posted
Black Egypt is the source of esteem to an otherwise humiliated people. Take away Black Egypt and what you have is a people without history, or at least, history that rises to the standards of the west. This is something that MUST be avoided AT ALL COST! And so, they will fight to death for Black Egypt.
American Negroes, especially the Afrocentrist ones, would rather embrace pseudo-history (Black Egypt) than admit to a humble beginning; that is, history as defined by the white western world. In the west, spear-chucking aint all that. Just saying.
quote:Originally posted by Hammer: These guys are like children. Instead of dealig with the deep and serious problems in black communities people like Mike want to be victims and blame everyone else for their problems. That is where all this black egypt crap comes from.
posted
You are starting to crack under pressure. I can see that in your response. Usually there is some level of sly and sophistication in your tricknowledgy replies to counter an argument. Now you aint even putting a dent. Dude, you are stumped on the Asian phenomenon.
quote:Originally posted by Mike111: ^Understanding that some members of the forum may be unsure as to what I meant by "The tests are geared for White kids reared in a certain environment."
Most simply put: intelligence is a measure of a persons "Problem Solving" ability. But it does not exist in a vacuum; childhood is the period of time, in which a person learns about his environment. Adulthood is when that person is expected to put all that he has learned together, in order to survive on his own.
Let me give an example:
Lets take a little White boy out of a London suburb, and put him and a little San boy out in the Kalahari desert alone.
As the little White boy out of a London suburb, stumbles and fumbles about, trying to find food and water, the little San boy would surely think that he is the stupidest child in the world.
But is he really? Of course not, he just has NO TRAINING or EXPERIENCE in THAT environment!
Just wanted to be clear on that: And to make clear, just how fuched-up White people are, for trying to run such bullsh1t on people.
Come to think about it, what WOULD you expect from defectives? MK is right, it DOES effect the brain.
posted
Let me get this straight, you White boys are pushing Asian intelligence (Hong Kong 107 verses U.S. 98) because you think what - well at least we are smarter than Blacks????
Well, You White boys may recall that I said this earlier:
"As to Asians, they have made themselves into unimaginative ROBOTS, in the chase for parity with the WHITE MAN."
Education in Hong Kong.
Quote: The system can be described as extremely competitive by global standards.
Suicide is one leading cause of death for those aged 15 - 24 in Hong Kong. This age group also has the highest admission rate for attempted suicide at the Accident and Emergency Departments of the Hospital Authority. Reported prevalence rates for adolescent suicidal ideation in Hong Kong range from 20 - 42% (Chan, 1995; Fong, 1993; Stewart, Lam, Betson, 1999; Yip et al., 2004). Our latest findings from a representative sample of 715 respondents show that 28.1% of youth aged 15 - 19 have experienced life time suicidal ideation (CSRP, 2005). Hence, the problem of youth suicidality warrants attention.
If the Asians want to be just like the White man, and it seems they do, then I say more power to them. A fool is a fool.
Posts: 22721 | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
Not unless Neanderthals were smarter than Sapiens. But seriously, this is like asking are polar bears smarter than grizzly bears. It's stupid and has been beaten to death on this forum. Only people who contest the obvious are hillbilly weirdos like Gigantic who himself is absurdly unintelligent so he falls back on old race mythologies of the 19th century to overcompensate for his individual failures.
Posts: 4021 | From: Bay Area, CA | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Gigantic: Your argument falls apart with Asian children. Yall just can't explain the counfounding Asian variable, except dumb assinine replies like Mike's. Asian children raised in poor environments, yet they still out-perform white counterparts raised in affluent neighborhoods. Your theory is flawed.
quote:Originally posted by Calabooz: I think you are an idiot Yes, blacks live in very poor areas, and they go to **** schools, which further PROVES that cultural and environmental surroundings play a dominant role. If you grew up, in a poor neighborhood, with terrible schools, terrible surroundings etc., you would have an IQ lower than what you have now (if that is even possible).
[/QB]
LOL! Ok, so which Asians are you talking about, that have it as bad as blacks? In the last 30yrs, a time that was more favorable to blacks in the united states, the "IQ gap" has decreased. So you want to believe IQ is genetic? What about in the UK, where black out preform Asians, I am pretty sure blacks in the UK have had it better than in America... or what about African immigrants who outpreform whites? One thing you have to understand is, if a parent doesn't care, you will not succeed. Many blacks in America, grow up in a single parent household, (one mother), would you expect them to have high IQs? Bad schools, bad environments, bad culture, are they supposed to be mega geniuses?
I think we all know blacks are discriminated against:
"Racism and discrimination cannot be discounted or dismissed as explanations for persisting poverty in communities of color. In a report published in the 1960s, the political scientist Anthony Downs identifies several ways in which institutions discriminate against poor people, and blacks in particular: by providing assistance in ways that emphasize dependency; by imposing higher costs for goods and services; bu omitting impoverished people from social insurance schemes; by denying services (mortgage, loans, credit, municipal services); and by maintaining public schools of lower quality. Manuel Craballo states that the failure to take account of racism and discrimination is a major weakness in how conservatives approach the problem of poverty:
"The central mission element, by omission or commission, in the conservative view of poverty, drawn as it is from the intellectual roots of a then racially homogenous Great Britain, is its failure to grasp the basic relationship in multi-racial America between racism and poverty. While most of the poor white, disproportionate numbers of the poor black, Hispanic, (that is, primarily mulatto or mestizo), and native American... Racism is by no means the sole or indeed perhaps even the primary cause of poverty among minorities... Bur racism does have a lot to do with the concentration of minorities in municipalities whose tax base cannot carry quality public education; in the neighborhoods that make minorities the disproportionate victims of crime; in jobs that are part-time, low wage, and without the benefits of health insurance, pensions, or even social security."
Discrimination means that the skills necessary for economic mobility are inaccessible to people of color; it means that job promotions are unequally distributed on the basis of race and ethnicity; and it means that information about economic opportunities is not distributed uniformly or consistently. The connections between discrimination and poverty are suggested in one case study of Massachusetts by the sociologist James E. Blackwell. He reviews the reasons for unemployment among black youth. In his view of people of color are subject to discriminatory practices, both formal and informal, which have detrimental consequences, in the following areas: Skills/union apprenticeship programs; availability of mortgages; economic dislocation; job proportions, equality of wages; and availability of information and informational networks about employment opportunities. Racial segregation, as suggested by the sociologists Douglas S. Massey and Nancy A. Denton and even earlier by Kenneth Clark, goes hand in hand with racism and discrimination. Massey and Denton's study "indicates that racial residential segregation is the principal structural feature of American society responsible for the perpetuation of urban poverty and represents a primary cause of racial inequality in the United States." Elsewhere, Massey writes that continuing racial segregation
acts to undermine the socioeconomic environment faced by poor blacks and leave their communities extremely vulnerable to any downturn in the economy. Under conditions of high racial segregation, a rise in the black poverty rates produces a dramatic loss in potential demand in poor black neighborhoods, leading to withdrawal, deterioration, and outright elimination of goods and services distributed through the market.
Racial segregation, in other words, exacerbates the ill effects of downturns in the economy or poverty increases among black individuals or families to a far greater extent than whites. Understanding the relationship between racial segregation and poverty, according to Massey, provides insight into why the composition of the underclass is black and why this sector is concentrated in the Northeast and the Midwest. Massey posits that " segregation heightens and reinforces negative racial stereotypes by concentrating people who fit those stereotypes in a small number of highly visible minority neighborhoods- a structural version of 'blaming the victim' (not the other way around, as you white supremacists usually like to claim) thereby hardening prejudice, making discrimination more likely, and maintaining the motivation for segregation. The persistence of segregation, in turn, worsens the concentration of poverty.
