Post: #51

^

I know the above is utter nonsense, because the world history of literature from before 1945 is freely available to everyone. There is not a drop of non-jewish marxism or feminism there. None.

Post: #52

(02-11-2017 08:56 PM)rw95 Wrote:  

(02-11-2017 07:23 PM)Lucky Wrote:  

(02-11-2017 05:58 PM)Kona Wrote:  Yale is 72% white. 10% black. 21% Asian. 10% Hispanic. Some % others. And then the Hawaiian guy I know. Students that are mixed get reported in multiple categories.

It looks to me like the majority is white.

72 + 10 + 21 + 10 = 113. Some of the "white" students are not white.

But some are (((white))).

Yale is 27% Jewish.

Jews are 2% of the population.

Why are Jews more than 10X more represented than their national demographic?

Because the Ashkenazi IQ is approximately 110, and as such they will always be overrepresented?

I don't understand this forum sometimes. Supposedly this forum has become "red-pilled" enough to admit IQ differences between blacks and whites. Why can't we admit the (rather large) IQ difference between the whites and the Ashkenazi?

60% of the U.S. consists of white gentiles, average IQ of 100.

On a normal bell curve, about 16% of them have an IQ at or above 115.

16% of 60% means about 10% of the U.S. consists of white gentiles at or above 115 IQ.

10% is much larger than 2%, which is the percentage of Jews in the U.S. population.

Yet Jews outnumber gentiles at Yale and Harvard. Why?

Post: #53

(02-11-2017 08:08 PM)AnonymousBosch Wrote:  This is why I have a hard time believing in any notion of White Supremacy. Killer migraine this morning, so rant incoming:

...snipped for brevity...

You speak as if this all happened in a vacuum.

Leftists took control of the schools in the US a century ago. Control of popular culture has been in the hands of cultural marxists longer than almost all of us have been alive.

How do you expect white people to avoid picking up some socialist thought, if only by osmosis, when they swim in a sea of socialism every day of their lives?

Meanwhile, I'm sorry to say that yes, in this country the minorities do push that socialist bullshit wholesale. Minorities in the US are 37% of the population and vote overwhelmingly for leftist crap. That's a huge handicap for the right to overcome.



Frankly, the only reason the US isn't completely fucked is because of the bulk of white people who do try to resist the changes. So I think it's pretty absurd to claim it's some fundamental flaw in white character that allowed these things to happen. The biggest flaw in white character that I see is being way too fucking nice.

If you want to talk about the flaws of the right, that's a different story and outside the scope of this post. But I have written about those flaws many times before on this forum.

So why are things the way they are today, fundamentally? It's because the left has been fighting and winning the culture war against their enemy, the right, who didn't even show up. Didn't even realize there was a war on.

You want to win? We need to take back popular culture and take back the schools. If we're lucky, we can do it in two generations. But hardly anyone seems to realize where the real war is fought, so I have serious doubts we'll make any headway. Instead we'll keep arguing about stupid shit like this.

Post: #54

(02-11-2017 06:45 PM)weambulance Wrote:  I've never paid much attention to Calhoun. Okay, he was pro slavery. Bad, bad, bad. I don't know much about him.

But, now is as good a time as any to point out that very often historical "bad guys" are painted far worse, and the "good guys" are painted as much more heroic and noble, than they actually were. You have to go look at the source material to see if the claims made in textbooks and in classrooms are accurate.

So was John C Calhoun a "complete fucking asshole"? Maybe. I dunno. But if you've never looked into the source material, you don't either. I know one of his contemporaries, Lincoln, was certainly not the saintly man he's made out to be.

It's disconcerting realizing how much of "history" is just a contrast-enhanced fairy tale.

He was an extremist is the point, and would have probably advocated secession alongside the Confederates had he lived to see the war. (He was such a nut, I wouldn't have been surprised if he pushed for continued guerrilla warfare after defeat.) Calhoun was not going to rest until the institution was forced on all states. His views on slavery were almost like the left acts on abortion.

(There were plenty of pro-slavery people who had no intention of leaving the Union, and didn't care at all if the territories in Kansas and California accepted the institution or not. All they wanted was the institution to stay put.)

He wasn't a figure that we should look positively on, and I don't really mind that his name is being taken off of some buildings (I feel the same on guys like Nathan Bedford Forrest).

