously we have not read the same history books or else you would know that it is possible to be original and perseverant with an IQ of 85 or higher. Besides, according to http://wilderdom.com/intelligence/IQCautionsInterpretingIQ.html the younger a child is, the less reliable his/her IQ test scores will be.

“Well if there are teachers that follow your train of thought, that it is a waste of time and money to teach black students, though IQ’s of 85 have never before meant that you couldn’t finish highschool +, then they would treat the black students somewhat lackadaisically and there are some that do.”

An IQ of 85 places one in the bottom sixth of white students. Treat such a student however you like; there are serious limits on his intellectual abilities. You assume the burden of proving that teachers 1)treat students in the manner you claim and that 2)this affects what they can learn.

“Since when was an IQ of 85 such a handicap?”

It is not a handicap. It is too low a level of intelligence to succeed in a field that requires abstract intelligence. Show me a documented case of a successful research scientist, attorney or physician with an IQ of 85 and I’ll take everything back.

“Unless you plan on administering IQ tests as entrance exams to high schools, how do you know that the student you’re teaching is average, above average or beyond?”

You know by this student’s performance and test scores. It’s not rocket science, and the debate has long been settled.

“You say that “building a society on a falsehood- that all racial groups are equal in all ways-is immoral and destructive.” For who?”

You mean “for whom.” It is immoral to tell white students that they have obtained a illicit advantage over blacks and must give up jobs and places in colleges in the interests of “fairness” when the intellectual deficiencies of blacks are 1)not the fault of whites and 2)largely innate. It is destructive to place unqualified blacks in positions of authority where real damage can be done to others. Perhaps you know of Benjamin Chavis, the black “doctor” whose admission to med school inspired the Bakke lawsuit. Despite being lauded by Ted Kennedy as some kind of affirmative action icon, Chavis was so incompetent that he eventually killed one of his patients and lost his license. Multiply that sort of thing by the tens of thousands, and you’ll have an idea why it is reasonable for whites to object to racial egalitarianism and the social engineering which is its inevitable result.

“This falsehood fallacy is a load of bull that race realist tell themselves to justify what the real motives are, because in reality, equal rights does not hurt anyone except for those who wish to deny them.”

You make a characteristic logical mistake. The question of realists’ motivations is quite beside the point. Google “genetic fallacy.” I’m tempted to ask you how you acquired this clairvoyant insight into the minds and lives of others. In any case it doesn’t matter. This site alone provides ample evidence, drawn from studies conducted by real scientists with real credentials at real research institutions, that the races are not equivalent, or “equal,” and that these differences are to a great extent genetic. Readers will be happy, I suspect, to provide you as many more examples as you like. Perhaps your motives in denying the reality of race are suspect. As for “equal rights,” there is no such thing in practice; the phrase is a cant coinage of leftist social engineers. “Equal rights” in practice means that blacks are rewarded in every academic, professional and academic venue in the country on the basis of their race. There is nothing “equal” about set-asides, affirmative action, the relaxed mortgage lending standards which have thrown our economy into chaos, or anything else that goes under the rubric of “equal rights.”

“But then again, the cost of fighting for justice and obtaining it has always been less than the cost of denying it.”

These self-dramatizing gestures are popular with blacks, but they’re really rather silly. It’s whites who bear the “cost” of all this nonsense. And “justice?” Something for nothing, you mean.

“I’m sure that race realism only benefits people of a certain race, not a certain genius.”

Gibberish.

“If race realist really thought they were being so objective then they would study all the races and ethnicities out there and not just publish racial differences pertaining only to IQ.”

Perhaps I’m wasting my time with you, but I’ll try again. There are many, many studies pertaining to things other than IQ and to races other than whites and blacks. You clearly haven’t bothered to master even the rudiments of these issues before rushing to offer your commentary upon them.

“And don’t blame me because your race realist beliefs happen to line up with the definition of what it means to be racist.”

