A New Theory of Racial Differences

Jared Taylor, American Renaissance, December 1994

Race, Evolution, and Behavior, J. Philippe Rushton, Transaction Publishers, 1995, 334 pp., $34.95.

Race, Evolution, and Behavior is one of the most important books about race to be written in many years. Not only does it describe the myriad ways in which the races differ, it advances a persuasive and original explanation for what these differences mean and how they came about. Prof. J. Philippe Rushton of the University of Western Ontario has written a rigorously scholarly book that is not always easy to understand, but it could well become a classic in its field, like Race by John Baker and Bias in Mental Testing by Arthur Jensen.

Just how different are the races? Most experts now take differences in intelligence for granted. Prof. Rushton has gone much farther and marshaled a wealth of data on other important differences. Some of these are summarized on page 3, in a chart that deserves close examination. The most striking finding is not just that Asians, whites, and blacks are different, but that the differences fit a pattern, with Asians and blacks at opposite ends of a spectrum, and whites in the middle.

A large part of the book — and a good portion of this article — are devoted to reviewing these data, but Prof. Rushton’s most provocative and original contribution is his application of what is called r-K theory to this pattern of Asians-whites-blacks. The main features of r-K theory are represented graphically in the drawing on page 3.

Different species have evolved different approaches to propagation. At one extreme is the r-strategy, by which an organism produces a very large number of offspring, but gives them little or no care. The oyster is a good example. Every year it releases millions of eggs into the ocean and leaves them to the mercies of weather and predators. Almost all of them die, but a few survive.

r organisms must mature quickly because they get no help from their parents. The ones that survive repeat the cycle by producing huge numbers of eggs, only a few of which will live. The symbol r stands for the maximum rate of increase in a population, and when the conditions for reproduction are good, an r-strategist can increase its numbers at a terrific rate.

At the other extreme is the K-strategy, which is used by more advanced animals, including man. The number of offspring is much smaller, but great effort is taken to give each one a good chance of survival. K– and r-strategists consequently are very different both in biology and in what Prof. Rushton calls life histories.

K-strategists live longer, have larger brains, and take longer to reach sexual maturity. Unlike the simpler r-strategists, they tend to have some kind of social organization. Besides the care they give their young, adults may share food, cooperate in the hunt, and fight predators together. The K-symbol stands for the carrying capacity of the breeding area, and represents the production of small numbers of offspring that are carefully nurtured for a particular environment.

All humans follow an extreme K-strategy. They have few young, who take years to mature and require a great deal of care. They have large brains and complex societies based on cooperation. However, human races are not identical. The chart on page 3 shows that Asians consistently show more K behavior than whites, who in turn show more than blacks. There is virtually no departure from this pattern.

Maturation and Reproduction

In almost every respect, racial differences in the physiology of reproduction show an r-K pattern that runs from blacks to whites to Asians. Fraternal twinning, for example, which happens when a mother releases more than one egg during ovulation, is clearly an r-strategy of producing more and smaller young, who are more likely to be miscarried, be born underweight, die in infancy, and receive less parental care.

Fraternal twinning is twice as common among blacks as among whites, and twice as common among whites as among Asians. Triplets are ten times more common among whites than among Asians and 17 times more common among Africans than among whites. In some African populations, multiple births account for 60 out of every 1000. In Japan, where twins are very rare, they are viewed suspiciously as the products of a “litter,” more akin to dogs than to humans.

Offspring of the different races gestate and mature according to different r-K strategies. Blacks are born earlier and smaller than whites, but are stronger and better coordinated. They can sit up and roll over sooner than whites, who can do so sooner than Asians. On average, blacks walk at age 11 months, whites at 12 months, and Asians at 13 months.

Although it is a specialized measure of development, permanent tooth eruption occurs sooner in Africans than in Europeans, and later in Asians. Among primates in general, there is near-perfect correlation between lateness of permanent tooth eruption and such things as length of life, brain size, years to maturity, and complexity of social organization.

Blacks reach sexual maturity sooner than whites, who reach it sooner than Asians. By age twelve, 19 percent of American black girls have fully developed breasts and pubic hair whereas only five percent of white girls do. Blacks, on average, have an earlier first menstruation than whites, and Asians menstruate later than whites. In the United States, the average white woman is two full years older than the average black woman when she first has sexual intercourse, and Asians start having intercourse even later than whites.

Professor Rushton has bravely taken on the delicate subject of genital size, which has received reluctant but official attention because of AIDS. International organizations that try to provide condoms to people all over the world have discovered that one size does not fit all. Blacks have larger penises than whites, who have larger penises than Asians. The length of the vagina also differs proportionately in each race. Black men produce more sperm than do whites, and Asian men produce the least.

In the United States, black married couples report the greatest frequency of sexual intercourse, and Asian married couples report the lowest frequency. AIDS, like other sexually transmitted disease, is most common among blacks, rarest among Asians.

In Africa, compared to Europe or Asia, it is common to have sexual relations with many partners and to expend less effort on child-rearing. Older brothers and sisters often look after smaller children. There are also huge racial and regional differences in the number of offspring produced. In the United States, the average woman produces 14 children, grand children and great-grand children; in Africa the figure is 258. This prodigious African reproductive effort takes place over a shorter life-span. Blacks do not live as long as whites who, in turn, do not live as long as Asians.

Here, clearly, are patterns of maturational and reproductive behavior that show a consistent r-K pattern. Quick maturity, early reproduction, numerous offspring, and shorter lives put blacks closer to the oyster end of the scale than whites, who are closer to it than Asians.

Differences in sexual activity, life-span, and number of children are usually attributed to “culture” or “environment,” but there is every reason to believe that they are at least partly genetic, just as size of sex organs or age of sexual maturity are almost entirely genetic. Life-span, for example, is clearly hereditary in part. The age at which an adopted child will die is more easily predicted from the life-spans of the biological parents than from those of the adoptive parents. Likewise, identical twins die, on average, only 37 months apart whereas fraternal twins die 78 months apart.

What about the other components of the human K-strategy, such as altruism, law-abidingness, and the other characteristics that make up distinctly human social organizations? To what extent are what we think of as personality — and the cultural institutions that reflect a population’s group personality — the products of heredity, and thus properly included in an analysis of r-K strategy? Prof. Rushton has exhaustively surveyed recent studies of heredity, which suggest a powerful genetic influence on virtually all aspects of human behavior.

— r Egg Production K —
500
million
a year
8,000
a year
200
a year
12
a year
2
a year
1
every
five
years

 

Race and r-K Variables
Variable Asians Whites Blacks
Brain Size Large Intermediate Small
IQ 105 100 85
Decision Times Fast Intermediate Slow
Cultural Achievements High High Low

Gestation Times ? Intermediate Short
Development Late Intermediate Early
Age of first intercourse Late Intermediate Early
Life Span Long Intermediate Short
Twinning per 100,000 4 8 16

Hormone Levels Low Intermediate High
Genitalia Small Intermediate Large
Intercourse Frequency Low Intermediate High
AIDS/Syphilis Low Intermediate High

Aggressiveness Low Intermediate High
Cautiousness High Intermediate Low
Dominance Low Intermediate High
Self-Concept Low Intermediate High

Marital Stability High Intermediate Low
Criminality Low Intermediate High
Administrative Ability High High Low

Genes vs. Environment

Some of the most startling and convincing data on the relative influences of genes vs. environment come from studies of identical twins who were separated at birth and reared apart. Identical twins come from a single egg that splits in two; the twins are genetically identical. Fraternal twins are produced by a double ovulation and are no more genetically alike than ordinary siblings. (Unlike fraternal twinning rates, there are no racial differences in the frequencies of identical twinning.)

