Monday, July 13, 2009

What is it Like to Teach Black Students?

This article comes from an American context, and it's long but worth a read. The comments by Marty Nemko on his blog are also worth reading, and Irish Savant has some comments as well on his. It all provides an interesting insight into the "African-American" psyche. I wonder if there are any parallels to our own South African 'lennas'.

What is it Like to Teach Black Students?

by Christopher Jackson

Until recently I taught at a predominantly black high school in a southeastern state.

The mainstream press gives a hint of what conditions are like in black schools, but only a hint. Expressions journalists use like “chaotic” or “poor learning environment” or “lack of discipline” do not capture what really happens. There is nothing like the day-to-day experience of teaching black children and that is what I will try to convey.

Most whites simply do not know what black people are like in large numbers, and the first encounter can be a shock.

One of the most immediately striking things about my students was that they were loud. They had little conception of ordinary decorum. It was not unusual for five blacks to be screaming at me at once. Instead of calming down and waiting for a lull in the din to make their point—something that occurs to even the dimmest white students—blacks just tried to yell over each other.

It did no good to try to quiet them, and white women were particularly inept at trying. I sat in on one woman’s class as she begged the children to pipe down. They just yelled louder so their voices would carry over hers.

Many of my black students would repeat themselves over and over again— just louder. It was as if they suffered from Tourette syndrome. They seemed to have no conception of waiting for an appropriate time to say something. They would get ideas in their heads and simply had to shout them out. I might be leading a discussion on government and suddenly be interrupted: “We gotta get more Democrats! Clinton, she good!” The student may seem content with that outburst but two minutes later, he would suddenly start yelling again: “Clinton good!”

Anyone who is around young blacks will probably get a constant diet of rap music. Blacks often make up their own jingles, and it was not uncommon for 15 black boys to swagger into a classroom, bouncing their shoulders and jiving back.

They were yelling back and forth, rapping 15 different sets of words in the same harsh, rasping dialect. The words were almost invariably a childish form of boasting: “Who got dem shine rim, who got dem shine shoe, who got dem shine grill (gold and silver dental caps)?” The amateur rapper usually ends with a claim—in the crudest terms imaginable—that all womankind is sexually devoted to him. For whatever reason, my students would often groan instead of saying a particular word, as in, “She suck dat aaahhhh (think of a long grinding groan), she f**k dat aaaahhhh, she lick dat aaaahhh.”

So many black girls dance in the hall, in the classroom, on the chairs, next to the chairs, under the chairs, everywhere. Once I took a call on my cell phone and had to step outside of class. I was away about two minutes but when I got back the black girls had lined up at the front of the classroom and were convulsing to the delight of the boys.

Many black people, especially black women, are enormously fat. Some are so fat I had to arrange special seating to accommodate their bulk. I am not saying there are no fat white students—there are—but it is a matter of numbers and attitudes. Many black girls simply do not care that they are fat. There are plenty of white anorexics, but I have never met or heard of a black anorexic.

“Black women be big Mr. Jackson,” my students would explain.

“Is it okay in the black community to be a little overweight?” I ask. Two obese black girls in front of my desk begin to dance, “You know dem boys lak juicy fruit, Mr. Jackson.” “Juicy” is a colorful black expression for the buttocks.

Blacks, on average, are the most directly critical people I have ever met: “Dat shirt stupid.

Yo’ kid a bastard. Yo’ lips big.” Unlike whites, who tread gingerly around the subject of race, they can be brutally to the point. Once I needed to send a student to the office to deliver a message. I asked for volunteers, and suddenly you would think my classroom was a bastion of civic engagement. Thirty dark hands shot into the air. My students loved to leave the classroom and slack off, even if just for a few minutes, away from the eye of white authority. I picked a light-skinned boy to deliver the message. One very black student was indignant: “You pick da half-breed.” And immediately other blacks take up the cry, and half a dozen mouths are screaming, “He half-breed.”

For decades, the country has been lamenting the poor academic performance of blacks and there is much to lament. There is no question, however, that many blacks come to school with a serious handicap that is not their fault. At home they have learned a dialect that is almost a different language. Blacks not only mispronounce words; their grammar is often wrong. When a black wants to ask, “Where is the bathroom?” he may actually say “Whar da badroom be?” Grammatically, this is the equivalent of “Where the bathroom is?” And this is the way they speak in high school.

Students write the way they speak, so this is the language that shows up in written assignments.

It is true that some whites face a similar handicap. They speak with what I would call a “country” accent that is hard to reproduce but results in sentences such as “I’m gonna gemme a Coke.” Some of these country whites had to learn correct pronunciation and usage. The difference is that most whites overcome this handicap and learn to speak correctly; many blacks do not.

Most of the blacks I taught simply had no interest in academic subjects. I taught history, and students would often say they didn’t want to do an assignment or they didn’t like history because it was all about white people. Of course, this was “diversity” history, in which every cowboy’s black cook got a special page on how he contributed to winning the West, but black children still found it inadequate. So I would throw up my hands and assign them a project on a real, historical black person. My favorite was Marcus Garvey. They had never heard of him, and I would tell them to research him, but they never did. They didn’t care and they didn’t want to do any work.

Anyone who teaches blacks soon learns that they have a completely different view of government from whites.

Once I decided to fill 25 minutes by having students write about one thing the government should do to improve America. I gave this question to three classes totaling about 100 students, approximately 80 of whom were black. My few white students came back with generally “conservative” ideas. “We need to cut off people who don’t work,” was the most common suggestion.

Nearly every black gave a variation on the theme of “We need more government services.”

My students had only the vaguest notion of who pays for government services. For them, it was like a magical piggy bank that never goes empty. One black girl was exhorting the class on the need for more social services and I kept trying to explain that people, real live people, are taxed for the money to pay for those services. “Yeah, it come from whites,” she finally said. “They stingy anyway.”

“Many black people make over $50,000 dollars a year and you would also be taking away from your own people,” I said.

She had an answer to that: “Dey half breed.” The class agreed. I let the subject drop.

Many black girls are perfectly happy to be welfare queens. On career day, one girl explained to the class that she was going to have lots of children and get fat checks from the government. No one in the class seemed to have any objection to this career choice.

Surprising attitudes can come out in class discussion. We were talking about the crimes committed in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina, and I brought up the rape of a young girl in the bathroom of the Superdome. A majority of my students believed this was a horrible crime but a few took it lightly. One black boy spoke up without raising his hand: “Dat no big deal. They thought they is gonna die so they figured they have some fun. Dey jus’ wanna have a fun time; you know what I’m sayin’?” A few black heads nodded in agreement.

My department head once asked all the teachers to get a response from all students to the following question: “Do you think it is okay to break the law if it will benefit you greatly?” By then, I had been teaching for a while and was not surprised by answers that left a young, liberal, white woman colleague aghast. “Yeah” was the favorite answer. As one student explained, “Get dat green.”

