Liberals use political correctness as de facto censorship.

Liberals use political correctness as de facto censorship to silence any and all debate that does not fit the liberal narrative, regardless of its truthfulness.

 

I hope they don't still claim to be tolerant and open and accepting of people with different beliefs and opinions than theirs.

Who was it that said that they claim something like the above and then they are shocked and outraged to find out that people exist that actually have different beliefs and opinions than theirs?

 

The Orange State is ready to cancel the wokers....ha
A Florida Republican lawmaker has introduced a bill that would make it defamation to accuse someone of racism, sexism, homophobia, or transphobia, a measure that would deal a devastating blow to freedom of speech in the Sunshine State.

 

I disagree with liberals on the issue of race. I disagree with conservatives on the issue of the environment.

Nevertheless, conservatives do not try to destroy the careers of those who maintain that human caused global warming is a serious problem and that we will need to make economic sacrifices to curb it.

Liberals do try to destroy the careers of those who maintain a connection between genes, intelligence, crime, and race.

 

the right came up with this idea over a bud light?

the right love cancel culture, seems this thread is nothing but projection

 

Well spreading the pseudoscientific belief that the races are hierarchal might be problematic. Saying those at the bottom, like Blacks, Native Americans, Aborigines, etc. are genetically inferior in intelligence and prone to crime might be called nakedly racist. Having a self professed racist coworker would be disruptive to the unity of the workplace.

 

Charles Murray, Jared Taylor, and Professor's Richard Herrnstein, Arthur Jensen, and J. Philippe Rushton never said, "Blacks are inferior." That would beg the question of what do we mean by "inferior." It would maintain that all blacks are that way.

The men I have listed maintain that the races differ in average intelligence, as well in average criminal and sexual behavior. That is easy to document factually. Nevertheless, each of these men faced efforts to silence them.

Those who draw attention to global warming do not face efforts like that.

 

I have not encountered either in society but I guess you have.

 

I have certainly read about. In 1969 Professor Arthur Jensen of Berkeley had an article published in the Harvard Educational Review in which he said that racial differences in academic performance were genetic, and that little could be done to close the race gap.

As a result new left radicals interrupted his classes, he received death threats, and sometimes required police protection.

In September 1971 Professor Richard Herrnstein of Harvard had an article published in the Atlantic in which he anticipated arguments he was to combine with Charles Murray in The Bell Curve, which was published in 1974.

The following spring the new left organization Students for a Democratic Society held a convention with the intention of getting Professor's Jensen and Herrnstein fired. Fortunately, the efforts failed. Nevertheless, a prescient was established by the left for suppressing ideas they dislike.

 

Those that "draw attention" to climate change have the backing of science. Your "scientists" are conveniently forgetting correlation does not imply causation and assume those traits are genetically hardwired which is unproven but accepted by racists and they ran with it.

 

Race realists have the scientific data to prove their assertions. Anti racists only have the power to suppress race realism. I suspect that the more intelligent anti racists are aware that race realism is true, but they fear the political implications if it becomes safe to discuss the truths of race realism when legislation is discussed. It is certainly legitimate to draw attention to those truths when affirmative action and race reparations are debated. as well as when we consider welfare and criminal justice policy.

 

I find that both the left and the right suppress what they dislike.

 

There you go with brain size again and in my learned opinion they are on the wrong track. Correlation does not imply causation again.

Women have 10% smaller brains than men but no difference in IQ. Elephants have brains 4 times larger that humans, but are less intelligent. Well what about body mass vs brain size?

According to this the dusky dolphin should be near our mental equals......




Maybe there is another answer besides pat disparities by race. Maybe it has more to do with nurture, rather than nature. The measurement used, the IQ test, is the variable and it measures math and language abilities. Skills that vary in importance in different cultures. A star quarterback who is an excellent tactician may be bad at math because of lack of interest and do poorly on an IQ test. I read a study some time ago, that I think I've repeated to you, where they surveyed students and Asians did homework for 2 hours at night, whites 1 hour and Blacks 1/2 hour. That is cultural, it doesn't mean Asians are more intelligent, but it does mean they have different values and that will change how they do on an IQ test.

