You seem to be validating the idea of Critical Race Theory, Chris Lewis. Although you did not actualy say it, you most certainly implied it by dredging up a whole truck full of statistics displaying that African Americans are doing very poorly in the USA, and then hinting that there must be something wrong with the system if they have not obtained equal outcomes with whites.

Reality check, Chris.

Western free market democratic societies are wealthy because they are, or at least were, competitive. The smartest people generally got to the top and the dumbest people generally stayed on the bottom. There have always been smart people from the lowest class who were upwardly mobile because they were smart and they worked hard. Dumb people from the upper class were less likely to be downwardly mobile because of family connections and inherited wealth. But such people have always been laughed at by the lower classes as "upperclass twits". And they have always been popular figures of fun in movies and plays.

Now, has it ever permeated your impermeable skull that the reason why African American people are poor and crime prone, is because colectively as a race, they are just not as smart as whites and Asians? Before you start screaming "Racism!", just remember that you seem to be supporting the concept of Critical Race Theory which is racist too. The question then is, which of the two racist explanations for African dysfunction is the more likely?

I reject CRT because it makes no sense. If white society is prejudiced against blacks, why is every black country dysfunctional? No white privilege in black countries. as a matter of fact, all of those countries went into the toilet when they chucked their whites out. And then, of course, there are the Asians who, being generally smarter than whites, do better in white society then whites.

Asians are generally smarter than whites, whites are generally smarter than Hispanics, and Hispanics are generally smarter than Africans. And that pretty much explains the social layering of US and western societies.

You seem to be validating the idea of Critical Race Theory, Chris Lewis. Although you did not actualy say it, you most certainly implied it by dredging up a whole truck full of statistics displaying that African Americans are doing very poorly in the USA, and then hinting that there must be something wrong with the system if they have not obtained equal outcomes with whites.

Reality check, Chris.

Western free market democratic societies are wealthy because they are, or at least were, competitive. The smartest people generally got to the top and the dumbest people generally stayed on the bottom. There have always been smart people from the lowest class who were upwardly mobile because they were smart and they worked hard. Dumb people from the upper class were less likely to be downwardly mobile because of family connections and inherited wealth. But such people have always been laughed at by the lower classes as "upperclass twits". And they have always been popular figures of fun in movies and plays.

Now, has it ever permeated your impermeable skull that the reason why African American people are poor and crime prone, is because colectively as a race, they are just not as smart as whites and Asians? Before you start screaming "Racism!", just remember that you seem to be supporting the concept of Critical Race Theory, which is racist too. The question then is, which of the two racist explanations for African dysfunction is the more likely?

I reject CRT because it makes no sense. If white society is prejudiced against blacks, why is every black country dysfunctional? No white privilege in black countries. As a matter of fact, all of those countries went into the toilet when they chucked their whites out. And then, of course, there are the Asians who, being generally smarter than whites, do better in white society then whites.

Asians are generally smarter than whites, whites are generally smarter than Hispanics, and Hispanics are generally smarter than Africans. And that pretty much explains the social layering of US and western societies.

Lego said "Asians are generally smarter than whites, whites are generally smarter than Hispanics, and Hispanics are generally smarter than Africans. And that pretty much explains the social layering of US and western societies".

Sad that anyone can really believe that.

And, no I do not support critical race theory.

Informed, educated, erudite commentary! Cannot suggest any remedy for ("the land of the free") a nation as divided and filled to the rafters with guns! And folks prepared to use them!?

God help us! What it might take is another war to finally unite that nation against a common enemy?

Every boy and his dog knows the problem! Just don't have any other remedy than law and order! And overflowing and seriously overcrowded prisons filled to the gunnels with folk. Many of who should be hospitalised instead!
Alan B.

Pretty pathetic rebuttal, Chris. If you think I am wrong, the onus is upon you to present a reasoned argument to say why you think I am wrong. What you wrote was not a reasoned argument, it was virtue signalling.. You presume that you are so right that you need not even bother arguing your case. Pretty arrogant and cowardly, I think.

Since you are unable to think straight, I will help you.

If you think that all races have equal intelligences, by what evidence did you come to that conclusion? By what direct observation have you come to the conclusion that all races have equal intelligence? Don't just say that there are smart and dumb people in every race, because I will agree with you. But what we are talking about is the proportions of people within every race who have very low intelligence,(IQ 70-85) low intelligence, (85-95) average intelligence,(IQ 100) high (IQ 110-130) intelligence, and very high intelligence (130-160).

How do you account that Asians do better than whites in white society?

If you disagree with the racist theory of CRT, then how do you account for the obvious ethnic layering in western society, which recurs in every western society, regardless of culture? If you think that all races are absolutely equal in every way, how do you account for the fact that the same ethnicities are a crime and welfare problem in every western society?

Cmon boy. You can't just claim that I am totally wrong without giving a reasonable explanation as to why you think I am wrong. Just standing on your dignity acting superior is just that. it is moral posturing, and just an act.

Lego,

I don't support CRT because I don't think that US history is as simple as a blame game.

The USA has come a long way since the 1950s, although there will be some Americans who still choose to hate (a minority).

My article is also not about which race has a supposed higher iq, so I am not going to respond to your simplistic assertion.

As I clearly indicated, the situation is improving for Blacks, as I indicated, but the wealth and education disparity means that progress will take a while yet.