There is a level of conformity among blacks that whites would find hard to believe. They like one kind of music: rap. They will vote for one political party: Democrat. They dance one way, speak one way, are loud the same way, and fail their exams in the same way. Of course, there are exceptions but they are rare.

Whites are different.

Some like country music, others heavy metal, some prefer pop, and still others, God forbid, enjoy rap music. They have different associations, groups, almost ideologies. There are jocks, nerds, preppies, and hunters. Blacks are all— well—black, and they are quick to let other blacks know when they deviate from the norm.

One might object that there are important group differences among blacks that a white man simply cannot detect. I have done my best to find them, but so far as I can tell, they dress the same, talk the same, think the same. Certainly, they form rival groups, but the groups are not different in any discernible way. There simply are no groups of blacks that are as distinctly different from each other as white “nerds,” “hunters,” or “Goths,” for example.

How the world looks to blacks One point on which all blacks agree is that everything is “racis’.” This is one message of liberalism they have absorbed completely. Did you do your homework? “Na, homework racis’.” Why did you get an F on the test? “Test racis’.”

I was trying to teach a unit on British philosophers and the first thing the students noticed about Bentham, Hobbes, and Locke was “Dey all white! Where da black philosopher a’?” I tried to explain there were no blacks in eighteenth century Britain. You can probably guess what they said to that: “Dat racis’!”

One student accused me of deliberately failing him on a test because I didn’t like black people.

“Do you think I really hate black people?” “Yeah.” “Have I done anything to make you feel this way? How do you know?” “You just do.” “Why do you say that?”

He just smirked, looked out the window, and sucked air through his teeth. Perhaps this was a regional thing, but the blacks often sucked air through their teeth as a wordless expression of disdain or hostility.

My students were sometimes unable to see the world except through the lens of their own blackness. I had a class that was host to a German exchange student. One day he put on a Power Point presentation with famous German landmarks as well as his school and family.

From time to time during the presentation, blacks would scream, “Where da black folk?!” The exasperated German tried several times to explain that there were no black people where he lived in Germany. The students did not believe him. I told them Germany is in Europe, where white people are from, and Africa is where black people are from. They insisted that the German student was racist, and deliberately refused to associate with blacks.

Blacks are keenly interested in their own racial characteristics. I have learned, for example, that some blacks have “good hair.” Good hair is black parlance for black-white hybrid hair.

Apparently, it is less kinky, easier to style, and considered more attractive. Blacks are also proud of light skin.

Imagine two black students shouting insults across the room. One is dark but slim; the other light and obese. The dark one begins the exchange: “You fat, Ridario!” Ridario smiles, doesn’t deign to look at his detractor, shakes his head like a wobbling top, and says, “You wish you light skinned.”

They could go on like this, repeating the same insults over and over.

My black students had nothing but contempt for Hispanic immigrants. They would vent their feelings so crudely that our department strongly advised us never to talk about immigration in class in case the principal or some outsider might overhear.

Whites were “racis’,” of course, but they thought of us at least as Americans.

Not the Mexicans. Blacks have a certain, not necessarily hostile understanding of white people. They know how whites act, and it is clear they believe whites are smart and are good at organizing things. At the same time, they probably suspect whites are just putting on an act when they talk about equality, as if it is all a sham that makes it easier for whites to control blacks. Blacks want a bigger piece of the American pie. I’m convinced that if it were up to them they would give whites a considerably smaller piece than whites get now, but they would give us something. They wouldn’t give Mexicans anything.

What about black boys and white girls? No one is supposed to notice this or talk about it but it is glaringly obvious: Black boys are obsessed with white girls. I’ve witnessed the following drama countless times. A black boy saunters up to a white girl. The cocky black dances around her, not really in a menacing way. It’s more a shuffle than a threat. As he bobs and shuffles he asks, “When you gonna go wit’ me?”

There are two kinds of reply.

The more confident white girl gets annoyed, looks away from the black and shouts, “I don’t wanna go out with you!” The more demure girl will look at her feet and mumble a polite excuse but ultimately say no.

There is only one response from the black boy: “You racis’.” Many girls—all too many—actually feel guilty because they do not want to date blacks. Most white girls at my school stayed away from blacks, but a few, particularly the ones who were addicted to drugs, fell in with them.

There is something else that is striking about blacks. They seem to have no sense of romance, of falling in love.

What brings men and women together is sex, pure and simple, and there is a crude openness about this. There are many degenerate whites, of course, but some of my white students were capable of real devotion and tenderness, emotions that seemed absent from blacks—especially the boys.

Black schools are violent and the few whites who are too poor to escape are caught in the storm. The violence is astonishing, not so much that it happens, but the atmosphere in which it happens.

Blacks can be smiling, seemingly perfectly content with what they are doing, having a good time, and then, suddenly start fighting. It’s uncanny. Not long ago, I was walking through the halls and a group of black boys were walking in front of me. All of a sudden they started fighting with another group in the hallway.

Blacks are extraordinarily quick to take offense. Once I accidentally scuffed a black boy’s white sneaker with my shoe. He immediately rubbed his body up against mine and threatened to attack me. I stepped outside the class and had a security guard escort the student to the office. It was unusual for students to threaten teachers physically this way, but among themselves, they were quick to fight for similar reasons.

The real victims are the unfortunate whites caught in this. They are always in danger and their educations suffer.

White weaklings are particularly susceptible, but mostly to petty violence. They may be slapped or get a couple of kicks when they are trying to open a bottom locker. Typically, blacks save the hard, serious violence for each other.

There was a lot of promiscuous sex among my students and this led to violence. Black girls were constantly fighting over black boys. It was not uncommon to see two girls literally ripping each other’s hair out with a police officer in the middle trying to break up the fight. The black boy they were fighting over would be standing by with a smile, enjoying the show he had created.

For reasons I cannot explain, boys seldom fought over girls.

Pregnancy was common among the blacks, though many black girls were so fat I could not tell the difference. I don’t know how many girls got abortions, but when they had the baby they usually stayed in school and had their own parents look after the child. The school did not offer daycare.

Aside from the police officers constantly on patrol, a sure sign that you My black students had nothing but contempt for Hispanics. Whites were “racis’,” of course, but they thought of us at least as Americans.

Security guards are everywhere in black schools—we had one on every hall. They also sat in on unruly classes and escorted students to the office. They were unarmed, but worked closely with the three city police officers who were constantly on duty.

There was a lot of drug-dealing at my school. This was a good way to make a fair amount of money but it also gave boys power over girls who wanted drugs. An addicted girl—black or white—became the plaything of anyone who could get her drugs.

