Coleman Hughes has a YouTube channel which presents his hour-plus interviews on a variety of social topics. One episode was a discussion with Charles Murray on intelligence and the social consequences of different average IQs of the different races.
Hughes repeatedly said that it would poison the social climate if we came out and acknowledged that blacks are less intelligent than whites.
It should be noted that while Coleman Hughes comes off as intelligent, better informed than most on the issues he discusses (admittedly a low bar), and willing to listen to contrary opinions, in every interview he brings up his experience as a black man in America and his concerns for blacks as a group. He seldom brings up what’s best for the US and Americans as a whole; I don’t recall him doing so at all but may simply have missed it.
So, he claims that it would “poison the social climate” to admit that blacks (and hispanics) are on average less intelligent than Whites and East Asians. He doesn’t deny that it’s true. He simply thinks that it should not be talked about.
The delta has many real-world consequences, from income levels to incarceration rates. These have been discussed in many places, including many of Murray’s books. He thoroughly documents his research and his method for coming up with the statistics on which he bases his conclusions. You can reasonably question the validity of the social sciences and their use of statistics, but to the extent that you accept them, Murray’s work is solid.
Rather than rehash the work and the numbers, let’s simply state that the typical black man in America is less intelligent than average. He has less education on his record, is less likely to have gotten education or training which leads to a well-paying job, has a lower income than average, is more likely to be involved in violent crime, and is more likely to have spent time in jail or prison. Murray claims that most of the discrepancy in outcomes derives from his lower intelligence.
Coleman Hughes doesn’t want the lower average intelligence to be discussed because it would poison the social climate.
But that’s exactly what we’re getting when we refuse to talk about it. There are big differences between the races in the social outcomes listed above. If it’s not because of intelligence (or we can’t admit that it’s because of intelligence) then there has to be some other cause.
In the absence of any other (acceptable) explanation, our society has settled on systemic racism as the cause.
No matter what hiring quotas and black-only scholarships and all the other special set-asides, blacks don’t do as well educationally or economically. That’s why, no matter how far society bends over to compensate for the dread Systemic Racism, it’s never enough. (One of the reasons. The other is that it’s a very profitable grift and the leeches will never voluntarily let go.)
Rather than hush up the regrettable difference in population intelligence, we need to acknowledge it, face it head-on, and work out ways for society to give the best opportunity for everyone to work with what they have. Ending the idiocy of pushing all teens into college and instead providing vocational training for those not suited for college is an obvious step. This will have a disparate effect on blacks (and hispanics) but who cares? We can set someone up to succeed as an auto mechanic rather than fail as a college graduate with a useless degree and a pile of college loans.
It won’t happen, of course. Facing the truth might hurt feelings (and cut off the gravy train). Instead, we’ll keep on as we are, building resentment on both sides because we won’t address the elephant in the room.
Reality is the thing which won’t go away, even when you refuse to talk about it.
7
- Entries
A mechanic that learns how things work begins their first step towards learning Science and other STEM.
Someone who learns “Studies” learns victimhood. Or acquires guilt
Which will pay off better?
In this world today, the “Studies”.
Unfortunately, you are correct.
“In the absence of any other (acceptable) explanation, our society has settled on systemic racism as the cause.”
Welfare is the cause since 1960 on.
Auto mechanics are smarter than 50-60% of the people graduating from college. A good mechanic requires intelligence to go along with a willingness to get your hands dirty.
I have no doubt there is racial variation in intelligence levels. My only quibble is with our ability to measure it, and the false reporting that takes place.
At the very least, being a good mechanic is a better life than being a useless bloodsucker “grievance monger”.
A great mechanic,.or plumber, or electrician AND an honest one is worth more than a dozen useless college grads.
Absolutely.
The skill of auto mechanics may not require the same level of intelligence that it used to since diagnostic computers are now required. It’s become nearly impossible to diagnose issues that are not completely shutting a vehicle down.
