“Whites Steal African Resources!”

Depends on the type of IQ test. Obviously IQ test designed for people raised and educated in Western Societies are going to be rather ineffective at testing the IQ of people not raised in such societies. Even wexler I believe it's called is going to have trouble testing the IQ of people raised in a society with no written language. A lot of standardized IQ tests in the US don't actually test IQ. Rather they test accumulated knowledge and make assumptions about the IQ of the individual based on how he/she compares to others in his/her age cohort in terms of accumulated knowledge. IT DOES NOT AND CANNOT, make allowances for the differing learning environments different children grow up in and how that effects their intellectual development.

 

You have no clue. Seriously. I have lived in the DR Congo for over 20 years off and on going back to the 70s, I have a very good grasp of the history and reality here. It's also against house rules to call someone a moron and it's embarrassing to do so when you have no clue.

 

Human capital is the most important capital there is. I’m 100% in support of high educated people from any country migrating to my country.

Now that my first point is made. As for the resources. There is no theft of resources. We’re not over there with guns forcing them to mine their own resources so we can load up our ships with diamonds. That’s absurd. They’re still a part of the economic activity those resources are bringing.

Also let me add, if not for the Europeans that these people are complaining about these people would still be piercing their nose with bones, blowing smoke at their sick, walking barefoot, using smoke signals for communication. I don’t feel bad about my European influence in the world.

 

So you bought the Clinton line that he was right of Reagan? We'll confirm what we know about kids and Clinton when Ghislaine is smitten by the Clinton curse. Epstein was what? The 45th suicide of people with the goods on Bubba.

 

To answer GaryD. There was no rebellion per se in the DR Congo for independence, the US told Belgium to leave and they did. They didn't like the first leader because he wanted to push for economics of equality and was forced, despite being a capitalist, to seek financial and political aid and cooperation from Russia. He was replaced by Mobutu in a coup who promised to turn over power in 5 years. He didn't. When he saw his extension wasn't going over well he invented Zairinisation after renaming the country. He proceeded to confiscate foreign owned businesses and properties and give them to Zairians who supported him. Keep in mind, at that point the country had no debt. Had he given the schools to teachers and the businesses to people that ran them for the foreigners it likely would have worked but he gave them to family, buddies and supporters. They saw all money coming in as theirs and the country led the world in Mercedes purchases rather than resupplying production. Schools and businesses failed miserably. To make it worse he had to give these failed owners government jobs to keep them happy. They were no more qualified for those jobs and we're just now beginning to recover from that damage.
I hope to see the comeback reach fruition.

 

And before it was the DR it was something else and before that it was Zaire, and before that was the Belgian Congo, your history seem to stop about twenty years back or so.

 

@StillBlue.. as long as we are throwing accusations of exploitation of Africa.. why don't you tell us what you are doing there.

 

I've often asked myself a question. As Africa was the first land of human beings, they have had the longest time to develop civilizations, invent way to improve life, organize societies, educate, and provide safety- all that. Yet when Europeans first came to Africa, they found it to be very primitive, many centuries behind the rest of the world in progress of all kinds. Basically the same state in many areas that would have existed perhaps 10,000 years before. I've suspected if those Europeans had never came, and no others had followed them- Africa would be the same today as it was before, and probably satisfied to be so, not knowing what exists elsewhere.

 

Well IQ tests apparently work in East Asia, an area populated by non Western countries and people.

My experience with IQ tests is that they do not "test accumulated knowledge." If it's a knowledge test, it's not really an IQ test.

 

Teaching

 

The climate does not require much in housing. No need for developing housing that does more than provide shelter at night from animals and rain. Even today people with very nice European style house only eat meals and sleep in them although kids have discovered TV and video games. Nature provides food year round, that only changed when Europeans came and destroyed much of it. Beyond that 18th century sub sahara Africa and Europe had little differences except one big one, using military for greed. Not really one I'd put on the plus side for the Europeans.

 

There are many people today that opt out of the system,m chose to live simply. Most also know what is on both sides of that coin, they make a choice. However an entire continent not developing in things like medicines, education and such makes little sense to me. It would not seem like making a choice not to progress- more like lacking a will or desire or awareness that progress was possible. Typically, humans want to know more, to see more, to find out what's possible, what other places are like- so we are driven to expand our knowledge; constantly experimenting. Somehow that wasn't there in Africa. Not knowing what was possible, it seem unlikely one would assume that change would always be bad and therefore to be avoided; more likely that change may not have occurred as desirable or even possible to them.

 

Every standard IQ test any massive multiple choice IQ is almost perforce testing what you know. As far as Asia goes they been doing tests in China longer than we've been doing them here. That's how they filled the bureaucracy.