The crucial finding is that identical twins reared apart are more like each other in virtually every way than are fraternal twins who were reared in the same household. From these similarities it is possible to estimate how much of the variation in personality traits is caused by genes and how much by environment.

The chart at the bottom of this page shows twin-study estimates of the genetic contribution to various attitudes. These estimates almost certainly undervalue heritability because the method used to calculate it assumes that all aspects of environment are arbitrary. In fact, to a very large degree, people influence their own environments according to traits that are at least partly genetic. Thus, even within the same family, an aggressive child elicits different responses from parents and playmates — and thus has a different environment — from a child who is placid and cooperative. Once they are independent of their parents, young people follow their genetic propensities even more freely by choosing entirely different environments.

The methodology of heritability estimates ignores this. Thus, much of the influence on personality traits that is due to “environment” undoubtedly reflects personal surroundings that differ primarily because people shape their surroundings to match their genetic predilections.

Intelligence, which is one of the most important, stable and most frequently measured traits, is also one of the most heritable. Variations in intelligence within a population appear to be 60 to 80 percent governed by heredity.

It is important to note that heritability estimates are for variations in IQ, not total IQ. Thus, for two brothers with IQs of 100 and 120, a genetic component of 60 percent (and an environmental component of 40 percent) does not imply that 40 IQ points of the 100-IQ brother’s intelligence are theoretically attributable to environment. It means only that 40 percent of the 20-point difference between the brothers — 8 IQ points — is theoretically governed by non-genetic factors.

Furthermore, no one is really sure how environment influences the remaining 40 to 20 percent that is presumably non-genetic. Non-genetic factors may well be grossly biological events like malnutrition, childhood diseases, and mishaps in the womb, rather than the household or educational differences that most people think of as environment. Such things as Head Start or special education appear to have very little lasting effect on IQ differences either between individuals or races.

For the different racial groups, Prof. Rushton has aggregated the results of a great many IQ studies to arrive at the following averages:

Whites — 100, Asians — 105, American blacks (who are about 25 percent white) — 85, African blacks — 70 to 75, Amerindians (including Central and Latin Americans with little or no European blood) — 89, Polynesians, Micronesians, Melanesians, and Maoris — 80 to 95.

Although Asians have a higher general intelligence than whites, the difference is mainly in visuo-spatial performance rather than verbal ability. This makes Asians good engineers and mathematicians, but they do not have a pronounced advantage in careers like law or language teaching. Not surprisingly, a 1980s survey of professions in the United States found that Chinese-Americans were over-represented in the sciences at a rate six times their proportion in the population. However, there were only one fourth as many Chinese-American lawyers as their numbers would suggest. Blacks were minimally represented in both fields.

Although it is common to criticize IQ tests precisely because they give disparate results by race, there are other, more obviously biological indicators of intelligence that cannot be accused of “cultural bias.” One that Prof. Rushton himself has studied in depth is brain size.

Larger heads (containing larger brains) are positively correlated with intelligence. This is true within families, with the sibling with the largest head likely to be the most intelligent. It is also true within races, with large-brained blacks or Asians likely to be more intelligent than their small-brained co-racialists.

As groups, whites and Asians have larger brains than blacks. At age seven, for example, black children are 16 percentile points taller than white children, but their head perimeter is eight percentile points smaller. Asians are likely to have larger brains than whites, though some indications of larger size appear only after correcting upward for the fact that Asians are smaller than whites. A small person with the same sized brain as a big person can be thought of as having a “larger” brain, because smaller bodies require less brain to maintain basal functions.

Whites probably have about 100 million fewer cerebral neurons, on average, than Asians and blacks have about 480 million fewer than whites. The black/Asian difference is especially significant because of differences in body size. Blacks with small brains in large bodies are at a serious intellectual disadvantage compared to Asians because a larger proportion of their already-smaller brains is probably occupied with basal functions and not available for conscious thought.

Yet another directly physiological assessment of intelligence is the type of reaction-time test pioneered by Prof. Arthur Jensen of Berkeley. These tests require people to make simple choices when a light goes on. Intelligence is correlated with both speed and consistency of reaction time, and Asians perform better than whites, who perform better than blacks.

Prof. Rushton cites several additional reasons to suspect that racial differences in intelligence are due to genetics rather than environment. One is something called regression towards the mean. Individuals who are at extreme points in a normal distribution of any trait are likely to have children not so extreme as themselves. Very tall people, for example, are likely to have taller-than-average children, but their children’s heights tend towards the average for the population. With respect to IQ, studies have repeatedly shown that black Americans regress towards a mean of 85 while whites regress towards a mean of 100.

Inbreeding depression scores are another persuasive indicator that racial differences are genetic. Children that result from unions of very close relatives often have unusually low scores on certain kinds of intelligence tests, indicating that the abilities measured by those tests are highly susceptible to genetic influence. As it happens, these measures of intelligence are the very ones that show the greatest black-white differences, which suggests that the intelligence gap is also genetic.

Other Personality Differences

High intelligence is not the only hallmark of K-strategy. Professor Rushton explains that the races with more K traits have more complex and cooperative social organizations, are more restrained and law abiding, and show more altruism. In terms of r-K strategy, altruism and social cooperation permit individuals to rear their young under more dependable and peaceful circumstances — which is a precondition for groups that have staked their survival on producing small numbers of large-brained but slow-maturing offspring.

For traits like altruism and aggression to be properly included in an r-K pattern, they must be shown to be, like intelligence, at least partly controlled by heredity and to differ from race to race. Research suggests that these traits are greatly influenced by heredity, and that they appear early in life. In one study, children who were rated as “aggressive” by their peers at age eight were rated the same way by a different set of peers 10 years later. By the time they were 19 years old, those in the “aggressive” group were three times more likely to have a police record than those who were not considered “aggressive.”

Identical twins are about twice as much alike in terms of altruism and aggression as fraternal twins. Studies in both Europe and Japan have confirmed that when a twin has been convicted of a crime, an identical co-twin is two to three times more likely also to have been convicted than is a fraternal co-twin.

Shyness and sociability also appear very early in children and endure through adulthood. Studies of identical twins reared apart have shown astonishing similarities not only in personality, but in careers, frequencies of marriage, style of dress, and individual mannerisms [please see AR cover story of August, 1993, for a broader discussion of twin studies].

Research also shows that predictions about criminal behavior in adopted children can be made more accurately from the behavior of biological parents rather than adoptive parents. Some time between the ages of 21 and 30, the adult personality is “set like plaster,” and environment seems to have little effect on it.

Prof. Rushton points out that most people marry and make friends with people who are genetically like themselves. They seek others who not only look but think like they do. Durability of marriage has been shown to be linked to genetic similarity of the partners — in intelligence, appearance, and in other personality traits that are to some extent under genetic control.

It is therefore not surprising that biological siblings have more similar friends than do adopted siblings. Likewise, young criminals — who appear to have a genetic propensity for crime — commonly make friends with other young people with the same propensity.

This clearly demonstrated human preference for associating with others who are similar has important implications for race relations. Even very young children are conscious of race and show racial preferences. Prof. Rushton writes that ethnocentrism and “racism” are probably natural mechanisms built into the human genotype.

