➡ Ron Partain of the Untold History Channel presents a long video addressing issues of race and prejudice, including discussions with Mike Harris and various other content pieces. Prejudice is noted as being prevalent everywhere, irrespective of the race or community, and ignoring differences among races and cultures is seen as problematic, predominantly by the political left, according to the speakers.
➡ The text brings up concerns about the modern education system’s approach to addressing racial disparities, specifically mentioning Oregon’s decision to dismiss certain graduation requirements due to lower passing rates among black students. The speaker argues this downplays standards, hinders society’s progress, and fails to address disparities in cognitive abilities among different groups. They insist on different educational strategies for different IQ ranges and caution against overinvesting in those struggling academically while underinvesting in gifted students. The text also touches on historical matters such as the war on poverty, and expresses worries over forces attempting to introduce a “one-size-fits-all” approach to education and societal structure.
➡ The speaker criticizes American policies and the dependency they create, mentioning rising crime rates and economic inequality. He calls for opening dialogue to discuss and solve these issues, encouraging personal responsibility and individual success regardless of race. He opposes taxation for welfare and favors self-reliance and hard work. The speaker also discusses district attorneys’ unwillingness to prosecute minor crimes.
➡ The text discusses the perception of racial bias creating unease within law enforcement, resulting in selective enforcement of minor crimes predominantly in areas with high black populations. It mentions elected district attorneys dismissing minor crime cases and explores a claimed failure of job training schemes, stressing the need to acknowledge victims of the crimes. The author implies that these actions out of purported racial sensitivity may contribute to an increase in crime and a lack of accountability.
➡ The narrator shares stories about racial bias and criminality in different American cities. He speaks about his experiences of privilege, differing traffic attitudes, and crime rates, particularly in neighborhoods with high black populations. There are also instances of racial victimization, such as an elderly woman being assaulted, which he argues occur often and are largely overlooked. Furthermore, he criticizes certain media figures and football players for focusing on instances of black victimization and refusing to acknowledge white victims. The text concludes with a court case where two black women lied about a racial attack, displaying the narrative’s concern with false victimhood.
➡ The text criticizes the handling of a fake hate crime incident, expressing frustration at the perceived lack of accountability and pushback on the false narrative. It then transitions into a philosophical exploration on innate racial differences in intelligence, addressing the historical and current implications of such beliefs, and emphasizing the need for further empirical research.
➡ The text discusses the interplay between genetics, environment, and cultural factors in influencing intelligence levels within a race. It argues that social dynamics and policies can affect the genetic pool of a race by incentivizing or disincentivizing certain groups from propagation, thus potentially impacting the average intelligence of that race in future generations. However, the absolute measurement of innate potential remains uncertain, highlighting that group averages do not negate high potential within all races/groups. Notions from the late 19th and early 20th centuries on drastic actions based on perceived racial differences in intelligence have since been challenged by contemporary research, showcasing the potential for significant changes in testing circumstances.
➡ The text discusses the imperfect correlation between social factors such as race, class and national origin, and the criteria for taking certain decisions, arguing that these factors are irrelevant when dealing with individuals. It also explores the arguments around mental test scores, their potential bias, and their relevance in predicting future performance. The influence of social welfare policies and their potential negative effects on educational achievement is also analyzed. A discourse around race and IQ scores takes center stage, with the magnitude of differences in the median IQs among racial groups being considered. The text suggests that factors beyond mental test scores should be considered when making relevant decisions, such as employment or college admission as there is evidence to suggest that different racial groups perform differently, even when they have similar test scores. It proposes that the importance of tests should lie in their ability to accurately predict future performance rather than their supposed relevance.
➡ The study indicates that ignoring standardized test scores for the sake of demographic diversity can lead to the mismatching of students with their institutions, resulting in higher failure or dropout rates, particularly among Black students. It suggests that test scores aren’t just about intellectual capacity but also reflect cultural focus on abstract comprehension, and bypassing them creates domino effects across schools+tiers. Furthermore, a culture-free test might be ideal for a culture-free society which does not exist. Lastly, affirmative action in admissions, without considering test score gaps, may result in confirmation of the mismatching hypothesis rather than its refutation.
➡ The text scrutinizes the notion of inherent racial intellectual limitations, underscoring examples from various racial groups that have historically outperformed stereotypes. It also questions the accuracy and relevance of IQ tests in determining intellectual prowess and potential, suggesting flaws and biases in past applications of these tests. The importance of teaching methods and the influence of socioeconomic factors on achievements are highlighted, implying that inherent racial intelligence differences may have been overstated. Finally, the text challenges the long-term significance of IQ differences on practical matters.
➡ The cognitive decline of the IQ of black citizens relative to whites as they age is suggested to be influenced by cultural factors, mainly the negative impacts of the black subculture. Studies indicate high-ability minority students thrive in intellectually homogeneous classes, rather than racially homogeneous ones, and also suggest popular theories advocating for a critical mass of black students in educational bodies might be unfounded. The cultural explanation for IQ disparities aligns with historic data showcasing regional differences in mental test scores and stresses the effect of cultural norms on cognitive development, especially among males.
➡ The text examines the cultural impact on IQ differences between different races and groups, referencing historical data and the theories presented in “The Bell Curve”. It dismisses the idea that genetics are the sole determiner of group IQ differences, instead emphasizing the influence of historical and societal factors such as cultural attitudes towards education and economic conditions. It also critiques the interpretations and reactions towards “The Bell Curve”, noting that the heated debates often sidestep the book’s actual content and conclusions.
➡ This text discusses concerns about the disproportionate allocation of government funding towards programs for impoverished communities, asserting these programs mainly serve politicians and bureaucrats rather than the intended recipients. It also critiques the politicization of topics such as welfare and abortion, as well as addressing racial disparities in crime rates and IQ, arguing these issues arise from systemic societal failures, not individual shortcomings.
➡ The text discusses criticisms of “The Bell Curve” book, suggesting it perpetuates problematic views about group differences. Those opposed highlight that the writers may have been biased by their sponsors. The discourse then shifts to the evolving ethnic composition in America, with emphasis on white Americans’ fear of losing majority status. Criticisms suggest this fear could lead to racial oppression and genocide as seen in other racial groups’ historical experiences.
➡ The text comprises multiple speech segments, with themes ranging from racial tensions, violence, personal narratives, and future concerns about cultural shifts in population demographics. It contains provocative thoughts and comments, conversations of a violent nature, recounts of personal experiences of assault, alongside expressions of worry about the future of a demographic minority.
➡ The text is a reaction to a viral video discussing the current cultural shift towards tolerating racial hatred against white people. It criticizes the normalization of negative generalizations and stereotypes against white people and argues that society should strive for race neutrality since race doesn’t define one’s personality, morals, or values. The piece also challenges the concept that current discrimination against white people somehow corrects historical racial bias.
➡ The text discusses racism towards white people, arguing that accusations of racism are often misdirected due to misconceptions about history, power, and privilege. The writer suggests that in the current socio-political environment, non-white individuals hold more power than is acknowledged, using examples of alleged discriminatory practices in the U.S. to substantiate this notion and highlighting the necessity to separate the past from the present in addressing racial issues.
➡ The text speaks about the rising racial prejudice towards white people under the guise of ‘punishing the oppressor’, referring to the perceived power and privilege of the white race. It criticizes the ideology that labels all white people as oppressors and argues that such mentality could lead to major issues in the future as demographics shift and power dynamics change. It underscores the need for individual responsibility over collective blame, calling out the destructive nature of assigning guilt based on race, and urging individuals to reject an ideology that teaches hatred and absolves personal accountability.
➡ The text is a reflection on the issue of reverse discrimination, addressing the current social dynamics where actions from the past are being mirrored onto white people today. It suggests that a truly progressive society should strive for equality rather than retribution, calling for a course correction and ironic echo of the phrase “do better.”
➡️ The text explores the overrepresentation of specific racial groups in crime statistics as influenced by a variety of social, environmental, and economic factors, including the controversial theories presented in the book “The Bell Curve”. The text also critiques federal actions such as the introduction of crack cocaine into black communities, the funding of rap music by the private prison bureau, and inadequate urban education, labeling them as significant contributors to systemic issues. Ultimately, it urges for comprehensive solutions to address these deeply rooted problems.
➡ The speaker acknowledges inherent racial differences and calls for tailored solutions in areas such as education and pharmacological treatment. They warn of the consequences of the U.S. government’s unsustainable debt and propose rethinking welfare benefits, limiting them to a ten-year window for retraining or education, to avoid the possibility of civil unrest or a civil war.
➡ The speaker criticizes affirmative action, claiming it harms rather than helps the black community by setting lower standards. They also express concerns about other social and political issues, such as systemic racism, criminal justice policies that allegedly protect the black community, over-representation of minorities in media, and the potential harmful effects of lead exposure, particularly in impoverished communities.
➡ Environmental toxins, such as lead, fluoride, BPA, and pesticides like glyphosate, are plaguing our society, creating health and environmental consequences. There is demand for the government to take more decisive action to curb their usage, particularly in the light of reckless agricultural practices and ignorance of the harm they cause to humanity and the environment. The controversy surrounding companies like Monsanto and the lack of accountability from these corporations and the government are major points of contention. Additionally, there is a need for society to respect diverse individual characteristics while creating equitable systems. Finally, concerns were raised about government accountability, the effect of policy changes such as the gold standard abandonment and ignorance about constitutional rights and mandates. The discussion ultimately lamented the lack of active involvement in government affairs by the citizenry.
➡ The speaker argues that current societal systems, including governing bodies and educational structures, restrict truly free discourse and fail to serve their intended function. They express concerns over governmental manipulation, economic instability, disparities in education, and racial differences in IQ, while advocating for open dialogue around these issues to find beneficial solutions for everyone.
➡ The speaker discusses the issues around race and societal norms, stressing the need for difficult conversations and promoting the awareness of diverse abilities. They advocate for a self-reliant United States, independent of international trade and global interests, a philosophy termed “Fortress America.” They also express skepticism towards talk of reparations, preferring instead that those pushing for them should leave the country, thereby addressing racial tension and promoting patriotic sentiment within communities.
➡ The writer discusses with concern the socio-economic issues in African countries and the struggle for successful black leadership while drawing parallels with the black population in the United States. He assertively questions black contributions to innovation, expresses concerns about population growth in low-IQ countries, and fundamentally criticizes Western policies for sharing resources and technology. He also argues for a shift from emotion-based to logic-based analysis, warns about nurturing a permanent underclass through entitlement programs, and emphasizes the necessity for everyone to self-sustain and to prepare for an imminent financial collapse, which he attributes to deliberate mismanagement.

