violent black racism

Posted on September 5, 2010 by jewamongyou

Back in March of this year, we read about “flash mobs” materializing in Philadelphia.  During these events, hundreds (if not thousands) of blacks descended upon innocent whites.  Practically all of the perpetrators were black and the victims were white.  Some people were seriously injured.  This happened more than once and, as usual, the media downplayed the racial aspect of it.  The New York Times didn’t even mention “race” until paragraph 15 – and then only after blaming the problem on a lack of programs and jobs for kids.
In May of this year, we read how black criminals systematically victimize Asians in San Francisco.  The San Francisco Chronicle, to its credit, openly stated the racial aspect of these crimes – but this news received virtually no national coverage from mainstream newspapers.  The only way to find out about it, for most people, was to specifically search for it online or to frequent white nationalist (or Asian) websites.
In August of this year, we read how black thugs were targeting Mexican migrants in Staten Island.  These crimes were reported by the Los Angeles Times which clearly stated the racial reality of the situation.  Unfortunately, the article made it seem as if these victims, only ten in number, were not representative of a larger trend.  Thus, the reader is left with the impression that this is an aberration.  It is also clear that the victims merit “hate-crime victim” status only because they are Hispanic.  Had they been white, not a word would have been said about it.
Also in August of this year, we read how dozens of wild blacks roamed the Iowa State Fairgrounds and beat up random whites.  The perpetrators were heard shouting about “beat whitey night”.  The Des Moines Register was clearly more concerned about an Aryan group that raised objections about the double standard applied to whites when it comes to “hate crimes”.  They quoted FBI director Louis Freeh that the Aryan Nations “represent a continuing terrorist threat.”  I would like to know when there has been a recent incident of white mobs targeting non-whites for violence in this country. This is a clear case of blaming the victim.  In the meantime, a police spokeswoman dared speak the truth and she was heavily penalized for it.
Over a hundred years ago, my family left Czarist Russia because of anti-Jewish pogroms.  They were among hundreds of thousands of other Jews who saw America as a peaceful refuge from such ethnic violence.  How ironic that the media, largely controlled by Jews, encourages pogroms against the white descendants of those who so graciously allowed us to come here.  The media, through its silence and obfuscation, gives the green light to black thugs to continue their ongoing onslaught against other groups.
Of course the problem lies not only with the media.  The power-structure that encourages persecution against whites encompasses all government agencies, all large companies and corporations, all major educational institutions and all so called N.G.O.’s.  But those other racist organizations would collapse, like a house of cards, if only the media would do its job and inform the public of the actual truth.
Yes, the media is to blame for much of the bloodshed – but this does not absolve decent whites from defending themselves.  The immediate solution to black mob violence is not more basketball courts.  It is not more jobs and it is not better schools.  No.  The solution is to meet those mobs with machine guns, rocket launchers, flame throwers and armies of vicious dogs.  This is how, given the opportunity, my ancestors should have met the mobs of the pogroms.  This is how the Jews of Hebron in 1929 should have met the Arabs.  This is how the Cambodians should have dealt with the Khmer Rouge.  Only when the tattered, bleeding remnants of black mobs tell their friends and family “don’t mess with the white man (or the Asians or the Mexicans)!” will the pogroms cease.

Posted in examples of propaganda, government/corporate discrimination against whites, racial differences and how they manifest themselves/race science | 15 Comments

Watch out for evil clouds!

Posted on September 3, 2010 by jewamongyou

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xlk0cq1R5wg&feature=channel

Posted in book/movie/video reviews and links | Leave a comment

"Race" by John Baker

Posted on September 2, 2010 by jewamongyou

I just finished reading “Race” by John R. Baker and wanted to give a brief review of it while it is still fresh in my mind.
It is a monumental work and of great value.  The depth, range of insights and objectivity, demonstrated by Baker, are awe-inspiring.  As a matter of fact, it would be no exaggeration to say that most aspects of race science that have been elaborated upon over the last couple of decades are dealt with here.  Not only that, but Baker’s words are often even prophetic.  I’ve already written about the flawed logic of “Guns, Germs and Steel”.  This is what Baker, over twenty years prior to Diamond’s folly, had to say about it (pg. 527, 528):

