Category Archives: Discrimination

The Second American Civil War, 2016-?

Great post from Judith Mirville.

The country’s pretty much gone at this point in so many ways it’s not even funny. The MSM has completely forfeited its role as arbitrator of truth and instead has transformed into one of the most monstrous propaganda systems the world has ever seen.

The Republican Party is two states away from calling a Constitutional Convention after which they will rewrite the Constitution to end any government role in the well-being of the nation’s citizens. They will also finally dissolve civil rights once and for all, a project they have been whittling away at for a while now. The Voting Rights Act was just overthrown,  taking us back to the 1960’s. The Housing Rights Act is hardly enforced at all. All Republican Presidencies completely defund this arm, and the Democrats don’t do much better.

Every Republican President who comes in completely defunds the EEOC, which is the arm of the government that enforces the Civil  Rights Act in terms of job discrimination. With the EEOC defanged, businesses are very to discriminate as they wish.

The Citizens United case was a dagger deep in the heart of democracy which showed that America was a nation whose only real citizens were the rich and the corporations. The rest of us are servants, peons, sharecroppers, bonded labor, serfs, helots, prisoners or ragamuffin vagabonds.

America is the land of the 1%.

There’s nothing here for the rest of us, the 99%. We are superfluous, and I suppose with the new Trump Wealthcare Act, we are now encouraged to up and die.

The death of what was once a respectable tradition of the GOP began with Ronald Reagan and the move to the Hard Right. The country has been on a rightwing juggernaut ever since, much to its detriment.

Since 1980, we have seen endless conservative treatises to the effect that we are a republic, not a democracy. This requires a bit of shorthand. Whenever a conservative says that, he means he hates democracy.  Conservatives always hate democracy everywhere and and at all times, as conservatism is aristocratic rule by the divine right of kings. This is antithetical to democracy on its very face.

Democracy is rule by the people.

Conservatism is rule by feudal lords, kings, rajahs, czars, Dalai lamas, warlords, emperors, sultans, furhers, generalissimos, caudillos, strongmen, militarists and leaders for life. It is rule by the richest men, the aristocrats, the 1%,  over the 99%, where the money and wealth of the 99% is progressively shoveled upwards to the conservative royalists until the people become more and more impoverished.

When a conservative starts going on and on about how we are a republic, not a democracy, you need to listen very closely to that. He is showing just how much he hates rule by the common man, by the workers, by the salt of the earth, by the people. The state only exists for those wealthy enough to purchase in order to rule in their own name and for their own ends and means.

Since 2000, Republicans have stolen many elections with the use of hacking of computerized voting machines. Indeed Trump’s recent victory was stolen. Not only did he lose the popular vote but he also lost the electoral vote and we can prove it.

Jonathan Simon of Code Red says that the era of election theft from 2000-2107 will be an era of increasingly extreme politics. His reasoning is quite simple. If the Republicans are going to win elections no matter how the people vote, then there are no restrictions on their behavior. They can do whatever they want to without fear of being voted our of office.

The politicians of the aristocracy (the Republican Party) are constrained by fears of being voted out of office. When they no longer have to fear being voted out of office, they can do whatever they want without any fear of the consequences.

Hence we see the extreme Republican Wealthcare Act that throws 23 million off their health care and pulls the plug out from under millions of newborn babies, tens of millions of children, half of the elderly and almost all of the poor. It’s a death sentence for countless Americans. That’s right. A lot of people are going to die, all so the rich can get a tax cut. The Top 400 earners in the US are going to get a $4 billion tax cut with this unspeakably cruel act. Ordinarily, politicians would be afraid to be thrown out of office for voting for such a monstrosity (81% of the public opposes it), but as the Republicans have rigged elections to always win, they have to fear of being voted out so they can act and vote fearlessly.

To me Trump is the proof that the country founded by Franklin and Jefferson rebuilt by Lincoln and Roosevelt just no longer exists: there is no longer any common soul uniting it. The Democratic and Republican parties, though both equally corrupt and dangerous for the survival of humanity, no longer refer to the same country and civilization.

The only thing equivalent elsewhere in the world is the difference between India and Pakistan or between Israel and Palestine: the difference between both in unbridgeable, and the only thing that can bring both under a common government is military occupation of one by the other.

Let’s get over it: Abraham Lincoln’s endeavor never succeeded actually: the Dixieland was occupied and wrought a slow motion revenge onto the rest of the country thanks to military industries and media industries being located in it. It is a different civilization altogether, where doing productive work, or worse still, harboring a mere mental concern for the common good, is considered a shame and something that should be reserved to prisoners and dark people having committed an offence in their previous life. The only other country like that on Earth is the Indo-Gangetic plain where Hinduism and caste are the law of the land.

Lincoln tried to give a common ideal to all Americans, the self-made man, the idea that however lowly is your station of departure in life, there is no limit to your success in life as an entrepreneur, an inventor, a scholar or even a president if you put it the right amount of the right kind of personal effort.

Get over it: the Dixieland never accepted that creed, it is a blasphemy of the God they adore not only as regards Blacks and Mexicans but as regards all social classes the Whites form themselves…and most of the Western Plains conquest was done by Dixielanders even though nominally under Union flag.

Kennedy, exactly one century later, seeing that both countries never united actually, tried to respect the Southern Civilization in the framework of a grander humanistic scheme by devising Political Correctness and multiculturalism as we have been knowing them, and it has proven equally futile an enterprise as Lincoln’s. The Dixieland and the Flyoverland just pounced upon the opportunity given by multiculturalism to enclose themselves in their own cultural no-go zones and also succeeded in having allied recently-immigrated ethnic groups in their enterprise.

However diverse is India, there is just no place in it for Pakistanis, they will rather consider nuclear war rather than accepting diversity of creeds: in the same way, in Kennedy’s new diverse America, there is no place for Dixieland; they already know that multiculturalism is a Marxist scheme organized by extraterrestrials to destroy natural law as they define it.

Secession is the only solution for America.

The present state of America is a Cold War between both countries with presumed spies and traitors from the other side being submitted to punishments and exclusion from professional work as harsh as in the Soviet-occupied parts of Europe (the only thing missing up to know is a new Berlin Wall as in Eastern Germany in the 1950’s just before they built it, but it is Trump’s promise he will never recoil from).

It is also a military occupation of Democratic America by a Republican government in a sweet revenge for the Reconstruction Era: when the Republican cut social programs, they don’t even do it to make their own 1% richer but to punish and crush back down in Third World style misery the 99% of the lands they feel they occupy like the Nazis did in German-occupied France and Eastern Europe during the 1940’s, together with the local 1% as collaborators.

Like the Hitler-led Germans they are ready to suffer themselves all kinds of miseries and revert to Feudal Age renouncement to all modern comforts just to go on with what they feel is their duty : killing once for all the civilization of the Enlightenment.

All KKK-approving lands should have been realistically subject to military occupation following that of Hitler’s Germany, and American citizenship be given back to their own people only on a piecemeal basis as to meritorious Germans at that time. The Civic Rights Movement should have been a military operation with humanistic militants trained for close combat during the Sixties and early Seventies, and devisers of the so-called Southern Strategy within the Republican Party should have been put to death for high treason before the foe.

All strategic industry, especially aerospace, military and media, should have been moved out of that perimeter into friendly territory. But now it is too late: they are the occupiers themselves. It is time for the decent part of America to organize military resistance together with foreign allied countries supporting or just tolerating humanism in the world however undemocratic they are themselves.

Make no mistake about it: the people of Flyover America, now onwards to be known as Murrica, consider all forms of upward social mobility and all endeavors to make the world better as the cardinal sin against their God’s law and the ability to make money in a zero sum game as the physical manifestation of their God’s grace.

They consider that over-educated people, that is to say educated beyond their own capacity to make money and for another aim than personal financial success, have forfeited their right to life, liberty and happiness and should be treated as Indian Untouchables. They actually stick to that dogma with far more fanaticism and less humanity than right-wing Hindu Indians themselves, most of whom abide by that rather play a humorous game in comparison, and all they ask from an Untouchable is not to be educated in Sanskrit and other sciences they consider sacred. They have no problem with one who succeeds to make himself known as an English writer.


Filed under American, Anti-Racism, Civil Rights, Conservatism, Culture, Death, Democrats, Discrimination, Education, Government, Health, Hinduism, History, Housing, India, Law, Pakistan, Political Science, Politics, Racism, Regional, Religion, Republicans, Social Problems, Sociology, South, South Asia, US, US Politics, USA

Alt Left Positions on Gays, Transsexuals, Non-Whites and the Disabled

Jason Y: The part about dumping gays and trannies might gain some sympathy, but action against non-Whites and the disabled makes the Alt-Left seem too hateful.