One of my students was a notorious drug dealer. Everyone knew it. He was 19 years old and in eleventh grade. Once he got a score of three out of 100 on a test. He had been locked up four times since he was 13.

One day, I asked him, “Why do you come to school?”

He wouldn’t answer. He just looked out the window, smiled, and sucked air through his teeth. His friend Yidarius ventured an explanation: “He get dat green and get dem females.”

“What is the green?” I asked. “Money or dope?” “Both,” said Yidarius with a smile.

A very fat black interrupted from across the room: “We get dat lunch,” Mr. Jackson. “We gotta get dat lunch and brickfuss.” He means the free breakfast and lunch poor students get every day.

“Nigga, we know’d you be lovin’ brickfuss!” shouts another student.

Some readers may believe that I have drawn a cruel caricature of black students. After all, according to official figures some 85 percent of them graduate.

It would be instructive to know how many of those scraped by with barely a C- record. They go from grade to grade and they finally get their diplomas because there is so much pressure on teachers to push them through. It saves money to move them along, the school looks good, and the teachers look good.

Many of these children should have been failed, but the system would crack under their weight if they were all held back.

How did my experiences make me feel about blacks? Ultimately, I lost sympathy for them. In so many ways they seem to make their own beds.

There they were in an integrationist’s fantasy—in the same classroom with white students, eating the same lunch, using the same bathrooms, listening to the same teachers—and yet the blacks fail while the whites pass.

One tragic outcome among whites who have been teaching for too long is that it can engender something close to hatred. One teacher I knew gave up fast food—not for health reasons but because where he lived most fast-food workers were black. He had enough of blacks on the job. This was an extreme example but years of frustration can take their toll. Many of my white colleagues with any experience were well on their way to that state of mind.

There is an unutterable secret among teachers: Almost all realize that blacks do not respond to traditional white instruction. Does that put the lie to environmentalism?

Not at all. It is what brings about endless, pointless innovation that is supposed to bring blacks up to the white level. The solution is more diversity—or put more generally, the solution is change.

Change is an almost holy word in education, and you can fail a million times as long as you keep changing. That is why liberals keep revamping the curriculum and the way it is taught. For example, teachers are told that blacks need hands on instruction and more group work.

Teachers are told that blacks are more vocal and do not learn through reading and lectures. The implication is that they have certain traits that lend themselves to a different kind of teaching.

Whites have learned a certain way for centuries but it just doesn’t work with blacks. Of course, this implies racial differences but if pressed, most liberal teachers would say different racial learning styles come from some indefinable cultural characteristic unique to blacks. Therefore, schools must change, America must change. But into what?

How do you turn quantum physics into hands-on instruction or group work? No one knows, but we must keep changing until we find something that works.

Public school has certainly changed since anyone reading this was a student. I have a friend who teaches elementary school, and she tells me that every week the students get a new diversity lesson, shipped in fresh from some bureaucrat’s office in Washington or the state capital. She showed me the materials for one week: a large poster, about the size of a forty-two inch flat-screen television. It shows an utterly diverse group—I mean diverse: handicapped, Muslim, Jewish, effeminate, poor, rich, brown, slightly brown, yellow, etc.—sitting at a table, smiling gaily, accomplishing some undefined task. The poster comes with a sheet of questions the teacher is supposed to ask. One might be: “These kids sure look different, but they look happy. Can you tell me which one in the picture is an American?”

Some eight-year-old, mired in ignorance, will point to a white child like himself. “That one.”

The teacher reads from the answer, conveniently printed along with the question. “No, Billy, all these children are Americans. They are just as American as you.”

The children get a snack, and the poster goes up on the wall until another one comes a week later. This is what happens at predominately white, middle-class, elementary schools everywhere.

Elementary school teachers love All of the Colors of the Race, by award-winning children’s poet Arnold Adoff.

These are some of the lines they read to the children: “Mama is chocolate … Daddy is vanilla … Me (sic) is better … It is a new color. It is a new flavor. For love. Sometimes blackness seems too black for me, and whiteness is too sickly pale; and I wish every one were golden.

Remember: long ago before people moved and migrated, and mixed and matched … there was one people: one color, one race. The colors are flowing from what was before me to what will be after. All the colors.”

Teaching as a career

It may come as a surprise after what I have written, but my experiences have given me a deep appreciation for teaching as a career. It offers a stable, middle-class life but comes with the capacity to make real differences in the lives of children. In our modern, atomized world children often have very little communication with adults—especially, or even, with their parents—so there is potential for a real transaction between pupil and teacher, disciple and master.

A rewarding relationship can grow up between an exceptional, interested student and his teacher. I have stayed in my classroom with a group of students discussing ideas and playing chess until the janitor kicked us out. I was the old gentleman, imparting my history, culture, personal loves and triumphs, defeats and failures to young kinsman. Sometimes I fancied myself Tyrtaeus, the Spartan poet, who counseled the youth to honor and loyalty. I never had this kind intimacy with a black student, and I know of no other white teacher who did.

Teaching can be fun. For a certain kind of person it is exhilarating to map out battles on chalkboards, and teach heroism. It is rewarding to challenge liberal prejudices, to leave my mark on these children, but what I aimed for with my white students I could never achieve with the blacks.

There is a kind of child whose look can melt your heart: some working-class castaway, in and out of foster homes, often abused, who is nevertheless almost an angel. Your heart melts for these children, this refuse of the modern world.

Many white students possess a certain innocence; their cheeks still blush. Try as I might, I could not get the blacks to care one bit about Beethoven or Sherman’s march to the sea, or Tyrtaeus, or Oswald Spengler, or even liberals like John Rawls, or their own history. They cared about nothing I tried to teach them. When this goes on year after year it chokes the soul out of a teacher, destroys his pathos, and sends him guiltily searching for The Bell Curve on the Internet.

Blacks break down the intimacy that can be achieved in the classroom, and leave you convinced that that intimacy is really a form of kinship. Without intending to, they destroy what is most beautiful—whether it be your belief in human equality, your daughter’s innocence, or even the state of the hallway.

Just last year I read on the bathroom stall the words “F**k Whitey.” Not two feet away, on the same stall, was a small swastika.

The National Council for the Social Studies, the leading authority on social science education in the United States, urges teachers to inculcate such values as equality of opportunity, individual property rights, and a democratic form of government. Even if teachers could inculcate this milquetoast ideology into whites, liberalism is doomed because so many non-whites are not receptive to education of any kind beyond the merest basics.

It is impossible to get them to care about such abstractions as property rights or democratic citizenship. They do not see much further than the fact that you live in a big house and “we in da pro-jek.” Of course, there are a few loutish whites who will never think past their next meal and a few sensitive blacks for whom anything is possible, but no society takes on the characteristics of its exceptions.