For myself, someone who does not view differences in race in black and white terms as you, it is a difficult topic to write about.

But thanks for reading

Another pathetic rebuttal, Chris Lewis. Within western societies, the same always dysfunctional minorities inhabit ghettoes, even entire cities, notorious for very high levels of crime and welfare dependency. Why this is so, is a hugely important question. There seems to be only two explanations, and both of them are racist. One is that white people have created societies which are so inherently racist that they ensure that people from notoriously dysfunctional minorities can never prosper. The other is that people from dysfunctional minorities are collectively not real bright and probably possess a genetic predisposition to violent behaviour, much more so than in other races.

You wrote an article which IMPLIED that you support CRT and then you say that you do not support CRT.

Huh ?

It sure looks to me like the old dishonest tactic of "Always imply, but when challenged deny."

If CRT is wrong, and the alternative is wrong, then how about telling us what is right? I presume it is because you don't know yourself? You can't explain it. So you come on OLO implying CRT is correct while denouncing the alternative as "simplistic."

Sometimes the explanations for problems can be very simple. And I would suggest that this is one of those times? Especially if the alternative view is easy to refute. And especially if the people who indirectly support the opposing view refuse to even defend it, and even distance themselves from it.

You wrote that "some Americans choose to hate". I agree with you there. Ghetto blacks are taught to hate whites. There are almost 2 MILLION black-on-white violent assaults in the USA every year. Blacks are 18 times (1,800%) more likely to commit a violent crime against a white person, than a white person is against a black person. A black man is 9 times (900%) more likely to rape a white woman, than a white man a black woman.

Given these statistics, which race is more racist?

Lego, you do not have to support critical race theory to point out that blacks have some economic disadvantages.

If I was to say anything else after going though many sources for many weeks, I would be lying.

While you can call me what you, I try very hard to look at all of the arguments when shaping my own contribution.

But since you know everything, then please explain why legislation of the 1950s and 1960s happened long before there was CRT?

Me think it happened because there was a recognition that measures had to stop discrimination.

My article simply cited reasons why progress is not better in terms of wealth and education disparity.

But you, being a halfwit, have explained the situation as a racist would by saying that the races have different levels of intelligence.

Rather than say the US reflects structural racism, say as CRT would, I would suggest that education outcomes would improve if the US adopted Australia's policies with regard to education funding.

do you get that Lego?

What have you all got against CRT?
They’re one of our leading rural companies and their affiliate stores are to be found all over Australia.

LEGO, do you believe in old fashioned Eugenics, where through selective breeding of human beings a superior race can be developed. Just select desirable groups with desirable characteristics over the undesirable, such as white with desirable qualities, over black with undesirable qualities, and through Eugenics an all white superior race will eventuate.

A man had two dogs, a black dog and a white dog. Everyday for a year he beat the black dog with a stick, and pampered the white dog with treats. Within a year he had proven black dogs are inherently savage, and white dogs are placid and friendly animals. The moral is choose a white dog over a black dog if you want a friendly pet, and not some savage beast!

To Chris Lewis.

In respect to education, let's look at the situation in Australia to see if we can figure out if your premise is correct?

According to one article in "The Australian" newspaper, 66% of the education budget in the Northern Territory went to aboriginal children, who represent 33% of NT schoolchildren. The result was a 90% failure rate for aboriginal children in NAPLAN examinations. The very high aboriginal failure rate in examinations was explained away by aboriginal activists in the customary way. One was (of course) more money, to "close the gap", which never closes. The other was the proposition by national teachers federations to ban all examinations altogether.

So no, Chris, I don't agree that more money for education will achieve anything. And the above example seems to bear out my premise. Aboriginal children, especially full blooded aboriginal children, have low intelligence. They can not handle higher thinking, and they don't even want to go to school because it is just too hard. US activists claim that mathematics is racist.

The government has to tempt aboriginal kids to go to school with a number of expensive programs. Hiring aboriginal people to drive the kids to school in government supplied cars using government supplied petrol. Withdrawing benefits from aboriginal parents who can't be bothered sending their kids to school. Giving aboriginal children free food at school. Making the aboriginal kids school courses more about having fun than learning.

Now, compare that to Asians who are smart.

Asian "Tiger mothers" in my own suburb send their kids to school six days a week. All over Sydney are privately operated Asian learning centres which operate on Saturdays. Smart people have smart cultural values and they value education.. Dumb people have dumb cultural values. Ever listened to a rap song with the "singer" praising drug use, raping his mother, or bashing his "hoe" girlfriend?

All this tends to refute your claim that education is the answer. And it does tend to reinforce the opposing premise that certain races have a lower "bell curve" of intelligence than others

Most people believe in Eugenics, paul1405.

When people seek a mate for life, the males are invariably attracted to young, healthy looking females, with pretty faces, adequate breasts, shining hair, child bearing hips, and clear skin. Shining hair and clear skin is especially important as it tends to be an indicator that the female's body is not harbouring parasites. Although, since you are such a virtue signaller, I am sure you will choose a mate who is overweight, unhealthy, and aesthetically challenged? Because you hate exclusion and reject discrimination.