We are not dumping gays and trannies, we are just with to lessen the celebratory rhetoric about these people that ends up treating the abnormal as normal and the normal people as freaks. Face it, it’s not normal to be a transsexual and fully homosexual. It’s abnormal. So is being left-handed or having green eyes, but if everyone was left-handed or had green eyes, we could deal pretty well. If even 20% of society was gay or tranny, the consequences to society would be catastrophic. Since gays are only 3% and trannies are maybe .15% of the population, it’s no great shakes to deal with them, but even with those low numbers, transsexuals and homosexuals still cause a lot of societal problems, so these are not exactly positive things society-wise.

On the other hand, I think the Alt Left in general wants full rights for gays. That is, we support most if not all of the political causes that the gay community is pushing right now. I personally participate in gay political campaigns, which is why it’s a bit rich that I keep getting called homophobic.

We support basic minimal rights for transsexuals. I am not sure about the transsexual bathroom issue. I doubt if it will be much of a problem if we implement this, but it’s not a very important issue either. Perhaps the Alt Left will go neutral on the transsexual bathroom issue.

I believe an employer ought to be able to discriminate against gays or transsexuals if the person looks noticeably odd like a lot of transsexuals do or if their homosexual behavior is blatant and flaunted. For jobs involving meeting the public, an employer ought to be able to say, “Hey, this person’s going to scare customers away.” In that case, the flagrant gay or transsexual still ought to be able to get a job say in the back room somewhere where they are not serving as a front to the business with the public.

I think transsexuals are generally mentally ill, but mentally ill people generally deserve full rights, and their mental disorder is not dangerous to others.

What sort of action does the Alt Left advocate with regard to non-Whites other than reducing legal immigration, stopping illegal immigration, ending birthright citizenship and restricting the abuse of work visas such as H-1B’s?

The Alt Left opposes all discrimination based on race, ethnicity, etc.

Furthermore, we believe that the Voting Rights Act needs to be put back in, strong efforts to curb Republican efforts to keep Blacks from voting (similar to Jim Crow).

We would like to see the Housing Rights Act much better enforced. As it is, there is still a lot of housing discrimination against Blacks because there is little enforcement of this act. Black people need to be protected against all forms of discrimination, not just employment but also in voting and housing.

On the other hand, the Alt Left opposes Black Lives Matter. Rather than evil, I simply see BLM as idiotic, absurd, unnecessary and counterproductive.

And how is it that the Alt Left is advocating any harm for the disabled at all? In fact, we very much support the state’s disability programs and would even like to see them expanded and liberalized, believe it or not. For instance, in the UK, people on the equivalent of SSI can make as much money as they want. They usually do not make much due to their problems, but still.

And SSDI will let you work quite a bit. I knew a guy who worked 28 hours a week on SSDI. He said they just deducted his check. And if you are making good enough money on Disability, just cut the check to zero dollars and let them keep the medical care. If they become ill again and have to cut back or stop work, bring back the check in some form, but don’t throw them off the program. If they are disabled, they are going to have some serious health care needs for as long as they are disabled, so it is important for them to keep health coverage.

What’s so bad about that?

Jason Y: Anyhow, note, if there are certain bozos drifting off toward Trump from the left, then good riddance !!! Who needs them anyhow? I mean, they know who Trump is and what he represents. It’s not like they were lied to.

I disagree. We should take any people leaving Trump or heading his way that we can. If they renounce support for Trump and the Republicans, they can join our movement. Better to have them with us on the Left than over there on the Right causing chaos.


Filed under Anti-Racism, Blacks, Conservatism, Discrimination, Employment, Fake Guest Workers, Gender Studies, Government, Health, Homosexuality, Housing, Illegal, Illness, Immigration, Law, Left, Legal, Mental Illness, Political Science, Politics, Race/Ethnicity, Racism, Republicans, Sex, US Politics, White Racism

An Alternative Left Position on Transsexualism

Betty: Following the logic of your article, it would be ok to harm these people as the human rights don’t apply to them which is not right. I don’t get why it bothers people when trans humans want to be the opposite gender? Does it have an effect on your personal life in anyway? Are humans and their personality only defined by their gender? Definitely not. They still have emotions, thoughts and needs just like everybody else. They aren’t worse in their behavior than other people only because they feel wrong in their own gender.

And by the way they don’t choose to feel wrong. It’s the same as being gay, you can’t choose it. So it’s not ok to call trans people “things” or “nonhumans” only because they feel to be wrong in their own body/gender. If you define human beings ONLY over their gender then there’s something wrong with your view of humans in this way. Just let people live how they want to without degrading them. That’s not okay and it’s not just “saying your own opinion” when you say that you don’t like them in such a humiliating way.

The Alternative Left should support full human rights and tolerance for transsexuals. We do not wish for them to be harmed in any way. We do not agree with any crazy people being harmed. We believe people should be kind to transsexuals in person because that is how fellow humans who are not hurting anyone else should be treated. We support nondiscrimination against them in employment, with the caveat that you might be able to discriminate if they have to meet the public because they might harm your business by driving customers away. We do not support discrimination against transsexuals in housing, education or any government services. We feel that transsexuals are crazy, but we should be kind to the mentally ill.

We feel that there is no evidence that this is biological. The rate of it has exploded ~100X what it was in the 1960’s. There’s one on every corner now. We feel that that is very strong evidence that it is not biological and that it is some epidemic form of mental illness we are  experiencing. We also feel that it has become a fad and many people are becoming transsexuals because it is the cool thing to be. We believe that most transsexuals are simply homosexuals.

Many homosexuals identify with the opposite sex. It’s rather normal for them to do so. 

We think that in thethe past such folks would simply be the typical homosexual who acts like the opposite sex and they were perfectly happy that way, but nowadays with the transsexual identity open to them, many such persons are choosing to be transsexuals instead of just opposite sex-identifying homosexuals. In other words, we believe that if the people identifying as transsexuals now were alive in the 1960’s instead of 2010’s, 99% of them would not be transsexuals, and presumably they would be fairly happy and well adjusted nevertheless.

Obviously we see no need for people adopt this identity, and we note that in societies that do not tolerate such things, the rate of transsexualism drops up to 99%. In societies that promote or encourage transsexuals like Thailand, there is epidemic transsexualism. Thailand probably has the highest rate of transsexuals on Earth. Apparently the more you promote and encourage transsexuals, the more of it you end up with. Obviously this speaks against a biological disorder and in favor of a societally constructed condition.

13% of transsexuals re-transition. We say If it’s biological, why can’t they make up their mind if they are men or women? We note that there have been documented cases of completely spontaneous cures in which all symptoms of transsexualism lifted, the person simply dropped it as an issue, decided to identify as the birth sex and went on to be happy and healthy. 60% of underage transsexuals (kids and teenagers) lose all symptoms by adulthood. If it’s biological like homosexuality, how come it goes away a lot of the time?

Transsexuals are mentally ill. It’s a mental illness. But it is a mental illness that is being celebrated and  promoted and it is encouraging a lot of people to adopt this mental disorder just because it is the cool thing to do. We strongly disagree with the celebration and promotion of mental illness and especially with encouraging the spread of mental illness. It’s infuriating.

What if anorexics formed a group and called themselves a protected minority like these transsexuals and cheered on their anorexia, promoted anorexia to the world at large and encouraged others to be anorexic? Would this be acceptable?

What if schizophrenics were celebrating their symptoms, asking to be a protected identity minority, and encouraging other people to think they hear things, see things, believe things that are not true like the CIA is after you and act in very irrational ways? Would this be acceptable. And we believe that just to be hip, a lot of people adopt the Schizophrenic or Anorexic Identities to be cool, we would even get a new Identity Politics for them and they would become yet another identity protected class. We believe it would be very bad for society if anorexics and schizophrenics did this, and this is exactly what transsexuals are doing.

Alt Left position on transsexuals:

  • Bare minimal human rights for transsexuals.
  • Nondiscrimination against transsexuals employment with some reasonable limits.
  • Kindness and tolerance, but no more than that, to transsexuals because they are after all only humans with a mental illness.
  • Recognition that transsexualism is a mental disorder and the treatment of it as such.
  • A halt to the celebration, promotion and encouragement of the mental illness called transsexualism because it is bad for society and it is senseless to celebrate, promote and encourage mental illness.

* I had a transsexual as a potential client, and I was very nice to him too. I would have taken him on as a client also, and I would have been very nice to him.


Filed under Asia, Civil Rights, Discrimination, Employment, Gender Studies, Homosexuality, Housing, Left, Mental Illness, Psychology, Psychopathology, Regional, SE Asia, Sex, Social Problems, Sociology, Thailand

Proposal for an American Paleo-Left Party: The American People’s Party

From Facebook, from a Russian Communist. OK guys, what do you think?

Idea for uniquely American Paleo-Left Party:

The American People’s Party

– Opposition to mass immigration calling for a 10 year moratorium on all immigration except self-produced, self funded immigration.

– Opposition to gun control.

– Opposition to all free trade deals that are bad for the worker.