However, I'm also not a Southerner and am unfamiliar with his good points, so I'm willing to give him the benefit of the doubt and say, just let the good ol' boys say good things about him if they want to - letting them do stuff like that was one of the concessions we made when we beat them, after all. We've already named half of our military bases after defeated Confederate generals.

See what I described above? That's nuanced. The left, however, just says "he was a pro-slavery white boy" and just puts a big label on him, not knowing the difference between someone like him and Thomas Jefferson. That's why I'm for keeping names like his on the buildings. Maybe they'll pick up a book that isn't Harry Potter.

Post: #55

Quote: Because the Ashkenazi IQ is approximately 110, and as such they will always be overrepresented?

If the Ashkenazi IQ is 110, that's only 5 IQ points higher than White American's 105-average IQ. Meanwhile, the Latino average IQ is 85, and the Black-American average IQ is 80.

Five IQ points represents only one-third of a standard deviation, whereas 20 IQ points represents 1.33 standard deviations.

(You may be citing older measurements of IQ, (100 average, with a 10 standard deviation), but that would be your fault, not mine.)

Post: #56

(02-11-2017 09:32 PM)MMX2010 Wrote:  

Quote: Because the Ashkenazi IQ is approximately 110, and as such they will always be overrepresented?

If the Ashkenazi IQ is 110, that's only 5 IQ points higher than White American's 105-average IQ. Meanwhile, the Latino average IQ is 85, and the Black-American average IQ is 80.

Five IQ points represents only one-third of a standard deviation, whereas 20 IQ points represents 1.33 standard deviations.

(You may be citing older measurements of IQ, (100 average, with a 10 standard deviation), but that would be your fault, not mine.)

I'd like to see these sources you speak of.
From what I've seen, White American IQ is 100 even. Latino is 89, black 85.

Post: #57

(02-11-2017 09:39 PM)rw95 Wrote:  

(02-11-2017 09:32 PM)MMX2010 Wrote:  

Quote: Because the Ashkenazi IQ is approximately 110, and as such they will always be overrepresented?

If the Ashkenazi IQ is 110, that's only 5 IQ points higher than White American's 105-average IQ. Meanwhile, the Latino average IQ is 85, and the Black-American average IQ is 80.

Five IQ points represents only one-third of a standard deviation, whereas 20 IQ points represents 1.33 standard deviations.

(You may be citing older measurements of IQ, (100 average, with a 10 standard deviation), but that would be your fault, not mine.)

I'd like to see these sources you speak of.
From what I've seen, White American IQ is 100 even. Latino is 89, black 85.

The book that is commonly mentioned, "IQ and Global Inequality" (a meta study), puts Germans and Swedes at 102, but keep in mind in 2006 there is already a significant immigrant population in both countries.

However, if you actually look into Azkenazim IQ, you find the IQ to be only greater in the verbal portion of the test, they do worse than whites in the visual-spatial part of the test. Asians do better in the math portion but significantly worse in the verbal.

http://immortallife.info/articles/entry/...ws-so-high

"...A study found that Jews had only mediocre visual-spatial intelligence, while their verbal IQ (which includes verbal reasoning, comprehension and working memory) compensated for this with a high median of 125.6..."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ashkenazi_...telligence

Jews score 125 IQ on the verbal portion of the test (which of these words type questions). That is an absurdly high verbal intelligence, but what does it mean, except the ability to master language? A trait that would have been very useful when migrating from one European country to the next.

Their visual-spatial IQ is only 98, which is below average.

Visual-Spatial intelligence is engineering, architecture, art, design, the ability to visualize that which isn't there in real life. It is what allows people to invent new things.

Post: #58

(02-11-2017 10:18 PM)nomadbrah Wrote:  

(02-11-2017 09:39 PM)rw95 Wrote:  

(02-11-2017 09:32 PM)MMX2010 Wrote:  

Quote: Because the Ashkenazi IQ is approximately 110, and as such they will always be overrepresented?

If the Ashkenazi IQ is 110, that's only 5 IQ points higher than White American's 105-average IQ. Meanwhile, the Latino average IQ is 85, and the Black-American average IQ is 80.

Five IQ points represents only one-third of a standard deviation, whereas 20 IQ points represents 1.33 standard deviations.

(You may be citing older measurements of IQ, (100 average, with a 10 standard deviation), but that would be your fault, not mine.)