Females, on the other hand, are mostly attracted to alpha males. Or at least those who try to look like alpha males. That is why fashion can be very important. Male fashion is designed to promote the idea that the wearer is rich and smart. This is very important when it comes to attracting breeding females. Male deer may attract females by urinating on themselves. Horses and lions by driving off other males. Frogs by croaking. But human alpha males do it by displaying status symbols. Sports cars, yachts, private planes, and flashy clothes. And it works a treat. The wives of celebrities know that they are always in danger of being replaced by a younger model because beautiful young women are always on the prowl for high status male celebrities and big spenders. Women's magazines are full of stories of successful men dumping their jaded wives for a siren old enough to be his daughter. Or granddaughter.

Top marks went to 26 year old Anna Nicole Smith (36DD rack) who married billionaire 89 year old J. Howard Marshal.

Rich men have no trouble attracting pretty breeding females and it is common for very rich men to have two, three, even four former wives. Very attractive working, or even disadvantaged class females, can even make the jump into the upper classes based upon how beautiful they are. Example, Gunnedah girls Miranda Kerr and Erica Baxter. This selective breeding with beautiful, high quality females has resulted in the upper classes being correctly labelled "the beautiful people."

Paul,
Perhaps you’d be kind enough to give us another analogy explaining why Southern Africa is such a mess as people of colour (very PC) murder their fellows with apparent abandon, kidnap young girls and wipe out whole villages.

Issy, to answer your question, the clue is in my analogy.

FW De Klerk the last racists leader of the white minority apartheid regime in South Africa has died aged 85. Will history judge De Klerk kindly as it has his nemesis Nelson Mandela. De Klerk went to his grave calming apartheid wasn't racists, in fact he would not use the term apartheid, rather referring to it as, "separate development".

LEGO maybe De Klerk was a Eugenics man, just like you.
BTW; "Most people believe in Eugenics", most people have not heard of Eugenics, unless they are well read, or old hang overs from the days of Nazism.

To paul1405.

You last post was of a particularly poor quality. Just coming onto a topic and demanding answers to Dorothy Dixers, then tossing a few insults around is hardly going to convince anybody that your opinion on any subject could be correct.

Most people may not even know what the term "eugenics" means, but they practice it all the same. If your teenage daughter came home with a well dressed young man who was in university studying engineering, you would be very happy with that. But if she introduced you to her new boyfriend, who was a Comanchero, had never had a job in his life, had tattoos all up and down his arms, and a bone in his nose, I think you would be worried that your beloved daughter was dating down.

I know what you are trying to do and as usual, I am way ahead of you. Since I am a racist, you think that makes me a Nazi who supports the extreme Nazi view of eugenics. You know, concentration camps complete with gas chambers. Don't be silly.

My view on racism came from being an anti apartheid demonstrator who went to demos with my former school mates who then went to university. But unlike yourself, I began to see through the whole anti racism ideology. To begin with, equality was preached by university types who were extremely class conscious and who really knew how to talk down to their inferiors. People like me. I began to realise just how important class consciousness was with university types, the same ones who preached that class was a social construct.

I began to realise that one needed to understand both sides of an argument in order to make an informed opinion. The more I read about the Boers the more I admired them. The Boer opinion was that there were good intelligent Africans who were admirable people, but most black Africans were very unintelligent and very prone to extreme violence. Nothing I have ever seen or heard of since then has made me think that they were wrong

Lego said "most people believe in Eugenics"

what an absolute joke.

Prove it Lego.

Have you done surveys? Are there surveys?

Are there liberal democracies out there that pursue such policies?

To Chris.

I already did that on my previous two posts to paul1405, printed on this very page. Could you please read all my posts and come up to speed before you come on here making silly statements?

I am rooly disappointed in you Chris. Aren't you some sort of Professor? Well, you are being done like a dinner by an electrician. Considering the length of my posts directed at you, I would have thought that a professor would have enough information from me to make a fair go at trying to refute my points? 31 lousy words? C'mon Professor, you can do better than that.

Since you have not given me much to work with, I suppose I will have to address some of your questions which I had to ignore to stay within my dreaded 350 word limit?

On the subject of eugenics, you question was "do any liberal democracies pursue such policies?" The answer is yes. They are presently importing highly dysfunctional ethnicities from highly dysfunctional countries into their advanced societies and then wondering why the dysfunctional ethnicities are becoming such a problem? It's kinda eugenics directed the wrong way.

With the idea of racial equality now considered God's Holy Truth there needs to be an explanation as to why these same welfare and crime prone ethnicities always form an underclass in every western society?

The only explanation the "progressive" left and university professors (same thing?) can come up with is another racist explanation, which is "blame the white guy for everything." This explanation is not new, it has been around for a very long time and it is now called CRT. But it was around when I was an anti apartheid demonstrator. Fortunately for me, although not having a degree, I figured out all by myself how racist the so called "anti racists" were, and I objectively started looking for an explanation which made sense.

Now, being a professor, I had hoped you might have convinced me I was wrong? But you are doing a singularly lousy job of it

LEGO, your post to me "Most people believe in Eugenics" absolute clap trap. The proof you offer is "gold diggers", over compensated "Fabio's", and rich silly old men. It was a joke post....YES!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m4gHNMECx1M&ab_channel=achievalist

"Nazism was “applied biology,” stated Hitler deputy Rudolf Hess. During the Third Reich, a politically extreme, antisemitic variation of EUGENICS determined the course of state policy. Hitler’s regime touted the “Nordic race” as its EUGENIC ideal and attempted to mold Germany into a cohesive national community that excluded anyone deemed hereditarily “less valuable” or “racially foreign.”