Expressions of altruism also have important implications for race relations. In virtually all species, the closer two individuals are, genetically, the more likely they are to help each other. This makes evolutionary sense if genes are thought of as the basic units of evolution. Genes for altruism are likely to leave more copies of themselves in future generations if they produce a trait that causes individuals to help their close kin survive.

Ants and bees are especially altruistic — frequently dying in great numbers to protect the colony — because they have an unusual reproductive pattern that causes workers to share 75 percent of their genes. Squirrels and monkeys can detect genetic distance between themselves and others, and are more cooperative towards close relatives.

Male Rhesus monkeys are promiscuous and cannot be sure that the child of a mate is their own. However, they have some unknown way of recognizing their offspring, and are kinder to them than they are to unrelated youngsters. (Actual kinship has been confirmed through blood tests.)

Belding’s ground squirrels mate with multiple partners, and females have litters that contain both sisters and half sisters. Despite the fact that they share the same womb and the same nest, full sisters fight less often and help each other more often than half sisters.

Among humans, preschool children are 40 times more likely to be assaulted by a step parent — that is to say, a genetic stranger — than by a biological parent. In promiscuous societies in which fathers are not sure which children are their own, they put more effort into caring for their sisters’ children than for those of their wives. A sister’s child is always close kin, whereas a promiscuous wife’s child may not be kin at all.

Experiments in altruism confirm the obvious: People are more willing to help people like themselves. Similar appearance is a good indicator of genetic similarity, and Prof. Rushton observes that racial solidarity can be viewed as a kind of extended nepotism. He also argues that it is often fruitless to look for sociological or economic reasons for the racial conflicts found all around the world. Genetic similarity and the desire to preserve a common set of genes are more likely explanations.

Racial Differences

The races differ consistently in the personality traits that can be classified according to r-K theory, just as they do in intelligence. Asians are more restrained, cooperative, and less aggressive than whites; whites are more restrained and less aggressive than blacks. These rankings are the same, whether subjects are assessed by personality tests or by their peers. From an early age, blacks are more impulsive and dominant than whites, and males boast and swagger more. Asians are least dominant and impulsive.

Differences in crime rates by race are too well established to bear repeating [please see AR cover story of June, 1994]. These differences are consistent across multi- and mono-racial societies. Nevertheless, stiff resistance to genetic explanations leads to environmental theories that are unintentionally funny. As Prof. Rushton notes, earlier in this century, all forms of deviance were so low in American Chinatowns — despite their poverty — that the ghetto was thought to protect people from crime. For blacks, isolation is routinely said to cause crime.

Although trendy talk of “self-esteem” suggests otherwise, blacks have higher opinions of themselves than whites, who have higher opinions of themselves than Asians. Asians are the most introverted and anxious; blacks are the least. Suicide figures reflect this: Whites kill themselves twice as frequently as blacks, and Asians kill themselves more often than whites. Self-consciousness and introspection seem to rise along with K characteristics.

Rates of mental instability show the opposite trend. Two hundred and forty out of every 100,000 blacks are in mental institutions whereas only 162 of every 100,000 whites are. Nor is this a function of poverty or wealth; blacks suffer from mental disorders, drug addiction, and alcoholism at higher rates than whites in all social classes. Asians, despite their introversion and anxiety, have the fewest mental problems.

Differences Within Races

Prof. Rushton points out that r-K theory can account for differences between individuals of the same race. That is to say, people of the same race tend to vary according to the same pattern that distinguishes the races. In both Europe and Africa, the following traits tend to go together: large families, short life-span, criminality, high levels of sexuality, loose family ties, frequency of twinning.

Mothers of fraternal twins are more likely than other mothers to have had early first periods, larger families, lower birth-weight children (even when they are singletons), more infant mortality, to have been promiscuous, and to have shorter lives. Prof. Rushton has found that in all societies, fraternal twins are more likely to be born into the lower than the upper classes.

A Swedish study determined that girls who have early first periods are more likely to cheat, be truant, and try marijuana than girls who have late first periods. In the United States, early maturation is correlated with promiscuity, illegitimate births, leaving school, crime, and other social problems. Early sexual maturity seems to be heritable, with daughters resembling their mothers.

If altruism is an important K trait, crime would be an extreme r trait. Across broad populations, crime is associated with behavior that almost perfectly describes how blacks differ from whites and whites differ from Asians: large families, illegitimacy, low intelligence, early sexual maturity, promiscuity, weak family ties, little investment in children, and a short life.

Prof. Rushton suggests that the entire complex of r-K trait differences is therefore largely under genetic control, and that it characterizes different social classes just as it does races. There is little question that the most physiological r-Ktraits are heavily influenced by heredity. Prof. Rushton makes the additional point that physiology is closely correlated with many other forms of behavior previously thought to be independent of heredity but now found to be greatly influenced by it. The result is a strong case for believing that the patterns of behavior that distinguish races as well as individuals are largely inherent, reflect a consistent r-K pattern, and are impervious to social “programs.”

Prof. Rushton takes the argument one provocative step further. In the current era of social mobility, in which most hereditary social privileges have disappeared, people succeed or fail in life very much according to their native abilities. The children of the rich are usually smart and talented because they inherit the qualities that made their parents rich.

However, as Prof. Rushton points out, a child’s IQ is a better predictor of his adult social status than is the social status of his parents. And, when the unintelligent children of the rich start descending the social scale, they take on the habits and values of their new class rather than keep the ones of the class into which they were born. Even the most K-oriented parents can have an r child, whose life increasingly reflects his genetic inclinations.

Prof. Rushton’s findings are a serious blow to contemporary egalitarian dogma. Unfortunately, the usual reaction to his work is simply to make wild accusations about his motives. In an article called “Professors of Hate,” the October 20th issue of Rolling Stone claims to have unmasked him as a vicious racist.

Of course, it is the haters of science and free inquiry who build societies that cannot but degenerate as ours has. Anyone who wants to understand the world as it, and to base policy on facts rather than on fantasies, cannot ignore this very important book.

Topics: , ,

Share This

We welcome comments that add information or perspective, and we encourage polite debate. If you log in with a social media account, your comment should appear immediately. If you prefer to remain anonymous, you may comment as a guest, using a name and an e-mail address of convenience. Your comment will be moderated.
  • Bardon

    Interesting, but flawed. Too much soaked in evolutionary psychology, sociobiology & unverified urban legends (aggressiveness, genitalia, dominance,..).

    This is what one gets while ignoring history. For instance:

    a) how this purported Black aggressiveness hasn’t done anything worth-wile in history. This is extrapolation of behavioral characteristics of low-life ghetto types. Low aggression in Asian peoples ? It’s a joke: Genghis Khan, Timur Lenk, middle-Eastern Assyrians, extreme Japanese militarism in past 800-100 yrs.

    b) how “high” is IQ correlated with cultural achievement ? Not much. If it did have some significant influence, than it wouldn’t have been Europeans who: invented mathematical proof (Pythagoras), University (medieval Catholic Church), calculus (Newton and Leibniz), novel (Cervantes), introspective autobiography (St. Augustine), global printing press (Gutenberg), polyphony (Gregorian chant), naval expansion(Henry the Navigator), modern rockets (Goddard, Ziolkowski, Von Ardenne), films (Lumiere brothers), genetics (Mendel), revolver (Colt), Quantum mechanics (Heisenberg, Schroedinger, Dirac), …. Asians have just contributed with Indian (Arabic) numerals, and rudimentary inventions of gun powder, printing press and matrix calculus that remained confined to their civilization.

    c) now, the best in science in technology is still overwhelmingly “White” (European and American), from nano-technology to various branchs of mathematics & military innovations.

    d) as for Blacks’ aggression- where are their wars ? In past 3000 yrs ? Just street thugs, much like Puerto Rican gangs in 1950s.