Explanations are frequently suggested for the failure of certain peoples to make this advance.  Thus Professor A. Sommerfelt excuses the fact that the Arunta had no numerals (in the proper sense of the word) on the ground that “The Arunta who lives far from all influence of whites has no need of a system of numerals comparable to ours.  He possesses nothing that he must necessarily count, no domestic animals, no merchandise, no money.”  One is left to assume that if they had had something to count, the Arunta would have invented numerals.  But why had they nothing to count?  Why were they content with this situation?  One is forcibly reminded of John Stuart Mill’s remark that it is “better to be Socrates dissatisfied than a fool satisfied.”  Members of all ethnic taxa of man must have experienced stages in their histories at which they possessed no domestic animals, no merchandise, and no money, but in many of these taxa there were people who were not satisfied.
The failure of Negroes and members of certain other taxa, living in civilized countries, to reach the same average scores in cognition and attainment tests as Mongolids and Europids has often been attributed to environmental causes.  In just the same way, it has repeatedly been suggested that those ethnic taxa that have never attained to civilization by their own endeavours in their native lands have been held back by the unfavourable nature of their habitats.  Some authors are dogmatic on this subject.  Sommerfelt, for instance, says that the differences between “peoples and tribes” are due to “natural surroundings and history, not to innate characteristics of these peoples.”  This, however, is not by any means always the experience of those who have actually travelled among primitive peoples in their natural environments.  Livingstone, for instance, was struck by the mental differences between members of different races living in the Kalahari Desert.  The Bakalahari, a Kafrid tribe, had been forced into this environment in the remote past.
“Living ever since on the same plains with the Bushmen, subjected to the same influences of climate, enduring the same thirst, and subsisting on the same food for centuries, they seem to supply a standing proof that locality is not always sufficient of itself to account for differences in races.”
And how, on the environmental hypothesis, can one explain the fact that the Negrids inhabiting the tropical rain-forest of central Africa made not even a start in mathematics, while the Maya of the Guatemalan tropical rain-forest, equally cut off from all contacts with civilized people, made astounding progress in this subject, and at one time were actually ahead of the whole of the rest of the world in one important branch of it?
It would be wrong to suppose that civilization developed wherever the environment was genial, and failed to do so where it was not.  Indeed, it might be nearer the mark to claim the opposite…

Baker’s exhaustive study of pre-contact African culture is an impressive work in its own right.  Chapters 18-21 (pages 325- 417) comprise some of the most entertaining (if sometimes graphic) reading in the entire book.  He had obviously carefully read every account of African travels available to him.  From these, he selected seven as his primary sources.  Accepting nothing uncritically, he compared each account to the others and was keen to point out errors, exaggerations and biases wherever he found them.  Far from being biased himself, Baker was quick to give credit where credit was due – even when writing of the most savage cannibalistic tribes.
From a layman’s point of view, the book has two flaws: a) it often delves into tedious detail while using technical words that few would understand and b) its excessive use of German and French.  Apparently, Baker assumed that anybody educated enough to read his book must also be familiar with these two other languages and would not benefit from translation.  As for me, I relied on context to figure out what he was saying.  I probably missed some of the finer points because of this.
Although Baker made some effort to come across as a neutral observer of humanity, his “Europid” roots lead him to spill much more ink on the differences between European sub-races than on any other sub-races.  Many pages are spent describing the differences between Alpinids and Nordids and I believe this is Baker’s old-school anthropology background (19th century, if you will) showing itself.  36 years have elapsed since the publication of his book and I believe that those intervening decades have made it clear that whites will either stand or fall together; the fate of Nordids is the same as the fate of Alpinids and Mediterranids.
The first few chapters of “Race” do not deal directly with humans at all.  Instead, they deal with various other species.  I think this is important because, when it comes to the animal kingdom, we find little or no bias.  Baker took advantage of this fact to explain the rules of morphology, evolution and genetics in ways that few could object to.  He explained, at length, what is meant by “typical”, “species”, “race”, “taxa” etc.  Nothing is taken for granted and Baker’s thoroughness insures that anybody who reads the book, from beginning to end, will arrive at the same conclusions he does – as long as the reader understands what he is reading.
The fact that this book, which was published so long ago, already explains almost everything we need to know about race (with the notable exceptions of crime rates and miscegenation)  leaves me with an unsettling question: this being the case, what have we been doing for the last thirty years?