LEGO, is the above your ideal of how Eugenics should apply?

To paul1405.

1. Parents prefer that their children "marry up", not "marry down." Men prefer beautiful, intelligent, young, healthy women, not old, ugly, dumb, overweight ones. Women prefer successful, healthy, intelligent men. That is selective breeding. Selective breeding is the basis of eugenics. I almost feel sorry for you, if you do not possess the wit to recognise and understand self evident logic. Although, it does explain a lot about your worldview.

If you can not understand how selective breeding applies to eugenics, I am sure others can, and they are looking askance at you.

2. You submitted some information about Nazism and eugenics, which I already knew. But you neglected to explain how your information was relevant to the subject of this discussion? Could you please explain what point you are implying? I can go from there.

3. The answer to your last question is "no."

4. Try writing an entire 350 word article starting with a clearly stated premise that you are prepared to defend with a reasoned argument. Writing curt replies dealing entirely in implications is hardly going to impress anybody into thinking you have an opinion worth reading. Neither is, just repeatedly asking loaded Dorothy Dixer questions. You may think that it makes you look authoritative, but it just makes you look like an ignorant person winging it to vainly defend a position he passionately holds, but has little knowledge of.

Which is what you are doing.

No Lego, just someone who likes to express my opinion.

To Chris Lewis.

You are doing a lousy job of expressing your opinion if you submit a 2000 word article basically supporting the grievances which created CRT, then saying you don't support CRT because it is "simplistic". Then replying to a 350 word critique of your logic with one sentence replies.

The modern western world needs smart people. Unfortunately, the USA has within it's borders an ever growing number of people from certain ethnic groups who's collective intelligence is so low that most of them can never prosper in the western world. That is the problem. Most of these people will always remain an underclass with very high levels of criminal behaviour and welfare dependency. What is worse, is that the numbers of this underclass keeps increasing through birth rate differentials and immigration, both legal and illegal. This is not going to end well.

But it can be taken advantage of by slimy politicians who see that pandering to this ever growing class of dysfunctional people is the way to win office. The trick is to claim that there is nothing wrong with these people at all, that they are equal in every way to everybody else. Therefore, the only possible explanation for the fact that they can never prosper must be the fault of the majority of US people, who do have the brains to prosper.

Asian people are collectively smarter than white people. Asians are so racist that they could teach the Nazis a thing or two. They are literally laughing their heads off at how stupid the white Europeans are for refusing to admit that races are not equal. Asians have no intention whatsoever of opening their borders to any ethnicities who's collective intelligence is so low that they will become a burden on the state forever. That is a major reason why they are beating us.

But nobody, certainly nobody from Monash University in the Soviet Socialist Republic of Victoria will say that. It is even illegal to say that in your part of this country. Telling the truth in Victoria is illegal.

Hi LEGO,

On the subject of Eugenics, I know you gave me the evidence of gold diggers, playboys, old farts with too much money and a moose peeing on it leg or something. All good stuff in my book, but I have a serious question. Why is it, if a farmer has a herd of cows and puts a bull in with them, they all end up pregnant. Not only the good looking cows get up the duff, but the ugly cows as well, regardless if the bull is a handsome dude, or an wart faced old chap. I believe Heinrich Himmler was doing some work on that before he met his untimely end. Please explain.

To Chris.

It is Sunday, Chris, so I thought I would toss a double broadside at you. I think you have a brain, so it might be possible to give you a reality check to deprogram you.

On page 2 of this topic, you tossed a question at me that I was unable to answer because of the accursed 350 word limit. But I can rectify that now.

You asked me to explain why legislation was passed in the 60's in the USA to alleviate black disadvantage? I am not sure exactly what legislation you are talking about? But I assume that you mean civil rights legislation like integrating public schools, and even Affirmative Action?

The erroneous concept that "all men are created equal" was first proposed by the slave owners who drew up the US constitution. By the 60's the growing new class of university schooled eggheads saw civil rights as the way to alleviate the crushing poverty of African Americans, who were subjected to extremely racist and discriminatory laws, especially in the US South. The idea was, that providing equal schooling opportunities, removing very discriminatory and humiliating state laws, and enacting racist laws like Affirmative Action, would eventually see African Americans obtain equality.

While it certainly allowed the small proportion of smart African Americans to prosper, it could not be considered a success. Equality with whites meant the opportunity for very dumb and very violent young black men to obtain guns, and that did not work out too good. It was just like allowing Australian aboriginal people to buy alcohol on the grounds of "equality." That did not work out too well, either.

I opine that giving equality to some ethnicities could never work out well because it is based upon a false premise. That all races are equal in every way. With the failure of equality of opportunity to do much, we now see leftists demanding that governments enact more racist legislation, to ensure equality of outcomes.

At least we can all agree that racist laws can be considered okay if they are done for good intentions.

Lego, I am very much for giving all people equal opportunity to progress.

There are gifted and hard-working people in all races that would do well with the right opportunities, as has been proven in the US experience.