The genie is going to be out of the bottle soon enough now that there is genetic information about various groups and how genetics plays with intelligence. Now, that doesn’t speak to any particular individual from the groups, but it’s a huge problem for things like the disparate impact doctrine.
The reason Mr. Hughes doesn’t want this subject breached publicly is because he, and most other black people, suffer from the malady of “repressed racism”. Blacks are the most racist of all, as found out in every poll on racism. Mr. Hughes doesn’t want this subject debated because he takes it personally.
It’s not so much race in general, it’s genetics and a process of social selection for the African blacks who came here. White or Hispanic or Arabic slave traders didn’t go into the jungle to capture or trap slaves, the slaves were gathered up, put in chains, and sold to the traders by the tribes. Selling people to the slave traders was a very convenient way of getting cash money out of people who were criminals, who were a threat to the authority of the chief, who could do little or no useful work due to mental illness or defect, or who were members of another tribe taken prisoner in battle, and whom the chief or the tribe didn’t want. It was a win-win – get cash, and get rid of undesirables, see https://research.cornell.edu/news-features/curious-history-slavery-west-africa and https://www.wsj.com/articles/when-the-slave-traders-were-african-11568991595). The slaves that came over for the most part weren’t exactly the cream of the crop, but the ones who stayed behind tended to have a better genetic heritage. My graduate program in Chemistry 35 years ago included quite a few African blacks, and maybe one or two American blacks. One of the guys who got his PhD in Radiation/Nuclear Chemistry graduated the same year I did – he was from Ethiopia, could read and write not only his native languages, but also English, German, and Russian. He was a member of the Ethiopian royal family and could trace his ancestry to the Queen of Sheba – literally.
So this really isn’t a racial thing, more of a genetic one.
Agreed, the slave trade dealt with the less capable, at least early on. Later it became profitable to the tribes to raid and sell everyone captured.
Natural selection works in more than one way.
I’ve extended your thesis here.
Interesting article. In light of the 14th Amendment, there doesn’t seem to be an awful lot to do about it, other than not to subsidize the growth of that population, and by “that population”, I’d be referring to the part of the population which has a IQ of 90 or below. Using this data, that’s about half of the black population, and about 10% of the white population: https://www.aei.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/10/magnitude%20and%20components%20of%20change%20in%20b-w%20IQ-Murray.pdf?x91208
Interestingly enough, from an article on the characteristics of populations in certain IQ ranges:
“70-79 — Borderline retarded
Limited trainability. Have difficulty with everyday demands like using a phone book, reading bus or train schedules, banking, filling out forms, using appliances like a video recorder, microwave oven, or computer, et cetera, and therefore require assistance from relatives or social workers in the management of their affairs. Can be employed in simple tasks but require supervision.
80-89 — Below average
Above the threshold for normal independent functioning. Can perform explicit routinized hands-on tasks without supervision as long as there are no moments of choice and it is always clear what has to be done. Assembler, food service.
This is also the I.Q. range most associated with violence. Most violent crime is committed by males from this range. This does not imply that all males in this range are violent, nor that all violent males are in this range. But when the modal I.Q. of a group is in this range, one may expect trouble with with many male members of that group. When the modal I.Q. of a society or population is raised upward of this range, violence decreases as fewer males fall in this range then, given the shape of an even remotely normal distribution. When the modal I.Q. of a society is below this range to begin with though, raising it may increase violence. The causal mechanism behind the (statistical) relation between crime and below-average I.Q. is likely that lower I.Q. levels inherently tend to go with having less impulse control, being less able to delay gratification, being less able to comprehend moral principles like the Golden Rule, and being overstrained by the cognitive demands of society.” https://paulcooijmans.com/intelligence/iq_ranges.html
If the average Black IQ is 90, about half of that population falls into the above two cohorts and that might explain a few things…
Every study I have seen puts the mean Black American IQ at 85, which is right in the middle of the violent zone. Add in their proven low future time orientation and low impulse control, and we have what we have.