Posted in book/movie/video reviews and links | 6 Comments

Southern African "clicking"

Posted on September 1, 2010 by jewamongyou

The “clicking” languages of Southern Africa are famous among scholars.  Linguists have even entertained the idea that these languages are vestiges of the oldest human speech.  Most such languages are members of the Khoisan language family, the most popular being Khosa, spoken by several million people.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D_l7ty_MH_Y&feature=player_embedded
Semitic languages have a similar sound: the Hebrew “Qof”, known in Arabic as “Qa”.  You can here it in this poem:

To hear it in Hebrew, you would have to listen to me since very few Hebrew speakers still know how to do this.  Some Iraqi Jews were good at it – and other Israelis would wonder how they would say “Coca-Cola” (Qoqa Qola – as spelled in Hebrew).
Incidentally, the word “Qof” means “monkey”.  It is possible that a monkey species, found in that part of the world so long ago, was accustomed to making such sounds.  The Arabic word for monkey, “Qurd”, also starts with the Qa sound.
Is it possible that there is an ancient link between Semitic languages and the clicking languages of Southern Africa?  The original clicking people of Southern Africa were not Negro; they were a distinct, lighter colored race known as Khoisan or Capoid (since they are found in “the Cape”).  Considering that their original range was much wider than it is today, perhaps this is not so far-fetched.

Posted in Uncategorized | 7 Comments

the Hebron pogrom of 1929

Posted on August 30, 2010 by jewamongyou

Jewish settlers in the West Bank are often criticized and considered to be oppressive occupiers.  My own experiences, while visiting Jewish settlements in those territories, does lend some support to these accusations.  There is much hatred and disdain, among those Jewish settlers, toward the Arabs.  Sometimes they are abusive toward their Arab neighbors.  The buildings they live in clash, esthetically, with the countryside while the Arab houses seem to compliment it.  On the other hand, these settlements do provide a source of employment for many Arabs who live in extreme poverty.
One settlement, in particular, has been a source of great controversy: the settlement within the city of Hebron.  Hebron is considered sacred by Jew and Muslim alike.  The patriarchs are reputed to be buried there and the Arabs call it “al-Khalil” (“the friend”).  Though the Jewish presence in Hebron dates to remote antiquity, due to various persecutions and restrictions, there was no known Jewish community there (in modern times) until the middle of the 16th century.  By the 20th century there were established Sephardic and Ashkenazic communities in Hebron.
In 1929 many of the local Arabs rose up and massacred 67 Jews.  Men, women and children.  Their brutality knew no bounds and they even murdered the Jewish doctor who had freely given his time and skill on behalf of those same Arabs.  They slaughtered his family, beheaded him and threw his head into the toilet.  So I was told.  Much to their credit, some Arab families risked their own lives and hid some 435 Jews in their homes.  On one of my visits to Hebron, I visited the local Jewish cemetery (where the victims are buried).  As I stood there, a very old Arab man was walking by and noticed me.  He stood there and stared.  I would have liked to know what role, if any, he played in that tragedy.
Somehow, I acquired a book that deals with this incident.  It was printed very soon afterward and includes photos of some of the victims along with their biographies.  For some odd reason, the first page or two are missing and somebody had torn out the photo of one of the victims.  In any event, this massacre occurred on the 23rd and 24th of August so we just passed the 81st anniversary of this event.  Let this post be a memorial to the victims listed in this book:
1)  Rabbi Yisrael Shlomo Zalman Vilinski 26 years old.
2)  Shlomo Yitzhak Broyda 28 years old.
3)  Shmuel Aizik Bernstein 26 years old.
4)  Meshulam Shraga Mitevski 26 years old.
5)  Dov Lipin 26 years old.
6)  Chayim Shalom Alter Cher 25 years old.
7)  Yisrael Mordechai haCohen Kaplan 25 years old.
8)  Moshe Aharon Rifas (?) 24 years old.
9)  Shlomo Yagel 25 years old
10)  Yisrael Hillel haCohen Kaplinski  23 years old.
11)  Shmuel haLevi Rosenholtz 23 years old.
12)  Ze’ev haLevi Berman  23 years old.
13)  Aharon David Sheinberg 24 years old.
14)  Tzvi haLevi Froyman 21 years old.
15)  Moshe haLevi Reizman 17 years old.
16)  Avraham Dov Shapira 18 years old.
17)  Binyamin haLevi Horowitz 20 years old.
18)  Yissachar Eliyahu Sendrov 17 years old.
19)  Aharon David Epstein 17 years old.
20)  Yisrael Lazarovski 17 years old.
21)  Ze’ev Greenberg 17 years old.
22)  Eliyahu Dov Haichal 17 years old.
23)  Ya’akov Vexler 17 years old.
24)  Chayim Zelig Krasner 16 years old.
25)  Tzvi Heller 15 years old.
Some of these young men were Americans, sons of wealthy families from places like Chicago and Cincinnati.  They relinquished the easy life for a life of hardship and sacrifice in the Holy Land.  Though they had no intention of making the ultimate sacrifice, when the time came, they did so with courage and dignity.  The stories of their short lives are told in this book, along with the details of how they met their demise.  I stood at their graves but I could never stand in their place.