All I endeavoured to do with the opinion piece was show how Blacks and Hispanics trail in terms of education and wealth levels, and suggest that improvement in those areas would help improve race relations, and build further upon gains made since the Civil Rights legislation.

I do not support any education approach that blames Whites for the current situation.

Chris, if you believe in equal opportunity, then you are not politically correct. Minorities in the USA are now demanding equality of outcomes. What this means is that somehow, minorities expect the US government to make their lifestyles the equal of whites and Asians. No wonder socialism is now so popular among dysfunctional minorities. Socialists have never succeeded in making everybody rich, but they sure as hell are good at making everybody poor.

I agree that there are smart people in all races who have a strong work ethic and there should be no impediment to such people prospering. But the problem with some minorities, is that there are so few of them. But your article said that education was the answer to black disadvantage, citing schools for minorities being having less money than with predominantly white students. But if the article in "The Australian" was correct, the NT government spends four times more on aboriginal students than on other races for a 90% aboriginal failure rate in NAPLAN.

Could I submit Detroit as an example of so called African poverty caused by blacks themselves? Detroit was once of the richest cities in the USA, and it in 1940 was almost exclusively white. But money attracts poor people and in time, African Americans began to take over entire suburbs, leading to "white flight" from "black" areas now notorious for very high levels of violent crime.

In time, so many African Americans migrated to Detroit that African Americans became a real political force. Power switched from the Republicans to the Democrats. With the election of black politicians and the infiltration of the bureaucracy of blacks through "affirmative action", taxes rose steeply to buy the black welfare vote, crime skyrocketed, and the productive whites fled Detroit, leaving entire suburbs of empty houses.. With the loss of the productive, tax paying whites, the city went bankrupt. But black Democrat leadership did not go bankrupt. The black political and public servants are among the highest paid in the USA. This includes the guy in charge of Detroit education, who is illiterate.

Lego, yes there will long be city developments that can be cited.

But, as my article indicated, levels of integration in many US cities has improved.

I believe that this will improve further as Blacks gain education and wealth.

I could be wrong, but I feel that greater integration and interaction helps improve sentiment, especially when all get their chance to prosper.

Sure, you raise important issues about how much Blacks and Hispanics may demand if they gain dominance in certain areas. For example, these two groups argue in certain areas of LA about what language should be taught in schools.

But that is another issue.

I heard yesterday on NPR that some blacks want reparations for slavery. I certainly do not support that

I do not believe that integration rates in many US cities have improved, any more than I believe that covid-19 originated in the Wuhan wet market, or that President Trump was a Russian agent. The histories of successful US cities shows that they are becoming white free as taxpaying whites flee rising taxes, and the incredible violence and crime perpetuated by African and Hispanic young men, who for the most part get their living from white welfare. White flight is accelerating as crime soars because politicians representing crime prone minority groups pander to the stupidities of their unintelligent electors and "Defund the Police."

One book I read by Vance Packard claimed that the fear of Africans among white families are so great, that in white areas with stable real estate prices, agents have been known to "seed" a few black families into a "white" suburb to start real estate prices plunging.

If anything, racial tensions in the USA are coming close to boiling over into either separatism or civil war. This is especially so now that the Dems are talking about stacking the US High Court with 6 more judges, and even saying that non citizens should be allowed to vote in US elections. Even more incredibly, you, yourself, agree with that clear violation of democratic principles.

Here is you saying just that.

"One hopes that the Supreme Court will continue to block any attempt to make it difficult for non-White residents to participate in the political process"

When a free and armed people realise that crooked politicians have manipulated the political system to such a degree that they use identity politics to divide and rule, and to over ride democracy, by stacking electorates with border crossing foreign citizens, then you are looking at a civil war. This is especially so when these self same rabble rousing politicians never cease promoting racist attitudes by sneering at "deplorable" white people. The portent of instability came with the "storming" of Congress. I am staggered that you are blind to the consequences of what you have written.

Yes Lego.

It is very important that all Americans vote in the political process, and that the courts uphold this right.

Perhaps you did not bother to click on your own link regarding the Supreme Court ruling against the Trump administrations decision to use the US census to query US residents about their citizenship? The idea, of course, was to find out just how many people in the USA were actually citizens of the USA, who were eligible to vote in US elections. At the very least it could give some indication of just how bad voter fraud was becoming. The court rejected the application, apparently on a mere legal technicality.

After the last US presidential election, it was revealed that one US state ended having more adult electors than it could possibly have, according to the last population census. This indicated that the last Presidential election was probably rigged.

It does not matter now if the US election was rigged or not. What matters is that the perception that if elections are now being rigged is an extremely dangerous development in US politics. It is in the interests of every single US citizen that elections must not be perceived as being rigged. Once one side or the other believes that the electoral process is a fraud, that opens the way to anarchy and civil war.

The fact that the Dems did rig the election was born out by their opposition to reasonable proposal for voter ID at polling stations. They knew that large numbers of illegal immigrant foreign citizens, and even legal foreign residents, had illegally taken part in the US elections, and that this fact very much favoured the Democrats.

The Dems opposed voter ID because they wanted the fraud to continue. And since you, yourself praised the court's decision, I presume that you too think that foreign citizens voting in US (and even Australian?) elections is a wonderful idea?

To Chris.