I'd like to see these sources you speak of.
From what I've seen, White American IQ is 100 even. Latino is 89, black 85.

The book that is commonly mentioned, "IQ and Global Inequality" (a meta study), puts Germans and Swedes at 102, but keep in mind in 2006 there is already a significant immigrant population in both countries.

However, if you actually look into Azkenazim IQ, you find the IQ to be only greater in the verbal portion of the test, they do worse than whites in the visual-spatial part of the test. Asians do better in the math portion but significantly worse in the verbal.

http://immortallife.info/articles/entry/...ws-so-high

"...A study found that Jews had only mediocre visual-spatial intelligence, while their verbal IQ (which includes verbal reasoning, comprehension and working memory) compensated for this with a high median of 125.6..."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ashkenazi_...telligence

Jews score 125 IQ on the verbal portion of the test (which of these words type questions). That is an absurdly high verbal intelligence, but what does it mean, except the ability to master language? A trait that would have been very useful when migrating from one European country to the next.

Their visual-spatial IQ is only 98, which is below average.

Visual-Spatial intelligence is engineering, architecture, art, design, the ability to visualize that which isn't there in real life. It is what allows people to invent new things.

And you do realize that almost all of those "new things" in the past 500 years came from western Europe, and in particular north-western Europe, yes?

And anyway, what's your point? All this is is mental gymnastics. Overall, the Ashkenazi are smarter than East Asians who are smarter than Caucasians (Europeans, west and South Asians, and North Africans) who are smarter than Hispanics who are smarter than blacks who are smarter than Australian aboriginals. Everybody needs to get over it and move on with their lives.

Post: #59

Racist, Sexist, Nazi etc are just labels created by a society to villify and censor individualistic views. These are all bullshit words that have no real meaning.

Post: #60

(02-11-2017 10:26 PM)rw95 Wrote:  

(02-11-2017 10:18 PM)nomadbrah Wrote:  

(02-11-2017 09:39 PM)rw95 Wrote:  

(02-11-2017 09:32 PM)MMX2010 Wrote:  

Quote: Because the Ashkenazi IQ is approximately 110, and as such they will always be overrepresented?

If the Ashkenazi IQ is 110, that's only 5 IQ points higher than White American's 105-average IQ. Meanwhile, the Latino average IQ is 85, and the Black-American average IQ is 80.

Five IQ points represents only one-third of a standard deviation, whereas 20 IQ points represents 1.33 standard deviations.

(You may be citing older measurements of IQ, (100 average, with a 10 standard deviation), but that would be your fault, not mine.)

I'd like to see these sources you speak of.
From what I've seen, White American IQ is 100 even. Latino is 89, black 85.

The book that is commonly mentioned, "IQ and Global Inequality" (a meta study), puts Germans and Swedes at 102, but keep in mind in 2006 there is already a significant immigrant population in both countries.

However, if you actually look into Azkenazim IQ, you find the IQ to be only greater in the verbal portion of the test, they do worse than whites in the visual-spatial part of the test. Asians do better in the math portion but significantly worse in the verbal.

http://immortallife.info/articles/entry/...ws-so-high

"...A study found that Jews had only mediocre visual-spatial intelligence, while their verbal IQ (which includes verbal reasoning, comprehension and working memory) compensated for this with a high median of 125.6..."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ashkenazi_...telligence

Jews score 125 IQ on the verbal portion of the test (which of these words type questions). That is an absurdly high verbal intelligence, but what does it mean, except the ability to master language? A trait that would have been very useful when migrating from one European country to the next.

Their visual-spatial IQ is only 98, which is below average.

Visual-Spatial intelligence is engineering, architecture, art, design, the ability to visualize that which isn't there in real life. It is what allows people to invent new things.

And you do realize that almost all of those "new things" in the past 500 years came from western Europe, and in particular north-western Europe, yes?

And anyway, what's your point? All this is is mental gymnastics. Overall, the Ashkenazi are smarter than East Asians who are smarter than Caucasians (Europeans, west and South Asians, and North Africans) who are smarter than Hispanics who are smarter than blacks who are smarter than Australian aboriginals. Everybody needs to get over it and move on with their lives.

Right, but....isn't our thinking in the United States today premised upon the idea that each group is exactly equal in intelligence, and in everything else? The idea behind the civil rights movement was that if the legal barriers to black advancement were removed that they would rise to the level of whites in terms of income and educational achievement. Once the legal barriers were removed, blacks would lift themselves out of poverty and as a result the crime rates between the races would equalize, because in this view poverty causes crime.