– Nationalizing health care, oil, Walmart, McDonald’s, car industry, all large industries.

– End to foreign wars and opposition to imperialism, solidarity with other oppressed peoples.

– Raise minimum wage to 20 usd per hour.

– Introduction of death sentences for corruption, Ponzi schemes, and other wall Street machinations.

– Women given 3 years maternity leave with stipends for children as long as they are married to the same man during issue of stipends.

– Veterans, families and elderly get free health care and special mortgage rates.

– Police to be judged by civil jury chosen by the public when accused of excessive force.

– Opposition to modern art funded by government, opposition to LGBT culture but not homophobic or anti gay, drugs.

– Neutral on abortion and women’s rights.

– Secular party neutral on religion.

– Antiracist, welcoming all people, but strongly implied as a White working class party.

– Pro Russian, Vietnamese, Venezuelan relations.

– Support Green energy policies but only if affordable for working people.

– Moderate environmentalism.

– State-sponsored gymnasiums where people can exercise for free.

– Push for metric system.

– Opposition to the NSA data collection techniques.

– Shift burden of taxation to the rich including the state confiscating funds if need be.

– Anti-NATO.

– Neutral on Israel and Palestine conflict.


Filed under Anti-Racism, Art, Corruption, Crime, Economics, Environmentalism, Geopolitics, Government, Health, Homosexuality, Housing, Immigration, Israel-Palestine Conflict, Labor, Law enforcement, Left, Neoliberalism, Political Science, Politics, Race/Ethnicity, Regional, Religion, US Politics, USA, Whites

The War on Poverty Was Not a Failure

Jason Y: Sorry to be so in your face and frank, but why do you think the War on Poverty failed from an Alt Left viewpoint?

I do not think it failed in the first place and the Alt Left does not think it failed. The Alt Left supports the War on Poverty. In this way, we utterly reject the Alt Right which wants to wipe all those gains out.

How well did the War on Poverty work? I guess I would channel Deng and say, “It’s too soon to tell.”

But of course I supported the War on Poverty and I do not believe that it failed, at least not for the same reasons that the Right does. It worked great at least for a time, and we have a ton of evidence to prove it. They started Medicaid, Medicare, Section 8 housing, I think food stamps, all that stuff goes back to the War on Poverty. Of course the DNC wants to get rid of all of that. The Civil Rights Act went right along with it along with the now overthrown Voting Rights Act. The Housing Rights Act came later. The EPA was created around this time as was HUD.

It was a great thing, but they started to defund it after a while. In other words, they surrendered in the War on Poverty and quit funding it. And then to some extent things headed back in the direction that they were before.


Filed under Civil Rights, Conservatism, Democrats, Discrimination, Government, History, Housing, Law, Left, Liberalism, Political Science, Politics, Regional, Social Problems, Sociology, US, US Politics, USA

The End of Racism in America

White racism towards Blacks has been heading out in the past 40 years.

White racism towards Blacks has been heading out in the past 40 years.

As you can see, White racism towards Blacks in all the important ways has been heading out over the past 40 years. 3 of the 4 questions are now down below 10%, so low that apparently the questions are not even being asked anymore. The only question that was still significant and therefore queried was  Homesellers can discriminate against Blacks. Unfortunately, 30% of Whites still agree with that, but incredibly enough, a majority of Whites supported that view in 1975, which I do not remember as a particularly racist era.

It is because real racism is collapsing in the US (something liberals and antiracists should take credit for), the antiracist movement has had to become increasingly insane to explain continued Black lagging and dysfunction. They have had to invent new forms of racism that are apparently so hard to measure that they appear to actually be invisible, such as “structural racism” and “institutional racism.”

Of course there is no way to measure such things or even honestly to prove they even exist, so those words mean whatever Antiracist Identity Politics says they do, and their level is exactly whatever increasingly crazy antis say it is. I don’t think the argument is even falsifiable, so it’s probably not even wrong, and it also seems a bit circular. How do we know Blacks suffer from institutional racism? Because it exists? How do we know institutional racism exists? Because Blacks suffer from it. Nice, tight little tautology there.


Filed under Anti-Racism, Blacks, Civil Rights, Discrimination, Race Relations, Race/Ethnicity, Racism, Regional, Sociology, USA, White Racism, Whites

Jewish Domination of Hollywood

This is a longstanding complaint. I am not sure if I care if they have a heavy representation in the place, but it looks like they are running it as a monopoly and not letting anyone else in, which is sleazy as Hell. I wonder how many other Jewish-dominated industries are Jewish-dominated because they are run as monopolies and not due to sheer talent and brains? I wonder. How much Jewish success in the US is due to nepotism and discrimination instead of talent and brains? Why won’t someone ever bring a discrimination complaint against Jews? I have seen Jewish directors on record in interviews saying hat they blatantly discriminate against non-Jews and daring anyone to do anything about it.

So it is illegal for White Gentiles to discriminate but the Jews get to discriminate all they want to? Sleazy.

It also really makes me mad how the Jews respond to all of these charges. The Jews always respond to anyone charging that they discriminate and run monopolies by saying that if you can’t get into one of their discriminatory monopolies, it’s because you are a loser with no talent. This is the way Jews respond to any charges that they discriminate. How infuriating – the arrogance of these pricks. It would be as if when Whites were deliberately discriminating against Blacks, the Whites said well the Blacks are just complaining and blaming the Whites because they are losers who don’t have the talent and skills to make it so they just blame the White man.


Filed under California, Cinema, Discrimination, Jews, Race/Ethnicity, Regional, The Jewish Question, USA, West

Republican Party Base White Racism

The focus of this essay is a particular type of White racism known as Republican Base White racism. An excellent example of its milder and more partisan flavor is here.

There are various types of White racism (mostly directed at Blacks) in the US. One type is out and out White nationalism. Although all of these people vote Republican, the party wants nothing to do with them as they are too toxic.

There is another type of White racism that is prevalent in the base of the party. The Republican Party Base is actually wildly racist. Not necessarily in the WN sense, but they are pretty bad.

On the other hand, the party itself at the very least does not speak the same language that the base does. Statements of the RNC and Republican officeholders on race are generally quite mild, that is when they discuss race at all. The attitude of the party hierarchy seems to be the less we talk about race, the better.

Nevertheless, the party leadership has gone to great lengths to disenfranchise Black voters to the extent that they are now more or less resurrecting Jim Crow type voting restrictions against Blacks. But party officeholders in general have not had much to say bout the Trayvon Martin affair or the recent mess in Ferguson. They simply do not want to talk about it. So accusing Republican officeholders of having openly White racist views would not be correct. It would be better to say that they simply do not want to talk about race at all. However, some of their actions are very racist.

The sheer insanity of Republican hatred for the very conservative Democrat Barack Obama is of course linked to racism in some way or another, but party officials are not outspoken about this. Instead they use a lot of coded language, dog whistles, and secret coded messages to send racist signals to their base.

However, the anti-Black racism of the Republican base has a certain flavor about it that sets it apart from many other types of White racism.

First of all, it is more civilized.

It often involves a lot of prefacing that the author harbors no racial animus towards Blacks in general. Perhaps this is so. What he is mad about though is certain types of Blacks. And especially White liberals and Black rabblerousers who stir up Blacks to hate Whites. Unfortunately there is a certain amount of truth to this charge Black people are angry and violent enough without stirring them up to hate all White people. Further, such action encourages Black racism, which a serious problem in the US. In fact, Black racism against Whites in the US is much more virulent than the other way around.

Republican Base White racism is also very partisan. The whole problem with Black people is that they vote Democrat. I would say that’s the least of their problems, and in fact, it’s not a problem at all. Worse would be if they voted Republican because voting for your enemies never makes sense.

Supposedly the Democratic Party uses Blacks, keeps them on the Democratic plantation and mires them in a state of dependency. This state of dependency is called “people have a right to survive” and it’s correct that most of us liberals believe in it. Republicans do not believe that human beings have a right to survive. They want to “free you from dependency” so you no longer have a right to survive. Black people, who are always accused of being stupid, look at the Republican offer, see right through it immediately, and say, “Screw that.” Black people refuse to vote against their self-interests no matter how much they are brainwashed into doing so. I would say that maybe Black folks are a lot smarter than we give them credit for!

Focus on high profile race conflict cases. Republican Party Base racism also focuses as lot of on the Trayvon and Ferguson cases, and there are many references to the O.J. Simpson case. No doubt Blacks behaved idiotically in all of these cases. As did my liberal and Leftist brethren.

Black crime against Whites. This is one of their favorite subjects, and they discuss it in a variety of ways. This blogger does so in a mild way, pointing out that Blacks slaughter Whites constantly and no one cares, but one White kills a Black, usually for a damn good reason, and all Hell breaks loose. He logically points out the idiocy and obvious bias in media reporting of interracial crime.