So, you reject CRT even though you wrote an article full of facts and figures basically validating CRT, and you reject the idea that notoriously dysfunctional minorities are that way because of their generally low collective IQ's and a genetic predisposition to violent behaviour?

You claim that education is the key to dysfunctional minority advancement. But when I twice pointed out to you that this very expensive policy did not work in the NT, you made no comment at all. I presume it was because you knew it blew your entire idea away? Better to avert your eyes than look at what you do not want to see?

In the USA in the sixties, good people like yourself claimed that "desegregating schools" was the way forward. That did not work either.

You claim that it will take some time for education to make a difference in dysfunctional minority outcomes. That looks like a cop out to me. Placing an indeterminate time on a positive outcome of your social theory means that you can use that excuse forever.

As for viewing race in terms of black and white, I have noticed that trendy lefties claim race does not exist when it is convenient, and then claim that race does exist when it is convenient. At least I am consistent.

Lego, correct, I reject CRT.

I have never claimed that a perfect society will emerge.

What I did suggest with article is that better education and wages outcomes will improve the situation.

I think we have exhausted this one, and you are free to state I am wrong and/or inconsistent.

As I said, it is never easy to write about race, but I had a go.

Thanks for the comments and debate

Dear Chris Lewis,

Bit of a bereft article I'm afraid.

You took such a big detour around the elephant in the room.

One of if not the most successful immigrant group in the US today are Nigerians and it has been that way for a while now.

They join the Asians as seeing the largest influx of new migrants over the last decade.

“According to the 2008-2012 American Community Survey conducted by the U.S. Census Bureau, 61.4% of Nigerian Americans aged 25 years or older hold a bachelor's degree or higher, compared to 28.5% of the total U.S. population.[23] The Migration Policy Institute reports that 29% of Nigerian Americans have a master's degree, PhD, or an advanced professional degree (compared to 11% of the U.S population overall). Nigerian Americans are also known for their contributions to medicine, science, technology, arts and literature.”

The migrant experience certainly turbo charges achievement. But why the relatively poor levels of African Americans? Well the obvious reason is the inherited disadvantage and pervasive racism.

CRT does a good job of describing these reasons in context and makes a valuable contribution to understanding the reason why things are the way they are.

Perhaps you could give it ago.

It is sad that an educated person such as yourself can think the way you do.

Lego, it is also sad that you are a racist and a know all, but I can live with that and your right to have an opinion.

Lego, I assume your last comment was directed at me, or was it SR.

No SR, I will not taking Critical Race Theory seriously.

I hope it is barred from schools as it all it will do is promote tension between races

SR, CRT is simplistic academic garbage, like most of their theories that claim some sophisticated understanding of the world.

Having said that, I will admit I have no inclination to study it.

No, I will stick to relying on evidence rather theories to inform my efforts, and accept any criticism for my imperfect efforts.

Thinking back at university, it was a shame we had to deal with so many stupid theories rather than focus on key issues.

Constructivism, realism, neoliberalism, world systems theory, blah, blah, blah.

What a waste of public resources.

Thankfully there were other subjects that focused on issues, not some clown's theory.

CL, the idea that all races are equal is academic and religious garbage.

One reason why I know I am right, is because of the reluctance of anybody who thinks that all races are equal, to ever defend what they believe. Some people, like yourself, refuse to even discuss it.

Every Race has an attribute which makes it superior to others & attributes which makes them inferior to others !

Hi LEGO,

You said; "the idea that all races are equal is academic and religious garbage."

Not sure what you mean by "equal", it implies some kind of quantitative measurement such as in IQ testing. Is there a test that does not have an inherent bias built in, which skews the results in favour of one group over another. What should one test to determine intelligence, general knowledge, resourcefulness in a practical sense, maybe some kind of problem solving ability. You have said white people are more intelligent than black, which might be true if academic achievement and their ability to conform and prosper in a Western style social is the measure, meeting the social and economic norms of that type of society. You promote Asians as being above even whites on the grands of social and economic success. There is a clear indication that given opportunity Asians value education above other groups, as do Jews, who appear to be more successful than others.

It is my belief that education is the real determinate of success in society given equality of opportunity, which involves far more than the class room facility, and dollars spent on the provision of education. The starting point for success begins at birth, parental influence in a positive way towards education, certainly in the formative years of a child's development is more important than anything else in determining future success. Based on opportunity a person will succeed or fail regardless of race.

cont

cont

To give you an analogy; three students are given a copy of a novel to read, then required to give a critique of that novel. The Asian students book is complete in everyway, the white students copy has some paragraphs missing and the black students copy has several chapters missing. On reading their assignments the teachers assessment is the Asian students knowledge of the novel is full and complete "A plus", the white students knowledge is good but lacks a little of the finer detail a "B" , but the black students knowledge is lacking in so many vital areas that his work is a complete "F". See, Asians do better than whites, and whites are superior to blacks. The fact is the Asian loved the novel, great story. The white kid got the gist of the book, but thought it was just so so. The black kid couldn't understand it at all, thought it was crap and stopped reading it half way through.

Two guys Barack Obama and Donald Trump, both well educated, both given very good opportunity, both at one time required to perform the function of American President. If wealth was the only measure of success then Trump wins easily. If the ability of being able to reason complex matters of state then Obama wins easily. Which guy is the more intelligent? In my opinion and that of the majority is that Obama is the more intelligent, yet Obama is black and Trump is white, should it not be the other way round with your natural order of things.