People who make accusations of “racism” remind me of my nieces, who like to pretend that certain areas of the living room carpet are really lava and that to step in them is to burn to death. “Look out!” they’ll shout, “that’s lava!” There’s really no lava, and charges of “racism” are the games of intellectual children who like to make up little rules and judge others by them. You didn’t understand this the first time around, so I’ll repeat it. A statement is either true or false. That blacks and whites differ in average IQ is either true or false. It isn’t icky, it isn’t purple, it isn’t rococco, and it isn’t “racist.”

“I really would like to know about all these academic and professional standards that have been tailor made for black people. As I said, most of you, not all of you, race realists are so small minded. When you walk into somewhere like yale or Harvard or wherever, EVERY minority to you is the product of affirmative action, even in places that don’t even have affirmative action! Not one of them could possibly be smart and have gotten in there on their own skill and dedication, NOT ONE. And that is the major flaw.”

Again, you completely misunderstand the question. How can affirmative action stigmatize anyone unless it IS a systematic lowering of standards? Of course blacks and mestizos are judged by separate and lower standards in college admission, in professional exams (see fire and police department) and so on, ad infinitum. One of Jimmy Carter’s last executive orders did away with the Civil Service exam, on the grounds that not enough blacks could pass it. You can hardly open a paper without reading another story about a “civil rights” case against a school charged with violations of “equal rights” because the racial outcomes aren’t equal. Look at the Hopwood and Michigan cases; in those instances there was no overlap at all between white and black admits. In other words the very lowest white admit scored higher than the highest black. Other places have established autonomous homeland academic departments for ill-qualfied blacks and black pseudo-intellectuals (see “black studies”). Of course some blacks can compete successfully without handouts, but the numbers of such blacks will never satisfy the ethnic ward-heelers, black activists and white leftists, who demand “equal” outcomes, based on the falsehood that there are no differences in average intelligence between the races.

“What kind of ignorant bs is that? No one profits from racism.”

Are you serious? Rooting out “racism” from under every rock is an extremely lucrative make-work industry for hordes of black and white “activists.” If it weren’t for “racism,” whatever would Jesse Jackson and Reverand Al do for a living? Moreover, if “racism” can mean anything, it would have to apply to the following, among many others:

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&ie=ISO-8859- 1&q=african+american+association&aq=f&oq;=

“Stupid people do not contribute to the advancement of arts and sciences?”

No, they don’t.

“I’m not even going to use the word stupid anymore because in the context of this dialogue, we are talking about people with an IQ of 85 which is average.”

Wrong. 85 is the BLACK average. Among whites 85 would comprise the bottom sixth. Put another way, slightly less than one black in six has an average “white” IQ.

“I don’t threaten people, especially people I don’t care to or ever will meet. Force almost always has a way of rebounding back on oneself, so the “not-so-veiled threat of violence” is of course something that someone like you (who thinks that “violence is so typical of blacks”) would naturally assume.”

Of course you threaten violence. A threat does not have to be directed against a specific person (eg. me). You certainly threaten generalized violence by blacks as a result of racial science.

“How can you offer a website that chooses to disclaim every known black invention and yet not offer one source of citation.”

The articles in that cite have been exhaustively researched and the bibliographies are provided in the texts themselves, which you clearly did not bother to read before commenting. Relying on an unsigned, anonymous Internet poster for your knowledge of something you haven’t read wouldn’t have made the grade in my fifth-grade English class. Nor would the cut-and-paste Wikipedia excerpt in your original post, which, technically, was plagiarism.

“Many of those, I have never heard of before, but I defend mine.”

It’s what you can prove that matters, not what you can assert.

“I find it hard that black people and white people sat down and agreed that some inventions will go to the credit of black history and others will go to European history.”

I have no idea what this means. Scholarship usually can determine with pretty considerable precision who invented what, and most of the black “inventions” are bogus.

“My first article, the one you’re responding to, was not a direct response to yours and in it, I addressed comments that other people had said on the discussion board”

You singled me out by name. Besides, boards like these are supposed to be open discussions. If that doesn’t suit you you don’t have to read or post.