Family structure as an explanation for poverty
As suggested in many popular and academic forums, dysfunctional family structure is a popular explanation for poverty, and sometimes the so-called breakdown of the family is offered as a major reason that individuals and families fall into poverty; this belief persists despite overwhelming and growing evidence that this link is much more complex than is suggested by the claim. The demographer Mary Jo Bane write: "It has become common knowledge- whether true or no- that family structure is important in explaining contemporary poverty... [But] in fact, previous research indicates rather small percentage of the changes in poverty level over the past few decades can be attributed to demographic change." Bane concludes that a focus on family structure is erroneous: "The problem of poverty should be addressed by devoting attention to employment, wages, and the development of skills necessary for productive participation in the labor force rather than hand wringing about the decline of the family." Despite increasing evidence to support this view, however, the family structure explanation suggested by Daniel Patrick Moynihan and, much earlier by the sociologist E. Franklin Frazier, not only remains conventionally popular, but reflects much of current social welfare politics in the United States. The "feminization of poverty" has been turned to as a special feature of the relationship between family structure poverty. This term, supposedly coined by Diana Pearce, is used to indicate that female-headed families are more susceptible to poverty than male-headed or two parent families. Although the term may be recent, Mimi Abramovitz shows that womaen's impoverishment dates back to colonial America, when from one-third to one-half of a town's poor were likely to be female. Thus, the feminization of poverty may be a misnomer if it suggests that this is a new development in the national profile, and history of poverty. Bane provides a statistical overview of poverty characteristics and trends associated with female-headed housholds. Barbara Ehenreich and her associates (1983) discuss how women are particularly exploited in the united states. This qualitative study provides case studies and cameos of women who are experiencing poverty. One conclusion of the book is that "a job is not necessarily an antidote to poverty for women. On the contrary,the jobs available to women are part of the problem." Women, according to these authors, are clustered in only 20 out of 420 occupations listed by the Bureau of Labor Statistics. These occupations tend to offer the lowest pay. In her article, published in 1978, Pearce suggests that race is not as significant a factor as gender in explaining the depressed economic condition of poor women. But, as shown by the extensive work of the political economist Julianne Malveaux and others, it is not accurate to dismiss important racial distinctions in the poverty experiences of women. Malveaux describes how the labor experiences of black and white women differ significantly. Gertrude S. Goldberg and Eleanor Kremin respond to Pearce by writing that "in the United States, black and Hispanic single mothers suffer poverty rates 50 percent greater than their white counterparts, and black women are three times more likely as white women to be in the economically vulnerable position of single motherhood. Three-fifths of poor, single-mother families in the United States , moreover, are women of color and their children. A strong precedent of utilizing family structure as an explanation for poverty is the Moynihan Report, published in 1965, which proposed a link between the family structure of blacks and poverty:
The circumstances of the Negro American community in recent years have probably been getting worse, not better... the fundamental problem , in which this is most clearly the case, is that of family structure... so long as this situation persists, the cycle of poverty and disadvantage will continue to repeat itself. Other observers such as Banfield, have gone so far as to suggest a cultural predisposition on the part of lower-class groups not to maintain stable families, leading to greater levels of poverty among these groups. In a book based on and analysis of U.S. Bureau of the Census data for 1980, the researchers Reynolds, and Walter Allen conclude that
"the best single country of explanations for race differences in the organization of family life in contemporary U.S. society would seem to be those that attribute importance to race differences in functional relationships with the larger society and its institutions. Black-white differences in economic well being, political power, an social standing--more so than differences in values and predispositions- explain the observed race differences in family organization and process.
Their finding has been confirmed by other studies. The Joint Center for Political an Economic studies, for example, reports that:
while family structure is an important factor in determining whether a black child will be poor, the decline in marriage and the increased proportion of child births occurring out of wedlock do not account full for the decline in children's economic well being. Indeed, the study revealed that the economic slippage experienced by all types of black families-- whether headed by married couples, never married women, or formerly married women--- played at least as great a role as family structure change in the worsening status of black children.
It is clear that single-family headed housholds have a higher rate of poverty than single-male-headed housholds, or two-headed housholds. But the implications of this relationship are not as clear and conclusive as some would contend. A clear and consistent poverty gap at the national level remains among black, white, and Latino families of similar composition. White families tend to be better off in economic terms than comparably structured black and Latino families. This fact tends to dampen the unqualified claim that "family breakup" causes poverty. There are examples of other national social welfare systems that do not reflect a strong correlation between single, female heads of houshold and poverty status. Sweden is one such example. As Goldberg and Kremin write:
"In the United States it has long been assumed that there is a direct link between poverty and family composition, of single motherhood. However, Sweden has gone far toward breaking this link-- a notable achievement. Single motherhood is about as prevalent in Sweden as it is in the United states. By using a combination of of labor market and and social policies... Sweden has achieved a relatively low rate of poverty for single parent families.
As the case of Sweden suggests, the relationship between single female heads of households and poverty status is not predetermined. Even in the United States, there are some periods when increasing the rate of labor-force participation for women, coupled with decent wages, has reduced poverty status for single female headed families. For example, in reviewing the post-World War Two, Richard X. Chase reports that increasing labor force participation rates for women during that period resulted in some reduction in the poverty rate for female headed households. Chase's study shows that the incidence of poverty for all female headed families, was reduced from 51.5 percent in 1947 to 49.2% in 1956, and 47.6% in 1963. These reductions were due to the increasing labor-participation rate of women earning wages that enabled them to live above the poverty level. During these same years however, the incidence for poverty in male headed families fell even more dramatically from 29.9% in 1947 to 19.8% in 1956, and to 15.6% in 1963.
So we have now examined two variables that can effect poverty. Both of which point to blacks and Latinos having it worse than their white couterparts, now what does this have to do with intelligence? Simple, let us look at the SAT scores in 1986 (combined math and verbal)
------------------------------------------------- Racial Group Average Score
Japanese 43,493 28.4 Asian Indian 39,739 70.4 Fillipino 37,662 64.6 Chinese 35,869 63.3 White 33,412 3.9 Korean 32,530 81.9 Hawaiian 30,522 1.6 Cuban 29,010 77.9 Mexican 23,476 26.0 Eskimo 21,988 1.5 American Indian 21,748 2.5 Vietnamese 20,415 90.5 Black 20,077 2.8
As you can see, the ethnic group that scored the lowest on the SAT, also had the lowest income.
Source: A New introduction to Poverty, The Role of Race Power, and Politics
quote:Originally posted by Gigantic: Your argument falls apart with Asian children. Yall just can't explain the counfounding Asian variable, except dumb assinine replies like Mike's. Asian children raised in poor environments, yet they still out-perform white counterparts raised in affluent neighborhoods. Your theory is flawed.
quote:Originally posted by Calabooz: I think you are an idiot Yes, blacks live in very poor areas, and they go to **** schools, which further PROVES that cultural and environmental surroundings play a dominant role. If you grew up, in a poor neighborhood, with terrible schools, terrible surroundings etc., you would have an IQ lower than what you have now (if that is even possible).
LOL! Ok, so which Asians are you talking about, that have it as bad as blacks? In the last 30yrs, a time that was more favorable to blacks in the united states, the "IQ gap" has decreased. So you want to believe IQ is genetic? What about in the UK, where black out preform Asians, I am pretty sure blacks in the UK have had it better than in America... or what about African immigrants who outpreform whites? One thing you have to understand is, if a parent doesn't care, you will not succeed. Many blacks in America, grow up in a single parent household, (one mother), would you expect them to have high IQs? Bad schools, bad environments, bad culture, are they supposed to be mega geniuses?
I think we all know blacks are discriminated against:
"Racism and discrimination cannot be discounted or dismissed as explanations for persisting poverty in communities of color. In a report published in the 1960s, the political scientist Anthony Downs identifies several ways in which institutions discriminate against poor people, and blacks in particular: by providing assistance in ways that emphasize dependency; by imposing higher costs for goods and services; bu omitting impoverished people from social insurance schemes; by denying services (mortgage, loans, credit, municipal services); and by maintaining public schools of lower quality. Manuel Craballo states that the failure to take account of racism and discrimination is a major weakness in how conservatives approach the problem of poverty:
"The central mission element, by omission or commission, in the conservative view of poverty, drawn as it is from the intellectual roots of a then racially homogenous Great Britain, is its failure to grasp the basic relationship in multi-racial America between racism and poverty. While most of the poor white, disproportionate numbers of the poor black, Hispanic, (that is, primarily mulatto or mestizo), and native American... Racism is by no means the sole or indeed perhaps even the primary cause of poverty among minorities... Bur racism does have a lot to do with the concentration of minorities in municipalities whose tax base cannot carry quality public education; in the neighborhoods that make minorities the disproportionate victims of crime; in jobs that are part-time, low wage, and without the benefits of health insurance, pensions, or even social security."
Discrimination means that the skills necessary for economic mobility are inaccessible to people of color; it means that job promotions are unequally distributed on the basis of race and ethnicity; and it means that information about economic opportunities is not distributed uniformly or consistently. The connections between discrimination and poverty are suggested in one case study of Massachusetts by the sociologist James E. Blackwell. He reviews the reasons for unemployment among black youth. In his view of people of color are subject to discriminatory practices, both formal and informal, which have detrimental consequences, in the following areas: Skills/union apprenticeship programs; availability of mortgages; economic dislocation; job proportions, equality of wages; and availability of information and informational networks about employment opportunities. Racial segregation, as suggested by the sociologists Douglas S. Massey and Nancy A. Denton and even earlier by Kenneth Clark, goes hand in hand with racism and discrimination. Massey and Denton's study "indicates that racial residential segregation is the principal structural feature of American society responsible for the perpetuation of urban poverty and represents a primary cause of racial inequality in the United States." Elsewhere, Massey writes that continuing racial segregation
acts to undermine the socioeconomic environment faced by poor blacks and leave their communities extremely vulnerable to any downturn in the economy. Under conditions of high racial segregation, a rise in the black poverty rates produces a dramatic loss in potential demand in poor black neighborhoods, leading to withdrawal, deterioration, and outright elimination of goods and services distributed through the market.