And welcome, everybody, to the Untold History Channel. My name is Ron Partain. Today is going to be a monster, an absolute monster video. This is, without question, probably going to be the longest video that I’ve ever uploaded. It’s going to be a conglomeration of things and it’s kind of taken a life of its own in many respects. It started off, I did a video with Dr. Alan Sabrrowski and Mike Harris about eleven days ago.

In fact, here, I’m going to share my screen here and show you. Okay, so this is the video that we did. It was a discussion questioning our current military readiness with Mike Heron and Alan Tabrowski. So when you click on that, what we do is we scroll down here and there was a comment. And in the video, Mike said something and he says, ron and Tradar 22, you are the one that’s responsible for this whole thing.

Ron, I’m appalled at Mike Harris Blanket assessment of Blacks. He has clearly stated his position in this video as well as the video the two of you did. While he may have good information to share, I cannot get past his disdain and complete unfounded stereotype of black people, because it’s simply not true. I wonder if Dr. Ben Carson falls into his assessment of blacks with low IQ. There are dumb and there are dumb, lazy thieves in all races, not just blacks.

And to that comment, I absolutely agree with that comment. I do believe that there are dumb and there are dumb, lazy people in all races. But I don’t believe that Tradar really, truly understood what Mike was trying to get at. I know Mike. Mike is a very. He’s an outstanding human being, all right? And he wants to have legitimate, truthful conversations about things and not just brush things under the rug because it’s more politically, or politically is probably the best word to use.

It’s more politically expedient to just sweep it under the rug and just pretend that it didn’t happen. Now, I have always been of the opinion that race and racism, and actually the word racism is probably the wrong term to use. I would say a more proper term to use would probably be prejudices. I think prejudice is out there and it’s everywhere. Prejudice is everywhere. And it doesn’t really matter if it’s from the white community, from the black community, from the Asian community.

It exists everywhere. And there are those in those communities who have no prejudiced bones in their body. I think that everybody has something that they probably don’t like about another race, and then there are people who, they set that aside and they’re like, yeah, okay, whatever. It doesn’t really matter. I couldn’t live with that or whatever. The point of the matter is that there are differences amongst races and ethnicities and cultures that should be discussed, should be elaborated upon, and we should operate under the guise that they exist.

And we shouldn’t just pretend that they don’t exist. And my opinion is that it is really coming from the political left to pretend that these things don’t exist. And the attitudes that they don’t exist are preached upon by the political left. Meanwhile, it’s the political left that actually exhibits the most disdain for members of different ethnicities. So that said, this video is going to be a conglomeration of multiple things here.