Posted in Jewish stuff and Israel | 8 Comments

Guns, Germs and Steel

Posted on August 28, 2010 by jewamongyou

It transpired that my left-leaning brother, sensing my race-realism, thought he could cure it by having me read the book “Guns, Germs and Steel” by Jared Diamond.  He was under the impression that this book would lay to rest any doubts I might have that all the races of Humanity are equal in every way that matters.   I don’t know who told him that “Guns, Germs and Steel” is a refutation of race-realism.  It turned out he had not even read it himself.  Perhaps another individual, who had not read it, had told him this.

After having read the book from cover to cover, I reported back to him that a) it hardly speaks of race at all b) when it does speak of race, it’s to claim that the natives of New Guinea are intellectually superior to other peoples due to natural selection and c) Diamond’s claims can be understood to go hand in hand with race-realism.  He had nothing to say about “a” or “c”.  Regarding “b”, he claimed that Professor Diamond must surely have been joking.  I explained that the claim was made twice and he clearly was not joking.

Although Diamond’s theories don’t contradict race-realism, it seems to me that at least some of them are false – perhaps even lies.  “Guns, Germs and Steel” was published in 1997 and one of its claims is that there were few animals suitable for domestication in black Africa.  Since black Africans had little opportunity to utilize such animals, civilization wasn’t in the cards for them.  Diamond goes to great lengths in order to illustrate exactly why various indigenous African animals and plants could not be domesticated.  To the uncritical reader, it might appear that Diamond is being truthful.

Professor Diamond is clearly a member of the leftist orthodoxy.  Therefore, it’s likely that he had never read “Race” by John Baker.  Baker lists several indigenous African species that are not only suitable for domestication but actually have been domesticated by other races.  Among them are the bush-pig, the hunting dog (possibly domesticated in the Kalahari), the guinea-fowl, the eland, and the African elephant (such as those used by Hannibal).  While it’s true that more such species existed in Eurasia than in Africa, the fact that Africans never took advantage of the ones they had leads us to ask: What use would the additional species have been to them anyway?  “Race” was published in 1974.