 

1. IQ test questions are not, "testing what you know."

2. Asia has been testing...in Asia. They have not been testing in Western IQ tests for hundreds of years.

 

What do you teach?

 

Testing sir is testing. Having a written language and not having a written language is the problem. There are also cultural differences. Test normed for Khalihari Tribesmen would make most Americans and Europeans look like the dumbest Khalihari Tribesmen ever. Questions would be tell me where the nearest Permanent water source is, where are the nearest temporary water sources are and what time of the year are the most likely to be useful. That sort of thing.
Back in my college I was given the assignment of administering the Peabody IQ test to a bunch of 1st graders in at least 3 different elementary school. I did four. The fourth one was to confirm what I believed to be inherent biases in the test. Rural kids did much worse on the test than city kids. For the test kids identify picture of things. I noted that that there existed within the test pictures that almost every city kid across every race got right but almost every country kid got wrong. These were always pictures of things that were common place in the city, but would have been nonexistent in a rural setting like taxicabs, skyscrapers, structural cranes etc.

 

reality is that wealthiest countries are primarily populated by caucasians, mostly on northern hemisphere.


the left wants to blame colonialism... hmm... i have a question. Why didn't blacks dominate the world and colonize??? they were just 'nicer' HAHAHA the answer is obvious, whites were more advanced to begin with. So then what? what explains this?

It's all explained by people who have studied this. Humans were all the same at one point, but the ones who migrated to colder, northern territories had more challenges to deal with. In the tropics where people could just roam free and pick off fruits from trees, hunt animals all year long without thinking much, they just didn't advance. The humans in the northern territories died if they didn't 'develop' faster. They needed to figure out how to grow crops and harvest, store enough food to survive winters. They needed to build shelters etc. etc.. over hundreds of years, one thing led to another and these civilizations just advanced, due to environment dictating it. Meanwhile, the tropical humans just kept picking off fruits on trees and hunting animals without a worry... Well, until hey were colonized.

So what is to blame? evolution of man.... nothing more, nothing else. Too bad the ones who stayed in the tropics didn't need to develop/advance as fast, who's fault is that?

 

Very true!
Whether we appear smart or dumb depends on where we are and what our experience. I think the intent of an IQ test was more to test potential to think and reason. specific objectives (like the pictures you describe) are related to experience and accumulated knowledge, this not very flexible. Funny how so many people think that those who agree with them and know what they know are smart, and assume those who are different are ignorant or dumb. Easy to deceive yourself...

 

Still true today. Some years back I was doing some contract management in central America, on an offshore island. A local man who was quite fit assisted me at times. He had worked a cruise ship at one time and made very good money, but longed for his island home. His family (father, wife and kids) lived in a one-room thatch roof house- wood frame with sapling sticks for walls, dirt floor. See right through the walls of course. One day, he asked if I had an extra pair of shoes, and if I would give him the shoes I was wearing when I left. Knowing he had the potential to make a fair income, I asked why he wasn't doing so. That of course would have required him to be gone some. He explained that it wasn't necessary. "There's fish in the sea, always many fruits and things to eat in the jungle. It's not so cold I need heat, it's not so hot I need air conditioning. The only thing I worry about is medicines and doctor care, that's the only thing that takes money." I left him the shoes.

 

right..

early on, climate wasn't a big factor, some of the early civilizations were close to equator, obviously. But, as years progressed, the environment dictated which civilizations advanced faster.... There is a reason Scandinavian countries surpassed southern countries, Canada has a higher standard of living than US... Germany > Spain... etc... Russia is an anomaly, part of it due to being communist/socialist for so long and terrain challenges..

fact is there is reason northern hemisphere dominated the tropics... heck, even within US, North defeated South... The environment pushed these civilizations to advance and leave the others behind.... too bad that the african countries couldn't develop as fast, so they were dominated... but it's because they couldn't keep up, even before colonialism.... colonialism doesn't explain the era where europeans simply outpaced the rest.... too bad

american indians were running around using bows and arrows... so they got dominated, too bad. Had they advances faster, they would've dominated


American indians and blacks weren't just 'nicer' people, they just were dominated by more advanced civilizations.

 

IT.

 

The people that did the colonizing.

 

thank god... imagine if the more advanced civilizations wouldn't have colonized... we would be running with bows and arrows, scalping people, shrinking heads or running around with strange stuff on our faces..

i guess, people are happy in their own way. Some of the happiest people may be those living with bows and arrows but pick and choose what you prefer...

old civilization:


modern civilization:

 

I'm sure you feel the same way about me walking I'm your front door?

 

Don't forget the cost.