Number one, it is going to be, let’s see here. Number one, it’s going to be about an hour and a little bit, about an hour and 30 minutes of Mike Harris and I. He requested that we do another video based on the comments in the video. So it’s going to be him and I talking now. That was all it was going to be, but I decided on my own.

Mike didn’t know this and he’s going to find out. And my apologies, Mike. That’s not me trying to be disrespectful to you or anything that you’re saying, but I actually wanted to take it up a notch and elaborate on these even further than what we did in our discussion and edify you and bring some of the things that you said even more to the fore with actual examples.

So that be, there’s going to be a video in here from Colin Flaherty. And if you guys are unaware of Colin FlahertY, Colin Flaherty wrote a book called Don’t make the Black Kids Angry. It was very interesting because Thomas Soul, who’s a black man, a very distinguished and knowledgeable black man, said in his analysis of the book, I quote, reading Colin Flaherty’s book made me painfully, excuse me.

Reading Colin Flaherty’s book made painfully clear to me that the magnitude of this problem is greater than I had discovered from my own research. He documents both the race riots and the media and political evasion in dozens of cities. So that’s Thomas Soul. That’s a pretty high authority for somebody who’s done a lot of research, extraordinarily well researched. And then it’s going to be about an hour long clip of an excerpt taken from the book written by Thomas Soul called Intellectuals and Race.

And then after that, there’s going to be about an hour long documentary called White Privilege the Movie. And after that, there’s going to be about a 30 minutes clip of a gal on YouTube who actually worked with Prager. You, Amala, I believe, is her name, and she dissects and goes through the video by the young Asian kid. And forgive me, I can’t remember his name, but it’s called what are we doing to white people? So that said, there’s a lot to unpack here.

Like I said, it’s a conglomeration of a lot of things, and it’s all about the same thing. It’s all about race relations and whatnot. And so I am putting all of this together for those of you who like extraordinarily long videos and whatnot. And if you don’t like long stuff and you want to just watch this in pieces, there’s going to be breaks. And I’ll put the breaks in the description about when the timestamps are so that you can watch it at your discretion if you want to break it up in pieces.

So I hope you guys get something out of this, because I did in preparation for this. I got a lot out of this and I learned a lot. For me, I don’t care about hurting people’s feelings as much as I care about the truth and what is really happening in the world. To me, that is way more important because we cannot learn from things if we don’t know what is truth.

History is something that needs to be learned from, from the truth. And it should not matter about if it hurts your feelings or not. It should matter whether or not it’s valid and true. And that should be our primary objective when we are learning things about history. So this is going to be a history of kind of race and ethnicity and culture and a whole bunch of things all rolled into a big ball of fun.

So buckle up because this is going to be a very wild ride. So if you have the courage to make it through the entire way, please let me know in the comment section. All right, guys, thanks so much for your time. And I do hope that you get a lot out of this because I sure did. And welcome back to the Untold History Channel. My name is Ron Partain, and today we are joined again by Mr.

Mike Harris. Mr. Mike Harris is one of my favorite people on the planet. He is a person of extraordinarily know. I consider one of the few people that I can literally hold a conversation with for hours on end and not be bored. So there, I stopped it. Some more for you, sir. Well, Rod, thank you for having me. And I have to come out and clarify that. I requested this opportunity to speak to the people because after one of my interviews, I was reading through the comments that had been posted, and someone posted a comment about me that they didn’t care for my attitude that I held black people in disdain.

And I really want to clarify that because I don’t hold black people in disdain. What I do hold in disdain is the untruths that we have been inculcated in, fed to believe as truth within our society, within our culture. This has been by design. And so whenever they say, oh, we’re all the same, we’re all equal, we’re all this. There’s some discrepancy there because we’re not. And there are some noted differences between the races, whether you’re Asian, whether you’re white, whether you’re black.

We have many similarities, but we also have differences. And if you look at any other breed of animal, I don’t care if it’s a Holstein versus a black Angus in cattle. I don’t care if it’s an Airdale terrier versus a Great Dane in dogs or a quarter horse versus a thoroughbred or a Shetland pony. Horses, they’re all respectively. They’re bovines, they’re canines, they’re equines. They’re all the same as far as what they are breed wise, but there are distinct differences between them.

You can’t enter a Clydesdale in the Kentucky Derby. He’s not going to win. It’s just one of those things. But you can’t use a thoroughbred that won the Kentucky Derby to pull as a draft down because you’ll break them down too quick. They have different purposes. They have different strengths. They have different weaknesses. Some things they do well and other things they don’t do well. And this is not to disparage or hurt people or hurt their feelings, but you look at how our society approaches the issue of race relations, and it has been an unmitigated failure.

The state of Oregon just dismissed the requirement to be proficient in the English language of writing and reading and the requirement to be able to master mathematics to graduate from high school because not enough blacks were passing. So is that going to benefit the blacks? It certainly isn’t going to benefit the Asians or the whites. It’s going to damage them. So instead of bringing the blacks up and holding to a set of standards to get a high school diploma, they eliminated the standards.

Now everyone passes. And if we’re going to build a society that’s going to be functional and is going to succeed and going to be able to compete on the global stage. How does that help us? It doesn’t at all. And our education system is really guilty of this because they’re the first ones to abandon the standards. And that is one thing we can’t do. You look at historical test, what it took to get an 8th grade education.

My grandfather had an 8th grade education. Well, he graduated high school in the 1920s. And if you look at what was required of graduation from him and you gave it to a college freshman today, they probably won’t pass it. That is how far the standards have been eroded. And the issue here is how do we benefit this country and our people as Americans the greatest? Is it by dumbing everyone down so that we’re all equally incapable of solving complex math and science issues? Or is it by maintaining the standards so that we can continue to advance our culture and advance our technology into the future? So that’s really the point of what I’m trying to do here.

Now, I sent you several articles here, and they go back to 1836, and there’s some of them that are as recent as 2003. There’s some that are more recent. But the discussion is about the differences in IQ, the differences in cranial capacity among the different races. And it turns out that the Asians have a greater cranial capacity and ergo, a higher IQ. Blacks have the smallest cranial capacity and ergo, the lower IQs.

Whites are very close to the Asians, but Asians have like 17 more CCs of space for gray matter between their ears than whites do. Blacks are a distant third. Then you cross reference that with IQ studies. And this first was began in the US army during World War I, where they started wanting to know what soldiers can do, what jobs. And so they started giving people IQ tests with the purpose of being able to categorize them into positions where their talents could be best utilized for the war effort.

And that’s not changed. We still have these issues here, but our modern society wants us to believe that we are all equal and that we all have equal capabilities. That’s simply not true. And I think black people know this, Asians know this, and white people know it, but we’re not allowed to discuss it. It’s not a matter of wanting to be dismissive of any group for any reason.

