"Anti-racist” intellectuals here will pretend to think while the rest of us will pretend to pay attention to their politically correct sermonising. "

I find it more disturbing that Kathe Boehringer thinks anti-racism is simply an intellectual endeavour. I wish it was so simple

The main area of interest about Andrew Fraser is not if he is right or wrong, but if his detractors are right or wrong. And if so, about what? Their theme seems to be that Fraser is misguided or racist or both and his published views should not be taken seriously - at best - or made effectively unavailable to the public. OK, so much for Fraser.

But what do his detractors believe? That all humans are an intellectual blank slate just waiting for the right home? At this point they become a little quieter as DNA still hides more than Andrew Fraser and his detractors can possibly know.

Race and IQ is not a debate. It is a drama. Fraser's detractors concentrate on Fraser and his character and nothing else, least of all a body of evidence to bolster any counter argument. Rather they would deconstruct the very idea of race which would go right over the head of the last Martian that landed. Darwin too, probably. Deconstruction basically scuppers conversation. And scuppering conversation is what it is all about.

Fraser detractors show the same morality that once led efficient clergy and concerned citizens to expose people who doubted the existence of God. And the use of words was similar, "heretic" literally painting a persons character as "racist" does today.

The cruelest cut of all is the possibilty that the drama aspect will work against the very people who are central to the debate - the sub saharan Africans who are dying in droves and have been for years and years - still counting. Remember them? The consequences of Fraser being right and his detractors wrong are predicatable in the unforgiving evolutionary world.

Better to face up to an unpleasant truth if it saves so many from an on going Holocaust.

And that is something that Fraser's detractors, more concerned with their moral vanity-or jobs, will never do.

Once again government interference (i.e. the introduction of the Racial Discrimination Act) has resulted in limiting free speech. Surely we are mature enough as a nation to allow people to say what they want without being reduced to tears!

Well it seems that Kathe may have had a conflict of interest on this one- as she actually lives with Fraser:

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5744,16742742%255E12332,00.html

So now we have to consider the article from a whole new perspective- was her personal interest outweighed by her professional one in this instance?

She lives with Andrew Fraser! You are kidding!
Hmm, does that mean her racial characteristics include a gene for deceit and shiftiness? Was such shoddy behaviour inborn? Or is it to do with the way she was brought up? Or, is Kathe merely human with the same number of strengths and weaknesses as all the rest of us, white, black or brindle coloured?
If only those who claimed racial superiority ever gave any evidence themselves of living up to their claims, instead they almost always make me wish I belonged to any racial group but theirs.

I am not kidding- stranger even was a post by Fraser himself on the majority rights website which stated his wife thought his initial comments were a "stupid racist rant"

http://majorityrights.com/index.php/weblog/comments/1153/

scroll down for Fraser's comment.

We can now turn to an ethical debate here- Kathe should have mentioned to the editors of this site that she in fact lives with Fraser. Instead she tell us that they are just collegues- she has surely fooled the readers of the article, not to mention the editors of Online opinion.