The main theory of “Guns, Germs and Steel” is that the alignment of the continents had much to do with the development of mankind in various areas.  Diamond claims that since Eurasia is aligned East to West, along the same climate zone, peoples, plants and animals could more easily travel over wide areas to bring cultural enrichment.  Africa, on the other hand, is aligned North to South.  Therefore East-West commerce was much more limited while the Sahara desert served as a barrier to the North.  As people migrated North/South, they were also forced to adapt to new ecosystems.  While there might be some truth in this, the fact is that Africa is home to far more biodiversity than most of Eurasia.  In fact, generally speaking, the higher the biodiversity in an area, the less advanced the people living there are likely to be (HDI = human development index).

When theorizing about any link between the exchange of species/cultures, it seems to me that the presence of many species and cultures in a smaller area would be a greater advantage than a similar number of species/cultures in a larger area.  From a cultural perspective, there was tremendous diversity in sub-Saharan Africa.  Nothing was stopping them from exchanging ideas and enriching each other.  The advantage was there – but Africans were not capable of taking advantage of it, at least not to the extent that they could create advanced civilizations on their own.

The advantage that people enjoy from an abundance of life in their area also works to their disadvantage.  Because food and water is so abundant, and because the weather is so balmy, there is less need for innovation.  There is less need for advanced forms of transportation, clothing or sophisticated tools.  In short, there is less need for intelligence.  When we recognize this, the above map makes a lot of sense.

Even if we accept, at face value, all the theories set forth in “Guns, Germs and Steel”, this does not diminish the reality of racial differences one iota.  It appears that many people simplistically believe that no more than one explanation of a phenomenon (such as racial inequality) can coexist.  I will take this one step further: Let us say, for argument’s sake, that Diamond is correct.  I would argue, as others have, that once civilization took root, it was the major catalyst for mental development among the peoples that sustained it.  Peoples that lived in areas less conducive to civilization (because of continent alignment or any other reason) would have been deprived of this catalyst.  Diamond can theorize until he’s blue in the face about why things started out the way they did – but the end result is no less real.

Posted in book/movie/video reviews and links | 25 Comments

Obesity and miscengenation

Posted on August 24, 2010 by jewamongyou

Today I saw a disturbing interracial couple that epitomizes the well-known stereotype: the black man was dumb-looking, primitive and brutish while the white woman was painfully ugly and obese.  As they walked down the street, the woman’s expression seemed to say, “look what all you white men have done to me!  Because so many of you rejected me, I am forced to date a negro.”  Though I have no way of knowing for sure, they did not appear to be a happy couple.
Some of us, having always been skinny, might be harsh toward the woman and blame her for not having lost weight.  After all, the vast majority of thin women are considered attractive by enough men that finding a decent match would not be too difficult for her.  Having been more or less svelte my entire life, it is difficult for me to imagine the great effort that must be expended in order to win the war against obesity.  I do, however, know at least one woman whose mating prospects are extremely dim due to her plus size.  Because of this (and some other things) she is a miserable person.  If it were easy to become thin, then surely people like her would have already done it.
I wonder if there would be any change in miscegenation rates if somebody invented a safe and cheap “skinny pill”.  Perhaps then obese white women would have more prospects among their own race and perhaps then black women would be more attractive to black men.
While I do not claim to have the answers to the above, I hope that the subject will be discussed and debated. It would be interesting to read some opinions on this.

Posted in miscegenation | 12 Comments

Jewamongyou is a grandfather!

Posted on August 21, 2010 by jewamongyou

As of yesterday, I am a grandfather.  The birth of my first grandchild was not under the best of circumstances but, by golly, he is my grandson so… so now I feel really old.  Not “sad old” but “happy old”.
Born with Spina Bifida, my infant grandson is starting life with a head start in the “challenges” department.  Some of the things most of us take for granted will be fraught with struggle for him.  He might not be able to walk without braces.  He will suffer from severe allergies.  His sexual functions will almost certainly be limited.  Yet he will certainly find things in life that will bring him joy and laughter.  At the very least, he will serve as a reminder for the rest of us that we should not take our many blessings for granted and that we should cherish the simple pleasures in life.
For all our flaws, my grandson was born into a close-knit family where we care about each other and help each other.  I hope that his disability will serve to bring us even closer and strengthen the love that binds us together.   When I think of all the people who do not enjoy strong family ties, I feel worse for them than I do for my grandson.
I wonder what kind of world he will grow up in and I hope that somehow, in its own little way, this blog will do its part in making it a better world.
For some bizarre reason, my daughter chose to name him Aiden.  I hope I spelled it right.
Not to worry; I have no plans to post baby pictures on this blog!