Racial segregation, in other words, exacerbates the ill effects of downturns in the economy or poverty increases among black individuals or families to a far greater extent than whites. Understanding the relationship between racial segregation and poverty, according to Massey, provides insight into why the composition of the underclass is black and why this sector is concentrated in the Northeast and the Midwest. Massey posits that " segregation heightens and reinforces negative racial stereotypes by concentrating people who fit those stereotypes in a small number of highly visible minority neighborhoods- a structural version of 'blaming the victim' (not the other way around, as you white supremacists usually like to claim) thereby hardening prejudice, making discrimination more likely, and maintaining the motivation for segregation. The persistence of segregation, in turn, worsens the concentration of poverty.
Family structure as an explanation for poverty
As suggested in many popular and academic forums, dysfunctional family structure is a popular explanation for poverty, and sometimes the so-called breakdown of the family is offered as a major reason that individuals and families fall into poverty; this belief persists despite overwhelming and growing evidence that this link is much more complex than is suggested by the claim. The demographer Mary Jo Bane write: "It has become common knowledge- whether true or no- that family structure is important in explaining contemporary poverty... [But] in fact, previous research indicates rather small percentage of the changes in poverty level over the past few decades can be attributed to demographic change." Bane concludes that a focus on family structure is erroneous: "The problem of poverty should be addressed by devoting attention to employment, wages, and the development of skills necessary for productive participation in the labor force rather than hand wringing about the decline of the family." Despite increasing evidence to support this view, however, the family structure explanation suggested by Daniel Patrick Moynihan and, much earlier by the sociologist E. Franklin Frazier, not only remains conventionally popular, but reflects much of current social welfare politics in the United States. The "feminization of poverty" has been turned to as a special feature of the relationship between family structure poverty. This term, supposedly coined by Diana Pearce, is used to indicate that female-headed families are more susceptible to poverty than male-headed or two parent families. Although the term may be recent, Mimi Abramovitz shows that womaen's impoverishment dates back to colonial America, when from one-third to one-half of a town's poor were likely to be female. Thus, the feminization of poverty may be a misnomer if it suggests that this is a new development in the national profile, and history of poverty. Bane provides a statistical overview of poverty characteristics and trends associated with female-headed housholds. Barbara Ehenreich and her associates (1983) discuss how women are particularly exploited in the united states. This qualitative study provides case studies and cameos of women who are experiencing poverty. One conclusion of the book is that "a job is not necessarily an antidote to poverty for women. On the contrary,the jobs available to women are part of the problem." Women, according to these authors, are clustered in only 20 out of 420 occupations listed by the Bureau of Labor Statistics. These occupations tend to offer the lowest pay. In her article, published in 1978, Pearce suggests that race is not as significant a factor as gender in explaining the depressed economic condition of poor women. But, as shown by the extensive work of the political economist Julianne Malveaux and others, it is not accurate to dismiss important racial distinctions in the poverty experiences of women. Malveaux describes how the labor experiences of black and white women differ significantly. Gertrude S. Goldberg and Eleanor Kremin respond to Pearce by writing that "in the United States, black and Hispanic single mothers suffer poverty rates 50 percent greater than their white counterparts, and black women are three times more likely as white women to be in the economically vulnerable position of single motherhood. Three-fifths of poor, single-mother families in the United States , moreover, are women of color and their children. A strong precedent of utilizing family structure as an explanation for poverty is the Moynihan Report, published in 1965, which proposed a link between the family structure of blacks and poverty:
The circumstances of the Negro American community in recent years have probably been getting worse, not better... the fundamental problem , in which this is most clearly the case, is that of family structure... so long as this situation persists, the cycle of poverty and disadvantage will continue to repeat itself. Other observers such as Banfield, have gone so far as to suggest a cultural predisposition on the part of lower-class groups not to maintain stable families, leading to greater levels of poverty among these groups. In a book based on and analysis of U.S. Bureau of the Census data for 1980, the researchers Reynolds, and Walter Allen conclude that
"the best single country of explanations for race differences in the organization of family life in contemporary U.S. society would seem to be those that attribute importance to race differences in functional relationships with the larger society and its institutions. Black-white differences in economic well being, political power, an social standing--more so than differences in values and predispositions- explain the observed race differences in family organization and process.
Their finding has been confirmed by other studies. The Joint Center for Political an Economic studies, for example, reports that:
while family structure is an important factor in determining whether a black child will be poor, the decline in marriage and the increased proportion of child births occurring out of wedlock do not account full for the decline in children's economic well being. Indeed, the study revealed that the economic slippage experienced by all types of black families-- whether headed by married couples, never married women, or formerly married women--- played at least as great a role as family structure change in the worsening status of black children.
It is clear that single-family headed housholds have a higher rate of poverty than single-male-headed housholds, or two-headed housholds. But the implications of this relationship are not as clear and conclusive as some would contend. A clear and consistent poverty gap at the national level remains among black, white, and Latino families of similar composition. White families tend to be better off in economic terms than comparably structured black and Latino families. This fact tends to dampen the unqualified claim that "family breakup" causes poverty. There are examples of other national social welfare systems that do not reflect a strong correlation between single, female heads of houshold and poverty status. Sweden is one such example. As Goldberg and Kremin write:
"In the United States it has long been assumed that there is a direct link between poverty and family composition, of single motherhood. However, Sweden has gone far toward breaking this link-- a notable achievement. Single motherhood is about as prevalent in Sweden as it is in the United states. By using a combination of of labor market and and social policies... Sweden has achieved a relatively low rate of poverty for single parent families.
As the case of Sweden suggests, the relationship between single female heads of households and poverty status is not predetermined. Even in the United States, there are some periods when increasing the rate of labor-force participation for women, coupled with decent wages, has reduced poverty status for single female headed families. For example, in reviewing the post-World War Two, Richard X. Chase reports that increasing labor force participation rates for women during that period resulted in some reduction in the poverty rate for female headed households. Chase's study shows that the incidence of poverty for all female headed families, was reduced from 51.5 percent in 1947 to 49.2% in 1956, and 47.6% in 1963. These reductions were due to the increasing labor-participation rate of women earning wages that enabled them to live above the poverty level. During these same years however, the incidence for poverty in male headed families fell even more dramatically from 29.9% in 1947 to 19.8% in 1956, and to 15.6% in 1963.
So we have now examined two variables that can effect poverty. Both of which point to blacks and Latinos having it worse than their white couterparts, now what does this have to do with intelligence? Simple, let us look at the SAT scores in 1986 (combined math and verbal)
------------------------------------------------- Racial Group Average Score
Japanese 43,493 28.4 Asian Indian 39,739 70.4 Fillipino 37,662 64.6 Chinese 35,869 63.3 White 33,412 3.9 Korean 32,530 81.9 Hawaiian 30,522 1.6 Cuban 29,010 77.9 Mexican 23,476 26.0 Eskimo 21,988 1.5 American Indian 21,748 2.5 Vietnamese 20,415 90.5 Black 20,077 2.8
As you can see, the ethnic group that scored the lowest on the SAT, also had the lowest income.
Source: A New introduction to Poverty, The Role of Race Power, and Politics
Edited by Louis Kushnick and James Jennings
[/QB]
Furthermore:
Black African Immigrants Significantly Exceed Whites in Level of Education:
African-born blacks comprise about 16 percent of the U.S. foreign-born black population (U.S. Bureau of the Census, 2000), and are “considerably” more educated than other immigrants. The vast majority of these immigrants come from minority white countries in East and West Africa (e.g. Kenya and Nigeria). While less than 2 percent originate from North or South Africa (CIA World Factbook, 2004; Yearbook of immigration Statistics, 2003). An analysis of Census Bureau data by The Journal of Blacks in Higher Education (1999-2000) and the “Lewis Mumford Center for Comparative Urban and Regional Research” (2003) find that Black African immigrants to the United States are more likely to be college educated than ‘any’ other immigrant group, which included those from Europe, North America and Asia (see also Nisbett, 2002; U.S. Bureau of the Census, 2000). African immigrants have also been shown to be more highly educated than any native-born ethnic group including white and Asian Americans (Logan & Deane, 2003; Williams, 2005; The Economist, 1996; Arthur, 2000; Selassie, 1998; Nisbett, 2002).