Once I asked my students, “What do you think of the Constitution?” “It white,” one slouching black rang out. The class began to laugh. And I caught myself laughing along with them, laughing while Pompeii’s volcano simmers, while the barbarians swell around the Palatine, while the country I love, and the job I love, and the community I love become dimmer by the day.

I read a book by an expatriate Rhodesian who visited Zimbabwe not too many years ago. Traveling with a companion, she stopped at a store along the highway. A black man materialized next to her car window. “Job, boss, (I) work good, boss,” he pleaded. “You give job.”

“What happened to your old job?” the expatriate white asked. The black man replied in the straightforward manner of his race: “We drove out the whites. No more jobs. You give job.”

At some level, my students understand the same thing. One day I asked the bored, black faces staring back at me. “What would happen if all the white people in America disappeared tomorrow?”

“We screwed,” a young, pitch-black boy screamed back. The rest of the blacks laughed.

I have had children tell me to my face as they struggled with an assignment. “I cain’t do dis,” Mr. Jackson. “I black.”

The point is that human beings are not always rational. It is in the black man’s interest to have whites in Zimbabwe but he drives them out and starves. Most whites do not think black Americans could ever do anything so irrational. They see blacks on television smiling, fighting evil whites, embodying white values. But the real black is not on television, and you pull your purse closer when you see him, and you lock the car doors when he swaggers by with his pants hanging down almost to his knees.

For those of you with children, better a smaller house in a white district than a fancy one near a black school.

I have been in parent-teacher conferences that broke my heart: the child pleading with his parents to take him out of school; the parents convinced their child’s fears are groundless. If you love your child, show her you care— not by giving her fancy vacations or a car, but making her innocent years safe and happy. Give her the gift of a not-heavily black school.

Mr. Jackson now teaches at a majority- white school.

52 Opinion(s):

Anonymous said...

Yes, and the average IQ they are dealing with is 85. Sub-Saharan Africa is 67, so amplify the problems a few fold.

Anonymous said...

"Most whites simply do not know what black people are like in large numbers, and the first encounter can be a shock." White SAns and Rhodesians have and the world would be wise to listen to our stories.

They say the difference between a bleeding heart aw-shame-poor-black liberal and a racist is a few years living among the natives in Africa.

I suppose y'all can guess why I opted to shift my stuff to Australia - it was a deliberate move - 98,5% non-black. Case closed. Not that I dislike blacks per se but in a world where whitey must give and give and give, while taking it up the rear, I just did not want to have the same issues I'd had in SA elsewhere and/or leave my kids to confront a similar future I had to face.

Anonymous said...

That is why there are so few teachers in SA. Nobody wants to teach. I had 4 friends who were teachers. The first left for Australia and tells me the student quality is miles apart. 2 of the teachers had been "boarded" from work due to stress. The 4th one just left teaching and started sell life insurance.

One of them that had been "boarded" from work taught at a farm school. She was a total wreck. Said she spent her lunch time trying to keep the kids away from the animals as they liked to shove objects up the rear of the farmers pigs next door. Apparently the kids liked it when the pigs started to squeal. The farmer was giving the school a hard time for this and other indiscretions. Oh that shit broke her. Older kids jacking off in class, teenage pregnancies. I felt sorry for her. She could not cope. Visiting her was depressing.

The other one that was boarded from school taught in a coloured township. Said how the parents would threaten you after school if you scolded their kids, his car must have been spray painted more than once as they would pull a nail against its side.

Man - bugger that!

Anonymous said...

It isn't a supremacy issue, it is one of survival.

Viking said...

"White SAns and Rhodesians have and the world would be wise to listen to our stories"
Nice point!
How ARROGANT of Westerners to think they know what black people are like, having met only a few in their lives, and then dismissing the opinions of people who've lived all their lives surrounded by them- and have done so for 200 years!
I regret having once done that, but then, arrogance is in no short supply among liberal do-gooders.
Thanks once again for editing this piece, I found it extremely informative.
The most important thing to remember is that it's written by someone who cared deeply about black American kids.
A friend of mine taught in a school in Georgia while I was living there, and her stories were identical to these. You can tell that the kids in the story idolise their rappers - they objectify their females, and the females respond by objectifying themselves!
Frankly, this article terrified me.
In my school there were about 3 non-white kids out of a total of 400. They did well. In fact, black kids always seem to do ok when they're outnumbered, but when they reach critical mass, something kicks in and they fail.

Anonymous said...

You said it "critical mass". They get brave, cocky when they form large numbers. Perhaps that's the problem, they need to be segregated from themselves.

Viking said...


FishEagle said...

"One tragic outcome among whites who have been teaching for too long is that it can engender something close to hatred."

I remember when I was 15 or 16 years old I crapped on my mother for being racist after she made some angry comments about blacks. They were on strike again at my parent's factory. Recently she reminded me of our discussion and I meekly defended myself, "that's how we were taught to think in school." I've worked with blacks for a few years and most of the staff in my office is black. When I turn the telle or radio on and I hear or see a black it gets switched off immediately. I can't STAND their presence. If it wasn't for my internet fixes before and after work, I would not be able to continue in this job.

Great post, thanks!

Black Coffee said...

This article is so full of stereotypes and bs that I doubt if an actual teacher wrote it. This is by the way on the site of Stormfront. They promote a KKK-type agenda, regardless of what their moderators say. I think the British government has right idea in cracking down on white racist websites, and I think SA and US governments ought to take lessons. VI - for the umpteenth time IQ tests measure ability to take those particular tests not intelligence. What this author says is undoubtedly true about SOME though NOT all black students. I speak as someone who lived in a mostly African-American neighborhood of Washington, DC before going to SA, and also worked security in libraries that are frequented mostly by blacks, including high-school and junior high students. Dobes- are you saying you prefer company of whites and that is why you moved to Australia? I kind of see what you mean about the "natives" yet have to disagree. Ok, so I did not spend years in Africa, but I did spend 6 months in South Africa. It seems like people like you, FE and some others would have me believe that I did not see what I saw and I did not experience what I experienced during my stay. I have freely admitted that I experienced a mugging at hand of 2 natives, but I also experienced tremendous goodwill, good conversations and a mix of cultures that I have not encountered anywhere else in world that I have been to. I did not let one negative experience negate all the others in my mind, nor make me become racist against blacks despite my mugging experience, which was compounded by fact that hundreds of vendors stood around and did nothing. I still wonder whether race played a part in that, but if it did I know it is because of tremendous psychological damage that apartheid inflicted.

Anonymous said...