Except none of this has happened. As one example:

Race gaps in SAT math scores are as big as ever

What you just stated right above me explains so well, so neatly, so Occam's Razor-y, what the liberal Brookings Institution is observing in that article.

If someone begins from the premise that the races are 10,000% equal in every way, nothing, literally nothing, of what he observes around him makes sense, at least not in this country. Blacks (on average, folks, on average) aren't even in the same galaxy as whites or Asians as far as education and test scores, they aren't in the same galaxy as whites or Asians as far as rates of imprisonment, they aren't in the same galaxy as whites or Asians as far as incomes and welfare use, yada yada yada. If the races are equal, and we know they're equal because (((Franz Boas))) told us so, what must account for these differences? White racism! White supremacism! Implicit racial bias in literally everything that has ever existed and exists now!

Ayn Rand (not a fan of her at all) always told people to check their premise whenever something doesn't make sense.

You checked the premise of racial equality very well...but then didn't address the very, very serious implications of removing that premise.

Post: #61

My problem with removing Calhoun's name is the principle of it. His name was removed because he owned slaves and defended slavery even though he was a significant statesman of the time who accomplished many things beyond owning slaves.

By that logic, we should burn up the Declaration of Independence because it was written by a slave holder, Thomas Jefferson. Also, let it be known the irony that the man who wrote "All men are created equal", again Thomas Jefferson, simultaneously owned hundreds upon hundreds of slaves. Just goes to show how the ideals we aspire to may fall flat in the face of the reality in which we live in.

Should we also eliminate any memory of George Washington, the man who fought off the British and laid the path for forming the United States of America as its first eminent leader? He owned slaves too!

Also let's not forget Abraham Lincoln's views on black people:

Quote:More problematic were Lincoln’s views on race. He held opinions not very different from those of the majority of his racist countrymen. Even if slavery was wrong, “there is a physical difference between the white and black races that will for ever forbid the two races from living together on terms of social and political equality.” His solution was a form of ethnic cleansing: shipping blacks off to Liberia, or Haiti, or Central America — anywhere as long as it wasn’t the United States.

https://artsbeat.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/...cist/?_r=0

Should we tear down the Lincoln Memorial because he promoted white supremacist views? He may have emancipated the slaves and led the country forward towards greater racial equality, but his own personal views were racist, maybe that's enough for us to forget he existed.

Or how about Franklin Delano Roosevelt who wrote this gem:

Quote:I hereby further authorize and direct the Secretary of War and the said Military Commanders to take such other steps as he or the appropriate Military Commander may deem advisable to enforce compliance with the restrictions applicable to each Military area here in above authorized to be designated, including the use of Federal troops and other Federal Agencies, with authority to accept assistance of state and local agencies.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Executive_Order_9066

This is the executive order that led to Japanese people being stripped of property and thrown into internment camps during WWII. Should we eliminate every vestige of FDR, the man who literally beat back Hitler and saved the Jews from near extinction, because of one executive order?

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

Whitewashing bothers me because it completely glosses over the fact that man is neither truly good or bad, man is just man (btw this goes for all men across racial lines). Man can be simultaneously self-interested to the exclusion of other people, while still contributing to the greater good of society.

To whitewash history is to try and reject our collective past rather than to learn from it and embrace it as a reflection of our modern society.

Post: #62

^@Arminius If we remove that premise, we'll find what we find now, that blacks on average don't do too well. I know this is something which the alt-right creams itself over. Just look at every Heartiste article or tweet.

Of course, once we point out that whites are not on top of this "natural hierarchy," then the triggering intensifies.

Post: #63

This is the reason I love history - it's full of narrative destroying characters like the president who followed Lincoln, Andrew Johnson. He was such a bad president but a fascinating character.

He was a very racist Southerner who had proudly owned slaves. He ended up giving them up because he hated the Confederates with such a bitter passion. (After the war, he was known to suggest sending blacks back to Africa, usually not long after he'd gone on some long tirade about how we should hang all of the Confederate generals. Thank God he eventually ended the war smoothly enough.)

Post: #64

(02-11-2017 10:59 PM)rw95 Wrote:  ^@Arminius If we remove that premise, we'll find what we find now, that blacks on average don't do too well. I know this is something which the alt-right creams itself over. Just look at every Heartiste article or tweet.