Most research suggests that between 43.8 and 49.3 percent of “all” African immigrants in the United States hold a college diploma (Nisbett, 2002; Charles, 2007; U.S. Census, 2000). This is slightly more than the percentage of Asian immigrants to the U.S., substantially greater than the percentage of European immigrants, nearly “double” that of native-born white Americans, nearly four times the rate of native-born African Americans, and more than “8 times” that of some Hispanic groups (Williams, 2005; Nisbett, 2002; Kent, 2007; The Journal of Blacks in Higher Education, 1999-2000; U.S. Census, 2000)! Black immigrants from Africa have also been shown to have rates of college graduation that are “more” than double that of the U.S. born population, in general (Williams, 2005). For example, in 1997, 19.4 percent of all adult African immigrants in the United States held a “graduate degree”, compared to 8.1 percent of adult whites (a difference of “more than” double) and 3.8 percent of adult blacks in the United States, respectively (The Journal of Blacks in Higher Education, 1999-2000). This shows that America has an equally large achievement gap between white Americans and African born immigrants as between native born white and black Americans.
In the UK, 1988, the Commission for Racial Equality conducted an investigation on the admissions practices of St. George's, and other medical colleges, who set aside a certain number of places for minority students. This informal quota system reflected the percentage of minorities in the general population. It was discovered that minority students with Chinese, Indian, or black African heritage had higher academic qualifications for university admission than did whites (Blacks in Britain from the West Indies had lower academic credentials than did whites). In fact, blacks with African origins over the age of 30 had the highest educational qualifications of any ethnic group in the British Isles (Cross, 1994). According to the 1991 British Census, 26.5 percent of black Britons who were born in Africa had at least some college education. In contrast, only 13.4 percent of white Britons had gone to college.Thus, the evidence pointed to the fact that minority quotas for university admissions were actually working against students from these ethnic groups who were on average more qualified for higher education than their white peers (Cross, 1994; Also see, Dustmann and Theodoropoulos, 2006).
Dustmann and Theodoropoulos (2006) provided the first thorough investigation of educational attainment and economic behavior of ethnic minority immigrants and their children in Britain. This study investigated how British born minorities performed in terms of education, employment and wages when compared to their parent’s generation, as well as to comparable groups of white natives using 27 years of “LFS data” (Labour Force Survey). In both generations Black Africans topped the list in both years of schooling/educational qualifications and wages/employment followed by Indian and Chinese immigrants. This study generally found a strong educational background for Britain’s ethnic minority immigrant population; with second generation ethnic minorities, ‘on average’, doing better than their parents, and “substantially better” than their white peers in most socio-economic indicators and outcomes.
Again, when comparing immigrants in the United States one quickly finds that the racialist models adopted by many Psychologists do not always predict outcomes in the way one might expect. For example, it has been shown that black immigrants born from Zimbabwe (96.7 percent), Botswana (95.5 percent) have high school graduation rates that far exceed all white immigrant and native born groups. While the average Nigerian immigrant (58.6 percent) living in the United States is “eight times” more likely to have obtained a bachelors degree than the average Portuguese born (7.3 percent) (Dixon D, 2006; Dixon D, 2005)!
The African born in the United States are concentrated in management or professional and sales or office-related occupations. Of the employed population age 16 and older in the civilian labor force, the African born are much more likely than the foreign born in general to work in management and professional occupations as well as sales and office occupations (i.e. clerical/administrative). Additionally, the African born are less likely to work in service, production, transportation, material moving, construction, and maintenance occupations than the foreign born in general (Dixon D, 2006). In the UK a study by Li and Heath, from Birmingham University and Oxford University (respectively), found that Africans are more likely to be in professional and managerial jobs than white British men, with a large proportion, about 40%, holding these positions (Li and Heath, 2006; Cassidy, 2006). Black African Educational Attainment and their Implications for IQ:
The information presented above suggests that African born blacks residing in western countries as a group possess IQs that are between 5 points and a full standard deviation (15 IQ points) above that of whites living in these countries (see, Gottfredson, 1998; Ostrowsky, 1999; Richardson, 2002; Cross, 1994; Williams, 2005; Nisbett, 2002). So that if one accepts the research suggesting direct casual relationships between academic attainment and IQ (Gottfredson, 1998; Ostrowsky, 1999) the median IQ for African blacks residing in the west should be about 110! This is especially true for those living in the United States and in the UK. One may also expect to find, according to much of the “corroborative” literature that relates IQ with education, approximately twice the number of African born immigrants with IQs in the 115 range, than among the general white American population (Gottfredson, 1998; Ostrowsky, 1999; Williams, 2005; Nisbett, 2002); and more than twice the number of African immigrants in the 125 IQ range (see Gottfredson, 1998; Nisbett, 2002; The Journal of Blacks in Higher Education, 1999-2000). For example, in the United States, African born blacks and their offspring have been reported to exceed American born whites in several of the most cognitive socio-economic indicators – ‘the areas of educational attainment and occupational status’ -- in ways that are virtually identical to the gaps observed between native born white and black Americans (Nisbett, 2002; Charles, 2007; Le, 2007; Le, 2007; US Census Bureau, Census 2000. "5% Public Use Microdata Sample.").
Some advantages to using academic attainment comparisons for the analysis of major group differences in IQ in Western industrialized nations are that they provide very big numbers, sample sizes often in the hundreds of thousands, that are genuinely random; and consequently specific ethnicities can be compared with statistical confidence. Evidence shows that the differences in overall educational attainment observed between African born blacks in the United States and UK and native born whites are quite spectacular! Indeed, if one chooses to adopt the racial hereditarian thinking of Jensen (1980), Herrnstein and Murray (1994) or Gottfredson (1998), these disparities become suggestive of underlying intelligence differences between the two populations; with these differences in “strong favor” of African born blacks! Though higher cognitive indices are said by some to be predictive of more educational achievements and more education predictive of higher intellectual outcomes (e.g., Brody, 1997; Ceci & Williams, 1997), so that there are reciprocal relationships. Most who study African immigrants attribute their inclination toward academic attainment to be the result of positive cultural factors (Arthur, 2000; Selassie, 1998).
In the United States today, most claims regarding differences between ethnic ‘populations’ in relationship to IQ test performance are based on statistically derived data that relate to scholastic aptitude tests (e.g. Flynn, 2006). With this in mind, and acknowledging the superior educational attainment of African blacks in the United States (and elsewhere) it can thus be argued, because of their superior educational attainment levels, that they must also surmount far more in number and more difficult scholastic aptitude tests, in general, which in turn would require higher level IQs (see Gottfredson, 1998; Ostrowsky, 1999). As whites on average do not, or are unable to attain the same levels of academic achievement within these (their own!) academic institutional frameworks, they must also by the racialist thinking employed by some, possess significantly lower cogitative indices on the group level (e.g. Jensen, 1980; Gottfredson, 1986, 1998). In fact, attainment differences of these ‘grand’ magnitudes would suggest that American whites, in particular, are at a significant intellectual handicap when matched against immigrants of black African, East Indian, and East Asian descent. Incidentally, most American whites themselves are the children or grandchildren of “self-selected,” voluntary immigrants from Europe (Ogbu and Simons, 1998), and thus these trends can not be said to result from immigrant selectivity.
African born blacks residing in Western countries tend also to be concentrated in higher level professional occupations, which are considered (by some) to be more intellectually demanding; requiring greater cognitive ability (Jensen, 1980; Gottfredson, 1986; Herrnstein and Murray, 1994), than the average occupations of either American or British born whites (Nisbett, 2002; Dixon, 2006; Li and Heath, 2006; Dustmann and Theodoropoulos, 2006). According to IQ advocates and social Darwinists, alike, these occupational differences should also be indicative of higher levels of intelligence among black African immigrants than among whites (e.g. Gottfredson, 1986; Jensen 1980). Cole (1990), argues that the relevance of school-based skills, such as those found on IQ and scholastic aptitude tests, will grow as the outside-of-school contexts becomes more like that of school itself. While demand for these kinds of school based skills are found most frequently among the clerical/administrative occupations (Richardson, 2002) which African born blacks residing in western countries tend to be found overrepresented (Nisbett, 2002; Dixon, 2006). In fact, as virtually all IQ tests in popular use today were designed specifically for the purposes of predicting academic success and occupational status, it could thus be argued that the west’s hereditarian “Cognitive Elite” (discussed in “The Bell Curve”) could be best described as black men and women from Africa.