“You can manipulate your way up to the top on the backs of others which is seemingly an American tradition.

How have I “manipulated” my “way” anywhere? This verges on gibberish.

“You think I’m violent, therefore every statement I say to you that threatens you, you are saying that I am threatening you”

I have already addressed this.

“You can’t really generalize anything.”

You just did. You’ve just made a statement about what you can NEVER do about ANYTHING. This is a generalization.

“I merely said that the problem with race realism was that IF (IF) (I want you to really understand that “IF” part) IF black people generally have an average IQ of 85 (IF), then it is still incorrect to assume that all black people you meet have an IQ of 85 because there is at least one, you just don’t know which one, that is above average”

You obviously haven’t read what any of the posters have said. No one said that all blacks have IQs of 85. Many have much lower IQs; in Africa the average hovers around 70. Moreover, you really don’t understand the basic question, that data can be averaged and is distributed in certain ways, etc. No one can be above average IF THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS AN AVERAGE. An average, an accepted statistical datum, is a mathematical GENERALIZATION. The fact is that without generalization, thought and language would be impossible.

“You say that MOST black people are X, because you can’t say ALL, because this type of science and reality tell you that there are exceptions. Yet in still [???], you are intent in your belief that ALL black people are X.”

You are simply wrong. I have never in this or any discussion attributed low intelligence or any single quality to all blacks. I haven’t the remotest idea why this notion has lodged itself so fiercely in your mind, but it is without foundation in anything I have said, which is perhaps why you don’t quote any passage making a universal, as opposed to a general claim about blacks.

I don’t accept anything you say or the article says or what other race realists say about IQ. I know that there is only one way to prove the world wrong and that is to succeed, not only me, but everyone like me and everyone that is placed in the same predicament by race realism.

Anyone who thinks IQ is the end all be all of mapping out someone’s career and destiny and that it affects all other aspects of personality must surely think that the sky is the limit. I refuse to think such things.

“If we treat others as they are, we make them worse. If we treat people as they should be, we help make them become what they are capable of being.” JohannW.VonGoethe

I can only hope that the vast majority does not accept your line of thinking. So you can continue being a champion of this science, but in reality you are a champion of nothing. Rather than argue that people can succeed, I am going to leave my computer behind and make it so.

You can call me ignorant or whatever because against all odds I have faith in all people regardless of where “science” dooms them. But it’s just a fundamental difference in our character.

Peace.

“I don’t accept anything you say or the article says or what other race realists say about IQ.”

Accept whatever you like. A fact is a fact is a fact. You might start by reading the American Psychological Association’s response to The Bell Curve, easily found online. They concede virtually everything we have said here.

I can appreciate that most of the posts and comments here are thoughtful in this blog and usually free of invective, but my primary question about r.r. is this: For this moment, let’s imagine that the science behind the r.r. and its findings is true; that there is some kind of verifiably genetic difference between the races as to IQ or ‘g.’ My question then is this: what exactly is IQ? Even if it’s a determination that can be scientifically measured/quantified and distinguished in individuals along racial and/or other lines, I would contend that IQ itself isn’t some indicator of anything all too specific. How objective is IQ as a notede human quality, whatever ineffable mix of social and genetic determination? And if it is deemed to be of a specific value, I’d ask value to who, how much and how do you come to that measured amount? It may be possible to quantify both IQ and the obtainable levels of it among human races, but since IQ itself was socially determined, no one can say with final, ultimate objectivity just exactly what IQ indicates in the human condition. And certainly most of you know that once the raw but pure scientific aspect of this debate may or may not have been determined, there certainly has been TONS of qualitative debate about its value, all of which has precious little to do with objective science. I should add that while I’m not partisan in any specific way, most here, for purposes of this debate, would consider me ‘liberal,’ because I do have an instinctive discomfort with the implications of r.r.; yet, I do think the above questions are fairly objective, and I tried be as free of cant and bias as I could in articulating them. Thanks in advance for any responses or reactions, nikcrit.