If course, once we point out that whites are not on top of this "natural hierarchy," then the triggering intensifies.

...Because the alt right is nothing but a bunch of white supremacists who can't handle reality. And Heartiste is the #1 spokesman.

You could be a writer for that show When We Rise, bud.

Post: #65

(02-11-2017 11:12 PM)weambulance Wrote:  

(02-11-2017 10:59 PM)rw95 Wrote:  ^@Arminius If we remove that premise, we'll find what we find now, that blacks on average don't do too well. I know this is something which the alt-right creams itself over. Just look at every Heartiste article or tweet.

If course, once we point out that whites are not on top of this "natural hierarchy," then the triggering intensifies.

...Because the alt right is nothing but a bunch of white supremacists who can't handle reality. And Heartiste is the #1 spokesman.

You could be a writer for that show When We Rise, bud.

Jared Taylor. Vox Day. John Derbyshire. Fred Reed. Ramzpaul.

Would you like more names, or will these suffice for now?

Post: #66

(02-11-2017 10:59 PM)rw95 Wrote:  ^@Arminius If we remove that premise, we'll find what we find now, that blacks on average don't do too well. I know this is something which the alt-right creams itself over. Just look at every Heartiste article or tweet.

If course, once we point out that whites are not on top of this "natural hierarchy," then the triggering intensifies.

The Jared Taylor wing of the white nationalist movement is perfectly fine with that. In my estimation, there are very few whites who want to rule over non-whites. The primary desire is for non-whites to go away, or conversely, for whites to be able to go away from non-whites.

What whites of virtually every persuasion are sick and tired of is being blamed, vilified, demonized, for the failures of other groups of people. The races - taken as whole entities - are different, the races aren't equal. Stop blaming us for inherited characteristics over which nobody has any control.

Post: #67

^And I don't know if you've noticed, but Jared Taylor is falling out of favor with the alt-right, largely BECAUSE he's ok with this, or more specifically that he does not hate Jews and considers them to be white.

If I recall correctly, he is also married to a Jewish woman, and you know what that means.

Post: #68

(02-11-2017 11:14 PM)rw95 Wrote:  

(02-11-2017 11:12 PM)weambulance Wrote:  

(02-11-2017 10:59 PM)rw95 Wrote:  ^@Arminius If we remove that premise, we'll find what we find now, that blacks on average don't do too well. I know this is something which the alt-right creams itself over. Just look at every Heartiste article or tweet.

If course, once we point out that whites are not on top of this "natural hierarchy," then the triggering intensifies.

...Because the alt right is nothing but a bunch of white supremacists who can't handle reality. And Heartiste is the #1 spokesman.

You could be a writer for that show When We Rise, bud.

Jared Taylor. Vox Day. John Derbyshire. Fred Reed. Ramzpaul.

Would you like more names, or will these suffice for now?

Listing names doesn't exactly support your thesis that white people are going to cry if we don't have the best IQ as a group. Certainly I have never seen Vox Day or Ramzpaul making excuses for such a "deficiency" or pretending it doesn't exist. I don't follow the others.

I've never met or read material from anyone who actually understood IQ differences between groups who didn't know, and state, that asians have a higher average IQ than whites. Thus, until you can support your case, I conclude that you just made this "natural hierarchy triggering" shit up because you have a problem with people who are pro-white. And I'm fairly sure, without going to check, that this isn't the first time you've tried such a tactic.

Post: #69

^I'm not talking about east Asians at all. I'm talking about the Ashkenazi.
And I'll talk about whatever I damn well please, thank you very much. Roosh values free speech, does he not? I'm exercising that right.

Post: #70

So you admit your point is bullshit, because apparently white supremacists don't care about asians doing better than whites in IQ tests despite getting "triggered" if they aren't on top of the "natural hierarchy". Jews are rarely broken out in general discussions of IQ because they're a tiny group, globally.

And I didn't try to silence you at all, so I don't know what the fuck you're talking about now. I just pointed out that you have a tendency to make shit up because of your personal biases. I think we've conclusively proved that now.

Thanks for playing.

Post: #71

(02-11-2017 06:27 PM)weambulance Wrote:  If you want to learn more about why whites are so often attacked in popular culture and education--and you would have to be enormously ignorant or an outright liar to claim they aren't--learn about the Frankfurt School. If you don't, you simply cannot discuss the matter because you lack the requisite knowledge.