The Black War on Whites. This fellow is pretty mild about it, but at the more extreme end of the Base, for instance at WorldNet Daily, they are starting to run a lot of articles about the Black “War on Whites” which I am not sure is even happening.

Supposedly since the election of Obama, Blacks have become emboldened and decided to war total war on White America. Various interracial crimes are held up as evidence of this such as flash mobs and race riots at various fairs and festivals. While this behavior is disturbing, I do not think there is any Black War on Whites. We have quite a few Blacks where I live, and they do not appear to be on a war footing since Obama got in. Actually, after he got elected, they seemed to get a whole lot happier.

Do Black criminals deliberately target Whites? Whether Blacks ever deliberately target Whites is another matter. I am sure that some Black crime is simply motivated by racial animus against Whites, and furthermore, hate crime charges are rarely filed against these Blacks, which is just wrong.

But in the main I see Black criminals are nothing more than animals. If there were wild lions and tigers running around our land killing people, do you think they would distinguish between Blacks or Whites? Of course not. So it is with Black criminals, who I see as animals on the same level as wild man-eating tigers. Black criminals do not particularly care what race you are. They prey on everyone. They attack Blacks, they attack Asians, they attack Hispanics, they attack Whites, Hell, they attack everyone. They are animals who attack anything that moves.

In fact, their fellow Blacks take the full blunt of the wrath of Black criminals. Blacks are only 13% of the population, yet Blacks are 90% of Black homicide victims. Obviously Blacks select Black victims far in excess of their % in the population. If anything, it appears that they selectively target their own people. While White victims of Black crime are lamentable, the truth is that we Whites probably get off easy in terms of Black crime.

Anyway, if you want to familiarize yourself with this rather mild but also insidious, sneaky and coded form of particularly partisan White racism known as Republican Base White racism, head on over to this fellow’s site. He has quite a few other articles on there that give you a broader attitude of his mindset. If you want to know where he is coming from, he is a Tea Partier. The Tea Party is simply the base of the Republican Party. Sure, it is a pretty ugly and insane segment of the base, but part of the base it is.


Filed under Blacks, Civil Rights, Crime, Democrats, Discrimination, Liberalism, Obama, Political Science, Politics, Race/Ethnicity, Racism, Republicans, US Politics, White Racism, Whites

Is India’s Caste System Comparable to Other Discriminatory Systems around the World?

Aakash writes:


What do you think about the whites in America then? Segregation (the American version of the caste system) was equally rampant and if you ever visit any southern city (say Atlanta). you’ll see that the whites pretty much live in the ‘burbs and the blacks in town. The county where I live (Dekalb) is pretty much black and the northern suburbs pretty much white. White flight is the new version of the caste system. Blacks cleaning toilets in downtown offices and whites enjoying their MacMansions in the ‘burbs. So far, I’ve never seen a white janitor around here. All imported Mexicans or blacks.

At the risk of getting banned, I have to say that you are turning into a (anti) Hindutva yourself. If Gandhi (for all his deficiencies) was a monster, the whites in America are straight outta hell. Jimmy Carter is one of the very few great souls of this country and nobody hates him more than Whites.

Aakash, supporters of the caste system always say that there is caste all over the world, that is, there are class and racial systems of discrimination.

Surely, formal discrimination was horrible, but that is over and done now. Racial discrimination is illegal in the US. The government doesn’t discriminate and there are many civil cases against businesses every year for various types of discrimination. Quite a few of the plaintiffs win these cases, and they have become so costly for businesses that many businesses, especially large ones, now have policies set in place that are strongly anti-discriminatory so as not to get sued. There is still a lot of housing discrimination in the US, but it is no longer legal. Surely housing discrimination has lessened since 1970. The government doesn’t have the money to go after housing discrimination because Republicans have defunded that enforcement arm.

White people engage in White Flight because they don’t want to live around large groups of Black people. This is because when you get large numbers of Blacks in an area, they typically make a Hell of it in short order. So the desire to flee is actually quite rational.

Janitors area all Hispanics now because that is the way employers want it. I lived in an all White town for 20 years, and all the janitors were White people. It’s just that employers would rather hire Hispanics than Whites to do that job because they can exploit them better. Also after a while, the janitorial force becomes all Hispanic, and then the Hispanics discriminate against Whites and others. So the reason for the all Hispanic workforce is anti-White and pro-Hispanic discrimination and not the other way around.

The argument “there is caste everywhere on Earth” is always used by Hindus, typically upper castes Hindus. Almost everyone making that argument is a supporter of casteism. It’s a way of saying that there is nothing wrong with casteism.

Personally I think that there is no way that casteism can be compared with racism or classism in the US; there is simply no comparison. However, it is a good question, and I think we should put it to the readers.


Filed under Blacks, Civil Rights, Discrimination, Hinduism, Hispanics, Race Relations, Race/Ethnicity, Racism, Religion, Social Problems, Sociology, Whites

James Flynn on 2007 Blacks vs 1957 Whites

Repost from the old site.

Note: this post is both lengthy (64 pages) and highly complex. I have tried to make it as understandable as possible, as this blog is geared towards the general reader, but some stuff is just inherently complex. If you think you can’t handle it, you might just want to bail out now; life is difficult enough as it is without me donating a frustrating reading and thinking experience to you.

If you want to sally forth, anyway, go ahead. Meantime, here is a good introduction by James Flynn that is fairly brief and easy reading. In particular, he deals with Jason Malloy’s notion that the Flynn Effect is worthless and not a rise in intelligence since it lacks a g-factor load. If you enjoy that, come back here and spear some of the red meat:

In recent days a particularly forceful assault has been leveled against my post, The Skyrocketing Black IQ, by Jason Malloy on the Gene Expression (GNXP) blog. Please see both of the linked articles above to get a background on the highly complex issues involved in this debate.

I first saw Malloy in the comments on the Dienekes blog.

Malloy hides his de facto racist message with various pretensions and obfuscations, perhaps unconsciously.

An artist from Madison, Wisconsin, he fashions himself an autodidact scientist and mathematician, and in my opinion, he and his ilk are among the most dangerous de facto racists on the Internet, mostly because they seem so reasonable and non-racist about their message. We need to take on him and his ilk with everything we’ve got.

The Malloy line is that environment does absolutely nothing and genes are everything. His political views? He says he is a liberal Democrat. I don’t understand this at all, but I’ve seen stranger things. To me, the politics he says he has and the politics he promotes in his writings are contradictory, but whatever.

He is neither a scientist nor a mathematician, has no degrees in either field, and has no peer-reviewed publications, yet used to go around to science blogs lecturing actual scientists on how to do science.

Real researchers have a skeptical attitude. Molloy does not.

After making comments on my post on Dienekes’ superb blog, Malloy then reiterated his rejoinders in a new post on the ultra-racist, super-arrogant, disturbing, childish and downright embarrassing GNXP blog.

Malloy insists he is not a racist; he is just dispassionate scientist without a science degree who is looking for the cold, hard truth. After some emails with him, I do not think he is consciously racist, but he is pushing a de facto racist message whether he intends or not.

A lot of these guys fashion themselves as “scientific martyrs” – a modern day Galileo. If only people would realize the unpleasant truth: Blacks are stupid, permanently so, and apparently nothing short of gene therapy will change this sorry state. I’m sure just about every Black person around is dying to believe such wonderful things about themselves.

There is no scientific consensus for such a painful conclusion, so there is no reason for any non-racist or Black-friendly person to take that line. The words of Malloy and the many like him amount to psychological warfare against Blacks. At the end of the day, it is more than that: it is a declaration of de facto racial warfare on every Black person on Earth hiding behind the lab coat of science.

Malloy has some charming things to say about US Blacks in that widely-linked piece. He ridicules their mental skills by calling them “story-telling ability IQ”. Their ancestors in Africa have a high “mosquito-dodging IQ“.

He disagrees with my suggestion that the Whites of the Greatest Generation have lower IQ scores than Blacks, remarking that 1945 Whites could not possibly be “even less intelligent” than our considerably dense Black citizens.

Malloy also claims that modern science proves Blacks are much more inferior as workers than Whites, that this is a serious drag on any employer of Blacks, and that the reason for this is their incurable genetic stupidity. The implication is that Blacks simply should not be employed in any sane workplace.

A White friend of Blacks can make sometimes-painful impressionistic observations about Black culture, without being nasty and racist-sounding about it. See here for an example. Malloy and those like him forgo that route and just slam away at Blacks, then are stunned when people note the racism, intended or not, that shines through loud and clear.

GNXP is a Social Darwinist blog where conceited, know-it-all, rude, immature young upper class “intellectual elitist” manchildren make asses out of themselves, and in so doing, idiotically try to poison their future careers. The racism and general elitism, especially the leaderships of South Indian high caste elitists Newamul Khan (Razib) and Paul Wickre (Godless) of GNXP has been cataloged on the Net in many places.