@BC. Which part of "stereotypes generally reflect the truth, otherwise they wouldn't be stereotypes" didn't you get from a recent article? Are you suggesting that if an article appears on Stormfront then it must be pro-KKK, in other words guilt by association? Are you also suggesting that Stormfront, the KKK or others, do not have a right to express their opinions freely? Is your Ukrainian ancestory suggesting suppression? Are you suggesting that choosing to live amongst, and enjoy the company of your own race is somehow racist? Are you wanting to deny people the right to choose as well? Let's be frank, all multi-cultural (MC) countries are only MC at the national level, not at suburban level. You proclaim that you "know" that the psychological damage inflicted by Apartheid played a part in your mugging, and the reaction thereto. How do you "know" this? Because you spoke to 6 people and each one cited the "legacy of Apartheid"? What experimentation did you engage in, what was your methodology and can the results be replicated and independently verified? Finally, BC, regarding IQ; as with Stalin and others, if you repeat lies often enough you may even get people to believe it to be the truth. So keep it up. Until you are a published IQ expert, I will defer my informed opinions in favour of the leading authors in the field, and to the preponderance of academic evidence. Instead of listening to your Harvey Wallbanger Community College Professors, why not engage the likes of Harvard, Oxford, MIT etc?

Black Coffee said...

VI - I read the article you refer to, but do not agree with its basic premise. Stereotypes are often based not on truth but on racist images and misperceptions about "other" people, going back to being socialized about it's "us" vs "them." I do not believe in guilt by association, but was merely pointing out that the fact that this article is on Stormfront's site makes it immediately suspect. Back to socialization above, I think the way people perceive the world around them has a lot to do with how they are socialized. So if black South Africans perceive that whites are mistrustful or that somehow if whites get mugged that they deserve it, that is based in large part on how they were socialized, which in turn is based partly on the reality of apartheid that their parents and grandparents had to deal with. I do not have time to go into it at length because I am trying to finish my own dissertation in August. However, I base my opinion on conversations with roughly 50-55 people in South Africa, most of them black, though not all. That is the sample for my dissertation along with written sources because a sample of 50 out of a population of 40 million is, of course, small and I acknowledge it. As I analyze my interviews and discussions I am always thinking actually of what Viking said - did the interviewees tell me what they really think or what they thought I wanted to hear? More on that later. I do believe in freedom of speech, but our Supreme Court in US is on record as saying that does not give one the right to yell "fire" in a crowded theater. It's a very fine line between free speech and racist speech which crosses into the yelling fire category. Finally, Howard University may not be on level of Harvard and Yale or Oxford but it is not a community college either. Finally, if this article is from a genuine teacher it may reflect some misperceptions on his part more than anything else.

Viking said...


I don't frequent "stormfront", in fact I hadn't heard of it until just now.
"This article is so full of stereotypes and bs that I doubt if an actual teacher wrote it"
I disagree, from the language this piece was written by someone who cares/cared a lot about his student, and the tone is one of exasperation, not hatred. I have heard hatred spewed as well, and this is not it.
Now, my judgement may be impaired, but if I didn't think it genuine I wouldn't have posted it, and like I said, the stories square with what two American teachers have told me, and they weren't KKK-types at all.

P.S. To spend time with people of your own race/ethnic group is not racism. Today I watched out my office window as around 20 people from the adjacent building congregated for their smoke break - surprise, surprise, the blacks, white and coloureds all stuck in their groups, although language may have been a factor, but freedom of association is a basic human right.

FishEagle said...

BC, "Finally, if this article is from a genuine teacher it may reflect some misperceptions on his part more than anything else."

That is an arrogant statement. You are not an expert.

Anonymous said...

Ha ha ha. If a stereotype were wrong, it would not be a stereotype. Stereotypes arise as a result of the general observations of the many. So your ramblings of images and misperceptions etc, are just crap. You are lucky you don't have me as your thesis supervisor, then again it would have raised the quality. Good thing you realise that your thesis has a major limitation, which will largely nullify your finding. As regards your Freedon of Speech interpretation, you have got it all wrong. Shouting fire in a packed theatre is not tantamount to freedom of expression, and the caselaw on this is clear. I suggest you speak to some of your law buddies, preferably Jewish ones.

Black Coffee said...

Viking - I did not realize it was you who posted the article, and so far you do not come across as racist. Perhaps this is genuine exasperation, but it sounds like this person is trying to say that black students are not interested in learning. That is just not true based on my observations as someone who has lived in a predominantly black area. Now there is an element, and it is important to point out that it is only an element, of black teens who believe that to be a studios student is to "act white." However, not all black students believe that. Viking - you hit on something one can observe in America as well, that is people generally congregate with others who look like them, white with white, black with black. However, those that break out of that discover that we - black and white, are more alike than we are different. Before I came to South Africa I had the misperception that all whites and blacks there do not get along. But I found that one can see blacks and whites having lunch together at a Wimpy or some similar place, or sometimes even drinking together on a Friday night at News cafe or in Sofiatown in Newtown. It doesn't happen often enough, but at least it does happen.

Black Coffee said...

Why would the limitation nullify the finding? My thesis is rather close to a book someone wrote - I won't mention name for now. However that book in 1989 was titled "Changing attitudes of black South Africans toward the US" but the author's sample was 93 black South Africans and he did not compare what they said with written sources - such as editorials, letters to editor, documents, etc. Anotherwords he basically passed 93 interviews as being representative of black opinion and this was published as a book. In my own thesis, written sources - letters to editor, documents by UDF and AZAPO, etc. are basis for my thesis. The interviews and discussions with about 50+people (about 30 of these were formal interviews, rest were informal discussions) add fuel to the fire so to speak? Would I hear different perspectives not only from whites but from blacks who were/are members of Inkatha, or who worked for a bantustan government, or even worked for police and whose homes were firebombed during township disturbances? My bet is that I would, and I acknowledge this in my thesis. I have looked at many dissertations here in US and in South Africa at Wits and most have some limitations. At a seminar I attended the professor advised the audience to acknowledge the limitations but but not dwell on them, and rather to speak about what contribution the study makes. That's how these get to the stage of "defended and passed." At least in history - I suppose it may be different in other disciplines where your peers would look for hard, empirical data.

Anonymous said...

@BC. I get it. So it makes a difference who posts an article. If it is posted by somebody you have branded a racist, regardless of the evidence, then the article is discounted. Same as if the article appeared on Stormfront, for example. I wonder who the bigot is? I also think you are clueless as to the meaning of misperception. Because I happen to socialise with someone of another race does not mean I choose to embrace his entire group and culture. It simply means I have a friend of another race. You make sweeping, unsubstantiated statements. I would have thought your Harvey Wallbanger College would have taught you not to do that.

Viking said...

@Black Coffee
Tell me, BC, have you ever experienced hostility as a white person in a black area in the United States?

I'm not really a 'racist' (whatever that means), but am a sort of a culture-ist. I don't believe in genetic determinism, or the idea that ethnicity determines behaviour or moral character - but on the other hand I, like most other people, don't buy the idea that skin colour is just an external, superficial characteristic. Most people accept the reality is somewhere in between the two extremes.
Anyway, some might see it as splitting hairs, but the problems in Africa as well as many other places are cultural, not racial.