I mean, for the time being, we’re all part of the same society. We have to get along. Question is, how do we structure the society that benefits everyone? And by looking at the education associations, dumbing everyone down. Lowering the standards doesn’t work. It doesn’t benefit anyone. It harms society as a whole. And maybe that’s their goal. Because I look at this Randy Weinstein, whatever her name, is, the head of the NEA, and I mean, if I ever saw a communist, that’s a communist.

Hang on to that. These people do not have our best interest at heart, and we need to change this. We need to start looking at things differently. I mean, I’m going to jump a little bit here, but Lyndon Johnson started the Great Society in the war on poverty in 1964. The legislation was passed and went to effect 1965. As of 2010, 13 years ago, we had spent over $22 trillion on the war on poverty.

And what did we get for it? A lot more poverty. We have not progressed an inch. And then we have the race know, the Sharptons, the Maxine waters, all these saying this is because you white people are racist. We’re not racist. We’re pragmatic. No. And it’s not that we’re trying to keep anyone down, but we can’t change the genetic code on the black population to make them smarter.

We can’t do it. There is IQ disparity. You can lie about it, you can talk around it, but you’re not going to tackle the issue and get workable solutions to the problem until, number one, you correctly identify what the problem is. And then, number two, look at how you’re really going to solve that problem. And we can’t solve it. We’re not going to be able to successfully educate Asian kids, white kids and black kids using the same formula.

We have to use different formulas. One of the greatest crimes that’s going on today is how we’re mistreating and underinvesting in our best and brightest. If you’re a special needs kid, the school district doesn’t mind dumping 15,000, $20,000 a year on you. But if you’ve got a genius level, IQ 145 and up, good luck. You’re going to have to get by with what the district average is there on what you are.

So we’re wasting our best and brightest. We’re underinvesting in them. They’re not reaching their full potential where they should be invested in much more heavily. And we have the people who don’t succeed at this is where we’re investing the most. And I don’t want to make this solely about IQ, but IQ is certainly a significant factor in this, and that is the average white IQ in this country.

I’ll give it a five degree, five point separation. Between 98 and 103 is the average white IQ. The average Asian is between 101 and 106. The average black was between 75 and 80. So we’ve got essentially a 20 degree disparity between black and white and a 25 degree disparity between black and Asian. And so how do we educate these kids with this system we have right now that treats them all as if they have an IQ of between 75 and 80? We’re shooting ourselves in the foot, and we’re leaving a lot of money on the table with innovation and things that can be developed, technologies, just innovations of all sort, by underinvesting in the smart ones and overinvesting in the dumb ones.

Let me ask you a question real quick, because I know a lot of people are going to be like, well, how is IQ measured? Is it a standardized test that they use the world over, or do different places have different tests for testing for IQ? That’s a question that I’ve always had. I’m not an expert on this. I don’t really have a good set of answers. I know the major tests are the Wexler test, the Stanford Benet test.

There’s two or three others out there that are universally accepted as good measures for IQ. And something like the Wexler test, it only goes up to 145. Stanford Benet goes up to 160. Others of these have different rankings and things. I don’t really know how they’re measured, but the standardized test really is the gold standard. Now, recently we’ve had many universities are rejecting the use of the SAT and the ACT test, which have been relied upon for decades and decades as indicators of academic.

So they’re a pretty good indicator. You get a high score and that you’re probably going to graduate college. If you get a low score, you’re probably not. Why do schools want to accept students with low SAT or aCt scores when they know they’re going to drop out and fail? It doesn’t benefit the school, doesn’t benefit the student. It’s just a waste of money and time on both ends.

And to abandon that is because of the political pressure that’s put on them by these various forces here that are trying to destroy our country and destroy our way of life. I’m glad you said that, because there are forces out there that are trying to destroy us. And that is the primary thrust behind trying to make us different, is essentially the Marxist. It’s the Marxists that want to undermine us and keep us separated.

And I think if I can couch kind of what you’re saying, in a way, it’s like, look, we are not all the same, and there’s no reason that we should all be the same. We can be different, understand what our differences are, accept them, and work within the confines of how we’re different for the betterment of society. Well, that’s what we need to focus on here, is how do we construct a system of education and a system where we can live in that benefits all of our participants, all of our population here.

And there’s a couple of ways to look at this. If you look at what we’ve spent up until 2010 on the Great Society War on poverty of $22 trillion, it should be nice to have that money back to pay off a lot of that deficit, wouldn’t it? Since 2010, we’ve had 13 years since then, so you can probably double that amount. It’s probably closer to 40, $45 trillion we’ve spent on these programs that have done nothing.

And let me give you some examples. Well, they haven’t done nothing. They’ve gone to line the pockets of the bureaucrats and the people who have kind of been forced on us. So, I mean, it’s not that it’s not done nothing. It’s just taken money out of circulation and put it into the pockets of a few people for the purposes of enriching a small group at the expense of the society.

Well, it also buys a voting bloc for the Democrats, who? Lyndon Johnson. I will quote him, and forgive me for using his language. This was him. He says, after passing these bills on war on poverty, them niggers going to be voting Democrat for the next 50 years. That’s a direct quote from Lyndon Johnson. Not my words, his words. Okay, so he knew what he was doing when he did this, and he was buying a voting bloc.

Now, let me give you another statistic. In 1964, the population of the United States was approximately 240,000,000 people, and the percentage of population that was black was about 8%. Okay? Now, the population of the United States is over 330,000,000, and the population that is black has gone from 8% to 13%. So, essentially, we went from about 22 million blacks in the country up to about 43 million blacks in the country.

So we’ve doubled their numbers in here, and we’re failing at deploying them as a useful component within the society. They’re not contributing when they’re consuming welfare, they’re consuming from others. The government has no money that it doesn’t take from somebody else. So if the government is going to give someone an EVT card, $200 a month on it, they’re taking that $200 out of somebody else’s pocket to give it to them.

When you look at the size of these budgets in the welfare and what this all comes down to, they’ve been robing us blind to feed this demographic, this population group that produces nothing. Well, people on welfare produce nothing. What do they produce besides more kids? And not only that, Mike, what they’ve done is they’ve incentivized fatherless homes by making sure that if there’s no father in the home, the woman can get more money from the government.

So they incentivize the fatherless homes. And I mean, Denzel Washington, who’s one of my favorite actors, he even talks about this. He’s like, look, the problem is not the fact that we’re dealing with. The problem isn’t racial. The problem is that we don’t have fathers in the homes. And then, of course, you don’t see, from a eugenics standpoint, Margaret Singer, who was the one behind Planned Parenthood, she loathed black people.