 

Women are usually smaller than men. When body size is considered, brain size still correlates with intelligence.

Intelligence has far more influence over culture than culture has over intelligence. Most Negroes have difficulty adopting the ways of civilization.Their behavior is more conducive to what enabled their ancestors to prosper in the tribal environment of sub Saharan Africa.

 

That is quite a list rationalizations. So a dwarf with a small body and regular sized head should be a genius? Neanderthals had a larger brain, but we outcompeted them. As the lady said, size doesn't seem to matter. The rest are subjective suppositions (without evidence) biased toward your already held belief that Blacks are an inferior race.

 

The evidence is overwhelming that Negroes tend to be less intelligent than whites, and that they are more prone to crime and illegitimacy. This is even more true in black majority, black run countries, so it cannot be blamed on anything whites impose on blacks.

Nowhere in earth is there a black majority, black run country with a high standard of living, a low crime rate, and a well functioning government.

 

The evidence is overwhelming that Native American, Inuits, Aborigines, Blacks, etc. all do poorly on IQ tests. Could it be due to their cultural priorities, higher poverty rates, poor schools, no tradition of scholarship like Jews and some Asian cultures or rejection/mistrust of white culture? No, you choose an unproven cause. They are hardwired that way and those races will remain an ignorant subspecies......according to IQ tests.

 

Civilization and cold climates selected genetically for higher intelligence before the welfare system began to preserve stupid people.

In a cold climate one must know how to build warm housing and clothing. Food is more difficult to acquire. This required intelligence.

In a civilization intelligent people tend to be more prosperous than stupid people. Until recently they had more children who lived to adulthood.

 

Eskimo and Siberian natives will be happy a white man thinks so highly of them despite their low IQ scores.

 

Eskimos have higher IQ averages than American Indians further south, but they have much lower IQ averages than Chinese, Koreans, and Japanese.

 

Here are some reasons Eskimos do poorly on IQ tests.....

Unfamiliarity with test-taking:

Eskimos' performance on standardized tests may be lowered because of their unfamiliarity with test-taking conventions and because of cultural biases of the tests. Eskimos, for example, may find it difficult to view a trivial, pointless task such as copying a design or running through a finger maze as worthy of serious concentration and maximum effort.

Racial context of test-taking

Eskimos, especially young males, have become increasingly antagonistic to any sort of testing and research, which they view as another form of White exploitation. Co-operation, if given at all, may be perfunctory, resulting in extremely low test scores.

Extreme caution during test-taking

Eskimos, especially males, have been socialized into extreme caution before making a judgment. The hunter is taught never to take risks, never to call out a hasty evaluation because the penalty can be swift death not only for himself but also for others who rely on his decision. […] Especially more traditional Eskimos tend to have a slow, cautious response style which may depress their scores on speeded figural tests.

Slower rate of cognitive maturation

[There is] some evidence that Eskimos' peak performance on figural tests occurs later than that of Western groups. [This] raises the possibility of a slower rate of cognitive maturation among Eskimos which would be consistent with their somewhat slower rate of physical maturation […]. If this is the case, the usual age-matched comparisons between Western and Eskimo children on figural tests may be misleading.

But you are going with an unproven theory of a genetic intelligence hierarchy based on race using an IQ test as evidence......and you know what I call that.

 

You call it "racism." I call "racism" wisdom based on comparing racial differences in average intelligence and behavior.

 

Sociology is basically the lefts politically correct version of Science.

Rarely does anything come from sociology that upsets liberal sensibilities. If the conclusions of a study are not politically correct, liberal sociologists will censor the study during peer review.

 

Or maybe it's just that the right is wrong.

 

Sociologists do not prove anything. They make assertions.