American blacks have an average IQ of 85. American whites have an average of 100, Northeastern Orientals 103, Ashkenazi Jews (also white) 115), America's Indians from India, probably higher (only the smart ones make it to the USA), non-white Hispanics 90, and Mexicans 87. Furthermore, GENES affect IQ more than any other factor or combination of factors. Sub-Saharan African blacks average an IQ of only 70 (some countries as low as 59, enough to institutionalize most of them). Superior American culture, education, diet, environmental stimulus, and 18% white genes gave American blacks nearly a standard deviation higher IQ than Sub-Saharan African cousins. Incidentally, the USA contains about 33 million whites with IQ below 85, the level needed to graduate from a decent high school..
Now, let's strip the racial divisions from the matter. America has about 80 million people with sub-85 IQ. Without any effort at seeming politically correct, I call sub-85-IQ people "stupid" for the purposes of this commentary.
These people, if citizens and over 18, have full, unrestrained voting rights UNLESS a court has judged them mentally incompetent or felons. In fact, not just the stupid, but virtually anybody but non-citizens, the insane, felons, and children under 18 may vote in elections. And I maintain that age 21 is barely old enough to be labeled "adult." 25 would make more sense, according to auto insurance actuaries who charge triple the rate for people under 25 because they are statistically irresponsible and cause a lot of car wrecks.
Since "low IQ" automatically means "does not solve problems well, can't figure things out, and makes notoriously wrong decisions" all those low-IQ people express their stupidity in every area of life, particularly at the polls where proper decisions require an understanding of often complex issues, good judgment of candidate character, and a decent education (at least a high school graduate). Sub-85 IQ people don't have these characteristics, and they still have a say in government. They shouldn't, not much, anyway, because the more say they have, the more likely we will end up with a corrupt government (like the ones we have now on federal, state, and county levels).
I could recommend that America return to the system in which only white adult male property owners may vote. I'd prefer to recommend that we establish a scaled universal suffrage voting system where everybody votes, but their votes count differently based on ability and accomplishment in life. For example:
- Felon and insane peoples' votes count 1% of a vote or less,
- welfare recipients count .2% of a vote,
- literate children count .3% of a vote,
- high school graduates count 1 vote,
- people with college degrees count 1.1 vote for associates, 1.5 for bachelor, 2 for PhD,
- plus 1 for every IQ point above 100,
- plus 30% for passing a course in the US and state constitution and demonstrating intimate knowledge of constitutional principles, knowing the rights and obligations of people and governments by heart,
- plus 20% for successful business, military, or professorial career (if business or military, extra scaling for size of company and position in it.
- and so on
But the worst problem with Parker's analysis boils down to unworkable solutions. America shares a common fate with other countries, economically. The higher the average IQ of a nation, the lower the value of the nation's productivity (GDP). See Lynn and Van Hanen's IQ and the Wealth of Nations and La Griffe du Lion's Smart Fraction Theory articles - Google them - in fact, read ALL of La Griffe's scholarly articles. In order for America to evolve a superior civilization, it must improve its gene pool and drastically reduce the percentage of the population who have defective, degenerate, or low-IQ natures. Why? Because those people constitute an enormous public burden on infrastructures like
- hospitals and other medical care,
- police, courts, prisons, and other elements of criminal justice systems,
- welfare and welfare abuse,
- subsidized housing and associated destruction and lack of maintenance,
- loss of productive people's property through theft, robbery, burglary, car-jackings, street drug sales, and muggings; and
- low value or work output.
Our nation cannot have unbridled public debate on this topic of benign gene pool improvement because it does not seem politically correct and it implies that all people are not created equal ANYWHERE outside the eyes of God. But realistically, God did not create us to have equal civilizational value, and equal opportunity does not mean equal jobs or equal pay.
In other words, MAN operates as God's agent (if you want to look at it in a religious sense) here on earth, and we must learn to set up better systems than he set up. Darwin nearly perfectly described the methods God set up - the laws of natural selection and the survival of the fittest. We MEN (with the help of women of course) messed with both of those laws by setting up governments that protect the weak from the strong. We still work on how to protect the stupid from the smart, and somehow to create our own nation of "peace on earth and good will toward men" as an operating principle.
We can add only one thing other than IQ, proper culturization (ethics), and good education to the equation of value of future civilization: raw determination. But no matter how determined, a relatively stupid person will continue making wrong choices and will never get beyond solving simple problems of life that smart people solved long ago. You could say that a measure of IQ lies in the QUALITY of problems people choose to solve. Street drunks solve the problem of getting another drink and staying out of traffic. Multi-Millionaire CEOs solve the problem of how to improve the value of shareholder equity. You might stop and ask yourselves: what quality of problems have you chosen to spend your life solving?