Loathed them. ANd she’s the one who was the biggest proponent of abortion. And of course, one of the major Democrat Marxist talking points is, oh, the woman needs to have control over her own body. Okay, well, whatever. Basically, you don’t see any Planned parenthoods in Beverly Hills. You don’t see Planned Parenthoods in affluent areas. You see Planned parenthoods in the ghettos in the hood. That’s where you see the Planned Parenthoods.

So they’re literally doing everything that they can to try to stop. They’re trying to do the game to stop the reproduction of black people or of brown people or whatever you want to call it. And yet they say that it’s the white people who are the racist ones against the black people, when it’s the Democrats who are primarily made up of the brown people that are supporting the ideology of abortion and who are abortion targeting.

Who’s abortion targeting? Then? You have that. Plus, you also have, I think I mentioned it to you before we even started back in the early 90s when the private prison industry literally funded the gangster rap music, which is glamorizing criminal behavior. And what has that done that has ensured that prisons are full of black people. And then you’ve got politicians like Joe Biden and Hillary Clinton who literally came out, and we’re talking about black predators.

And we’ve got to make sure that these people go away and that they’re the hardened criminals and that they go away for life. The very people that the black people are voting for are the ones that are literally putting them the most. I sent you a note, Rock. Yeah. Let me see here. Yes, absolutely. And I’ve got to do something, too. You have a puppy and I have a kitty.

So let me pause. I pulled up a study here. Let me share my screen. I pulled up a study, and this is. I don’t know if it’s a study as much as it is. It kind of talks about what the average IQ is around the world and by country, and I don’t necessarily know if it. Let’s see here. It doesn’t really talk about race as much as it talks about country.

I’m familiar with the study, and I’ve looked at the IQ averages from around the world. And if you look at the United States, the question we have to ask ourselves in the United States is, if we did not have a black population, how much higher would the IQ be because they function lower on IQ. And I’m sorry, folks, I don’t want to offend anyone, but that’s the reality.

There are similar studies out there that show by crime, we’re considered to be one of the most violent countries in the world. But if you take out the racial component of black violence, we’re one of the more peaceful countries. There’s like five cities, New York, LA, Detroit, Chicago, St. Louis. You take those out, and our gun violence goes next to nothing. It changes everything. And we have to realize that we’ve got a block of our population in here that happens to be black, that doesn’t function at standard.

They function at a different level, whether it’s violence, whether it’s education, whether it’s income, performance. And as a white person, getting blamed for that group’s deficiencies and anomalous behavior, I don’t care for it. I’m not going to take the blame for what somebody else does. So that’s just kind of how it is. I mean, you look at a country like Cameroon in Africa, average IQ is 64 average.

That means half or below 64 and half or above. In this country, if you have an IQ less than 70, you’re considered developmentally disabled. And that’s just the hard reality. So we have people out there who are members of society walking around free, going to public school, and they’re developmentally disabled. How do we deal with this? And this is the arrest records. This is from the Office of Justice Programs.

This is a Gov website. And it talks about the arrest numbers by all races and all offenses. This is 2020. Yes, all offenses. There was 7,600,000 arrests. The white people were arrested, 5,335,000. Black people were almost 2 million. American Indian, 185,000, and Asian, 119,000. Now, the crazy thing is here is that what’s the percentage of population by black and white? This is where it really kind of gets into kind of the crux of the matter is that the black population makes it like, what did you say? It’s about 13%.

13% currently, yes. So just for giggles, so that we can actually have numbers that we can see here, I’m going to bring some of these numbers over here so that we can actually have an intelligent conversation. So we’ve got 7,000,630. No, I don’t want that. I want 533-5610 and 199-2510 now, do you know what the demographic percentage of white people is in the country? Well, it’s just right at 60%.

But that’s including Hispanics as whites. And so that demographic is a little misleading because if you carve out Hispanics out of that, and there’s no way to dig it out of there, because the Census Bureau has deliberately included Hispanics as white people. I mean, you’ll notice on your demographic forms you’re filling out for anything these days. It says white, non Hispanic. They differentiate that out. But for these purposes, Hispanics are included as white.

So it’s sort of an inaccurate number. But if we take 60%, you would expect 60% of the crime to be committed by whites. I think that’s probably accurate. So it’s 330. I think I’ve got that right. Zeros there. That’s 33 million. So I need to add another zero there. I’m trying to get that into percentages. There’s 198,000,000, basically 200 million white people. And then you have equal 3300 times.

So there’s that 42,900,000. So out of 42,900,000, you get basically 2 million arrests out of that, whereas you’ve got 198,000,000 and you get a little over 5 million arrests. So there’s a huge discrepancy there in terms of how many people are committing crimes based on within the racial community. And that’s not us being racist, that’s just pointing out the statistical facts. No, but. But the Marxists on the left will distort that and they’ll say, this is how the system is set up against you.

Blacks. The laws are. The laws are the laws. You don’t sell drugs, you don’t kill people, you don’t Steal, you don’t do these things. But somehow the Marxists want us to believe that because blacks do these things, that’s racist against them and it’s not. It’s a behavior oriented thing. And then they’ll say, oh, it’s because of poverty. Well, that brings up the topic of the book, the Bell Curve.

And the premise of the Bell curve is that your income you’re going to make over your lifetime is proportional to what your IQ is. That’s the whole purpose of the book. That financial gain and reward is distributed according to intellect. And the fact that blacks have lower intellects than whites or Asians, they don’t do as well financially. That’s the whole premise of the book. And that sure tied the Marxist establishment’s underwear and a knot.

And they still disparage that book because it tells some fundamental truths. There’s another site out there, it’s the FBI site. It’s a Gov. It’s called the Color of Crime. And look at the rape statistics out there. There’s like 50,000 rapes. Gov or I know you have to search for it. FBI data, color of crime data. Let’s see, FBI table. Okay, here it is. I think this is probably a better one, sir.

Instead of me doing the actual numbers, it’s all done for me. So this is FBI Gov. And it actually gives the percentages. If you look at the statistics on murder, you look at the statistics on rape, you look at these things, and the blacks are disproportionately represented on all of these heinous crimes, these crimes against other people. Wow, look at that. Yeah. Let me make it a little bit bigger.

So murder and non negligent manslaughter. So there was a total of 5,319,000 arrests. And for the murders were 3953. And in the black community, there was 115,000 arrests. I don’t know what year this was, 2018 and 4700. So there was literally less than half of the white people arrested. If you go to your next set of columns over here where it says a percentage distribution, 100%, 44% of the murders were committed by whites, 53% were committed by blacks.