What’s ticklish is that if US Blacks are idiots, what does that make Razib’s Desis, who are apparently even dumber than the Blacks he scorns? Don’t ask. Like so many insecure narcissists, Razib attacks those above him (in this case Blacks and Hispanics) while projecting his inferiority complex on them. It’s Psychology 101, and it would be funny if it was not so pathetic.

GNXP is a hangout where petulant, conceited, condescending, basically immature cranks can pitch their atavistic and nihilistic misanthropy couched as “science” while they cheer themselves on.

Malloy’s debating and authorial style is sledgehammer-like. I have yet to see him concede a point, and he typically refers to opponents as ignorant. Not a good way to win friends and influence people, and it won’t fly in any peer-reviewed journal.

Malloy’s counterattack has been widely linked around the blogosphere, usually in a laudatory way, and was even discussed in a widely-read NY Times article. Unfortunately, instead of being the tour de force it appears to be, this carefully-penned attack is a de facto racist screed.

The author takes as face value that US Whites have higher IQ’s than US Blacks, that this difference is largely genetic and therefore unalterable by any environmental means (except presumably gene therapy) for at least the next century, and that the Flynn Effect (see below) is not an intelligence gain at all and has no bearing on the Black-White (B-W) IQ gap.

Furthermore and most importantly, Malloy seems to take utter delight in all of the above positions.

Except for the italicized first one, none of these positions are supported by scientific consensus, to put it mildly. Even the first position is widely disputed, at least in the popular press most folks read. Even the US Federation of American Scientists disagrees, though I think they are wrong on that. Bottom line: this debate is very much an unsettled issue, for better or worse.

Anyone who has gleefully taken such an extreme position and argues forcefully against all contrary evidence should have their motives questioned. The truth is that anyone staking out such an intellectual space is arguing from a de facto racist point of view, and unfortunately, Malloy’s widely hailed post is a tour de force of de facto scientific racism.

The real danger in this stuff (there are many more like Malloy out there) is the fact that it is very well researched and written and sounds quite convincing and reasonable. A maniac in a sheet or giving a Seig Heil can be scornfully dismissed. The de facto racism of a mild-mannered, reasonable-sounding liberal is much more frightening in its allure and potential to intoxicate.

The reason this is a racist position is that there is as yet no scientific consensus whatsoever about the B-W IQ gap. All we know is that it exists. All else is pretty much up for grabs right now (for exhaustive overviews of the state of the enormously complex debate, see here and here).

Many libertarians and extreme rightwingers are now taking a hardline, “Blacks are stupid” line on the B-W gap. That few Western Blacks or Mulattos, Hispanics, Amerindians, Polynesians, Black Africans, Southeast Asians or Arabs, not to mention Leftists, Liberals, Centrists or even mainstream conservatives take this position is telling.

This hard line is both unwarranted and unproductive.

On the other hand, it is important to not go to the other extreme. Pointing out the verifiable fact that IQ scores are low in Africa or there is a Black-White gap in the US is not racism at all, yet Western society seems to treat it as if it is. The treatment of James Watson’s basically reasonable remarks (other than the remarks about Black employees) is a sad testament.

And those of us opposing scientific racism need to come up with better arguments than, “No such thing as race,” “No such thing as intelligence”, “No such thing as IQ”, “IQ does not measure intelligence”, and on and on.

For instance, IQ is positively correlated with glucose metabolism, frontal grey matter and cerebral blood flow in the brain. A brain that works more, faster or better is likely to use more glucose and blood and to have more tissue than one that does not. This would hardly be the case if IQ had nothing to do with intelligence.

My post cited a phenomenon of rising IQ’s in the West for 80 years called the Flynn Effect (FE – named after James Flynn, the man who discovered it)1 and claimed that Blacks today have the same IQ score as Whites in 1957. 2007 Blacks also have IQ scores four points higher than Whites in 1945. If 1957 Whites were not stupid and did not have low IQ’s, neither are Blacks today stupid, nor do they have low IQ’s.

Here are Malloy’s complex charges:

He first asserts that there is something called g, or general intelligence factor (conceived by Charles Spearman)2, and that this is pure, or real, intelligence. Everything not g is not real intelligence. Instead, it’s just garbage, test-taking practice, “bias”, cultural bias, statistical noise, nothing at all, this or that, or whatever.

Then he asserts that FE rises are not on g, twisting and misrepresenting (Apparently deliberately!) several statements by Flynn. Malloy says they are not on g because the rises are not something called factor-invariant. On the other hand, Malloy notes the fact that the B-W gap is factor invariant.

In fact, Malloy is conflating two different ways of measuring g-factor here, one elaborated by Arthur Jensen, and another way of measuring g, called factor invariance, used by a team out of the Netherlands in 2004 (N2004)3.

The Spearman-Jensen g -factor (SJGF) does indeed correlate with the FE as shown by Flynn in a counterargument to Jensen who said his g-factor did not correlate with FE (the highest FE rises have been on the most SJGF-loaded tests of them all – see Raven’s Progressive Matrices4).

However, there is no correlation between the FE and the N2004 factor-invariance method of measuring the g-factor (but see here 3 for quotes from the study that imply that the authors felt there was some correlation).

Also, note that the same authors issued a paper three years prior in which they called into question Jensen’s prize argument, that the B-W gap was due to g and that it was genetic and irremediable – i.e., Blacks are doomed to be stupid forever.5

It’s confusing, and overviews of several studies indicate that whether or not the FE is correlated with g is still very much up in the air, in part due to varying ways in measuring g. A cautious conclusion is that the FE shows a fluid-g gain but not a crystallized g gain.

Fluid intelligence is a rough measure of how fast and efficiently one’s brain works, and tends to decrease with age. Crystallized intelligence is more what you know, rather than how fast or well your brain works. It is also the sum total of life experience that we call “wisdom”. As one might expect, crystallized intelligence tends to increase with age, and even aged people can score very high.

The FE is not about knowing more stuff (young people today often seem strikingly ignorant to me, at the same time that I am shocked by how well their brains seem to work), nor is it about wisdom (see my post here that shows that Black pathology in the US increased wildly in the past 50 years while Black IQ’s went through the roof due to the FE6).

Malloy concludes that FE gains are not real intelligence gains since they are not g gains (but see above), and hence are worthless. He also states that 2007 Blacks do not have the same IQ scores as 1957 Whites, nor do their scores surpass 1945 Whites. Flynn disagrees.

There is indeed a paradox between the FE and the B-W gap. The B-W gap shows the stereotypical g-factor pattern – that is, the g-factor will measure the degree to which superior test-takers will tend to have a score lifted across all subtests, or across the board.

We could say that they seem smarter in an “across the board” way. It is true that the Blacks of today are not smarter “across the board” than the Whites of 50 years ago, but neither is the converse true, as Malloy implies.

Flynn and others offer some intriguing theories on the differences between g and the FE, and Flynn suggests that the g construct is not terribly important. Flynn suggests that the FE shows gains in intelligence within groups over time, like a movie. If you stop the movie at any time and take a snapshot, you see g. Start the movie again, and you see the FE.

Therefore, it seems wrong for Malloy to bash the FE on the basis that it is not on g, since the FE and g seem to be two entirely different things.

Put another way, we are comparing apples and oranges. It is true that apples do not correlate well with some hypothesized “orange factor”, but they need not and should not, and anyway, the fact that they do not does not imply that an apple is not fruit. It’s just that there is no reason to be comparing them.7.

Furthermore, Malloy and Jensen have problems when trying to say that the more a test taps g, the more genetic it is. B-W differences are highest on the subtests that are greatest in g, and the more a test taps g, the more genetic it is. How then to explain the massive FE, which is mostly on the most heavily g-loaded tests of all?

Malloy is also incorrect to imply that non-g FE gains are “hollow”, worthless, or not “real intelligence”. For instance, Malloy repeatedly states that IQ differences between ethnic groups (he often compares Blacks and Whites) are g-based, hence real, genetic and irremediable.

However, comparisons of Whites with some 3rd World groups show that the difference is on non-g. Hence, it follows that these 3rd World groups have the same intelligence as Whites.8.

A hallmark of the B-W gap genetic theorists rests on the scores of US Blacks, who strangely score 85, while African and Caribbean Blacks score 67 and 71 respectively. The hereditarian notion is that White admixture is what raises the US Black score, since African Blacks are pure Black and Caribbean Blacks are mostly Black. There are serious problems with this approach.9

Malloy is fond of several other claims.

Foremost, they believe that the B-W gap is wholly genetic, and hence cannot be remedied by any environmental factors or interventions. Blacks are hopelessly stupid forever, and the implication is that all money spent trying to give them a brain is down the drain.

They are doomed to wail, “If I Only Had a Brain“, in the wilderness forever, like the Strawman in the Wizard of Oz. The implication is that, as a hopeless race, Blacks must be cast off onto the proverbial ice floe as in the Eskimo custom, set free to fail and die as evolution deems fit.