In evolving American civilization and government, the wisest people of our land have concluded (and legislated accordingly) that raw capitalism has to suffer government regulation or tens of millions of stupid people will suffer oppression and abuse of a relative handful of brilliantly intelligent "business people" in the industries related to money, finance, banking, insurance, investment, energy, and pharmaceuticals. Today even the most impoverished families in America now have big color TVs, with many owning new large size flat panel high definition TVs on cable. These and other luxuries the stupid crave just as the smart do, because of advertising directed at financially irresponsible people. By that I mean stupid people go into debt for luxuries they don't need, while smart people go into debt only to increase their ability to prosper. And the stupid do create massive debt that makes them and their demagogue political supporters vote for ever more government spending, at a deficit, on programs that ostensibly benefit the stupid while surreptitiously enriching the smarter people. Of course the smart can afford those programs because they successfully competed for the better jobs and mates, and they have learned how to make the people of average IQ (the semi-smart) pay a lot of the tab for them.
So, our nation has hundreds of laws devoted to preventing industrial trusts and unfair business practices that stifle competition, that abuse employees, that discriminate against employees on the basis of race, religion, creed, or culture, and so on. The nation has gone litigation crazy, and juries award astronomical damages to some people (rather than to the whole set of victims) in tobacco-injury lawsuits, gun-injury lawsuits, and so on. Medical malpractice lawsuits have driven a lot of doctors out of business and increased the cost of insurance for so many that they leave private practice and seek employment with the government (VA hospitals, etc).
And our educational systems seem totally idiotic, throwing the stupid into schools with the smart, making the stupid misbehave out of frustration with inability to learn, and throwing the smart into abject boredom, hoping the teacher will "get on with it." School boards have pulled all kinds of tricks to try to segregate these students (honors classes, weekend studies on college courses, special University-Prep public schools, etc). But that has done nothing to help the stupid who cannot and will not graduate, and then will become net burdens on society because without crime and welfare abuse to help them get by they will never experience the American dream (not mere opportunity, but actual results, in the form of nice cars, clothes, houses, TVs, computers, and other luxuries) which they personally, lawfully, and ethically earned.
Plainly, our schools need openly to segregate people of different IQ groups (low, average, high), and give free educations to the master or doctor level for those who qualify through ambition and cognitive ability. And schools need to put the stupid into apprenticeship programs that will prepare them to work in communities without suffering embarrassment for their inability to compete against the smart, and where they can work productively and gainfully with a sense of pride in their accomplishments. Upon graduation, the stupid must be guided into work situations so they don't have to compete against the smart for menial jobs. And they need to go into government subsidized housing they would never afford, but which the SCHOOLS build through their apprenticeship programs under guidance of smart teachers.
And these communities need both workplaces and housing for the stupid, well-policed to keep them from hurting one another with their notoriously bad decisions followed by bad actions. And society should keep the stupid and smart from mingling socially, and limit procreation prerogatives for the stupid so their numbers and percentages of the population reduce by natural attrition. As this happens, the stupid will burden society less with requirements of socialism (robbing from the rich and middle class to support and care for the poor).
Oh, you have begun to see how these communities somehow resemble our increasingly profitable prison systems that force inmates to manufacture both commercial and government-related products? They have great similarities. I think they can become more beneficial if employed BEFORE the stupid get incarcerated for street crimes and thrown into prison work environments that endanger them worse than street life did. Then we won't need so many prisons, will we? And eventually the smart will learn to stay out of them altogether, or to go into them intentionally to get ahead in some devious, clever way.
At the same time government should sponsor eugenics programs to improve the gene pool by raising the average IQ dramatically (say to 115 or 120), develop smarter factories and machinery to replace the need for low-IQ people in the workplaces, and increase the percentage of super-intelligent people to do the senior-level inventing, idealizing, planning, and senior-level managing needed to advance the civilization to a day of light and life, where we have no war, crime, or poverty to sap our wealth.
So in reality, Parker has rightly divined that we have a Socialist America for the stupid and a Capitalist America for the smart, but she has stopped short of promoting truly workable solutions for this miserable state of affairs. So I have suggested some for her:
- More sensible education provisions, including separate school systems for the stupid and the average/smart
- Scaled voting rights
- Separate communities for living and working
- Benign Eugenics programs that dramatically improve the gene pool humanely and ethically
- Refinement of government regulation of capitalists to ensure they do not use criminal methods to take unfair advantage of the stupid and average.