Now they’re overrepresented for 13% of the population. They’re committing 53% of the murders. I mean, that’s a big deal. That ought to be jumping off the page at somebody. The other one that’s of interest is the rape numbers down there. I mean, 18,776 rapes on the year 12,079 were committed by whites. 5376 by blacks, 88% or 68% by whites, and 28% by blacks. Again, they’re overperforming in their area here.

This goes down the line here. Blacks don’t have a monopoly on crime. Whites are in there, too. Asians, all of them. Yeah, there’s a lot of. Well, I have several really good friends who are in law enforcement, and there’s a reason that. They tell me there’s a reason that they don’t want to go into black areas at night. You know, when. Unless they’ve got two members of the.

You know, they have two officers in one unit, two police officers in one vehicle. Right. Then you want to go in with two vehicles, because you don’t know. You have to have somebody there watching your back because you get into some of those areas, and it’s hard. They say law of the jungle, and it very much is that. But the thing about it is, Mike, and I don’t think this is not necessary to be this way.

I am with you in the sense that there’s a lot of disparity here on stuff, but I think there’s also some mitigating factors here as well. Number one, I think that the fact that you’ve got lead poisoning in the older homes, you’ve got a lot more. Let me ask you a question, Ron. When you’re saying lead poisoning, you’re talking chronic lead poisoning. You’re talking acute lead poisoning. Doesn’t matter.

No. Okay. Got you. Okay. No, I’m talking about lead poisoning. The CDC says that there is absolutely no amount of lead level that is safe in human physiology. There’s no amount of lead that is safe, that it can cause permanent brain damage. Let’s interject something here. Lead paint hasn’t been legal in this country to use, hasn’t been used over 50 years, 1000%. And so for good reason. Because when I was growing up, there were these stories about black babies eating the lead paint off the wall because they were so hungry.

Okay? Now, I don’t know what’s true and what’s real or not about them. I never experienced it. But we’ve had 50 years of a lead free environment. So I don’t really look at the lead paint issue being the issue. It may have been back in the early 60s, but it is a consideration. What I look at more is the drug issue. The drug problem. And I want to blame this squarely on the Reagan administration when Holly North, John Poindexter, and William Colby were the ones who are responsible for buying cocaine in Columbia, converting it to crack, and then putting up a distribution network to sell it in the black inner city.

That was done by design because Congress would not fund the war in El Salvador that Reagan said he wanted to fight and wanted to fund the Contras to get them up so they could take on the Sandinistas in Nicaragua and stop the spread of communism. Well, let me give you a hint here. Those contras in El Salvador, you know what we call them today? Probably cartels. MS 13.

That is what the Contra organization devolved into, okay? And I want to give people a hint that the Contras that the United States army trained at Fort Benning, Georgia, at the School of the Americas, have morphed into MS 13, okay? Another brilliant act of our foreign policies. I also want to remind people that prior to that, that Ollie North. Everybody looks at Old Ollie North. What a great American bullshit.

He’s a fucking traitor. Should have been hung by the neck until dead, along with Poindexter and Colby for what they did to American citizens by bringing crack cocaine in here. And everybody lauds Ali north about how brilliant he was, how gloriously he testified in front of Congress during the Iran Contra hearings. The man is a criminal for what he did, what he did to the black community. And that’s when police officers stopped carrying Smith and Wesson police specials and started carrying Glock 17s because they were outgunned on the streets.

And if you want to know why the death rate in the black community is so high, why there’s so many shootings, it’s because they’re still fighting over drug turf on who gets to sell drugs on this corner this day. That’s a big reason for it. And I got to lay that squarely at the Reagan administration because that’s who did it. And then Ronald Reagan turned around in his stupidity and pardon these idiots that should have been hung by the neck for treason against fellow American citizens, all because they wanted to fight another stupid, nonsense war in a country in Central America.

And I blame them firmly for mean. But the bell’s been rung. How do we unwring it? How do we restore order back into our cities that are failing and falling and falling apart? How do we do these things? We lose our kids in grade school these days. We lose them there. The way they’re being educated, black kids in particular, because they’re not being stimulated. They’re not being taught to in a way that they relate to that works for them.

And we have to find a way to solve that puzzle if we want these people to grow up and be productive, or do we want them to grow up and be criminals? Like your commentary about the rap music there. That was done and designed and funded by the private prison Bureau. Well, they wanted to make sure they had a secure source of labor, so they criminalized these things.

All of these things show the level of corruption that has undermined the backbone of our country, and the blacks suffer from it. I guarantee you. I have a very dear black friend, and her and I were talking about this, and I said, I guarantee you that you don’t love your kidney less than I love mine. She goes, no, you’re absolutely right. I said, doesn’t that just break your heart, what’s going on in these cities? She goes, yes, it does, because she didn’t want that to happen to her kids.

None of these black women want this to happen to their kids. Nobody wants to bury a child. And we’re allowing this to go on. We, as the American people have allowed this to go on. We’ve let this bullshit go on for a long time. The reason I brought this issue up was to tell the world that I’m not against black people, I’m not disparaging them. We have problems.

Black people, they know they’re different from us. They know it. We know it. The Asians know they’re different from both of us. We can all recognize our differences as people. How we conduct ourselves, the music we like, the foods we like. There’s just a million and five differences for this Communist delusion that we’re all the same when we are all very different. It’s a formula for failure that the Communists have imposed upon us.

And I’m going to speak back to the Communists and say, no, what you’re saying is wrong. It’s a lie to the American people. So stop lying and let’s start working on solutions that work for the American people. Maybe we have to structure education differently in the black schools because that’s how they learn best. Maybe we have to do it differently in the Asian community because they learn better under a different structure.

All I’m asking, do I have solutions? No. I’m asking for people to talk about how do we get better solutions, right? And by going along and nodding your head and saying, oh, yeah, we’re all equal. We’re all the same. It’s bullshit. The medical profession knows this because you can read the inserts in a number of drugs that are out there. It says if you’re African American, you may need to take less of this medication or more of this medication.

You may have these reactions. They know it, too, because they know we have a different physiology, we know we have a different psychology in our heads. We know we have different strengths and weaknesses. All I want people to recognize is the fact that whites have strengths, black have strengths, Asians have strengths. Sometimes they overlap, and sometimes they’re different. I want to share this with you. I want to share this because this goes exactly to what you’re talking about here.

This is from PubMed on the NIH website, and it specifically talks about racial and ethnic differences in response to medicines towards individualized pharmaceutical treatment. And it says, it is now well documented that substantial disparities exist in the quality and quantity of medical care received by minority Americans, especially those of African, Asian, and Hispanic heritage. In addition, the special needs and responses to pharmaceutical treatment of these groups has been undervalued or ignored.