  • McGillicuddy

    I am very persuaded by the this wonderful theory, but is it fair to rate black cultural achievement as low? Obviously, it is not as near as high as that of Europeans or Asians, and so for the sake of simplicity, I suppose the chart could not be arranged any other way, but in the field of international pop-music, American blacks have been wildly successful and influential. Due to this alone, whites are the only group who has obviously out-striped blacks in cultural achievement during the time since post WWII (Though perhaps I, a Westerner, have a slanted perspective, but aside from electronics and Japanese anime, what has the East done in this area since the war?).

    I know that a lot of people would say that the emergence of a mass-market has put the unrefined majority in the position of cultural arbiter, and thus the popularity of the intuitive, primal beats of black music, but the point is that blacks played to their strength, and so should all peoples. That is what nationalism, and white nationalism too, is all about. It is the idea that true enlightenment is the celebration of difference, but not as the left would have it, not as a way to bring us all together and try to make all groups the same. Instead, the goal for every people should be the creation of states that reflect their own biology, and to try to be the best in a way that can only they can. And every people can do this.

  • John Engelman

    The higher average intelligence of Chinese can be explained by the Imperial Exam System. For two thousand years brilliant youths from humble origins who could pass the exams entered the Scholar Gentry. In the Scholar Gentry they had more wealth, power, and prestige than merchants or rural land lords. They were expected to have several wives and many children.

    The lower crime rates of Chinese everywhere in the world can be explained by the fact that control over floods and famines gave Chinese governments more control over their subjects than Western governments had. Chinese governments have always been authoritarian. They have always had the ability to reward deference and punish insubordination. In the West people often had to fight for survival. In China it was a better idea to ask politely.

  • 1RW

    @Bardon

    Militarism is not the same as aggressiveness on a personal level. Large armies require multilevel hierarchies of leadership, administration, bureaucracy, logistics, training, communications, etc… These are all traits that blacks would be bad at according to the article, and history shows that they indeed are bad at it. Finally, an effective soldier obeys his officers, while an effective officer takes care of his men, materially, thru training, and motivation. Both these stations require a large amount of self control and suppression of dominance tendencies on the part of the soldier, and to some extent the officer.

    Therefore, your critique is off base on point a.

    As far as point b, remember that IQ is a distribution, not a fixed number. There are plenty of very smart whites that create all the technology. What Rushton neglected to mention is creativity and tolerance for novel ideas. Whites do seem to demonstrate more of both, probably because they didn’t kill their original thinkers quite as often as the Chinese. Perhaps the social cohesiveness of the Asians makes them reluctant to think for themselves.

  • ATBOTL

    This part is suspect:

    “Cultural Achievements High High Low”

    Clearly, Caucasians have higher cultural achievements than East Asians.

  • Blaak Obongo

    “In the United States, early maturation is correlated with promiscuity, illegitimate births, leaving school, crime, and other social problems. Early sexual maturity seems to be heritable, with daughters resembling their mothers.”

    The generalization “In the United States” seems to posit that the population of the United States is racially homogenous, which, as we know, is contrary to fact. If this remark were broken down by race (as is the rest of the essay), it would be more meaningful.

  • Anonymous

    2 — McGillicuddy wrote at 8:35 PM on September 16:

    I am very persuaded by the this wonderful theory, but is it fair to rate black cultural achievement as low? Obviously, it is not as near as high as that of Europeans or Asians, and so for the sake of simplicity, I suppose the chart could not be arranged any other way, but in the field of international pop-music, American blacks have been wildly successful and influential.”

    ———

    On this count, I disagree, STRONGLY:

    Here’s a couple of reasons. Influence, yes. Worth? NO. Look, we buy the cheapest, most worthless stuff, the most defective consumer products, the most awful, nutrition-less food, and watch the worst TV, simply because that’s what’s on offer.

    Pop music has at times been good, and I like quite a bit of Motown. But whites invented virtually 100% of all that even made up Motown. I am a lifelong professional musician. I know, firsthand. Hip Hop is pure junk. Simply excrement. It is not music. Nor is using pitch correction to robotically create perfect pitch in a vocal performance. But idiots lap it up. Britney Spears is not someone who will be remembered 100 years from now, nor Jay Z.

    To belabor this would be inane.

    Simply put, black contribution to music is a drop in the ocean.

  • Bardon

    Reply to #4

    Yes, as far as individual aggressiveness goes, it may be true. Warfare is, per definitionem, a controlled aggression. The stress is on “controlled”. But, there are also some myths to be dispelled on racially related “spontaneous” aggressiveness: for instance, the testosterone level. It’s basically the same across races:http://bit.ly/iw5meI

    “After applying sampling weights and adjusting for age, percent body fat, alcohol, smoking, and activity, testosterone concentrations were not different between non-Hispanic blacks (n = 363; geometric mean, 5.29 ng/ml) and non-Hispanic whites (n = 674; 5.11 ng/ml; P > 0.05) but were higher in Mexican-Americans (n = 376; 5.48 ng/ml; P

  • Bardon

    # White civilizations have this Promethean-Faustian, individualistic strain ingrained. Not everything, even the majority of what goes now under the title of sociology, culturology etc. does not warrant newer fields like evolutionary psychology, sociobiology, social neuroscience (you name it)- parts of evolutionary anthropology:http://goo.gl/F0AWH

    Or- it does, but I haven’t seen any revolutionary paradigm I haven’t already read in Spengler, even in his American disciple Joseph Campbell or in old-fashioned Max Nordau.

    Simply, there are no Chinese or Indian Prometheans. This is not their way of living life to the fullest. Culturally- Homer is contest, Plato is contest, Shakespeare is contest, Dostoevsky is contest, Melville is contest, Nietzsche is contest. Confucius, Lao Tzu, Chou Hsi, ..Shakuntala, Kabir, Dogen, .. it’s all about harmonizing with the Nature or radically transcending it in a stupor of- they think- bliss in transcosmic Void (hallucinogens work just as good). There is no sense that life is worth living, that change is desirable, that individual matters, that future can be better than the past, that, essentially, Protagoras was right: The Man is the measure of all things.

    That’s why Asia couldn’t produce great things which could change the face of the Earth.

  • Daniel

    That fact that the average IQ of blacks is around 85 is not the problem. A person can function in a technical society with an IQ of only 85. The problem is that for every black man with an IQ of a 100 there has to be another one with an IQ of 70 to get that average of 85.

    A person with an IQ of 70 does have problems in an advanced technical world.

    A white person with an IQ of 80-85 may appear to be a little slow but that’s average even for an American black. Are there any laws that say we have to take the dumbest white guy on a crew or in an office and promote him/her to foreman/supervisor.

  • Anonymous

    I always have thought of racial differences as resembling the differences between species of cats. Cheetahs, tigers and lions and leopards, for example, they are all cats buts have evolved different social and hunting behaviors. I am a huge believer in biological determination and am conscious of it in every aspect of my daily existance, from my relationship with my dog, who basically pretends to love me in order to get food from me, to the fact that I look prettier and am more receptive to men when I am ovulating. Many people seem blissfully unaware of how deep biological processes are responsible for much of their behavior. I also think Americans are different biologically for being descendents of people who left their familes and countries of origin, which is a strange thing for social animals to do. It explains why we like a lot of space and many of us are loners and individualists.