In particular, Malloy attacks adoption studies, saying that adopting Blacks into White homes failed to raise their IQ’s. However, the evidence from adoption studies is far more complex than that, and many have shown gains for Blacks in these situations.10

Furthermore, even the model that holds that IQ scores within families are heavily genetic and owe almost nothing to shared home environment has been challenged, with radically different loadings for poor and high-income households on these factors.11

An anomalous study in Germany (Eyferth 1961) based on the children of Black and White soldiers and White German women found no differences at all in IQ among the White and Mulatto children.

Note that many pushing a hardline “Blacks are forever stupid” line today are extreme rightwingers or libertarians. They are almost all Whites, and, in particular and creepily, Northern European Whites. There are a few high-caste South Indians and a Chinese here and there.

Jensen’s first article in 1969 stated that Blacks were dumb, that it was genetic and permanent and that Head Start should therefore be abandoned.

There is a reason for this political stance and there is a reason that almost everyone saying this far to the Right politically. There is an agenda being pushed here. If we can prove scientifically that Blacks are a hopelessly moronic race, and that their stupidity is embedded in their genome with no way of fixing the matter, we can cut off Blacks of any and all social programs designed to help them, educate them or make them smarter.

More savagely, the implication is that they are a useless evolutionary dead end that needs to be “phased out” in the frightening words of Richard Lynn. All money spent to help this dead-end hopeless race of idiots, either in the US or in Africa, is down the rathole. We should not give them medical care, income, rent, welfare, food stamps, disability, WIC or any other assistance or help in any way.

Africa, a continent reeling in disease and poverty, needs to be thrown out of the nest like a baby bird and told it is on their own, cutting off all food, medical and developmental aid. The result will be massive death and suffering in Africa. In the US, similar policies will be less severe but still frightening and tragic.

It is important to see the cruel and deadly racist motives behind scientific racism, even when promoted by consciously non-racist people. Even if their arguments are correct, the prescriptions most of them are pushing, if adopted, will mean chaos and widespread death and suffering for countless Blacks. It amounts to a declaration of war on Black people everywhere.

Scientific racism also claims that evidence shows that educating Blacks is useless, and most are ineducable. Many point to an set in stone “achievement gap” to show that Blacks are permanent dolts and need to be cut off. However, there is impressive evidence that the achievement gap is closing and that spending money on Black education does improve Black scores,

From Malloy’s piece:

An additional popular argument is that the Flynn Effect, the observed rise in IQ scores over time, is evidence that African-Americans or African countries will eventually reach parity with white norms. This typically includes the premise that white intelligence in the recent past was even lower than modern black intelligence. A typical example:

US Blacks, with an average IQ today of 85, have the same IQ as US Whites with an IQ of 100 in 1957. If 1957 US Whites were not stupid, then neither are US Blacks today. It’s time to shut up about the “low Black IQ”, since by any reasonable standard, it is not really low at all.

These arguments are wrong for the simple fact that the Flynn Effect is not a gain in real g factor intelligence, while the differences between nations and ethnic groups are differences in g factor intelligence. These findings led a 2004 team to state:

It appears therefore that the nature of the Flynn effect is qualitatively different from the nature of B-W [Black-White] differences in the United States… [so] implications of the Flynn effect for B-W differences appear small

James Flynn, namesake of the secular increase, reiterates (DOC) these points:

Factor analysis is a way of measuring this tendency of some people to do better or worse than average across the board; and it yields something called g (a sort of super-correlation coefficient), which psychologists call the general intelligence factor…When you analyze IQ gains over time, you often find that they do not constitute enhancement of these latent traits — they do not seem to be general intelligence gains, or quantitative factor gains, or verbal factor gains (Wicherts et al, in press).

In the language of factor analysis, this means that IQ gains over time tend to display ‘measurement artifacts or cultural bias’. For a second time, we are driven to the conclusion that massive IQ gains are not intelligence gains or, indeed, any kind of significant cognitive gains (pp 27-28).

Flynn believes the secular increase represents important changes in specific narrow aspects of developed cognitive style, but not a rise in g intelligence. It is therefore incorrect that 1945 US whites were less intelligent than 2007 US blacks. The Flynn Effect has little apparent bearing on racial intelligence gaps.

A brief perusal of the Flynn links that Malloy provided above showed clearly that Malloy grotesquely took Flynn’s words out of context, possibly deliberately.

For one, Malloy implies that Flynn concedes that FE gains are not gains in any kind of real intelligence. For years Flynn did think that the gains were a practice effect or test artifact, but in recent years, he has changed his tune, and now really does believe that we are smarter in some ways. Even racist blogger Steve Sailer agrees.

Further, even scientific racists Steve Sailer, Richard Lynn and his co-author Tartu Vanhanen believe strongly in the FE, Lynn so much so that Sailer calls it the Lynn-Flynn Effect.

Malloy has been staking out this extreme scientific racist stance for years now – see here from 2003. Ole Eichhorn, a colleague of his at GNXP, does not share his views and believes strongly in the FE. Malloy at times parrots scientific racist hardliners Jensen and Charles Murray. Murray is a libertarian and Jensen is apparently an extreme rightwinger.

In a recent paper with fellow scientific racist Rushton, Jensen laid out his position: that an acceptance that Blacks are genetically less intelligent than Whites should logically lead to an end to anti-discrimination lawsuits. The burden of proof in such cases would fall on the plaintiff in proving that the employer was motivated by bias and not by Blacks’ scientifically proven genetic intelligence deficits.

This is the brave new world that the scientific racists have in store for us: where Blacks are forever resigned to much lower socioeconomic, health and educational status, with no way for them to equalize things even a bit. It’s this, and not “search for truth”, “science” or Galileo-martyr complexes, that motivates scientific racism, and it is for this reason that we must fight it with all we have.

I sent Flynn an email linking both my post and Malloy’s counterattack. He emailed me back13. Flynn made three rather confusing points, quoting from a book of his now on sale at Amazon:

  • The FE gains are on g but at the same time they are not on g.
  • The FE gains are real intelligence gains in spite of the fact that they are not factor-invariant.
  • Flynn agreed with me that Blacks today have the same IQ’s of Whites of 1957, but he made a confusing statement that seemed to imply that Blacks may continue to gain on Whites, and possibly even move to close the gap.

Here is the statement for you to play around with: Blacks do match the whites of 50 years ago but that does not settle the debate. It can be argued that they are the beneficiaries of the effects of modernity over that time and this could be either more or less than the environmental disadvantage they suffer at any given time.

According to this mail, Flynn disagrees with Malloy’s assertions above and also disagrees with all views that Malloy has attributed to Flynn above. However, in a recent email, Malloy agreed that he and Flynn disagree about the meaning of the FE.

There are a lot of confusing terms in here – g factor, factor invariance, etc. See the footnotes and click some of the links to try to understand it better, but this is stuff is not easy going.


1. The FE in the US shows a 18 point gain over the 70 years from 1947-2002. In my opinion, Blacks have scored higher, reaching 23.5 points.

There are many possible causes of the FE in modern life. According to Flynn in his new book, they may be: Increased demands from more professional, technical, and managerial jobs; increased leisure time; changing cognitive demands of personal interactions; or changing attitudes toward intellectual activity. Nutrition, better schooling, video games, television, computers, cell phones and the increased complexity of modern life are all thought to play a role.

2. The g-factor is best thought of as a correlation coefficient that shows the extent to which superior test takers, if they score better on one test, tend to score better on other tests across the board. It indicates a brain that works “better all across the board” than others with lower g.

A group higher in g than another group will tend to score better than the lower group in an across the board kind of way. Like IQ, g also correlates with quite a few correlates of intelligence such as increased grey matter in the brain.

Jensen’s original extension of Spearman’s g involved the concept that that g-factor is what he called “Level 2 conceptual learning” – the ability to solve problems = conceptual learning = synthesizing ability. Non-g factor was conceived by Jensen as a “Level 1” type of learning, and is roughly the retention of input and rote memorization of simple facts and skills = associative learning = memorizing ability.

Most IQ subtests would appear to measure Level 2 conceptual learning quite well. Actually, by Jensen’s own reasoning, he felt that the B-W gap was only 60% in g.

3. Raven’s, the most g-loaded test ever made, shows the largest FE of any test. The test was in fact specifically designed to measure g-factor intelligence only. The test has more predictive validity than any other test used in occupational groups and especially predicts mobility in jobs. It measures ability to “make sense out of the buzzing confusion of life”.

Scientific racist Philippe Rushton shows that Raven’s has no cultural bias whatsoever.

4. This extremely complex paper notes: gains cannot be explained solely by increases at the level of the latent variables (common factors), which IQ tests purport to measure.

In other words, according to this study, some of the:

…inter-generational difference in IQ is attributable to bias or other artifacts, and not real gains in general intelligence or higher-order ability factors…A cautionary conclusion would be that part of the gains (excluding the sub-tests Similarities and Comprehension) could be explained by genuine increases in intelligence.