This article reviews the genetic factors that underlie varying responses to medicines observed among different ethnic and racial groups. Pharmacokinetic research in the past few decades has uncovered significant differences among racial and ethnic groups in the metabolism, clinical effectiveness, and side effect profiles of many clinically important drugs. These differences must be taken into account in the design and cost management policies, such as formulary implementation, therapeutic substitution, and step care protocols.

These programs should be broad and flexible enough to enable rational choices and individualized treatments for all patients, regardless of race or ethnic origin. But the point of that is that, and I worked in the pharmaceutical industry. My father was a pharmacist. And I know that if you were a black person or you were a Hispanic person or whatever, the potential ramifications for taking certain medications was significant. It was significant.

Certain things. It could cause problems for a white person that it might not cause for a black person or vice versa. I mean, it’s a big deal. If it’s true in the medical community, especially in metabolism of pharmaceuticals, then why wouldn’t it be true in other aspects of a life? Well, that’s the whole point. And you couple this back with the illegal drug problem we have in the country.

Does it apply there? Do whites and blacks have the same reaction to different illegal drugs, or do they respond differently to them? Just like that thing said about pharmaceuticals? I mean, these are things that nobody talks about. Everybody is scared to death to talk about this. Or, oh, you’re a racist because you thought that. I don’t care if they call me a racist. I could care less. I care about solving the problem.

And the most important thing about solving any problem is to first correctly identify what the problem is. And our education system is failing. We’ve got a permanent underclass of people out there who are living off the welfare system that is going on, third and fourth generation welfare recipients. Now it’s become a career choice for some people. I mean, 1516 year old girl says, I don’t feel like going to school.

I don’t want to live with my parents. I’m going to get pregnant. I’m going to collect my own welfare, get my own sex aid, housing. I have my own ET card. I’m going to go live my life. And that’s a career choice that she just made. And we have to direct or assist these people who are making poor career choices because the bottom line is the US government is broke.

We’re not just bankrupt, we’re in debt. We’re deeply in debt. So what’s going to happen when the welfare safety net doesn’t exist and people fall through? What’s going to happen when the government pension plans fail, when Social Security checks don’t go out, when military retirement checks don’t go out, when any of your GS series people who have a government pension don’t get paid that month? What’s going to happen when the EBT cards aren’t refilled? How are these people going to survive? What are they going to do? Because the US government is going to be in a position where it just doesn’t have the money on one hand.

The other possibility is, okay, you might get $200 a month on your EBT card, but because of hyperinflation, a loaf of bread costs $50, right? How long is that going to feed you for? So your $200 is supposed to last that person a month to feed them or to assist them in being fed lasts them a week. So you got three weeks now before they get their EBT card refilled again.

How do they live in the meantime? The same with any person on a fixed income from any pension, whether it’s Social Security or military or any public servant out there who did a career and is expecting this to come in, that this was how they were going to live after they retired. What’s going to happen to these people? Because the government is broke and we say we have a $33 trillion deficit.

It’s going to be 34 trillion here by the end of this year and there’s no end in sight for this. So what’s going to happen when that system crashes? How are these people going to live? Well, Mike, if I may interject just real quick, the 33 and the $34 trillion that you’re talking about is that does not include the unfunded funded mandates for another 200 trillion plus. Right, there’s that.

I mean, like I said, the US government isn’t just broke but they’re deeply, deeply in debt. What are we going to do, sell off the Grand Canyon? Are we going to sell the Anwar oil reserve to the Saudis so we can bail out our debt? What are we going to do? We’re not going to be able to afford a 900 billion dollar defense budget. Can we afford a 200 billion dollar defense budget? I don’t know.

But when we come back to this race relation thing, we’ve been doing it wrong. Do I know what right is? I don’t have a clue what the right answer is. But by ignoring the problem and pretending that what we’re told is the right answer is not the right answer because it doesn’t work. Like I said, the war on poverty, the only thing it’s done is created more poverty.

So we need to stop the war on poverty. Now we’re not a stingy people, we’re generous. But what about if we limited welfare benefits? People fall on hard times. We’re glad to help you out. Limit welfare benefits to a ten year window over your lifetime. Is that an equitable solution? That if take ten years you should be able to get a PhD? Within ten years you can go from undergrad, freshman undergrad to PhD level.

In that amount of time you should be able to acquire some skill or some education to where you’re going to make yourself more valuable and be able to get out of your hard time retraining of some sort. So your job went overseas to China, you can retrain for a new job in a ten year window. But we’ve got to start taking care of our own and start looking at how is this society going to position itself.

The one thing that our government knows how to do and that we cannot do as American people, we cannot have a civil war, we cannot have the lefties against the righties, we can’t have the blacks against the whites. We just can’t do because that is the one thing this government knows how to do, is to kill people. And they will turn that upon the American people if it goes to that type of a situation.

Just this last weekend I decided to watch Gone with the Wind again because I wanted to see what a civil war looks like again. And that’s just a movie, I grant you, but it’s horrific. It is horrific. What happens and I don’t want to see America, the United States, shred itself having a civil war because I will guarantee you, Joe Biden and the Communists will come in here and declare martial law.

They’ll confiscate everyone’s guns. They’ll confiscate everyone’s assets. They’ll lock us down. They’ll put us in camps, and they’ll deal with us. We cannot afford that. But we can begin to have dialogues like you and I are having right now and talking these forbidden third rail topics like racism, because there was a time when we had segregation in this country. That was a long time ago. That was back in the 1960s.

The Civil Rights act of 64 did away with it. These days, racism is working in reverse to where the Supreme Court had to intervene and said affirmative action is essentially racism against white people to benefit blacks. But that’s another topic. And that affirmative action didn’t help black people. No, it hurt them. It did. It hurt them. It may have got them through school. It may have got them a degree.

But you know what? If I have to go in for brain surgery? And the person who wrote that comment to you said, well, what about Ben Carson? What about him? Did he get there on his own or was he an affirmative action admitted into medical school? And so if I’m going to go in for brain surgery, am I going to pick the black brain surgeon? Probably not. I’ll pick the white or the Asian.

And probably the Asian, because he’s been discriminated against in another way that made him, he had to be better than anybody else to get in there, whereas the black had to be not as good to get in. So I would probably choose the Asian guy as my surgeon because they discriminated against him. They made his job to get that education harder, not easier, and to kind of piggyback on some of the stuff that you just said, how affirmative action harmed the black community and how it’s continuing to harm the black community.

You talked about what they did up in Oregon, and you look at how the Marxists have gone in and how they’ve taken over the district attorney positions and whatnot. And so what they’ve done is they have literally gone in and they are removing statistics that would harm the black community or that would highlight the disparity and highlight the criminal activity and whatnot. What they’re doing is they’re removing arrests and they’re not charging them.