Posted in Uncategorized | 21 Comments

Tennessee: Dusk or Dawn? by Hunter Wallace

Posted on August 18, 2010 by jewamongyou

Hunter Wallace has recently posted a synopsis on the fortune of conservative/white causes in the state of Tennessee.  While I agree with him that there is cause for hope, there are a few critiques I would like to offer.
First and foremost, I object to the term “progressive” being used for leftists or their ideas.  They are not “progressive”.  In truth, our ideas are progressive and those of leftists are old, rusty and impractical.  Leftist ideology has held sway for at least two generations.  Leftists are “the establishment” and they are the “old ways” that we now struggle to break away from.
Secondly, while it is true that mainstream “conservative” Americans (red Americans, if you will) share some of our concerns, I am not convinced that Mr. Wallace is justified in his optimism.  He sees such conservatism as a useful watered-down version of us.  As for me, I think that it can be a dangerous inoculation against us.  As a “weaker form” of our movement, it can have the same effect as administering an inert form of small-pox to a child;  it fools the body into creating anti-bodies against the real small-pox.  As long as Americans can feel good about themselves for supporting “conservative” ideas, they will feel no need to embrace the real thing.
Lastly, I do not understand why Mr. Wallace refers to the War between the States as “the Civil War”.  The latter term is not only inaccurate, but it does not show support for Southerners.  I think that, within a post dealing with Tennessee (a Southern state), we should have more deference to Southern sensibilities and show our support through the terms we use.
I hope, of course, that Mr. Wallace turns out to be justified in his optimism.  Aside from the above points, I say: keep up the good work Hunter!

Posted in book/movie/video reviews and links, politics and attitudes of the pro-white movements | 2 Comments

Skulls and the negative "science" of the Left

Posted on August 16, 2010 by jewamongyou

I picked up a book today called “The Skull Measurer’s Mistake” by Sven Lindqvist.  Reading through it for a few moments, I noticed that Lindqvist did not seem to cite any racial research, done by leftists, that supports his position: that there are no substantial racial differences in cranial capacity.  This is probably because leftists deny the validity of race as a biological concept.  Since they claim race does not exist, they see no more reason to research it than to research the Easter Bunny.  So any “research” done by them is strictly comprised of trying to find flaws in the research of “racist” scientists who preceded them.  The circular nature of their beliefs never dawns on them.  Since they deny the existence of race, they will not research it.  Since they do not research it, they deny its existence.
Lindqvist tries to pick apart the research done by “racist” scientists.  He accuses them of inconsistencies, of fudging the data, of bias and of sloppy methodology.  Let us assume that all this is true – then those who wish to get to the bottom of the matter will conduct their own research and make sure they adhere to higher standards.  Those who condemn the research of others, but refuse to do their own, are engaging in a sort of “negative science”.  If they were actually interested in reaching the truth, then at least some of the multitude of leftist academic institutions would fund such research.
In a 1993 Discover Magazine article, Anne Fausto-Sterling mocks Rushton’s theories on the correlation of brain size and I.Q. scores.  Though I am certain that her objections have already been answered by others, here I shall expose some of the fallacies behind her reasoning myself.  It does not say much for Discover Magazine that they would allow such biased drivel to pass as “science” on their website.
She writes:

Franz Boas, the pioneering Columbia University anthropologist, also studied skull sizes. His results present Rushton with a different problem. From 1910 to 1916 Boas published a series of studies showing that racial characteristics such as average height and the shape of the face and skull, which everyone had assumed to be unalterably inherited, change with the environment. He reported that the size and shape of heads (and hence cranial capacity) of American-born children differed markedly from those of their European-born immigrant parents. For example, U.S.-born Bohemians had shorter, narrower heads than their parents. U.S.-born Sicilians, on the other hand, had shorter, wider heads than their parents, while U.S.-born Jews had longer, narrower heads than their parents. Not only did skull shape change with different environments (presumably with different diets, among other factors), but the changes varied among people from different places in the world. Boas’s landmark study threw the entire concept of a fixed racial type into disarray. Yet it is precisely this idea that Rushton clings to in his Intelligence article.