May I respectfully point out the irony of this comment. Nobody on this forum has read the Frankfurt School. Nor are they reading it in universities. The scapegoat you are looking for is Judith Butler.

Post: #72

(02-12-2017 12:00 AM)weambulance Wrote:  So you admit your point is bullshit, because apparently white supremacists don't care about asians doing better than whites in IQ tests despite getting "triggered" if they aren't on top of the "natural hierarchy". Jews are rarely broken out in general discussions of IQ because they're a tiny group, globally.

And I didn't try to silence you at all, so I don't know what the fuck you're talking about now. I just pointed out that you have a tendency to make shit up because of your personal biases. I think we've conclusively proved that now.

Thanks for playing.

What shit am I making up exactly?

Ashkenazi Jews are on average smarter than whites. This is a fact.

In my experience, bring that up to alt-righters and you get a shitstorm of mental gymnastics.

Look no further than this very thread with Nomadbrah.

Post: #73

Becomes race thread....

Becomes IQ thread.....

Should I get the 32 oz big gulp cup out yet?

Post: #74

(02-12-2017 12:04 AM)churros Wrote:  

(02-11-2017 06:27 PM)weambulance Wrote:  If you want to learn more about why whites are so often attacked in popular culture and education--and you would have to be enormously ignorant or an outright liar to claim they aren't--learn about the Frankfurt School. If you don't, you simply cannot discuss the matter because you lack the requisite knowledge.

May I respectfully point out the irony of this comment. Nobody on this forum has read the Frankfurt School. Nor are they reading it in universities. The scapegoat you are looking for is Judith Butler.

Is critical theory still taught? Yes. Is political correctness still taught? Yes. Ergo, the reference to the Frankfurt School is not irrelevant. I was not meaning to give a comprehensive lecture on the history of indoctrination in our schools and Judith Butler is less relevant to my point than what I actually referenced.

And I'm not looking for a scapegoat anywhere. Are you claiming that indoctrination in schools is not happening?

Post: #75

(02-11-2017 10:55 PM)Arminius Wrote:  Right, but....isn't our thinking in the United States today premised upon the idea that each group is exactly equal in intelligence, and in everything else? The idea behind the civil rights movement was that if the legal barriers to black advancement were removed that they would rise to the level of whites in terms of income and educational achievement. Once the legal barriers were removed, blacks would lift themselves out of poverty and as a result the crime rates between the races would equalize, because in this view poverty causes crime.

Except none of this has happened. As one example:

Race gaps in SAT math scores are as big as ever

What you just stated right above me explains so well, so neatly, so Occam's Razor-y, what the liberal Brookings Institution is observing in that article.

If someone begins from the premise that the races are 10,000% equal in every way, nothing, literally nothing, of what he observes around him makes sense, at least not in this country. Blacks (on average, folks, on average) aren't even in the same galaxy as whites or Asians as far as education and test scores, they aren't in the same galaxy as whites or Asians as far as rates of imprisonment, they aren't in the same galaxy as whites or Asians as far as incomes and welfare use, yada yada yada. If the races are equal, and we know they're equal because (((Franz Boas))) told us so, what must account for these differences? White racism! White supremacism! Implicit racial bias in literally everything that has ever existed and exists now!

Ayn Rand (not a fan of her at all) always told people to check their premise whenever something doesn't make sense.

You checked the premise of racial equality very well...but then didn't address the very, very serious implications of removing that premise.

Reading this type of post makes me feel dirty. I feel like a scumbag piece of shit for agreeing with it, yet I can't find a single thing in there that's logically or factually incorrect to make me disagree.

This issue in general causes me a lot of internal discomfort. If people knew that I believed in race differences, 80% of them would hate me and think I'm some kind of monster. But between the persistent achievement gaps you allude to and the fact that African countries are invariably far less developed than white-run countries, I cannot convince myself otherwise. In fact, sometimes I think the rest of the world is insane for chalking up this mountain of outcome inequality entirely to "racism." Yet I envy them in a way. I don't want to be a bigot. I don't want people to misconstrue my opinion as "hatred," or a hard-and-fast rule by which every black person is dumb. I want to be an acceptable human being. The pressure to conform can be overwhelming.