Meanwhile we might all consider that since raw capitalism cannot work justly in a land or ultimately on a planet without allowing one or more classes of smart people to abuse another or more classes of less-smart people, and since socialism unjustly robs from the smart/rich/able to give to the stupid/poor/unable in order to force people who don't know or love someone to support that person anyway, then we have a responsibility do devise something better - a compromise. I suggest a mandate something like this for the typical person's daily routine:
- 12 hours rest, meditation, play, nourish, social contact, family interaction
- 4 hours self-maintenance (gainful employment - capitalism)
- 4 hours self-improvement
- 4 hours helping others officially, in teams, individually (non-government welfare for people around you)
As sensible folks will quickly surmise, only the most defective people will not have the ability to comply with such a schedule, and if everyone else complies, then people get a little capitalism, a little socialism, and a little personal growth every day. Over a lifetime, this will lead to better community organized efforts in each of those main areas, and it will eliminate the need for government welfare programs, help people to know their neighbors and teach children the right way to operate, by example, and it will get the deadbeats and professional welfare recipients off their backsides and into giving aid to others as a matter of practice, rather than focusing on how to get others to support them. And all shall improve daily to the limit their antecedent conditions and individual capacities allow.
Okay, you have part of MY opinions on the subject. I hope somebody will get this message to Parker so we can debate the matter and its solutions more fully in some public venue.
Bob Hurt -
http://bobhurt.com
2460 Persian Drive #70
Clearwater, FL 33763
+1 (727) 669-5511
Donate here:
http://bobhurt.com/lawdonation.htm
Study Jurisdictionary:
http://www.jurisdictionary.com/index.asp?refercode=HB0002
Subscribe to Lawmen newsletter:
lawmen-subscribe@googlegroups.com
UNCLE SAM'S PLANTATION
http://townhall.com/columnists/StarParker/2009/02/09/back_on_uncle_sams_plantation
|
Back on Uncle Sam's plantation
Star Parker - Syndicated Columnist

Six years ago I wrote a book called Uncle Sam's Plantation. I wrote the book to tell my own story of what I saw living inside the welfare state and my own transformation out of it.
I said in that book that indeed there are two Americas -- a poor America on socialism and a wealthy American capitalism.
I talked about government programs like Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF), Job Opportunities and Basic Skills Training (JOBS), Emergency Assistance to Needy Families with Children (EANF), Section 8 Housing, and Food Stamps.
A vast sea of perhaps well-intentioned government programs, all initially set into motion in the 1960s, that were going to lift the nation's poor out of poverty.
A benevolent Uncle Sam welcomed mostly poor black Americans onto the government plantation. Those who accepted the invitation switched mindsets from "How do I take care of myself?" to "What do I have to do to stay on the plantation?"
Instead of solving economic problems, government welfare socialism created monstrous moral and spiritual problems -- the kind of problems that are inevitable when individuals turn responsibility for their lives over to others.
The legacy of American socialism is our blighted inner cities, dysfunctional inner city schools, and broken black families.
Through God's grace, I found my way out. It was then that I understood what freedom meant and how great this country is.
I had the privilege of working on welfare reform in 1996, passed by a Republican Congress and signed 50 percent.
I thought we were on the road to moving socialism out of our poor black communities and replacing it with wealth-producing American capitalism.
But, incredibly, we are going in the opposite direction.
Instead of poor America on socialism becoming more like rich American on capitalism, rich America on capitalism is becoming like poor America on socialism.
Uncle Sam has welcomed our banks onto the plantation and they have said, "Thank you, Suh."
Now, instead of thinking about what creative things need to be done to serve customers, they are thinking about what they have to tell Massah in order to get their cash.
There is some kind of irony that this is all happening under our first black president on the 200th anniversary of the birthday of Abraham Lincoln.
Worse, socialism seems to be the element of our new young president. And maybe even more troubling, our corporate executives seem happy to move onto the plantation.
In an op-ed on the opinion page of the Washington Post, Mr. Obama is clear that the goal of his trillion dollar spending plan is much more than short term economic stimulus.
"This plan is more than a prescription for short-term spending -- it's a strategy for America 's long-term growth and opportunity in areas such as renewable energy, healthcare, and education."
Perhaps more incredibly, Obama seems to think that government taking over an economy is a new idea. Or that massive growth in government can take place "with unprecedented transparency and accountability."
Yes, sir, we heard it from Jimmy Carter when he created the Department of Energy, the Synfuels Corporation, and the Department of Education.
Or how about the Economic Opportunity Act of 1964 -- The War on Poverty -- which President Johnson said "...does not merely expand old programs or improve what is already being done. It charts a new course. It strikes at the causes, not just the consequences of poverty."
Trillions of dollars later, black poverty is the same. But black families are not, with triple the incidence of single-parent homes and out-of-wedlock births.
It's not complicated. Americans can accept Barack Obama's invitation to move onto the plantation. Or they can choose personal responsibility and freedom.
Does anyone really need to think about what the choice should be?
"The trouble with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people's money."
|
|
"You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity. What one person receives without working for, another person must work for without receiving. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them, and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for, that my dear friend, is the beginning of the end of any nation. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it."
~~~ Adrian Rogers, 1931
|
|
|
|