One wonders how Boaz determined who was a “U.S.-born Bohemian” or a “U.S.-born Sicilian”.  Did he present documentation proving that these people were the offspring of actual Bohemians and Sicilians?  Inquiring minds would like to know – because, if he based his research on self descriptions, then how do we reconcile this with Sterling’s own words as follows:

To determine which race recruits belonged to, Rushton used the recruits’ self-descriptions. But that raises another problem, not just for Rushton but for any work involving race. First, enormous differences exist among the peoples designated as Asian, Caucasian, or black. Compare the tall, fair Nordic to the short, dark Italian. Or the tiny Pygmy to the giant Watusi. The variability of outward appearances is mirrored at the level of the gene, where there is almost as much variation within racial groups as between them. Furthermore, there has been a lot of mixing between peoples who were once geographically isolated from one another…

She goes on to write:

One need only look at a cross section of U.S. citizens whom we call black to see the problem. My black friends range from people who are dark brown to people nearly as white as me (a Jew whose ancestors come from Central Europe). They all identify themselves as black for historical and political reasons, but a quick glance shows that the name cannot denote biological unity. In fact, Harvard geneticist Richard Lewontin concludes that broad racial classifications have no real biological meaning. If he is right, then Rushton’s interpretation of the Army data becomes mere illusion.

Is Sterling implying that those who call themselves “black” are, on average, no more likely to have a preponderance of negro genes than those who call themselves “Jewish”?  From the above, one gets the impression that she never even bothered to read Rushton’s work – because he was obviously very much aware of the fact that American blacks are not usually pure negroes.  This is why, according to him, they tend to be more intelligent than their African cousins.
Sterling spills much ink showing us how complex brain-size calculations have become and claims that they are pretty much worthless.  She even questions the very concept of larger brain=higher intelligence:

But no matter which measure you choose, the fundamental question remains: Does size really count? Brain size can differ for lots of reasons. For example, children born with a medical condition called hydrocephalus (water on the brain) have huge, fluid-filled brains in which large amounts of nerve tissue have been irrevocably damaged. Some of these children suffer from mental deficiencies. Clearly in this case bigger is not better.

I have never heard of anybody seriously claiming that a larger brain always equates to higher intelligence – or that a smaller brain always equates to lesser intelligence.  What we have here is a typical straw-man.  I found myself wondering, as I read her words, if she also objects to brain size research of proto-humans.  Does she deny that the human brain has gotten larger over the eons and that this increase in size has corresponded with higher intelligence?  Perhaps she believes that Australopithecus and Homo Habilis could have been just as intelligent as modern humans.  Maybe their rudimentary tools and short life-spans were the results of racism by the white man.  If brain size does not matter, she should inform those racist paleontologists that they’ve had it wrong all these years.  Oh but there is a big difference here: there are no Australopithecines or Homo Habilis alive today to get offended – so we may estimate their brain sizes and judge them accordingly.  We cannot do this with blacks because they might get offended.  Worse yet, they might riot (presumably to show us how intelligent they are).
In conclusion, yes it is true that there are serious challenges when it comes to measuring brain size.   It is difficult to account for body mass, height, health and gender.  Yes, it is possible that some brains pack more neurons into a smaller area.  But, if it is possible to study the (now completely decomposed) brains of Australopithecines, then surely there is a way to study brains of living human populations in regard to size.  Where there’s a will, there’s a way.  The problem seems to be that there is no will.

Posted in book/movie/video reviews and links, shenanigans of the Left and of non-white activists | 8 Comments