The more a handful of people provide, the more stupid the masses become !

Paul1405 said

"It is my belief that education is the real determinate of success in society given equality of opportunity, which involves far more than the class room facility, and dollars spent on the provision of education. The starting point for success begins at birth, parental influence in a positive way towards education, certainly in the formative years of a child's development is more important than anything else in determining future success. Based on opportunity a person will succeed or fail regardless of race".

Very true Paul.

I would add a funding system that ensures that all successful students get their chance to go all the way.

Hi Chris,

Agree, a couple of points, my older brother a retired school teacher, and a Liberal voter, not all teachers are radical lefties. He said many times to me; "At parent teach night the parents you see are the ones you don't really need to see". I'm sure many a bright student from a disadvantage background missed out because of that lack of family support. My wife came from a family of good parents, but very much disadvantaged. The wife left school at 15, not because she or her parents thought education was un-necessary, they just couldn't afford it, she need to work. Later my wife obtained an advanced education at nigh schooling.

Our "Son" in Fiji 22, has just started a career in an architects office, as a graphics designer. Its fair to say without our support through school, including secondary boarding school and collage, he would have never made it to where he is now.

Chris just to continue,

Imagine if our son had not received an opportunity in life, and I took LEGO to a certain village garden and I know through some magical gift of what could have been. Should I take LEGO up to this 22 year old man hoeing the vegetable patch, and I say to LEGO; "This man is too bright to be working here, he should be in an architects office in Suva doing graphic design. LEGO would say to him; "Boy, what's one plus one," The man might answer; "I don't know"...and LEGO might say; "You think he should be a graphics designer, you have rocks in your head, he's just a dumb black fella!"

BTW; The kindy's and primary schools in Fiji, are great, having visited several over the years. Teachers, and teacher aids, are very devoted people, as are headmasters, still called headmasters, very strict in the "Methodist Tradition" (The native Fijians are predominantly Wesleyan Methodist, and the Indian population Hindu, all are religious) but very good with the children. What the schools lack sometimes is basic resources, even to the point of not having writing materials. The wife is now involving herself in a book program, where appropriate for age, reading books are collected in Australia and shipped to Fiji for distribution to kindy's and primary schools. How many Aussies have books that were their kids, and with the kids getting older, now sit in boxes gathering dust.

Thanks for the posts Paul.

I agree with you 100%, all children and adults should have a right to flourish in a decent education system, and I hope most can benefit from guiding parents who wish their kids to do well.

Yes, there are many talented kids in every corner of the world.

If only they could get better education skills, and not be held back by poverty which makes it so much harder.

To paul1405.

Congratulations for having more guts in defending your conviction than CL.

For decades, civil rights activists have claimed that anyone who says that races are not equal is a racist. They are therefore claiming that all races are equal. This seems to be based upon the US Constitution in which Slave owners claimed that "all men are created equal." If you do not think that races are equal, then tell me that, right now. Don't do what other posters have done on OLO, and oppose the concept that races are unequal, without defending the opposing position, which can only be that races are equal.

IQ testing is a serious science. It is used in education, industry, the military, and in scientific research. If it was inaccurate or just black magic nobody would take any notice of it. Measured IQ is the most reliable indicator of future success. People with high measured IQ's usually do very well in life. People with very low IQ's always do badly in life.

The smartest race by IQ is the Jews. Next come the Asians. Next the whites. Then the Hispanics and then the Africans. That fact pretty well explains university admissions in the USA, where university admissions into the most prestigious universities were once done solely by the SAT IQ score. That this meant that Africans and Hispanics were very under represented and Asians and Jews were very over represented.

I recently read a report that high SAT scores are now no longer the sole determinant for ivy league university admission. "Affirmative Action" has reared it's ugly head and minority identity is being given preference over merit for university admission. I presume that few of these minorities are doing STEM courses because most are just not smart enough. Hence the latest activist idiot claim by minority activists that mathematics is racist. Most of them would be studying rubbish like Gender Studies or Political Science, coming out with all sorts of idiotic theories, and making complete idiots of themselves.

No amount of education can make a basically dumb person into a genius.

HI LEGO,

Always puzzled me why the so called "founding fathers" of America came up with the line; "All mem are created equal", and then went out and enslaved the blacks and shot the Indians. A mystery to this day, maybe it just sounded good, I don't know. There was a thing about a Pope and blank men being human, but lacking a soul, and you couldn't enslave a soul, but you could enslave a body, providing it didn't have a soul, crazy but convenient, since it was Catholics doing a lot of the enslaving.

Are Jews really the smartest people in the world, or are some just good in the business world, many a Jew has died in poverty. I don't equate making money with smartness, I did give the Trump/Obama example but you didn't comment. I agree some people are intelligent and some are not, but its not all reflected in ones station in life. I think we both agree Einstein was very intelligent, but he didn't make a lot of money, in that regard he lacked opportunity. On the other hand Al Capone by any measure was not as intelligent as Einstein, but did make a lot of money. For the two men, lets say environmental factors was the determinate and not intelligence when it came to money making success in life.

cont

cont

On IQ tests as an indicator of intelligence, I'm not convinced they are the be all and end all in that regard, but they are a significantly useful tool for measuring aptitude, the ordered processing of the human brain. The old putting the round pegs in the round holes ability thing.