Anonymous said...

@BC. What? I am completely gobsmacked. Your findings are nullified because they will not be statistically significant, based on your sample size. You may have got away with it at Masters level but not at Doctorate. Any decent external examiner will fry your ass. In order to make an original contribution, you need to overcome any obvious limitations that can be overcome through the correct application of a well considered methodology. I acknowledge that all studies have limitations, but these are usually factors that are outside the researchers control. For starters you need an Ho and H1. Then you should have established the correct sample size. This is done by calculating a size based on an infinite population. Your sample would have had to be at least 384 surveys to be valid at 95% with a 5% error.

Anonymous said...

Mmmm, I disagree with Viking, for once. Culture is a social construct, therefore exposing one to a different culture from birth should eliminate any differences. It doesn't. Race isn't the problem, which is the same as skin colour. Race is merely correlated to the cause, which is IQ. There is very little conflict between the groups with average IQs above 90, in fact they get on quite well unless they are competing for limited resources. IQ is genetically determined, and I acknowledge that a proportion is environmental but not enough to make a difference. The only way forward is once there is popular support for the evidence, which I acknowledge will probably never happen; only then can we collectively determine programs that may lead to future progeny with higher IQs. Now the likes of BC will reject this straight off, and because of this type of behaviour we will never make progress. Black results will remain poor and Africa will remain retarded.

Anonymous said...

Oh, BC, as regards your sample. It also depends on how you selected your interviewees. Were they randomly selected or was there a bias, in other words did they come from a similar ideological group?

Exzanian said...

A very engrossing thread developing here. I hear exactly what Viking says and I thought bingo, nail on the head. But then VI goes back to genetics, so I guess we are into the nature vs nurture debate again?
There's got to be a bit of both there, but which came first? We all know that genes are fundamental to our nature, not only for things like skin colour and haemoglobin formation, they determine the workings of the brain, and are clearly linked to schizophrenic, suicidal, substance abuse tendencies, and of course intelligence. We are products of our genes. It's too crass to say black = stupid. Of course not, but why is there ALWAYS that nagging statistical correlation? I cannot seem to get past it. If I follow the trail of bread crumbs, it always leads to Africa. And there, as we observe abundantly, is evidence of more than just a statistical fluke.

Viking said...

You've summed up the debate nicely. It is almost impossible to resolve by experiment, because you can't exactly experiment with people .
Culture is a social construct like VI says - doesn't make it any less real, but as to whether it has a genetic origin, I really have no idea. I imagine that exposing someone to a different culture from birth should make a difference - are there any good examples to study? They would have to be adopted into a new family, not just be immigrants with immigrant parents, though.
And are IQ results genetic? I don't know enough about it.
There does seem to be a stupid-gene which is related to class, and who knows how determined we really are by our genes?
It does seem that testosterone-content is genetic, and the fact that blacks have 8-13% higher levels than whites could account for higher levels of violence, and lower levels of 'self-control'.
As Ex says, there is always that nagging statistical correlation..

Anonymous said...

@ExZan. Indeed, and I decided to model for it, just for fun. If we accept the dogma that we are all equal genetically, then we can safely say that the portion of IQ determined by genetics would be roughly equal. Therefore observable differences would have to be environmental. If we weight the environment based on perceived past prejudices, we can fiddle with the nature/nurture mix to see what happens. At 100% nurture, like culture, we assume the figures correspond to reality, namely whites at 100, black Americans at 85 and Africans at 67. Here's the rub though. As you reduce the environmental component IQs rise, until at 100% genes we all have the same IQ. Of course it is ridiculous to suggest that IQ is 100% environmental. A conservative estimate is probably 50:50. If this were the case, and we were all equal genetically, IQs would be much higher than they are. Which raises a finding that we are not all equal genetically speaking. But this gets refuted by saying that we need to reduce the environmental discount rate in order to raise IQ. True. But what if the discount rate isn't as high as we assume because environment isn't 100%? Then we are back at genetics, and that some races are genetically more endowed than others, which is the only explanation for Ashkanazi Jews and the Far East Asians. So the gist is that the debate has to eventually settle on genetics. Then we can make progress.

Anonymous said...

@Viking. Extensive identical twin tests, adoption and mixed family households from different socio-economic backgrounds and races attest that ideal environments do have a slight impact, but not statistically significant and not enough to refute the genetic component largely being the determinant. In fact there is the famous one where a group of researchers set out to "prove" the racists wrong, that it was environmental. A revisit something like 14 years later necessitated that they publish the truth, namely that it had made no difference. Because the results make us feel uncomfortable doesn't make it false.

Black Coffee said...

VI - to reiterate, if my dissertation was based primarily on oral interviews and discussions, then yes an external examiner would probably fry my ass. However, it is not my main sourcebase, my main sourcebase are written, primary sources. Interviews help to shed light on the latter. As to how I picked them - a few were random interviewees who agreed on the spot so to speak, most were people who had previously been involved in UDF, BCM or labor unions.

Anonymous said...

@BC. Good for you. Next ....?

Viking said...

somebody actually separated identical twins for a social experiment??! It wasn't in Berlin in the 1930s by any chance was it?
What were the circumstances?
And can IQ change throughout the lifetime of an individual?

Viking said...

I don't think you can design social policy based on IQ, although it is a good across-the-board rule of thumb.
Just because someone has a high IQ doesn't make them compassionate or a good leader, and just because someone is a dumbass doesn't make them a criminal or incapable of humanity.
Unless someone is retarded, you shouldn't really treat them any differently to a normal person. I don't think people are "genetically equal", people are only equal in terms of the law, not in any other way.

Anonymous said...

@Viking. There have been many analyses. The best is to review the literature. If this article doesn't help I can scratch up the various analyses.

No, from the age of about 16 IQ is fairly constant. Of course IQ and wisdom are two different things.

Your last comments are interesting. On the surface it seems only fair to treat everybody equally. But such a policy leads to discrimination. If we live in a genetically homogenous society then equality works, and there are safeguards for the weaker members of society. But you cannot treat a 120 IQ individual the same as you treat an 70 IQ. The issue is what is normal for your society?

Everybody agrees that we are all equal before the law, and most agree that we are not genetically equal at the individual level. The disagreement is that entire groups may be genetically endowed in different ways. Even this isn't a profound statement; it is only outrageous when you suggest intellect.

There isn't popular support for social programs, but there needs to be. For example social grants need to disappear. You cannot support grants for a low IQ section of the population that continues to breed. Education and voting rights should be correlated to IQ. There could be tax incentives. I haven't applied my mind to it, but if we accept that it is genetic then over time we can influence behaviour that will lead to a higher IQ population. Instead we dogmatically pour money into programs that insist that environmental factors cause everything, yet decades of efforts have produced naught.