  • 1RW

    @Bardon

    The extent of warfare is a function of social organization. Primitive tribes are by no means peaceful, for example Comanches. However, lacking complex social organization, they couldn’t field armies with specialist soldiers ( such as cannon crews, engineers, signal corps, quartermasters corps, etc…). Which is why their warfare was always small. But their numbers were also small. So their warfare consisted of raids and intertribal skirmishes. This is true of Eskimos and Africans. Africans could very well have high rates of interpersonal aggression, which would hinder their ability to form massive polities capable of fielding large armies. Likewise, when they did form armies, they were little better than a mob. The Zulus famous bull formation had four units, two flanks, the main body and reserve. This was the entire army. By contrast, the roman army that preceded them by thousands of years had multiple levels of command – maniple, century, cohort, legion (platoon company battalion division). They fielded specialist troops, including an excellent medical corps and artillery. That was an army capable of fighting the world, and it did. Primitive tribes are only capable of small short skirmishes and raids, against equally small opponents, which is why they may look peaceful to you

  • Anonymous

    There is a theory that the reason asians have so few twins is that asian women who had twins were presumed guilty of adultery and killed. Those with 2 eggs in 1 cycle were eliminated from the gene pool. Is this true or is it a myth?

    Asians nowdays restrict births. Did they do so in earlier times?

    Asians are polygamous. One man can have more than 1 partner even if only 1 is a legal wife.

    When making theories about asian births we need to look before the 20th century and its successful birth control methods.

    Was life in disease ridden africa with its man eating crocodiles, leopards raiding the villages, droughts and diseases that destroyed crops and other threats to human life really so much easier than life in Northern Europe and Asia? I don’t think sub sahara africa has any native fruit and nut bearing trees as the rest of the world does.

    The sahara is a young desert. It began about 6,000 years ago and is still expanding south ward. Thre were great civilizations beginning 8,000 years ago in the middle east. Why did those civilizations not spread to sub sahara africa when the desert was not much of a barrier?

    I think Kenya had only about 1 million people in the 1890’s when the English took it over. That tiny population does not support the theory of carefree child raising. It supports a theory of a very high death rate.

  • Anonymous

    “Blacks do not live as long as whites who, in turn, do not live as long as Asians.”

    Which asians; late 20th and 21th century japanese? That is a pretty small group within the asian race. What is the life span of burmese, hmong, laotians, cambodians etc? What was the japanese life span compared to the european life span 300 years ago?

    It seems to me that Rushton is cherry picking among ethnic groups of asians to prove his points. Japanese, Chinese and Koreans have average IQs of 105 it is true. The other asian ethnic groups have IQs around 95 except for hmong whose average IQ is 80.

    Has he ever heard of the death of 10 million during the 19th century chinese tai ping rebellion civil war? Rushton should also include the chinese death rate from 1948 to 1995 during the famines and upheavals that occurred every 10 years in his statistics.

    Chinese history reveals that even middle class chinese men often had dozens of children by their wives and concubines. Not all the girls were killed. Selling 5 year old daughters into sex slavery is not exactly careful child raising. This was a common practice among asians since before written history.

    It seems to me that Rushton is studying 20th and 21th century cultural, economic and political asian factors and claiming that those factors are genetic and apply to asians who lived centuries ago.

  • Anon

    I think this thesis is true not just between races, but within a race. If you create the right social conditions, the r-types will breed at explosive rates.

    I don’t recall the argument exactly, since I read Milton Friedman’s “Capitalism & Freedom” about 1980; but he actually claimed that Jews had become stupider at some point, maybe in the 19th Century, due to conditions that favored higher rates of breeding for the poor, as we do with our welfare systems. A race can actually breed itself down by simply increasing the numbers of the dumber among them.

    But, it’s also the case that the smarter, those who go further in education, also tend to be more heavily propagandized in our society and thus more likely to be bred out or to encourage their children to breed out, due simply to wrong information and ideas. Of course, this is due to a sort of “decapitation” of whites through elimination of the intelligent and racially aware whites from the universities, publishing, film and other media, law, etc.

  • wat tyler 23

    Dear all, I go along with this theory of racial differences but I would like to add speaking as a layman, I don’t see the word imagination used or spoken of in the context of intelligence. To me intelligence has many parts and the part played by imagination is the largest and most important. This imagination part gives us invention, some of the greatest inventions of mankind have been of the most simplest form, take as we all know,The Wheel, I am sure the person responsible for that was not a mathematical Genius, just a person with imagination, It has stood the test of time it is still with us, so lets hear more about imagination and the part-it-plays. I would like to make a mention about Blacks and their intelligence or lack of it as written in the article. I have lived and worked in Africa and can attest to the infuriating lack of uptake and the slowness of thought by Africans but I have met a number of very intelligent Blacks, I would put them on par with Europeans and Asians, it always puzzled me as to why there were not more of them and why they played such an insignificant role if at all in their tribal groupings and country. I thought about these intelligent ones and their lack status and achievement, I was struck by their mild manner and lack of aggression, that for me was the answer. You see intelligent Blacks have to keep their heads down, they are too afraid of sticking their head above the parapet and telling others of the tribe what to do, if they did they would soon feel the rock the stick bashing their heads and the Machete at the back of their neck all being wheeled by their less intelligent most aggressive Tribal Brothers. In European and Asian societies we are compartmentalised, we form groups of differing intelligences and we call them, Artisan,Tradesmen, Doctors, Architects, Engineers, Teachers,The Professions and we all rub along just fine, some thing the Blacks as yet do not do.

  • Anonymous

    7 — Anonymous wrote at 1:01 AM on September 17:

    “Hip Hop is pure junk. Simply excrement. It is not music. Nor is using pitch correction to robotically create perfect pitch in a vocal performance”

    I fully agree. BUT, can we ignore the prior contributions of American Blacks to Jazz, Swing, Blues, and Rock and Roll?

    (I will admit that I liked rock and roll better after it had made the trip to England and them back to America for further work, though.)

    The playing and improvisations of the New Orleans and Swing Jazz players are really very impressive IMO.

  • Anonymous

    I think Rushton is essentially right, but on the other hand, I’ve know plenty of people of Scandinavian descent and they are sometimes a little slow compared to people of British or German ancestry. Not dumb, but not quite as quick. Also, the Romans and Greeks of southern Europe had a far more advanced civilization than the northern Europeans.

  • Istvan

    16 — wat tyler 23 wrote at 3:41 PM on September 17: I have lived and worked in Africa and can attest to the infuriating lack of uptake and the slowness of thought by Africans but I have met a number of very intelligent Blacks, I would put them on par with Europeans and Asians, it always puzzled me as to why there were not more of them and why they played such an insignificant role if at all in their tribal groupings and country. I thought about these intelligent ones and their lack status and achievement, I was struck by their mild manner and lack of aggression, that for me was the answer.

    Africans stop developing when very young and have the emotional maturity of a 10 year old, tops. Now we all know how the smart and nerdy kids are frequently picked on in school, imagine a society where the alleged adults act the same way. The few Africans capable of advance thought don’t stand a chance in a society where the chiefs are no more mature than the common rabble.

  • Ken

    Bardon wrote “as for Blacks’ aggression- where are their wars?”

    Let’s not forget, blacks didn’t have their own written language until around 500 years ago, lack of documentation doesn’t grant you liberty to make up history out of thin air. Tribal warfare is usually not very news-worthy. Besides, when you are fighting just to create the general necessities for life (food water shelter), there is little time for war.