Something else to note, according to the New York Times (Roberts, 2005), for the first time in history more blacks are coming to the United States from Africa than during the entire span of the transatlantic slave trade: “Immigration figures show that since 1990 more Africans have arrived voluntarily than the total who disembarked in chains before the United States outlawed international slave trafficking in 1807. “ For example, research shows that around 15% of Ghana’s 20million citizens live aboard (Owusu-Ankomah 2006). Similar trends can be observed among other African states. The U.S. Census Bureau's 2005 American Community Survey counted 114,000 black African immigrants in the Washington metropolitan area, alone, accounting for about 11 percent of the area’s total immigrant population. Less than 6 percent arrived before 1980. In other words: black African achievement can not simply be dismissed as that of a “small group” of elites entirely unrepresentative of the greater continent. Moreover, the academic attainment and occupational achievements of black Africans are not only documented in the United States, but also the UK (Li and Heath, 2006; Dustmann, Theodoropoulos, 2006) and Canada (Guppy and Davies, 1998; Boyd, 2002; The Canadian Encyclopedia, 2008). Culture, Race and Intelligence Testing:
It is taken for granted by many in the West that children who do well on standardized tests are intelligent. However, different cultures have their on views of what intelligence is and often these views do not resemble western notions (Sternberg, 2007; Cole, 1990; Cole et al. 1971; Greenfield, 1997). In this respect, people that are considered intelligent may vary from one culture to another, along with the acts that constitute intelligent behavior (Sternberg, 2007). It has been said, for example, that the comparison of IQ scores of different nationalities or cultural groups is, at best, a hazardous enterprise and at worst a nonsensical and mischievous waste of time (Mackintosh, 1998).
In addition, few researchers ever apply standardized measures that are either preferred by or normed in favor of those whose livelihoods or day to day lives are more closely associated with the informal sectors and/or economically disparaged segments of society to those from more affluent or formal society, in order to provide some kind of balance. It has been shown, for example, that tests which are highly novel in one culture or subculture may be quite familiar in the next (Valsiner, 2000), so that, for instance, unschooled subjects may fail at classification tasks characteristic of school learning contexts and succeed with classification relevant to their own everyday practical experiences (Cole, 1990; Cole et al. 1971). That is, even if components of information processing are the same, the experiential novelty to which they are applied may be different (Valsiner, 2000; Sternberg, 2004). Thus, the structure of thought depends upon the structure of the dominant types of activity in different cultures. In other words, people will be good at doing those things that are important to them and that they have opportunities to do often.
A study by Serpell (1979) highlighted this well. Zambian and English children were asked to reproduce patterns using three media alternatives (wire, clay, or pencil and paper). It was found that the Zambian children excelled in the wire medium with which they were most familiar, exceeding the English children in that task; while the English children were best with pencil and paper. Both groups were found to perform equally well with clay. Thus, children performed better with the materials that were more familiar to them from their own environments. A study by Carraher et al (1985) also demonstrated examples of this effect, this time in a group of Brazilian children. The study found that the same children who were able to do the mathematics needed to run their street businesses were often unable to do “the same” mathematics when presented in a more formal (grade schooling) context.
Cole et al (1971) studied a tribe in Africa called the “Kpelle” in which culture was shown to have a rather humorous effect on interpretations of intelligence. In this study adult participants were asked to sort items into categories. However, rather than producing the kind of taxonomic categories (e.g. "fruit" for apple) typically done in the west, the Kpelle participants sorted items into functional groups (e.g. "eat" for apple). After trying and “failing” to teach them to categorize items taxonomically, the Kpelle were asked as a last resort how a “stupid” person would do the task. At that point, according to the researchers, without any hesitation, the Kpelle sorted items into taxonomic categories (Cole et al., 1971)! Demonstrating that not only where these individuals able to do the presented tasks, but in their own culture, what was considered intelligent by western views was thought to be “stupid.” Education, Literacy, Culture and Standardized Tests --When Blacks Exceed Whites!
Crawford-Nutt (1976) found that African black students enrolled in westernized schools scored higher on progressive matrix tests than did American white students. The study was meant to examine perceptual/cultural differences between groups, and demonstrated that one’s performance on western standardized tests may actually correspond more closely with the quality and style of schooling that one receives more so than other factors. These findings closely support research suggesting that the forms of recognition and reasoning found on Progressive Matrixes tests are exercised and maintained within a western style educational setting (Ceci & Williams, 1997; Ceci, 1991; Richardson, 2000, 2002). Buj (1981) also showed Ghanaian adults in another study to score higher on the same supposedly ‘culture fair’ intelligence test than did Irish adults; scores were 80 (Ghanaian) and 78 (Irish), respectively. While Shuttleworth-Edwards et al (2004) in a study with black South Africans between the ages of 19–30, showed highly significant effects for both level and quality of education within groups whose first language was an indigenous black African language. For example, black African first language groups (as well as white English speaking groups) with “advantaged education” were comparable with the US standardization in IQ test scores (e.g. WAIS-III).
Other programs have shown dramatic improvement in test scores for socially disadvantaged adolescents as a result of short-term cognitive training, so that "…three months later their performance was indistinguishable from that of middle class students” (Feuerstein & Kozulin, 1995, p. 74). Studies done with Ethiopian immigrant students coming from extraordinarily poor rural circumstances tested in Israel by different IQ tests had, in pre-intervention tests, demonstrated lower test scores than the Israeli norm. However, after a short but intensive teaching process the Ethiopian immigrant children performed at about the same level as the Israeli norm (Tzuriel & Kaufman, 1999; Kozulin, 1998).
Bond (1924) early last century pointed out that the average IQ scores of African Americans from several northern states were higher than those for whites from many southern states (Bond, 1924a, p. 63). He argued that African Americans who migrated to the North must have left their "duller and less accomplished White fellows in the South." Bond also believed that IQ test scores reflected social and educational training. Inline with this belief, Jenkins's (1936) reported the results of IQ tests given to Black and White children in Illinois, and found that the proportion of students with scores over 130 was the same among Black and White children when environmental influences were comparable. A later study, involving Caribbean children, would in essence replicate these findings. The results from that study showed that when raised in the same enriched institutional environments as white children, black children demonstrated superior IQ test scores. IQs were: Black children 108, Mixed children 106, and White children 103 (Tizard et al, 1972).
Studies also show that upward of 99% of group IQ score differences between healthy black and white Americans are eliminated after controlling for cultural factors. Manly et al (1998) found that after cultural factors such as linguistic behavior (e.g. black vs. standard English) are controlled between healthy black and white Americans that IQ score differences between these populations virtually disappear; becoming insignificant in all but only one area (a reading section)! Some argue that because those who construct standardized tests come from a narrow social group that it follows that test items will contain information and structures that match the background knowledge of some people more than others (Richardson, 2000). This may explain why “acculturation” is found to predict IQ score differences better than virtually any other variable, aside from literacy levels (which is essentially another mediator of culture). Other studies have shown similar results, after controlling for cultural factors. Fagan and Holland (2002) found that where exposure to specific information was required; whites knew more about the meanings of different sayings than did Blacks, due to exposure. But, when comprehension was based on generally available information, Whites and Blacks did not differ (Fagan and Holland, 2002; see also, Fagan and Holland, 2007). This study also found that when Blacks and Whites are matched as to the comprehension of sayings requiring specific knowledge that Blacks were superior to Whites on intelligence tests (ibid).
Teng and Manly (2005) argue that tests developed for members of the majority culture are often inappropriate for ethnic minorities, especially those who speak a different language, have little or no formal education, and grow up in vastly different circumstances (see also, Williams, 1972; Boone et al, 2007). These researchers further argue that variables that directly affect test performance, such as education and acculturation instead of race or ethnicity, should be considered as explanatory variables for test performance (Teng and Manly, 2005). Boone et al (2007) obtained findings that further supported this line, as not ethnic differences, but the effects of acculturation directly and significantly influenced IQ test performance. The authors cautioned that normative data derived on Caucasian samples may not be appropriate for use with other ethnic groups (Boone et al, 2007). Ryan et al (2005) found that discrepancy in reading and education level was associated with worse psychological test performance (e.g. IQ and other tests), while racial/ethnic minority status was not. Educational Bias:
In the United States, when matched for IQ with Whites, American Blacks have been shown to demonstrate superior “Working Memory” (Nijenhuis et al., 2004). This is a particularly interesting finding as African Americans tend to be taught by less qualified teachers (e.g. non-certified teachers and teachers with limited experience) than their white counterparts, and are provided with less challenging school work (Hallinan 1994; Diamond et al., 2004; Uhlenberg and Brown 2004). In Chicago, for example, the vast majority of schools placed on academic probation as part of the district accountability efforts were majority African-American and low-income (Diamond and Spillane 2004). Thus, it is somewhat of a surprise that African Americans should outperform white Americans on any portion of a paper and pencil test designed to mimic the structures of western style schooling and culture (Richardson, 2000, 2002).
Educational inequality in the U.S. is a pervasive part of the social system and is primarily a consequence of housing. Since the majority of states determine school funding based on property taxes, schools in wealthier neighborhoods receive more funding per student. As home values in white neighborhoods are higher than minority neighborhoods, local schools receive more funding via property taxes (Kelly, 1995). In addition, there has been a history of social policy which has limited African American’s access to avenues of wealth accumulation (e.g. purchasing suburban homes); so that black families also have far fewer assets than their white counterparts who earn the same incomes (Oliver and Shapiro, 1995). Parents with greater assets are free to use them for things like tutors, purchasing educational materials (e.g. computers), and to pay for private schools and more expensive colleges.