Anonymous said...

@Viking. Another article is Race Evolution and Behaviour. It is an easier read than the first, and very interesting. The twins test is referred to, and ample references are provided.


It seems so abstract to have a guy like BC to lecture us - at least those that live here or have lived here for decades - what the life in South Africa is about. I would never dream about to lecture BC about the place where he spent many years in. How will BC ever understand the daily hassels with huge bunches of keys for layers of security gates, the sheer endless hassels with badly functioning alarms that one is forced to have to obtain insurance cover at all ,
the storing of anti retro virals just in case a family member or a employee gets raped, the maintaining of many security cameras and image storing systems to keep staff and clients safe , the inconvinient lump on ones side that represents the semi auto pistol and some clips, the tracing systems in all cars to enable one to firstly get insurance cover and secondly to monitor the drivers that like to forget from time to time the planned route they are suppost to take, the never ending garneshe orders ( issued because the noble black creature did again not pay some debt )that keep rolling in and are a hassle for our book keeping section, the many times of getting up at all hours in the night because some alarm was set off at one of the factories or warehouses, the hustlers that hassle our reception with wild tough luck stories and with the request for some money, the evening routine of the family to check all points of entry to the house, the placing of guns , flash lights , spare ammo at pre determined spots, the list is simply endless. The price to live in the RSA has simply become to high for productive, caring people.
So BC you can theorize as much as you like, I live here ( still , but not much longer ) and I , my family and our staff have to jump through all this precautionary loops every day of our lives. Whose reality do you think ultimatly counts for me ?

Anonymous said...

@WHITEADDER. BC is just an ignorant fool. I was going to say that it is the ignorance of youth, but he isn't that young. Thanks for the comments, it brought back many awful reminders. I particularly laughed at the garnishee orders. Especially when the staff member leaves, then you get telephonically harassed as to why payments haven't been made. Also, don't forget the continual checking with the banks that customer payments have been deposited, especially when you receive a faxed proof of payment, which is usually on a Friday, just after the banks have closed and Monday is a public holiday. Then we have SAPS. Try calling them when you have cornered a would be fraudster. They will tell you, "But a crime has not been committed. Call us when you have lost some goods." So attempt no longer counts. Then there are the restless dogs and the bouts of insomnia brought on because you are never quite happy with your security. Then there is always the delivery team, that somehow loses all of your cargo, because they apparently left the vehicle unattended for just 3 minutes. There is always the lost cell phone story, lost uniforms, lost anything. Then, of course, the day a delivery team takes a big cash haul, they are bound to get hijacked. Coincidence? Not. Ag the list just goes on and on.

Exzanian said...

Viking said: There does seem to be a stupid-gene which is related to class"
Bingo comment Viking! But the PC Nazi's have caught a whiff of that already!!! Nowadays you can be labelled a "classist" OH fuck, where will it all end! let's just go back to throwing spears at each other! No WW3 please, I want spears!!!

Viking said...

thanks for th refs, will read tomorrow when not on dialup!

Viking said...

I don't get it - why can't you treat a 120 IQ person the same as a 70? They both have equal rights under the law, and the same feelings etc. Sure, one will always outperform the other, but that's the way of the world. The 70IQ dude could easily train hard and become a premier league footballer, model or any other career and end up making more money than the genius who spends his time lecturing maths at a community college.
Being extremely intelligent is a handicap too, in some ways (for me anyway ha ha).
I don't accept that there is a need to breed out low-IQ people from society, it interferes with human freedom for one thing, and also, don't forget it was the super-geniuses and so-called intelligentsia who came up with socialism and other 'enlightened' ideas.
Children in such a society would have their IQs tested from a young age and would then have their lives mapped out for them - a lot like in Huxley's Brave New World.
Evolution takes care of most of humanity's faults - or at least it should.
There are other ways to let people succeed or fail.
I'm not uncomfortable with the idea that whole races have lower or higher IQs than others - just with the idea that they should be punished for it. People should only be punished for their actions!
For example, having a low IQ (while not being retarded) is no mitigation for any crime.

I thought being class-ist was still acceptable ! damn....

Anonymous said...

@Viking. I see you are grappling with the concept. Being equal before the law has nothing to do with it. Let's use a simple example. Let's say, as has happened, that we are told that we can all run the 100m in under 10 secs. All it takes is dedication. By saying this we discriminate against those that will never be able to run that fast, instead of designing programs that will allow them to reach their full potentials. In a country where everything will be a reflection of the demographics, systems will be designed to cater for 70 IQ. This means an inordinate amount of frustration and lost potential, when the larger IQs are ignored. Don't believe me? Consider that there are no widespread programs for advanced learners. Research at universities has declined. So we have become so obsessed at accommodating the masses, that the fringes (where it happens I might add) are ignored. As for feelings, what feelings are we talking about? certainly not high brow, introspective stuff. So, no, we don't have the same feelings of love, hate, hope etc. The examples you use of the footballer and the maths genius are true, but are outliers and you probably know that. Incomes are correlated to IQ up to about 120, on average. It isn't about breeding out low IQs. If the low IQs still lived in a world they were prepared for, then great, but in an inter-linked world which is increasingly technologically driven you have to have a population with a mean IQ of at least 90. If you don't you will become increasingly marginalised. Human freedom has everything to do with it. A higher IQ gives you freedom, without it life will be very hard indeed. Finally, if we do not address the issue of IQ sooner or later, we will be overwhelmed with have nots, that have no capacity to maintain a world built for smarter people.

Exzanian said...

Viking said: "Evolution takes care of most of humanity's faults - or at least it should."

Well it hasn't has it? Perhaps because of a "misfiring" of some altruistic gene within us? Are we doomed to nurture the weak forever?

VI said "Finally, if we do not address the issue of IQ sooner or later, we will be overwhelmed with have nots, that have no capacity to maintain a world built for smarter people."

Is there a "final solution" then? Should we attempt to usurp nature itself? Is there such a thing as free will? Or are we simply deterministic creatures carrying out the dictates of our genes?

I believe I'll have another beer now...

Viking said...

You raise an excellent point about altruism - it does work directly against evolution in that the weak are protected when they would otherwise perish. It is so frequently misplaced in any case ...That's a subject for a whole other discussion!