    When introduced to a situation where they don’t have to worry about general survival (ie White/Asian civilization), they have more freedom to exhibit their aggression, modern day blacks turn once great cities into gang warzones. Many of the blacks who turn rich because of sports, end up committing violent crimes.

  • S P

    Interesting but for whatever reason the “intermediate” qualities that whites have seems to have predisposed them towards dominance.

    Also, for whatever reason, throughout history there appear to more white geniuses, even if the average intelligence of Asians is higher.

    However, it’s important to note that these are very big, crude groupings of human beings. A Japanese person does not consider himself to be Chinese, an Englishman does not think of himself as Russian etc.

    To say nothing of the many varied ethnic, linguistic, class, religious, etc., differences between peoples.

    So you can’t just take some large groupings, a few differences here or there, and think that is somehow explanatory. You have to look at the entire picture which includes every bit of demography, history, genetics, etc. to really try to understand human beings.

  • Expat68

    Altho some of what is presented in this “study” probably is true, so much of the study depends on generalisations, assumptions, and even myth.

    Notice how whites are always “intermediate” while the asians and blacks are on the far ends. This makes whites out to be so-so or just average, when in fact whites are always at the far end with the asians with the asians only having a marginal, slight advantage in whatever they are measuring.

    As far as asians and whites are concerned, I see major cultural differences but as far as differences in intelligence, brain size, aggression, etc, etc, the differences are rather petty, IMO.

    I’ve lived in asia for almost 20 years and a lot of the alleged advantages asians hold over whites simply aren’t true.

  • White Guy In Japan

    I just read Rushton’s book. In fact, I finished it last week. Great stuff. He does a great job presenting the history of these ideas plus the science of measuring humans.

    Having said that, I still have some questions I would like to see developed and examined. Namely, if East Asians have a mean IQ one third of a deviation above that of Whites, why wasn’t the automobile invented in Korea? Informally, I can see the cultural factors that impeded scientific discovery in Asia. They are great at improving ideas but not so good at discovering raw ideas. High conformity and senior-based hierarchy makes it difficult to impossible to introduce new ideas. Whites, with a higher tolerance of variation and a stronger sense of objectivity and logic, are the hunters of original ideas.

    Another interesting point Rushton looks at is how the mean Asian IQ hit that 105 mark. Their verbal intelligence is a bit lower than Whites, around 96 or 97. As I teach English in Asia I can believe that; Japanese are generally not verbally gifted nor very good at learning foreign languages. Yet their visuo-spatial intelligence is incredibly high (112 or so, I think). While Japanese engineering is quite amazing, their sense of spatial relationships is not so good when it comes to driving or urban planning. Wonder what happened there.

  • Buridan

    Answer to #11 Anonymous

    The fundamental problem with the Rushton theory of K- and r-strategies : it opposes species, whereas Blacks and Whites are SUBspecies of the same specie. The same problem when you, Anonymous, compare human races with different SPECIES of cats : tigers, cheetas, etc.

    By the fact, does somebody know a mammal specie in which there are subspecies which differ as regards cognitive abilities and behavioral characters (and, occasionnaly, can give a reference to his source)? [domesticated species excluded ; and, excluded, too, subspecies which never mate together in Nature, as, to my knowledge, Wolwes and Jackals, or Lions and Tigers (so much that they are normally considered as two different species, indeed the specie/subspecie difference is not so much the mere impossibility of the interbreeding as its unsignificant character : Irish people never interbred with Australian Aborigenes, but there was a continuity between Irish people and Austalian Aborigines, Irish mating with English, English with French, French with German, etc., and Irish and Australian Aborigenes proceeding from common ancestors not so long ago]. Are there, for instance, among Wolwes, or Chimpanzees, or Rats, subspecies who could be compared to human races, as regards the existence of interbreeding and, nevertheless, the significative differences in cognitive abilities and behavioral characters ? [My problem when discussing with an antiracialist : I can only mention races [subspecies] among domesticated animals. Indeed, I can add that man is a self-domesticated animal, but wolwes have been consciously selected and mated to produce chihuahuas and Saint-Bernard, whereas the same is not true for the origin of the White and Black subspecies ; so, I suppose that interbreeding is easier for man than for Lions-Tigers because of the domesticatd character of mankind (a physical-behavioral difference is not sufficient to prevent mating), but that is not the mating as it is consciously organized within the domesticated species].

  • Callisto

    #24:

    Are there, for instance, among Wolwes, or Chimpanzees, or Rats, subspecies who could be compared to human races, as regards the existence of interbreeding and, nevertheless, the significative differences in cognitive abilities.

    Animals can in no way be compared to humans. Humans migrated all over the globe and were subjected to different environmental pressures to stay alive. Those who didn’t or couldn’t adapt did not survive to pass on their genes.

    Animals have natural characteristics (teeth, claws) to defend themselves and fur coats to keep themselves warm that humans do not possess. Unlike animals, we humans had to use our brains to figure out how to fight off predators, secure food and keep ourselves from freezing for the long, cold, dark winters in the north. Those unable to do this did not survive. Domestic dogs are many levels less intelligent than their wild cousins.

    Chimpanzees, obviously never faced these pressures or challenges in their long genetic history in tropical and sub-tropical regions. Tigers and wolves are predators.

    As Professor Rushton explains in his article Winters Are Good for Your Genes:

    As early humans migrated out of Africa they encountered the cognitively demanding problem of having to survive cold winters where there were no plant foods and they had to hunt, sometimes big game. They also had to solve the problem of keeping warm.

    This required greater intelligence than was needed in tropical and semi-tropical equatorial Africa where plant foods are plentiful throughout the year. Lynn shows that race differences in brain size and intelligence are both closely associated with low winter temperatures in the regions they inhabit. He gives a figure of 1,282 cc for the average brain size of sub-Saharan Africans, as compared with 1,367 cc for Europeans and 1,416 cc for East Asians.

    How to explain the Inuits?:

    Lynn also notes some anomalies in the cold winter theory of intelligence. The most striking: the Inuit, exposed to the coldest winter temperatures, have a brain size equal to East Asians, and yet have an average IQ of only 91. To explain this anomaly, Lynn proposes that additional genetic processes are important—such as population size. The larger the network of co-operating and competing population groups (“demes”), the faster any mutations for advantageous alleles can spread. So large landmass groups like East Asians and Europeans average higher IQs than isolated hunter-gatherer groups like the Inuit.

    http://goo.gl/oq8rf

  • Anonymous

    “Another interesting point Rushton looks at is how the mean Asian IQ hit that 105 mark.”

    Not true. The average Chinese, Japanese and Korean IQ is 105. The average IQs of Thais, Cambodians, Vietnamese is 95.

  • Anonymous

    The most superficial reading of Asian history shows that they are no more peaceful than any other race. The history of Asia is as replete with wars, invasions, revolutions and violent power struggles as Europe.

    Has Rushton heard of the Wu dynasty? The 19th century Chinese Taiping civil war that lasted 50 years and killed 10 million people? What about the Japanese warrior culture that ruled the island for 2,000 years until their defeat in WW2?

    What about the history of Asia in the 20th century? Japan invading every country and massacring millions, the Chinese war that began in 1911 when the Emperior was overthrown and lasted until 1948 when the communists took over and the real violence began;no one can claim that the last century in Asia was peaceful.

  • Anonymous

    American black aggressiveness is a recent thing. Blacks in the south before 1970 did not behave the way blacks behave today. Ever seen how submissive black prostitutes are to their pimps?

    Quite a contrast to their aggressive behavior towards White women.