In a study which helped to highlight the need for better education for African American children, Serpell et al. (2006) took 162 low-income African American and white fourth graders and assigned them, randomly, to ethnically homogeneous groups of three to work on a motion acceleration task, using computer simulation or physical tools. Or to a control group that did not participate in the learning activities. It was shown that both African American and White students performed equally well on the test of initial learning, with both groups scoring significantly higher than the control group. However, it was also found that African American children’s transfer outcomes were superior to those of their White counterparts (see Serpell et al., 2006). The study demonstrated, empirically, that not only do African American children learn as well as white children, but that they may actually exceed their white counterparts in their ability to transfer learned abilities to real tasks. A Closer Look at Culturally Bias Testing:
Barnes (1972) noted that the Stanford-Binet, and the Wisc IQ tests are examples of “Culture specific tests,” and that the culture in this instance is what is referred to as “white middle class” culture. Lyman (1970) designed a cross cultural test called the “American Cross Culture Ethnic Nomenclature Test”, or “ACCENT.” The instrument contained 20 black biased and 20 white biased items. In one experiment this test was administered to 110 undergraduates (91 whites and 19 blacks) where it was found that the black participants out performed the white participants. Blacks obtained a mean of 15.3 on the black items and 11.1 on the white items, while white subjects obtained a mean of 12.7 on the white items and 8.3 on the black items. The results of this study indicated that when blacks and whites are tested cross-culturally that blacks may outperform whites on standardized tests.
Williams and Rivers (1972b) showed that test instructions in Standard English penalize the black child and that if the language of the test is put in familiar labels, without training or coaching, the black child’s performance on the tests increase significantly. Ideally a child’s language development should be evaluated in terms of his progress toward the norms for his own particular speech community (Cadzen, 1966); however, this kind of evaluation is rarely, if ever, done with respect to African Americans. Studies using sentence repetition tasks have found that at both third and fifth grades white subjects repeated Standard English sentences significantly more accurately than black subjects, while black subjects repeated nonstandard English sentences significantly more accurately than did white subjects (Marwit et al, 1977). Students in American schools are usually taught and tested only in Standard English, which can put African American students at a disadvantage. In fact, this issue was at the center debates concerning the use of Ebonics in the American school system during the 1990s.
Researchers provide considerable evidence showing that traditional psychological assessment is based on skills that are considered important within white, western, middle-class culture, but which may not be salient or valued within African-American culture (Helms, 1992; Helms, 1997; Hilliard, 1995; Boone et al, 2007; Teng and Manly, 2005). Kwate (2001) argues that IQ tests are antagonistic and incompatible with an African centered conception of intelligence and mental health, while a study by Obiakor and Utley (2004) showed that culturally diverse learners are often excluded in educational programs in the U.S. through misidentification, misassessment, miscategorization, misplacement, and misinstruction-misintervention. When test stimuli are more culturally pertinent to the experiences of African Americans, performance improves (Hayles, 1991; Williams and Rivers, 1972b). For example, research shows that “Black Culture” depicts problem solving as an integrative hemispheric endeavor rather than a linear, analytical process (Bell, 1994), and that in this culture "psychological closeness" is necessary for one’s involvement in the phenomena which he seeks to understand.
Studies using empirical methods also find that cultural differences in the provision of information account for racial differences in IQ scores. Fagan and Holland (2007) asked African-Americans and white Americans to solve problems typical of those administered on standard IQ tests. Half of the problems were solvable on the basis of information generally available to either race, or on the basis of information newly learned; while other problems were only solvable on the basis of specific previous knowledge. In this study specific knowledge varied with race and was shown to be subject to test bias (Fagan and Holland, 2007).
Explain why... when blacks have access to the same things as their white counterparts, they exceed them in education? Sorry, your racist ideology is wrong.
Oh yeah, and happy halloween Posts: 1502 | From: Dies Irae | Registered: Oct 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
Like I said Calabooz, the confounding Asian variable CONFOUNDS your theory. One more thing, CalaBOOZ, lay off the booz!
Posts: 2025 | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
Calabooz says: "Explain why... when blacks have access to the same things as their white counterparts, they exceed them in education? Sorry, your racist ideology is wrong."
Please cite a study to substantiate this otheriwise urban legend.
Posts: 2025 | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Gigantic: Calabooz says: "Explain why... when blacks have access to the same things as their white counterparts, they exceed them in education? Sorry, your racist ideology is wrong."
Please cite a study to substantiate this otheriwise urban legend.
Can you read? I already cited my sources. Blacks in the UK outpreform Asians, learn to read. I also explained in great detail the effects of poverty and intelligence, just as I explained how blacks with equal oppurtunities as whites do better than them.
Posts: 1502 | From: Dies Irae | Registered: Oct 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Gigantic: Calabooz says: "Explain why... when blacks have access to the same things as their white counterparts, they exceed them in education? Sorry, your racist ideology is wrong."
Please cite a study to substantiate this otheriwise urban legend.
Can you read? I already cited my sources. Blacks in the UK outpreform Asians, learn to read. I also explained in great detail the effects of poverty and intelligence, just as I explained how blacks with equal oppurtunities as whites do better than them.
Most research suggests that between 43.8 and 49.3 percent of “all” African immigrants in the United States hold a college diploma (Nisbett, 2002; Charles, 2007; U.S. Census, 2000). This is slightly more than the percentage of Asian immigrants to the U.S., substantially greater than the percentage of European immigrants, nearly “double” that of native-born white Americans, nearly four times the rate of native-born African Americans, and more than “8 times” that of some Hispanic groups (Williams, 2005; Nisbett, 2002; Kent, 2007; The Journal of Blacks in Higher Education, 1999-2000; U.S. Census, 2000)! Black immigrants from Africa have also been shown to have rates of college graduation that are “more” than double that of the U.S. born population, in general (Williams, 2005). For example, in 1997, 19.4 percent of all adult African immigrants in the United States held a “graduate degree”, compared to 8.1 percent of adult whites (a difference of “more than” double) and 3.8 percent of adult blacks in the United States, respectively (The Journal of Blacks in Higher Education, 1999-2000). This shows that America has an equally large achievement gap between white Americans and African born immigrants as between native born white and black Americans.
In the UK, 1988, the Commission for Racial Equality conducted an investigation on the admissions practices of St. George's, and other medical colleges, who set aside a certain number of places for minority students. This informal quota system reflected the percentage of minorities in the general population. It was discovered that minority students with Chinese, Indian, or black African heritage had higher academic qualifications for university admission than did whites (Blacks in Britain from the West Indies had lower academic credentials than did whites). In fact, blacks with African origins over the age of 30 had the highest educational qualifications of any ethnic group in the British Isles (Cross, 1994). According to the 1991 British Census, 26.5 percent of black Britons who were born in Africa had at least some college education. In contrast, only 13.4 percent of white Britons had gone to college.Thus, the evidence pointed to the fact that minority quotas for university admissions were actually working against students from these ethnic groups who were on average more qualified for higher education than their white peers (Cross, 1994; Also see, Dustmann and Theodoropoulos, 2006).
Posts: 1502 | From: Dies Irae | Registered: Oct 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
Nobody said that all blacks were low IQ, again you are getting off the subject. There are brilloiant blacks, no doubt but most of their population is very low IQ. The entire nation of hati negates your point.
Posts: 2036 | From: Texas | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Hammer: Nobody said that all blacks were low IQ, again you are getting off the subject. There are brilloiant blacks, no doubt but most of their population is very low IQ. The entire nation of hati negates your point.
Yes, on average blacks have lower IQ's. The reason being cultural and environmental surroundings I already explained it. This is supported by the fact that in the past 30yrs, a time that has been more favorable to blacks, the IQ gap has dropped significantly. And when blacks have equal learning opportunities as their white/Asian counterparts, they do just as well, and in many cases better. This has been explained before.
Posts: 1502 | From: Dies Irae | Registered: Oct 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
I think part of it is cultural but not all. The very fact that they do not seem to be able to adapt to modern western culture indicates a deeper problem and is in itself a sign of low IQ beyond culture. I have always said individual blacks have a good future but blacks as a group do not. Blacks seem happier to be victims than to try to really solve their own problems.
Posts: 2036 | From: Texas | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
calabooz, the study u cite, does it measure Chinese and japanese Asians, or near east Asians iq?
Posts: 1340 | Registered: Apr 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
hammer, us blacks would be doin fine if insane whites didnt want to take over the world and control everything? thats the problem with the world, look what whites do and did to blacks in america and everywhere else.
they destroyed garveys movement,why
they destroyed the black wall street,why
they destroyed the black panthers,why
all because blacks were organising themselves and creating a good future for themselves.
can you refute this??