@Vanilla Ice
I think we are arguing at cross purposes. I don't want any social programmes. For me, 'equality' is before the law and in no other place.
I do believe you about the frustrations involved in being above-average. My 11 year old son has an extraordinarily high IQ, but lives in Norway where the highest moral imperative seems to be to make things "fair", at whatever cost. Getting him any extra attention has been a nightmare, and I have gone on record there as referring to their education system as child-abuse. And that is in a country where at secondary/high school level students are divided according to ability into A, B and C students and go to different schools. There is no such distinction at primary level.
But where is this world you refer to where we have to accommodate the massses? Sure, at the moment there are ideological leaning towards socialism, where everything has to be dumbed down but I believe this will change. In any case, capitalism has a way of ensuring the gifted prosper - I am with Scott Adams on this one, who maintains that Capitalism is the best system because it discriminates against lazy people and stupid people!
That's why capitalism must be protected, and that's why in the European elections recently there was a decided shift away from the left in spite of the current economic crisis (says Time magazine 6/7/09)
Anyway, back to IQ. I admit I don't know all the details, but am interested in subject. MRI scans, by the way, are a far better guide to intelligence and may replace any kind of test in the future. And a second point - a large part of the IQ tests I've done are concerned with mechanical reasoning, and it struck me at the time that if I hadn't had Lego and other 'mechanical' experience from a very young age maybe I wouldn't be so good at them.
But you make an excellent point that in an increasingly technological world, the divide between the intelligent and the 'tards will only increase.
And while I take your point about the 100m sprint, it's a good analogy for success in the modern world but there are other events at the Olympics, and success may be defined less by how fast we can sprint, but on how wisely we can choose the best sport to dedicate ourselves too. I suspect I would be best at the low-jump. Or the Steers-eating contest.

Black Coffee said...

I have not had much time to comment, but on IQ - I query whether anyone has looked at how these tests, which VI puts so much faith in to point he thinks policies should be formulated around their results, as to who designs the tests? And who is it that tallies the results? It appears that these IQ "tests" are designed to perpetuate the false myth, and that's all it is, that black Africans are less intelligent than whites. History blows this notion out of the water. I believe ancient Egyptians were black, but forget that for now. Look at Great Zimbabwe. Contrary to what Bantu Education told me on SAS in reply, it was not just the architecture but the fact that it symbolized a nation which was trading with Asians (Arabs and Chinese) and which was based on gold mining. The Shona (black) people of Zimbabwe were doing this on their own without white or Asian guidance. No one with low intelligence could have done that. So either they were exceptions among black Africans, which I doubt, or the whole argument that some lead to through IQ scores, which is that black Africans are less intelligent than whites and less capable of learning complex tasks than whites, is patently false. It is not only disingenuouos but dangerous I think to structure policies around tests and scores whose validity in terms of design, questions posed on the tests and evaluation is open to doubt.

Anonymous said...

So there we have it folks. BC believes that the IQ differential between blacks and whites is a myth, contrary to every day observations and the mountains of evidence. His explanation? One needs to look at who designs, administers and tallies the tests.


Which still doesn't explain why it is that tests designed, administered and tallied by whitey IN FACT FAVOUR FAR EAST ASIANS.

How is it disingenuous? I sincerely believe that a debate needs to be conducted regarding IQ differentials. Current upliftment programs are a farce and a failure, and not due to lack of transformation. You can beat that drum forever, but unless we engage the uncomfortable it is doubtful anything will change.

Anonymous said...

@Viking. Where is the world I am talking about? All around us. Meritocracy isn't the order of the day. Governments tend to pander to the people, and this means implementing programs that benefit the masses. In open societies merit is rewarded, but this merit is only at the fringes. Intellect produces exponential growth in output, as it builds on itself. So the gap just continues to grow. It is not sustainable to rely blindly on capitalism which is increasingly benefiting the few. There is a movement globally, amongst nations, to be proportionally represented. What do you think will happen? I think we will ultimately pander more and more to the "tards". The only way to make an advanced global economy more inclusive is for the prospective participants to have the cognitive abilities. As for your explanation surrounding the Olympics, of course, we don't all want to be rocket scientists. There are other events, but the world can only absorb so many ditch diggers and traffic light peddlers. The nations with IQs below 90 have excessive population growth and will be an increasing burden on the world. No amount of relief, aid or upliftment will turn that around until IQ is addressed.

Black Coffee said...

VI - I hope at this point we can agree to disagree without being disagreeable, though I leave that up to you. I agree with your last comment on one thing - it may be worthwhile to have the debate about IQ and let the various intellectuals who study this, whether they are black, white, Asian, whatever, bring all the evidence to the table. When I get some spare time, I will look for some of the scholarly literature about IQ, race and intelligence. However, I recall pointing out to you that I already saw references to articles which rejected IQ score as a measure of intelligence.

Black Coffee said...

Follow-up - there was a study published in 2005 issue of "Psychology, Public Policy and Law" serial which actually corresponds with and puts forth Vanilla Ice's view that IQ differences among races are largely genetic. The article also states that these findings though invited critical commentary of 3 scientists. The more I read about the more it appears that somewhat similar to the history field the science of measuring intelligence, if there is such a thing, is open to interpretation. However, if I see the evidence that I am wrong, I will acknowledge it regardless of how uncomfortable I may be with results. So far though, it appears there is a lot of debate on the issue of IQ among scientists, and this I can see just from a 2 minute Google search using terms "IQ and race."

Ranger Tom said...

I've got three words for BC:

"The Bell Curve"

Anonymous said...

@RT. BC is a product of the US schooling system. What is up with that?

Ranger Tom said...

@VI: Curiously, so am I... ;)

Anonymous said...

@BC. As an apparent scholar you continue to make the same fundamental mistakes. Stop using popular sources for support of your theories. There is no debate about IQ within the hallowed halls of academia. The only debate is what causes the differential, is it nature or nurture, and even here only 17% believe it is entirely as a result of the environment. If you use popular sources for your data, you will easily be misled into believing that the debate rages on. Don't waste your time sending me articles by fringe researchers. Until the overwhelming evidence shifts in favour of your view, I will not budge. You do a lot of damage to your credibility by espousing ill-considered views, especially since you should know better if you have been exposed to the rigors of research.

Anonymous said...

@RT. Yep. So then it isn't education. It must be genetics.

Ranger Tom said...

@VI: Absolutely. I walked out of school with the ability to read & write, but others who sat next to me in the same classrooms couldn't do either after 12 years.

Same school. Same teachers. Same textbooks.

If it isn't genetics, I'd really like someone to explain it all to me.

Because, well, you know, I MUST be a moron if I don't get it, you know?


Anonymous said...

A site full of racists. You white people stole from the Africans and then blamed them because they are poor. You prevented them from going to school and then blame them for being uneducated. Leave the country and go back to where ever you came from. Oh but the Europeans don't want your racists ass either.

Eddie said...

Why should we leave? A white man lives like a king in Africa. I kind of like someone else cleaning my house,garden,car and shoes. White africans keep the economy running.You are a racist and uneducated. Wither you like it or not the modern world is a white mans world. Adapt or die. All the education you are thought at school is about white mans inventions and patents. Are you from Mars?