Whereas implications of the FE for B–W differences appear small, the implications for intelligence testing, in general, are large.

As we can see, even Malloy, Jensen and Rushton’s favorite study indicates that part of FE gains could be on their version of g.

5. Dolan and Hamaker 2001 reanalyzed the data from several earlier studies and concluded that Spearman’s hypothesis is not an “empirically established fact” (i.e., that Black-White IQ differences may be due to differences in common factors other than g) due to insufficient power in the data to choose between alternative models.

The paper said:

This leaves the validity of Spearman’s hypothesis, considered a central justification for the genetic explanation, an unresolved question…

However, they did confirm that the Black-White IQ gap is not due to measurement artifacts, and is instead due to some measured factor that varies both within and between groups. These same people stated that the g factor did not explain the B-W gap as it was not explanatorily accurate.

The paper reanalyzed the data from several previous studies (Jensen and Reynolds 1982; Naglieri and Jensen 1987) that used the statistical method invented by Jensen (the method of correlated vectors – g factor) with a more recent and improved method (multigroup confirmatory factor analysis).


On the basis of the present, as well as other results (Dolan 2000), we are convinced that the Spearman correlation cannot be used to demonstrate the importance of g in b-w differences with any confidence…

It is possible that the analysis of all available data sets (perhaps using an appropriate meta-analytic procedure) will demonstrate that a model incorporating the weak version of Spearman’s hypothesis provides the best description of the data. However, until this work is undertaken, we cannot accept Spearman’s hypothesis as an “empirically established fact [139]

6. There is quite a bit of existing evidence suggests that FE gains across subtests may indeed be positively correlated with g loading. See Colom 2001 for good correlations between FE and g, and Juan-Espinosa 2000 for much stronger correlations between g loadings and FE gains.

Jensen’s The g Factor, pp. 320–21, reviews a number of studies of the relation between FE subtest gains and g loadings, all of which show weak positive correlations. However, Rushton 1999 finds that a measure of g developed on the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children (WISC) has loadings that are negatively correlated with FE subtest gains in several countries.

Yet this was challenged in Flynn’s new book, Extending Intelligence: Enhancement and New Constructs, where he makes the argument that FE gains are greatest on tests of fluid g rather than crystallized g. Flynn finds a positive (though statistically insignificant) correlation between a measure of fluid g he develops and FE gains in the data used by Rushton.

Two tests in Estonia did not find a correlation between g loadings and FE gains on those tests, but these are achievement tests with a strong crystallized bias. See Must 2001 and Must 2003.

7. For an introduction to Flynn’s new book in which he explores the various paradoxes of the FE, see Amazon’s page on the book. For a much more complex take on how FE gains can be on g but not on g, see this paper.

From the paper:

Numerous studies indicate that measures of intelligence reliably produce a latent general factor, referred to as g, which is associated with real world competence and is highly heritable (see Jensen 1998).

However, analysis of measurement invariance between normative cohorts in gains on five standardized measures of intelligence indicated that IQ gains cannot be attributed to change in a general latent factor but primarily reflect systematic variation in specific aspects of cognition leading to bias between cohorts on a number of subtests of intelligence measures (Wicherts et al., in press).

Something in the experience of successive generations is bringing about changes in aspects of cognitive functioning that are associated with g within but not between cohorts.

See also Flynn’s superb but hard to follow lecture (based on his new book) at the Psychometrics Centre in Britain where he made fascinating points and intriguing allegories while offering fascinating examples. From the lecture:

(1) The factor analysis paradox: Factor analysis shows a first principal component called g or general intelligence that seems to bind performance on the various WISC subtests together. However, IQ gains over time show score gains on the WISC subtests occurring independently of one another.

How can intelligence be both one and many?…

(1) The WISC subtests measure a variety of cognitive skills that are functionally independent and responsive to changes in social priorities over time. The inter-correlations that engender g are binding only when comparing individuals within a static social context…someone who tended to be superior on any one would tend to be above average on all.

Let us assume that the 100 meters, the hurdles, and the high jump all had large and similar g loadings as they almost certainly would. A sprinter needs upper body strength as well as speed, a hurdler needs speed and spring, a high jumper needs spring and timing.

I have no doubt that a good athlete would best the average athlete handily on all three at a given place and time. However, over time, social priorities change. People become obsessed with the 100 meters as the most spectacular spectator event (the world’s fastest human). Young people find success in this event a secondary sex characteristic of great allure.

Over 30 years, performance escalates by a full SD in the 100 meters, by half an SD in the hurdles, and not at all in the high jump. Although average performance has risen “eccentrically” on various events, the following is still true: superior performers still do better than average on all 10 events and are about the same degree above average on various events as they were 30 years before.

Arithmetic, Information, Vocabulary, and Similarities all load heavily on g(IQ) and on a shared verbal factor. Despite this, Americans gained 24 points on Similarities between 1947 and 2002 (1.6 SD’s), 4 points on Vocabulary, and only 2 points on Arithmetic and Information…

To sum up. Factor analysis and g(IQ) describes a static situation where individual differences are compared and social change is frozen. The degree to which superior people are above average on the various subtests sets their respective g loadings.

IQ gains over time describe a dynamic situation in which social priorities shift in a multitude of ways. No better math teaching, more leisure but with the extra leisure devoted to visual rather then verbal pursuits, the spread of the scientific ethos, and a host of other things all occurring together.

The average on Similarities rises but the average on Arithmetic and Vocabulary does not. How odd it would be if social trends mimicked factor loadings in determining what real world cognitive skills progress and which mark time! If they did so, IQ gains would appear factor invariant, but that would be purely accidental (Wicherts et al 2004).

Although radically different trends alter average performances on various WISC subtests between Time 1 and Time 2, note that this leaves a certain stability untouched. Superior performers are much the same degree above average on each and every subtest at both Time 2 and Time 1. Therefore, much the same g will emerge.

Our first paradox is resolved. At any particular time, factor analysis will extract g(IQ) — and intelligence appears unitary. Over time, real-world cognitive skills assert their functional autonomy and swim freely of g — and intelligence appears multiple. If you want to see g, stop the film and extract a snap shot; you will not see it while the film is running. Society does not do factor analysis.

It is a juggernaut that flattens factor loadings and imposes its own priorities. Similarities requires you to solve problems on the spot without a previously learned method. The Performance subtests… require … arranging pictures to tell a story.

General information, math and vocabulary show only small gains on most tests, though the Dutch scored high gains. There have also been IQ identical rises in NAEP tests. Children are learning to read at an earlier age, but they are no better at reading adult literature than before. Basic math skills have shown impressive gains, but mathematical reasoning has been flat.

That means people are no better at geometry and algebra than they were in the past. Ability to solve problems without a previously learned method will be good for managerial, professional, and technical jobs to fill — jobs that often require decisions without the guidance of set rules. We are better at solving novel problems verbally, visually and abstractly.

Previous generations were more rule-governed and less likely to “think outside the box”. Previously, people engaged in pre-scientific, more concrete operational thinking. Now, they are post-scientific and more abstract.

What do dogs and rabbits have in common? They are not retarded, they use syllogistic logic, but they will appear retarded on Similarities. There is more lateral thinking now, and the human mind has been liberated – the liberation of reason from the concrete. There has been the spread of the language and categories of science and on the spot problem solving has been enhanced.

So, Flynn shows that IQ gains are real and that they are the result of environmental progress. The artifact, test taking or bias options cannot be supported by evidence. Test sophistication shows a particular pattern that is not present in the Flynn Effect. Flynn also resolutely shoots down cultural bias.

A series of studies were undertaken by a Russian researcher in first decade of the 20th Century amongst Siberian peasants. He was studying their cognitive styles. Looking at their test answers today, we can see how they were not retarded at all, but would have scored retarded on some of our modern IQ tests.

From the lecture:

Q: All bears are white where there is always snow; in Novaya Zemlya there is always snow; what color are the bears there?

A: I have seen only black bears and I do not talk of what I have not seen.

Q: But what do my words imply?

A: If a person has not been there he can not say anything on the basis of words. If a man was 60 or 80 and had seen a white bear there and told me about it, he could be believed.

This indicates that the Siberian peasant uses syllogistic or concrete logic that was useful for him at the time. As you can see, the questioner tries to get the peasant to think scientifically, but the man stubbornly refuses to, possibly because he is not able to. Not because he is stupid, but because he has never learned how to think this way.

If you tried to explain to the peasant the more abstract and rational way of looking at the problem, he might have argued with you, but more likely he would give you a look that says, “Why do you think that is important?” There was little use in his world for abstract thinking.

Again, in the lecture, Flynn shows that if you asked a boy in 1920 what dogs and rabbits have in common, he would probably have given you an “odd” answer like, “You use a dog to hunt a rabbit.” Nowadays, if someone gave an answer like that, people would crinkle their eyes, look puzzled and say that that answer was “Idiotic!”.