The I.Q is a white mans feel good concept that acts as a smokescreen that stems from their insecurity about history and biology and spiritual matters.
posted
This actually does bring up an interesting point. Why is it that the East African Aethiopids that are genetically the closest to non-Africans do not have a higher IQ than other Sub-Saharan Blacks?
If IQ was primarily genetic then you would expect that the closer you get to non-Black Africans the higher the IQ but instead Ethiopians have lower IQs than Bantu Ghanians.
This argues that environment has more significance in IQ than what we are currently led to believe. But at the same time, why would Southern Irish have a significantly lower IQ than the Northern ones? The only difference being political and economic.
Posts: 4028 | From: NW USA | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Hammer: I think part of it is cultural but not all. The very fact that they do not seem to be able to adapt to modern western culture indicates a deeper problem and is in itself a sign of low IQ beyond culture. I have always said individual blacks have a good future but blacks as a group do not. Blacks seem happier to be victims than to try to really solve their own problems. [/QUOTE
LOL! The brain is just a muscle, the more exercise it, the stronger it gets. There are some types of intelligence that are genetic obviously (Downs Syndrome), but seriously, you people think blacks as a group have no future? LOL! How can you say that? African immigrants do better than whites, blacks in equal learning areas on average do just as well and many times better, they are doing well in the UK. The only problem is racism and discrimination.. I went into that a little above. Also, how do you mean "unable to adapt to western culture"? That is the most retarded thing I have ever heard. And why do you say they are happy to be victims? It is the other way around in many cases, it is people like you who BLAME the victim (e.g., blacks, Hispanics and other minorities), you have no idea what is happening in the real world. You think people aren't trying? You think they're not improving? You think as a group they have no feature? You are an ignoramus! Obviously some ethnic groups place more pressure on their children than others, so those children will succeed. If you think things aren't improving... you need to get a life Posts: 1502 | From: Dies Irae | Registered: Oct 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by osirion: This actually does bring up an interesting point. Why is it that the East African Aethiopids that are genetically the closest to non-Africans do not have a higher IQ than other Sub-Saharan Blacks?
If IQ was primarily genetic then you would expect that the closer you get to non-Black Africans the higher the IQ but instead Ethiopians have lower IQs than Bantu Ghanians.
This argues that environment has more significance in IQ than what we are currently led to believe. But at the same time, why would Southern Irish have a significantly lower IQ than the Northern ones? The only difference being political and economic.
quote:Originally posted by osirion: This actually does bring up an interesting point. Why is it that the East African Aethiopids that are genetically the closest to non-Africans do not have a higher IQ than other Sub-Saharan Blacks?
If IQ was primarily genetic then you would expect that the closer you get to non-Black Africans the higher the IQ but instead Ethiopians have lower IQs than Bantu Ghanians.
That would make sense, but how does schooling determine IQ? Just wondering This argues that environment has more significance in IQ than what we are currently led to believe. But at the same time, why would Southern Irish have a significantly lower IQ than the Northern ones? The only difference being political and economic.
posted
Victimization is at the core of their world view for most black people. It is so deeply ingrained in their thinking it is amost impossible to deal with. They take a position that opposes western civilization and what they see that it represents. I disagree with you about IQ. All our research shows that if you are not reading on grade level in the first grade you never will.
Posts: 2036 | From: Texas | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Gigantic: Black Egypt is the source of esteem to an otherwise humiliated people. Take away Black Egypt and what you have is a people without history, or at least, history that rises to the standards of the west. This is something that MUST be avoided AT ALL COST! And so, they will fight to death for Black Egypt.
American Negroes, especially the Afrocentrist ones, would rather embrace pseudo-history (Black Egypt) than admit to a humble beginning; that is, history as defined by the white western world. In the west, spear-chucking aint all that. Just saying.
quote:Originally posted by Hammer: These guys are like children. Instead of dealig with the deep and serious problems in black communities people like Mike want to be victims and blame everyone else for their problems. That is where all this black egypt crap comes from.
Its not that simple for all of us. For me it really comes down to finding the evidence of a Black African Egypt ( at least in as much as Ethiopians and other horn Africans are Black ) very compelling. For me this was well before I heard of Afrocentrics. Just bored and spent too much time in the library in my college years.
Just assumed they were Arabs before those days.
And then I saw Pepi:
And I saw a lot more variations of Pepi. And then I noticed the clothing, the hair, and then the skin color. How they reminded me so much of my own Black Moor roots and even Fulani ancestry.
Then you start to question the missing noses and so on. Then you read about it and it only gets better.
So now I am pretty much confident that people like you are full of it. You have a double standard and in fact your self esteem is founded on lies that you need to maintine. Lies of White supremacy that drives your decision making.
Posts: 4028 | From: NW USA | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Why do you insist on speaking for black people? You have been constantly speaking like you have a solution to black problems, but yet you can't take care of your own asss. You motherfuckkers play victim more than any group. Stop speaking for us. I am not anybody's victim. You need to work on your own community. Do you honestly think blacks don't know what is going on in the white community?
Like I said, I would put my money on a little black girl than a little white boy any day. Any teacher who is honest will tell the little black girls are kicking everybody's ass real decently in the classrooms.
These children as young as they are already know his-story is fucked up and boring. We need to keep the old miserable politicians from dictating what the children learn in the classrooms and rely on the real educators to make the determination what is best for the children.
Little black girls come out of the womb reading.
Posts: 36 | Registered: Sep 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
Enough with the strawman already! AE was NOT white!
quote:Originally posted by osirion: you have a double standard and in fact your self esteem is founded on lies that you need to maintine. Lies of White supremacy that drives your decision making.
posted
Confirming, Did you just arrive here from Pluto. We live in a world built and created by Euro-American civilization. You just proved my point whith the white supramacy remark. Why do you think the Zulu's were throwing spears at the British? come on man...think and stop the victim crap.
-------------------- The tree of liberty is watered by the blood of tyrants. Posts: 2036 | From: Texas | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
You wouldn't dare admit little black girls are raising hell.
I woke up long time ago. It is 2010 and you are still sleepwalking.
How in the fuckk do you know what is better for blacks, when you can't solve the bullshit in your own community. That bullshitt is crazy as hell.
Posts: 36 | Registered: Sep 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
Hammer, we blacks owe you a tremendous, THANK YOU!
Standing next to you, every black person can be seen as having God-like Infinite Intelligence.
Your main problem lies within the fact that you fail to realize that Black Americans know whites at least a magnitude more than whites know us. We observe you shaking in your little booties every time we approach your scared flat asses. Don't think that your own women don't see the FEAR in you. They do, and they pity you.
Posts: 2403 | Registered: Feb 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
Mike, MK is just a field nigger. He is incapable of a rational conversation with anyone. He is you on steriods. All he does is scream his bizarre ideology and throws turds at anyone he can. Nobody cares what he thinks.
Posts: 2036 | From: Texas | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Hammer: Why do you think the Zulu's were throwing spears at the British? come on man...think and stop the victim crap.
Even dumber, is gun-equipped troops loosing a battle to spear-throwing simpletons.
Posts: 7516 | From: Somewhere on Earth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
Hammer, if you think ancient Egypt was white, you are a fool. While I will agree with you that AEians were not Negro, but surely you must know they were not white either?
quote:Originally posted by Hammer: Confirming, Did you just arrive here from Pluto. We live in a world built and created by Euro-American civilization. You just proved my point whith the white supramacy remark. Why do you think the Zulu's were throwing spears at the British? come on man...think and stop the victim crap.
quote:Originally posted by Confirming Truth: Hammer, if you think ancient Egypt was white, you are a fool. While I will agree with you that AEians were not Negro, but surely you must know they were not white either?
quote:Originally posted by Hammer: Confirming, Did you just arrive here from Pluto. We live in a world built and created by Euro-American civilization. You just proved my point whith the white supramacy remark. Why do you think the Zulu's were throwing spears at the British? come on man...think and stop the victim crap.
technically they were whigros
Posts: 43007 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:If IQ was primarily genetic then you would expect that the closer you get to non-Black Africans the higher the IQ but instead Ethiopians have lower IQs than Bantu Ghanians.
Osirion, Ghanians are not Bantu You should know that by now. And by the way "Bantu" refers to language, not ethnicity.
Posts: 5492 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Hammer: Little black girls have horrible reading scores, wake up
Osirion, Pepi was far from black, it is time to stop the victimization and grow up.
Southern Egypt is to this day a people of significant Horn African presence. It has been proven that the Nile acted as a bi-directional channel. From North Kenya to the Egyptian Delta, there is clear evidence of back and forth migration since the Upper Holocene.