    I wish amren would stop posting Rushton. His nonsense does not help our cause. His theories are not valid. They are worthless.

    Urban legends is right.

  • Anonymous

    “The lower crime rates of Chinese everywhere in the world can be explained by the fact that control over floods and famines gave Chinese governments more control over their subjects than Western governments had. Chinese governments have always been authoritarian.”

    Engleman, do you have any idea of the illegal gambling, loansharking rising from illegal gambling, extortion, protection rackets, forced prostitution, labor and industrial regulations violations, outright slavery, zoning and building code violation,sconsumer fraud, insurance fraud, food stamp fraud, human trafficking, disability, social security, tax and every other kind of fraud that goes on in asian immigrant communities in America?

    Granted, asians do not send their teen age boys to beat down Whites as blacks do. They send their boys to extort money from asian businesses, to guard illegal gambling operations and to collect 600 percent interest loan shark debt.

    Talk to any police department’s Chinatown squad. Learn the truth.

  • Anonymous

    22 — Expat68 wrote at 2:51 AM on September 19:

    Altho some of what is presented in this “study” probably is true, so much of the study depends on generalisations, assumptions, and even myth.

    I agree, especially about the assumptions and myths. I have never lived in Asia, but I am a historian and a San Franciscan.

    I know Asian history. They are no more peaceful than any other race. I am all too familiar with San Francisco Asian crime to go along with Engleman’s and Rushton’s naive ideas that Asians are low crime. Ever heard of the triads? They are more mafia than masons or knights of columbus.

    Rushton seems to have based his ideas of Asia on all those 1950’s movies of Japanese girls and American occupation troops;

    or the polite maitre’de of his favorite Asian restaurant who, like all maitre’des is polite and eager to sell a meal.

    Has he ever tried to repossess a $300,000 copier machine from an Asian who bought the machine with a minimal down payment under a false name and closed the copy shop as soon as the machines were delivered?

    Has Rushton ever tried to enforce building and zoning codes against an Asian who is running a butcher shop in the garage of a home in a residential only neighborhood?

    Rushton should take a look at the Sunset and Richmond neighborhoods of San Francisco. 1,000 sq ft 2 bedroom houses with 30 people living in the house and an illegal business operation in the attached garage.

    How is this endless nitpicking and cherry picking of statistics going to help Whites survive affirmative action, black on White crime, unchecked non White immigration and vicious discrimination against us by our goverment?

  • Anonymous

    “The lower crime rates of Chinese everywhere in the world can be explained by the fact that control over floods and famines gave Chinese governments more control over their subjects than Western governments had.”

    Engleman, you don’t know what you are talking about. Talk to the police in London, Amsterdam, New York, Vancouver. You will learn that Chinese have high rates of certain kinds of crime.

  • Anonymous

    Average IQ German, 107 Average IQ Poland 107 Average IQ Italy 103

    Why does Rushton never mention these IQs?

  • Expat68

    Upon a closer look at this idiot Rushton’s funny little chart, I felt compelled to add my 2 cents here…

    Marital Stability: Asian marital stability is higher because it is a CULTURAL AND ECONOMICAL thing, and getting divorces is generally frowned upon in these male dominated societies. White marriages used to also be very stable as the women had little or no education and were almost always homemakers and really had no choice but to make a marriage work. Divorces in asia are now on the rise because women are becoming more educated and can support themselves financially, and they will not tolerate a bad husband or bad marital situation as much as before.

    Criminality: Criminality in asia is just as bad as it is anywhere, IMO. Haven’t any of you people visited asia? Yes, blacks do appear to be much more violent than whites or asians, and between asians and whites I see no real difference in crime potential altho whites might be more willing to solve a problem using physical force as they are larger and not afraid to use their strength.

    Brain Size: When adjusted for size, asians do seem to have a small advantage here but that’s assuming that a slightly larger brain really makes a noticeable difference. How a brain is wired also counts, and I believe that asians hold no advantage over whites overall altho certain differences in ability do exist because of brain wiring.

    Decision Times: Yes, asians do hold the advantage here and there could be many reasons for it. I think it’s brain wiring and also an evolutionary advantage for quick decision making processes, and IMO it might have something to do with the population density that many asian countries have traditionally had. Or in other words, quick decision-making times might mean more food on the table for a quick-thinking Chinese in a crowded market while such a trait served no evolutionary advantage for the Europeans as their countries were much more sparsely populated.

    Hormone Levels: Not that we can prove that high hormone levels lead to over aggressiveness or impulsiveness, but even if you can then so what?

    Genitalia: So having small genitalia makes you smarter or somehow gives you an edge over the next guy? Well, Rushton?

    Intercourse Frequency: Nah, asians don’t have a lot of sex. They only have made their countries the mostly densely populated places on earth, but I’m sure that having sex has nothing to do with it!

    Aggressiveness: Whites are more vocal than asians, but are they more aggressive? I don’t think so. Whites are some of the most laid-back people on the planet- too laid back, IMO, and they are NOT more aggressive than asians.

    Cautiousness: It’s total nonsense to even try to claim that asians are the most cautious of the other groups. Asians are big risk takers just like the rest of us.

    Dominance: I guess we whites win this one, right, Rushton?

    Self-concept: What about you, Rushton? Do you have high or low self-concept? Lol…

    I will continue if pressed to further prove my point, but being that most of you are no dummies I’m sure you get my point. Yes, racial differences do exist, but this idiot Rushton and his pseudo-scientific ideas and even wild speculations takes it to a whole new level. Enuff of this nonsense!

  • Expat68

    To: White Guy in Japan.

    Yes, Japanese engineering is top-rate but I wouldn’t call it any more than that. I am in the auto industry and Japanese design and quality is a close 2nd when it is compared to us and countries like Germany. There is extreme demand her in asia for American heavy auto-parts (BECAUSE of the quality and design I’m talking about) and it’s a shame that the industry for transport trucks is slowly bing fazed out. There is NO asian that would argue with me about this because it’s nothing but common knowledge over here in asia.

  • John Engelman

    29 — Anonymous wrote at 7:46 PM on September 19:

    Engleman, do you have any idea of the illegal gambling, loansharking rising from illegal gambling, extortion, protection rackets, forced prostitution, labor and industrial regulations violations, outright slavery, zoning and building code violation,sconsumer fraud, insurance fraud, food stamp fraud, human trafficking, disability, social security, tax and every other kind of fraud that goes on in asian immigrant communities in America?

    Granted, asians do not send their teen age boys to beat down Whites as blacks do. They send their boys to extort money from asian businesses, to guard illegal gambling operations and to collect 600 percent interest loan shark debt.

    Talk to any police department’s Chinatown squad. Learn the truth.

    ——-

    Those who believe that economic deprivation causes crime must account for James Q. Wilson and Richard Herrnstein’s portrait of an urban community that has suffered severe poverty but little crime. During the 1960s, San Francisco’s Chinatown had the city’s lowest income, highest unemployment rate and highest proportion of families with incomes under $4,000 a year. Yet in 1965, the authors note, there were only five people of Chinese ancestry committed to prison in the entire state of California.

    http://goo.gl/0Yz4y

  • Anonymous

    #28, “American black aggressiveness is a recent thing. Blacks in the south before 1970 did not behave the way blacks behave today. Ever seen how submissive black prostitutes are to their pimps?”