This means it shows contempt for scientific norms, not that it is incorrect – one may indeed use a dog to hunt a rabbit – but modern science does not deem that relationship the most important one between the two animals.

Even a youngster in the ghetto with poor grades nowadays may be able to give the answer we deem “correct”: “Both dogs and rabbits are mammals”. The boy in 1920 is not slow or retarded, he is just using concrete and pre-scientific thinking. The boy in the ghetto, despite his gangsta language and clothing, may at least be able to think like a scientist.

Flynn also shows how Rosenau and Fagan (1997) compare the 1918 debate on women’s suffrage with recent debates on women’s rights and make an excellent case that the latter shows less contempt for logic and relevance. This shows that we are becoming less illogical and irrelevant in our thinking over time.

That our ancestors were illogical or irrelevant in some aspects of their thinking does not mean they were retarded or slow. Illogicality and irrelevance were useful to them in some ways as argumentation styles and in making sense of the world in pleasing and comforting ways; they were culturally sanctioned and incurred little to no penalties.

The Darrow Trial in the 1920’s is another example. They were not retarded or stupid, just unscientific.

8. For instance, B-W IQ differences in South Africa are not factor invariant, so according to Malloy, these differences are not real at all. Malloy’s position would have to be that there are no differences between White and Black IQ’s in South Africa, despite a White score of 100 and a Black score of 67. Is this a position that he is willing to take?

Furthermore, in his book, The g Factor , Jensen himself says that White – South Indian IQ differences are not based on g. Therefore, according to both Jensen and Malloy, Whites and South Asians score the same on IQ tests, despite a White score of 100 and a South Indian score of 81. Is Malloy willing to concede this?

9. Clearly, US B-W differences compared to US White – African differences cannot be explained by the European admixture in the blood of US Blacks. US Blacks are 17.5% White on average. Adding 17.5% White (IQ 100) to the African IQ of 67 gives us 67 + 6 = 73. Instead of the expected 73, we get 85. Clearly, something other than genes is raising US Black IQ.

In addition, numerous studies have been done to try to determine whether or not White admixture in Blacks is correlated with IQ. These studies have found nothing – there is little or no correlation between the degree of White blood in a Black and their IQ score.

Since the US B-W gap is said to be based on g and purely biological, yet there is no difference in Black IQ based on White ancestry level, this takes apart Jensen’s notion that both the B-W difference and g are biological.

10. For instance, Tizard 1974 showed that the Black orphans raised in an orphanage were smarter than the White orphans. Moore 1974 and Willerman 1986 found that Blacks adoptees raised by White mothers had higher IQ’s than adoptees raised by Black mothers.

Scarr and Weinberg (1976, 1983) in a study of Blacks adopted into upper-income White homes in Minnesota, showed that Black children benefited by adoption into high-income white families. Black children had IQ’s of 94 (5 pt gain) and mixed-race (mulatto) adoptees had IQ’s of 99.

The effect wore off by late adolescence and adulthood, but this just shows that home environment only benefits Black children, and the effect wears off by late adolescence to adulthood. But late adolescent to adult Blacks may need a new sort of stimulating environment to maintain their gains from childhood.

Most adoption studies, as noted by the Minnesota trans-racial study above, show gains only in childhood, with gains wearing off by adulthood. However, one study did find lasting gains into adulthood. This effect lasted into adulthood.

11. For instance, from Turkheimer 2003: The models suggest that in impoverished families, 60% of the variance in IQ is accounted for by the shared environment, and the contribution of genes is close to zero; in affluent families, the result is almost exactly the reverse.

12. Huang and Hauser 2000 show that, controlling for social background, Blacks made significant gains in closing the Black-White achievement gap from 1974-1998. Since then, they have begun to lose ground as rightwing policies to cut back on education funds for Blacks have taken hold, harming Blacks. Boozer and Cacciola 2001 show that reducing class size caused an impressive increase in achievement test gains.

13. It is normally a violation of netiquette to print private emails without someone’s permission, but the folks at GNXP demanded that I post Flynn’s letter in its entirely. I do not reprint the whole letter, but I do reprint the parts that are important.

I bold the parts of his letter that are at least a bit confusing to me. A characteristic of the narcissistic young men on GNXP is that they never admit that there is anything they don’t understand, and they never concede a point. Being a grownup and all, I do both.

You raise three questions and my current book (What is intelligence?) illuminates all three. You can get it from for $14.96 or probably from a Border’s bookstore:

(1) IQ gains are significant despite not being factor invariant – see chapter 2;

(2) Black gains on white are gains in g even though they are not g gains – sounds odd but true – see pp 60-63;

(3) Blacks do match the whites of 50 years ago but that does not settle the debate. It can be argued that they are the beneficiaries of the effects of modernity over that time and this could be either more or less than the environmental disadvantage they suffer at any given time.


Blair, C., Gamson, D. Thorne, S., Baker, D. “Rising mean IQ: Cognitive demand of mathematics education for young children, population exposure to formal schooling, and the neurobiology of the prefrontal cortex”, Intelligence 33 (2005) 93–106.

Boozer, Michael A. and Cacciola, Stephen E. “Inside the ‘Black Box’ of Project STAR: Estimation of Peer Effects Using Experimental Data,” Discussion Paper 832 (Economic Growth Center, Yale University, 2001).

Colom, R., Juan-Espinosa, M., and García, L.F. “The Secular Increase in Test Scores Is a ‘Jensen effect,’” Personality and Individual Differences 30 (2001): 553–58.

Klaus Eyferth “Leistungen verschiedener Gruppen von Besatzungskindern in Hamburg-Wechsler Intelligenztest fur Kinder (HAWIK),” Archiv fur die gesamte Psychologie 113 (1961): 222–41.

Flynn, James R. “The History of the American Mind in the 20th Century: A Scenario to Explain IQ Gains over Time and a Case for the Irrelevance of g,” in Extending Intelligence: Enhancement and New Constructs, edited by P. C. Kyllonon, R. D. Roberts, and L. Stankov (Hillsdale, N.J.: Erlbaum, forthcoming).

Huang, Min-Hsiung and Hauser, Robert M. (2000) Convergent Trends in Black-White Test-Score Differentials in the U.S.: A Correction of Richard Lynn

Jensen, Arthur The g Factor: The Science of Mental Abilities, pp. 320–21. (Westport, CN: Praeger, 1998)

Juan-Espinosa, Manuel and others “Individual Differences in Large-Spaces Orientation: g and Beyond?” Personality and Individual Differences 29 (2000): 85–98.

Moore, Elsie G. J. “Family Socialization and the IQ Test Performance of Traditionally and Transracially Adopted Black Children,” Developmental Psychology 22 (1986): 317–26.

Must, O., Must, A.. and Raudik, V. “The Flynn Effect for Gains in Literacy Found in Estonia Is Not a Jensen Effect,” Personality and Individual Differences 33 (2001).

Must, Must, and Raudik, V. “The Secular Rise in IQs: In Estonia the Flynn Effect Is Not a Jensen Effect,” Intelligence 31 (2003): 461–71.

“Myth: Social intervention cannot raise IQ;”, in “Intelligence Quotient”, chapter in The Encyclopedia of Adoption.

Rushton, J. Philippe “Secular Gains in IQ Not Related to the g Factor and Inbreeding Depression—unlike Black-White Differences: A Reply to Flynn,” Personality and Individual Differences 26 (1999): 381–89.

Scarr, S. and Weinberg, R. A. “IQ Test Performance of Black Children Adopted by White Families,” American Psychologist 31 (1976): 726–39.

Scarr, S. and Weinberg, R. A. “The Minnesota Adoption Studies: Genetic Differences and Malleability,” Child Development 54 (1983): 260–67 .

Tizard, Barbara “IQ and Race,” Nature 247, no. 5439 (February 1, 1974).

Turkheimer, E., Haley, A., Waldron, M., D’Onofrio, B. and Gottesman, I. I. “Socioeconomic status modifies heritability of IQ in young children”, Psychological Science 14 (6) (2003), 623–628.

Wicherts, J. M., Dolan, C. V., Hessen, D. J., Oosterveld, P., Baal, G. C. M., van Boomsma, D. I., & Span, M. M. “Are intelligence tests measurement invariant over time? Investigating the nature of the Flynn effect.” Intelligence 32 (2004), 509–537 .

Willerman, Lee and others, “Intellectual Development of Children from Interracial Matings: Performance in Infancy and at 4 Years,” Behavioral Genetics 4 (1974): 84–88.


Filed under Africa, Blacks, Civil Rights, Conservatism, Culture, Discrimination, Education, Europeans, Flynn Effect, Genetics, Intelligence, Libertarianism, Neuroscience, Political Science, Psychology, Race/Ethnicity, Racism, Regional, Reposts From The Old Site, Science, White Racism, Whites