An analogy; Outside my local fruit market he has bins of various fruits for sale, apples, pears, rockmelons etc, in each case the price is good, being the shop specials, so price is only a weak determinate for choice. There is no test that I the customer can apply to quantify the desirability of one against the other, are apples a better choice than pears etc. I only have a subjective test of "which one I prefer" to make that ultimate choice. I chose the apples over the pears, rockmelons a poor third choice, that's not to say that apples are superior overall to pears, but in my mind they are, I have applied the "choice test", to someone else it maybe a different result with the same "choice test". Then of course I have to go though the bin to pick out the nicer apples from the marked ones, another choice, but there I could apply a practical test. But at no time is a nice looking pear inferior to a half rotten apple, but I still choose apples, but not the rotten ones. Looking at intelligence is like that, sorry my analogy was not clearer. BTW I get home and the wife says; "You got apples again, you know I like pears...."Sorry, but he didn't have any pears today, maybe next time".

To paul1405

I don't know what you are trying to say with your bizarre "examples?"

In all races there are a small proportion of people with very low intelligence, a significant minority with low intelligence, the vast majority with "average" intelligence, a significant minority with high intelligence, and a small proportion with very high intelligence. The problem is that comparing races in a graph reveals that
these "bell curves" are displaced. The "average" intelligence of races differs. Even within African races, the western Africans are considered smarter than the east Africans, especially Africans from Somalia and Sudan. Smart black African people include Condoleeza Rice, Colin Powell, Sydney Poitier, Morgan Freeman, Candice Owen, Tom Bongino, and maybe even Martin Luther King.

Trump is smart and a billionaire. Obama is smart, although I don't think he is as smart as Trump. Obama's mother was white so he is a "coloured." Even in Apartheid South Africa, "coloured" people were considered smarter that full blooded black Africans. I once had a "coloured" South African apprentice who was so smart he ended up being my boss.

One reason for Australian state and federal governments removing half caste aboriginal children from tribal situations was because the Australian authorities considered the half caste kids smart enough to educate. Another was to prevent the very racist aboriginal men from murdering the "yeller fellas."

In regards to your implication that IQ tests are inaccurate because the tests might mean different things to different races, this was a charge that the cognitive matriclans investigated. Needing to justify the accuracy of their science, cognitive matriclans set about designing tests addressing their critics concerns. The results from the new tests simply confirmed that the old tests were accurate.

To the best of my knowledge, there is no scientific controversy among cognitive matriclans to the fact that different races have different most common IQ scores. If their finding are false, then a Nobel prize and international acclaim awaits any cognitive matriclan who can prove your belief, that all races have equal intelligence.

That is never going to happen.

Hi again LEGO,

Are you confusing intelligence with aptitude, and are you discounting environmental factor when determining intelligence. Example peoples ability to ride a bike is not simply intelligence based, aptitude is more important, given all are physically the same.

Intelligence; The ability to acquire and apply knowledge and skills.

aptitude; A natural ability to do something.

IQ teat; Measures reasoning and problem-solving abilities.

There is an overrider with IQ testing, the age factor, as we get older are we getting more intelligent up to a point.

If I take 3 children of the same age, physically the same, children who have never seen a bicycle in their life, and I give them an identical machine each. I say now teach yourself to ride the bike, can you guarantee the child who learns to ride first is the most intelligent, and the one who is the slowest is the least intelligent, based on IQ testing, that's what it tells me? Maybe aptitude is an important factor as well. I believe a teacher once wrote on Einstein lacked intelligence based on his aptitude for school work.

Very true Paul.

I read once that the Jews in the US long ago scored below average iqs, yet within one generation they reversed the situation.

I am hoping that your comments are no lot on Lego as most of us, of all races, can learn from logical argument.

Hi yourself, paul1405

I think I must be making progress with you, if you have given up denying that different races have different bell curves of intelligence, and you are now tying yourself up in knots trying to rationalise around what you do not want to focus on.

You now appear to be saying that intelligence is unimportant. if this is not what you implied in your last post then write plainly. Write "I think this, or that" "Here is my supporting argument."

Of course intelligence is important. Throughout history, smart people have been prized as assets by those in authority. Da Vinci, Michelangelo, and Galileo all said and did things in their lives that should have got them burned at the stake, but authorities of the time knew that you do not waste brains.

Smart people who do smart things are prized, and dumb people who do dumb things are sneered at by everyone, except today's leftists who see the ever growing numbers of dumb people as their future voters. Smart people are a pleasure to teach. Dumb people are a real chore to teach. Given equality of resources, smart generals will beat dumb generals every time.

A natural aptitude to do anything is a type of high intelligence. Cognitive metricians actually talk about "intelligences" as there are many forms of intelligence. Social intelligence. Athletic intelligence. Mathematical intelligence. Literary intelligence. Emotional intelligence, and musical intelligence. People who have high general intelligence in everything are considered to be very intelligent. Those who's intelligence is focussed in one direction only can still be considered intelligent, if a little kooky and bumbling in other areas of life. Such characters are popular figures of fun in popular culture.

But the over all rule is, that those with high intelligence, either focussed or general, usually do very well in life. Those who have low intelligence almost always do poorly in life. And human intelligence can be heritable and is measurable.