Black Egyptian heritage is the opposite of victimization. Black dominance over Whites in the various dynasties should really make us Blacks less hostile to Europeans in terms of how they have treated us.
You are really confused. A Black Egypt means that we no longer have anything to complain about in terms of slavery and oppression. At the same time, it is our own slave culture that is hindering us since we clearly are able to produce highly sophisticated cultures. We need to recognize our potential and shed the dependence on White handouts and sympathy. I have no animosity towards people of European origin precisely because I recognize that when Blacks are dominanting they too would oppress minority groups and have. I recognize that this is a human condition and that the poor will always fall victim to those that have resources and the solution to that is to not be poor. Innovation is the cure to poverty.
Posts: 4028 | From: NW USA | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:If IQ was primarily genetic then you would expect that the closer you get to non-Black Africans the higher the IQ but instead Ethiopians have lower IQs than Bantu Ghanians.
Osirion, Ghanians are not Bantu You should know that by now. And by the way "Bantu" refers to language, not ethnicity.
Are you saying the Twee is not related to the Bantu family of languages?
Posts: 4028 | From: NW USA | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:If IQ was primarily genetic then you would expect that the closer you get to non-Black Africans the higher the IQ but instead Ethiopians have lower IQs than Bantu Ghanians.
Osirion, Ghanians are not Bantu You should know that by now. And by the way "Bantu" refers to language, not ethnicity.
Is this map wrong? It shows that Bantu is directly related to the languages of Ghana. Not exactly the same but having essentially the same origin. I am not going to split hairs - a Niger Congo language means Bantu to me.
quote:Originally posted by the lioness: Originally posted by Confirming Truth: Hammer, if you think ancient Egypt was white, you are a fool. While I will agree with you that AEians were not Negro, but surely you must know they were not white either?
Lioness - technically they were whigros
Ha, ha, ha, Good one Lioness.
But don't you see; when you disagree with Whites being Albinos, you are in the same boat as "Confirming Truth".
Mindless, afraid to face the facts, denial. When you do that, you sound just as silly as "Confirming Truth."
Posts: 22721 | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Hammer: Confirming, Did you just arrive here from Pluto. We live in a world built and created by Euro-American civilization. You just proved my point whith the white supramacy remark. Why do you think the Zulu's were throwing spears at the British? come on man...think and stop the victim crap.
Shut up Hammer! Did the Anguluus invent the gunpowder?
Lion!
Posts: 7419 | From: North America | Registered: Mar 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ You are right IronLion. Both factually and technically, whites have never invented anything of importance on their own. What they have done is use merchants (Jews) to ACQUIRE foreign technologies, religions and culture, and merged these foreign inventions into their own culture-less (People Of The Sea) society.
Not only didn't whites invent gunpowder, they also did not invent projectile weapons. These too were invented by the Asian. Up to the late 1500s (just 500 years ago) whites were still calling coal by the unscientific description, MAGIC BLACK STONES. Africans and Asians had been utilizing coal for thousands of years before whites even knew what it was, or it's many uses.
Posts: 2403 | Registered: Feb 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
MK and lion - Boys, come on, I have posted on this many times.
Gunpowder is controversial: choose Indians or Chinese (used for fun).
The actual "GUN" which used that gunpowder to fire a projectile with; Well that was invented by one of those all-but-forgotten, but still BRILLIANT Niggers in Egypt.
The Caliphs Turk Slave soldiers (Mamluks) used that Egyptian gun, to beat back the Mongols at the battle of Ayn Jalut (halfway between Jerusalem and Acre in Palestine) in 1260 A.D.
Posts: 22721 | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
I mentioned "projectile" with the development of the large scale aerial missile, that I assumed was first invented in Asia. The Koreans as I recall, some 400 years prior to Europe stealing the concept. However, I have read Indian texts that state the missile (and flying machines) were used in India some 10,000 years ago.
Anyway, the point remains the same. It wasn't whites (Europeans) who invented either, or anything else for that matter.
Posts: 2403 | Registered: Feb 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
^The Asians used gunpowder for fireworks and the like. The Egyptians were the first to develop a cannon to weaponize gunpowder.
On a related point. Members spend a lot of time answering and reanswering the same bullsh1t, like Egyptians weren't Black.
Meanwhile really important questions like below, are never talked about.
What were the social and political dynamics of Egypt during the Greek period, that prevented Egyptians from freeing themselves?
Greeks were mainly in Alexandria AND, no way they had an army large enough to police all of Egypt.
There WERE rebellions, why didn't these rebellions spread?
The last rebellion in southern Egypt, which eventually caused the fall of the Ptolemy's and the Romans taking over: why didn't Egyptians in northern Egypt join in?
The Arab period:
Okay, the Egyptians were glad to see the Albinos go, so they may have welcomed the Arabs.
But when they saw other Albinos (the Turks) taking over, why didn't they rebel then - they knew how to make superior weapons. Why didn't having new White masters bother them?
The Negros in the south.
64 years after the battle of Ayn Jalut, Mansa Musa made a pilgrimage to Mecca in 1324. Talk of the Gun must have still been fresh in everybody's mind. Mansa Musa MUST have heard about it: Why didn't he get some guns.
Yes,yes, I know that the Turks had already taken over from the Arab caliphs in 1050. But Mansa Musa is reported to have traveled with 60,000 men - he could TAKE whatever he wanted.
Why did he and the other Negros of the south, leave southern Africa vulnerable to the Gun?
Posts: 22721 | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
I apologize, but I could care less about the debates of which periods of Egypt or which Pharaohs of Egypt was black. That's really just too far in the past for my immediately considerations. Particularly, when we have so much reality to deal with in the Here and Now.
Those are all great questions and worthy of further research to find answers.
My immediate guess (sans any formal research) would be that the Turks, with their close ties to trading and bartering amongst the nations, were very skilled in the early art of the bribe.
As we see today, a bribe to the right person or people in the right position can easily topple a nation.
Regarding the Hykos, are you familiar with the Masonic myth of Harim Abif?
From Wiki: Hiram Abiff is a character who figures prominently in an allegorical[1] play that is presented during the third degree of Craft Freemasonry. In this play, Hiram is presented as being the chief architect of King Solomon's Temple, who is murdered by three ruffians during an unsuccessful attempt to force him to divulge the Master Masons' secret password.[2]
It is explained in the lecture that follows this play that the story is a lesson in fidelity to one's word, and in the brevity of life.
Numerous scholars, both Masonic and non-Masonic, have speculated that the character may have been based upon one or more Hirams that appear in the Bible[3]. For example, in the Masonic ritual Hiram is referred to as 'the Widow's Son,' which is similar to a biblical reference to a Hiram found in 1 Kings 7:13–14.
Some scholars have proposed the myth actually extends back to Egypt, prior to the formation of Israel, and that Harim Abif is actually a renaming of a Pharaoh who was murdered at the hands of the Hykos King attempting to gain the secret mysteries of, Pharaoh making. With the murder of this pharaoh and his Priests, Egypt lost the actual ritual of Pharaoh making for all time.
Posts: 2403 | Registered: Feb 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ the gun was considered cowardice. In fact, only Black soldiers used it at first in Egypt.
-------------------- Across the sea of time, there can only be one of you. Make you the best one you can be. Posts: 4028 | From: NW USA | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Hammer: Victimization is at the core of their world view for most black people. It is so deeply ingrained in their thinking it is amost impossible to deal with. They take a position that opposes western civilization and what they see that it represents. I disagree with you about IQ. All our research shows that if you are not reading on grade level in the first grade you never will.
Why do you accuse black people of wanting to be victims? Stop giving your opinion and show some evidence if that is what you think. Remember... the brain is a muscle, exercise it and it will get stronger. IQ tests are really easy, just some math and pattern recognition basically, not that hard...
Posts: 1502 | From: Dies Irae | Registered: Oct 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by MelaninKing: My immediate guess (sans any formal research) would be that the Turks, with their close ties to trading and bartering amongst the nations, were very skilled in the early art of the bribe.
As we see today, a bribe to the right person or people in the right position can easily topple a nation. ...
Bribery and corruption... so true!
Posts: 7419 | From: North America | Registered: Mar 2009
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
But seriously, this is like asking are polar bears smarter than grizzly bears. It's stupid and has been beaten to death on this forum. Only people who contest the obvious are hillbilly weirdos like Gigantic who himself is absurdly unintelligent so he falls back on old race mythologies of the 19th century to overcompensate for his individual failures.
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
Yes, blacks live in very poor areas, and they go to **** schools, which further PROVES that cultural and environmental surroundings play a dominant role. If you grew up, in a poor neighborhood, with terrible schools, terrible surroundings etc., you would have an IQ lower than what you have now (if that is even possible). ![[Embarrassed]](redface.gif)
![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic