Maggie's Farm

"What's wrong with Murray?"

Murray undertook a legitimate study and it contributed to our understanding of the human psyche. Unfortunately it exposed some truths that made an entire race look bad. But this depends on your focus because it is equally true it made some races look good. So was Murray a racist who thought that Asians and Jews were the superior race(s)? No! That would not fit the liberal narrative that in order to be a white supremacist you must say that the "white" race is better. Certainly not the Asian race or the Jewish race. But never mind the left never let's facts stand in the way of their narrative.

But more importantly the problem with blaming the messenger in this allows the problem to fester rather than to take steps to fix it or compensate for it. IQ is not set in stone. A person's IQ is malleable and can be changed. There is a reason that most inner city children have such poor education results and it goes far beyond their natural ability. Murray's research only exposed the symptoms not the cause. There are two major causes for black under achievement:
1. The fear mongering and race hustling has created a situation where teachers and the system dare not treat black students as they would white students. If a student acts out in class or fails to do the work there should be consequences designed to get the student back on track. This is what every responsible parent does with their own children. It is what most education professionals do with most students. But it is what they dare not do with students who have special rights to act up and get away with it. The teachers understand this and thus choose to just pass them and graduate them rather than fight the system.
2. The culture of blacks and some other groups is that if they raise enough hell that they will get their way. The parents of black students believe that their children should simply be given good grades just as they were just a few years/months before they themselves became parents. It is a culture of free stuff and they are brought up and conditioned to believe they deserve free stuff for a multitude of reasons. I.e. because someone in their family tree was a slave or simply because someone the same color as them was once a slave or because their parents or ethnic leaders told them that someone was once a slave. So therefore they are forever to be accommodated and treated with kid gloves. This is how the parents and grandparents think and that is what they teach their children. They believe that working hard and studying is acting "white" and beneath them. AND they believe that any success by whites no matter how hard won those successes are, are the result of "white privilege" and thus the blacks need more free stuff to make up for it. It creates a self fulfilling prophecy that encourages blacks to choose not to act in their own self interest and expect others to give them more and more free stuff.

Until and unless these two problems are addressed and proper corrective action taken Murray will continue to be right and the left will continue to propose the wrong actions and in fact the very actions that have created the problem. The real white supremacist in this are the left and the SPLC who want blacks to be held down and remain dependable voters for their party.

I believe that the overall IQ of blacks could be increased easily with the two suggestions I outlined: (1. require the teachers to teach and to in turn require the student to do the work. 2. Require the parents to "parent" and if and when they fail require the parents to take parenting classes and if they still fail to face child endangerment charges.) Until and unless we break this cycle we will continue to raise a generation after generation of black (and white) perpetual welfare class.

I don't think you understand statistics. It isn't Murray's fault that the bell curve of observed IQ's for the various races follow the trajectory that they do. It is indeed generally accepted that some races under the bell curve put a greater percentage of their population above the 100 IQ. And just as obviously some races must have a lesser percentage of their population above 100 IQ.

It is interesting to note that the Bell curve for women IQ is tighter (did I really say that?) I mean by that more/most fall into the smaller range that peaks above the 100 IQ. Whereas men have a much longer curve (did it again!) that spreads them further on both sides of the 100 IQ AND more outliers, i.e. more dummies and geniuses than women. This kind of information could well piss of either or both genders but it is just the facts not some crazy racist/sexist theory that should be blamed on anyone who repeats it.

The bottom line is when you compare the different race's IQ's they are not equal and thus inevitably one race must be the best and one race must be the worst but that does not equate to some kind of supremacy conspiracy.

So explain why the bell curve of IQ for males is different from females. Kinda points to genetics doesn't it.
Or why the bell curve for Asians puts the peak of their curve more to the right of the rest of the ethnic groups.

But neither of these facts is "genetic determinism". Because the curves encompass a broad range of IQ's That means that Whites and Asians have their share of sub 100 IQ individuals and blacks have their share of high IQ and 130 IQ and above individuals. All that the study tells us is the statistical trends. It must be interpreted correctly to be of any value. The left choose to use this as a whipping boy to further their race based politics. Murray was simply a casualty of that war. If instead the left had interpreted this data correctly it would result in better education for groups who need it. But the left could give a fig about that it is all about winning elections and using their power for their agenda.