    Perhaps black aggressiveness before that time was not as encountered daily in (white) American life because of segregation in the south? Also, while blacks make up 12~13% (the exact number escapes me, but it’s something like that) of the US population, they do commit lots of violent crimes on average and have a much higher proportion of them in prisons. This is obviously not caused by poverty, as there are quite a few poor whites yet they don’t use poverty as an excuse to commit crime. And, it’s certainly not a situation of non-black police officers deliberately arresting every other black person they can get their hands on for no reason, either.

    Perhaps black prostitutes can’t help but be submissive, or else they will be subjected to violence at the hands of their pimp?

  • Anonymous

    35 — John Engelman wrote at 6:21 AM on September 20:

    29 — Anonymous wrote at 7:46 PM on September 19:

    Engleman, do you have any idea of the illegal gambling, loansharking rising from illegal gambling, extortion, protection rackets, forced prostitution, labor and industrial regulations violations, outright slavery, zoning and building code violation,sconsumer fraud, insurance fraud, food stamp fraud, human trafficking, disability, social security, tax and every other kind of fraud that goes on in asian immigrant communities in America?

    Granted, asians do not send their teen age boys to beat down Whites as blacks do. They send their boys to extort money from asian businesses, to guard illegal gambling operations and to collect 600 percent interest loan shark debt.

    Talk to any police department’s Chinatown squad. Learn the truth.

    ———-

    Those who believe that economic deprivation causes crime must account for James Q. Wilson and Richard Herrnstein’s portrait of an urban community that has suffered severe poverty but little crime. During the 1960s, San Francisco’s Chinatown had the city’s lowest income, highest unemployment rate and highest proportion of families with incomes under $4,000 a year. Yet in 1965, the authors note, there were only five people of Chinese ancestry committed to prison in the entire state of California.

    http://goo.gl/0Yz4y

    ———————————————-

    Here we go again, John….you never fail to post your drivel about how the Chinese (Asians) are such model specimens. BTW, the Chinese have their own exclusive communities in America and always have. Do you honestly think they report crimes committed by their brethren? Of course not! Just like most blacks and mexicans NEVER report crimes that their brethren commit!

    Do you not remember here on Amren the articles about these Asians and how they operate? Did you ever comment on those articles? I don’t think so.

    Do you think you could, maybe just once, talk about all the WHITE people during the depression and the Grapes Of Wrath era? Talk about POVERTY! How about those Walton’s!

  • Anonymous

    Looks like John Engleman has met his match in many of the posts here. Does my heart and soul good!

    How about that John? Any comment? and not the kind you always print with your bogus links. You are a lefty and a troll so admit it.

  • John Engelman

    38 — Anonymous wrote at 3:34 PM on September 20:

    Looks like John Engleman has met his match in many of the posts here. Does my heart and soul good!

    How about that John? Any comment? and not the kind you always print with your bogus links. You are a lefty and a troll so admit it.

    ——-

    Do you call this a “bogus link?”

    ——-

    Asians commit violent crimes at about one quarter the white rate.

    – Jared Taylor, from “The Color of Crime”

    http://www.colorofcrime.com/colorofcrime2005.html

    ——-

    What about this? Is it bogus too? Keep in mind this is a thread praising Professor J. Philippe Rushton

    ——-

    Many statistics in Chart 1 come from the United States, where Orientals are a “model minority.”They have fewer divorces, fewer out-of-wedlock births, and fewer reports of child abuse than Whites.

    More Orientals graduate from college and fewer go to prison.

    Studies of race differences in brain size use a number of methods, including MRI. All methods produce the same results. Orientals have the largest brains (on average), Blacks the smallest, and Whites in between. These differences in brain size are not due to body size. Adjusting for body size still results in the same pattern. The three-way pattern is also true for IQ. These race differences in brain size mean that Orientals average about 102 million more brain cells than Whites, and that Whites have about 480 million more than Blacks. These differences in brain size probably explain the racial differences in IQ and

    cultural achievement.

    http://www.charlesdarwinresearch.org/Race_Evolution_Behavior.pdf

    – Professor J. Philippe Rushton, from “Race, Evolution, and Behavior”

  • Anonymous

    John Engleman wrote”

    “During the 1960s, San Francisco’s Chinatown had the city’s lowest income, highest unemployment rate and highest proportion of families with incomes under $4,000 a year. Yet in 1965, the authors note, there were only five people of Chinese ancestry committed to prison in the entire state of California.”

    I am a retired police officer who began my career in San Francisco in 1961. The San Francisco Chinese REPORTED only an average of $4,000 per year. In reality they earned much, much more. Even then they owned vast amounts of expensive real estate in the downtown financial district, Chinatown, Nrth Beach, the Marina, Fisherman’s wharf tourist area and the inner Richmond.

    San Francisco Chinatown was basically an extension of Hong Kong, then and now one of the most corrupt cities in the world.

    The major business of Chinatown was illegal gambling, human trafficing, sex and labor slavery and extortion of Chinese businesses. The Chinese victims would really and truly rather die than report Chinese criminals. Prostitution then as now was rife in Chinatown. Illegal workshops and factories worked by slave labor abounded.

  • Anonymous

    Engeleman wrote

    ” They have always had the ability to reward deference and punish insubordination.”

    I don’t know much Mandarin, but I do work with a lot of Chinese Drs. There are literally hundreds of Chinese sayings on the order of “obey the law and then do what you want”

    “pass a law, pass anther law to get around it” “shout yes master yes master whisper no master no master.”

  • margaret

    “As Professor Rushton explains in his article Winters Are Good for Your Genes: ” As early humans migrated out of Africa they encountered ”

    So Rushton believes Out of Africa? That theory was created by the nation of islam founder Mr. Fard back in the 1930’s. It was Mr. Yacub, the evil wizard who searched high and low for brown skinned instead of black skinned blacks. He bred them for lighter and ligher skins and hair until he produced the evil blue eyed devils.

    That theory was re-invented at the marxist University of California at Berkely by 2 marxist researchers using flawed methodology and exclusively non african tissue samples to create Out of Africa which sounds more scientific that the evil wizard Mr. Yacub.

    If Rushton believes Out of Africa he has lost any respect I ever had for his scientific standing.

  • John Engelman

    Anonymous 40, and 41,

    In addition to being fairly well read on racial differences I have also had extensive experience with different races. I lived in downtown San Jose, California when the area was engulfed with impoverished war refugees from South Vietnam. I would often leave work at 10 PM, and walk three miles home. Nothing ever happened to me.

    For a spell downtown San Jose was infected by street walkers. Out of several hundred, one I saw once or twice was probably Oriental. I never saw any Oriental prostitutes in San Francisco’s Chinatown or Oakland’s Chinatown, although I often visited those places.

    Now I live on the edge of a black ghetto. If I tried walking through it after dark I would risk my life. I have been mugged several times. Several other attempts I have thwarted with pepper spray.

  • Anonymous

    Engleman wrote ” I never saw any Oriental prostitutes in San Francisco’s Chinatown or Oakland’s Chinatown, although I often visited those places.”

    There are thousands of prostitutes in San Francisco and Oakland’s Chinatown. The black pimps put their girls out on the street. The Asian pimps keep their prostitutes locked up. Any who try to escape are killed.

    Surely you have seen those asian massage parlor signs in just about every city neighborhood?

    Another difference between black and asian pimps is that the black pimps just dump the dead girls bodies in the nearest park or yard. The asian pimps bury them deep where the bodies will never be found.

    Can you quit with the oriental silliness? The asians declared oriental to be a derogratory term decades ago. You better hope the SPLC ADL doesn’t charge you with hate crime and racial slurs for using the word oriental.