If there’s no arrest, then there can’t be a statistic. If they can’t pass the test, then they just don’t give them the test. And so if they don’t give them the test, then they can’t fail the test. It’s like the person who says, well, you know what? If you want to ask a girl out, then you just don’t ask the question. You just don’t ask the question. Because if you know she’s going to say no, you don’t ask the question.

And then, therefore, if you don’t ask the question, then she can’t say no. So the statistic can’t be that she said that she declined to go out with you type thing. Right. But you don’t get a date either. Exactly. And that’s my point. What’s happening is that by not taking the tests, by not giving the tests, you’re not helping the community to find out where the problems are, that they can resolve the problems.

What you’re doing is you’re just sweeping the problems under the rug, pretending they don’t exist. Well, you’re right. But you know what? Hollywood fights that issue all the time. Because when you watch movies and TV shows, as a white person, I am offended when they bring out, oh, the general, he’s black. Oh, the CEO, she’s a black woman. Oh, the person in charge when you know that these people probably couldn’t get there on their own merit, but Hollywood puts them in there.

And for the record, I wish black people behaved like they do on TV, but they don’t. That’s not how they are. They’re a little different than that. I wish that that would soak in a little bit and they would be more enculturated into the way Hollywood presents them. But they’re not. But we’re under constant assault. And now they’re burying us in the homosexual agenda. And I was watching some TV show, and the psychologist that is counseling people is a tranny.

Really. A tranny mentally ill. That’s a mentally ill person not capable of counseling anybody, much less resolving their own issues. But we’re being poisoned by all of this stuff. And one thing that is coming to light here with this Israel Gaza issue, and this may seem like conversation whiplash, but it is a little bit. We’re seeing as American people for the first time how thoroughly controlled we are by the Zionist entity and how thoroughly it controls every aspect of our culture, every aspect of our life, our government, our business, everything.

And so when we see this, this should be a wake up call for anyone who’s not drank the Kool Aid yet. How thoroughly the infiltration has been on us, but I’m getting off topic a bit here. But black people have their own issues, their own problems. Like I said, they’ve been treated poorly in this country. What happened under the Reagan administration with Ali north, that is an unconscionable crime.

And Ali north to this day should be hung by the neck for what he did. Because how do you undo the damage? How many deaths in our inner cities have happened because of people selling drugs to each other to fund some illegal war? And you look at all of these things cumulatively. There was one of these meme things. I think it was John Wayne on the thing that says, life’s hard enough.

It’s harder when you’re stupid. And you know what? It seems like we’re all pretty fucking stupid these days. I don’t want to Belabor this point, but I want to come back for a second and I want to talk about the lead issue, because I know that we have been living in a society that hasn’t had lead in a long time. I fully understand that. But if you look at a lot of the issues that are out there, there’s a tremendous amount of lead paint and things that are out there now that are 100 years old, where there’s still the presence of the lead that’s out there.

The reason I know this is because I literally was just watching a documentary on this yesterday, and lead is an extraordinarily potent IQ disruptor. And it affects people of all ages. It affects people of all ages. It affects every race, anybody of human, any humans. But it primarily impacts people who are relegated to live in the older parts of the country because the older parts of the country are not the.

That’s where the rent is the least expensive, and that’s where the section eight stuff is. The people that live in those parts of the world are primarily. They’re going to be the more impoverished group. That includes white people, too, but it’s much more predominantly in the minorities. It severely negatively impacts the black community. And it is a very big deal, much bigger than anybody wants to admit. And especially in the older big cities like Cleveland, Detroit, Flint, Michigan, New Orleans, Pittsburgh.

A lot of the older cities on the east coast or in the Midwest and the Upper Northeast, where a lot of the industrial jobs came in, where people fled from the south up into the north, because that’s where the jobs were during the Industrial Revolution right around World War I. So it’s a huge deal, and it has a severe impact on people of all races, but it predominantly affects the minority communities the most.

And I don’t say that trying to be like, hey, I know more. I’m just saying I know for a fact that it does disproportionately affect the black community more. So, and it’s bad. Well, let me give a little toss on here for that, because lead used to be in all of our gasoline, and it was eliminated from the gasoline supply in 1976. Correct. And so before that, I used to like the smell of gasoline.

It had kind of a sweet smell to it. Now I can’t stand the smell of gasoline because I guess it was the lead in there. But we’ve all been exposed to this. We’ve all been exposed to IQ lowering elements. And if we’re going to talk about lowering IQ, let’s address the issue of fluoride in the water. That is another thing that lowers IQ in everyone. It’s not just blacks, it’s whites, it’s Asians, it’s everyone.

And our country has subjected its population to these toxins. Right now, the house I’m in is 104 years old, okay? So I’ll guarantee you if I dug down beneath five layers of paint, I’d probably find some lead paint on the walls there someplace. But what I don’t know is by putting a new coat of paint over the top of it, does it seal in the toxin of the lead? I’m not going to go along around and pull the paint chips off and eat them like the Life magazine article.

I remember when I was a kid came out and said that was a problem. But lead and fluoride are these other environmental toxins that we have to deal with. And then you look at the estrogen emulators in the plastics, the BPAs and things, you wonder why our men are becoming feminine, why the sperm count has been plummeting. It’s all these BPAs and the plastics and that the glyphate, the monsanochemicals and the pesticides and herbicides that are used on our crops that never get rinsed off where we’re consuming them in minute amounts.

And so what these things do is they make our men feminine and they make our women fat. And to your point, glyphosate, basically, is the modern glyphosate is essentially like Agent Orange. Yes, it is. TheRe’s another one called atrazine that they use on corn. And corn is in everything. I mean, you can’t eat a Dorito without eating corn. Popcorn, crack, all that kind of stuff has got. It’s in everything.

And so our government has behaved rather irresponsibly towards its population of all color by allowing these things to be used. Now the upside of that is that it allowed for greater food production short term. But for long term we’re poisoning our topsoil at the same time. I mean you put these herbicides and pesticides on the ground and they get in as a function of time. They’re 810ft below the surface and they’re killing off the subterranean biosphere down there.

It’s killing it off. So our soil does not have the minerals that is not as productive. It’s not as anything as used to. So now you have to put more fertilizers and more stimulants on it to make it grow and be productive again. So we’re ruining everything that we were gifted in this country by the indiscriminate use of these chemicals. But we’re getting way off topic here. But these are important things that people need to realize and that we need to demand from our government be remedied.

We can’t allow the Monsanto’s of the world to dictate government policy. And now it’s bear I suppose has purchased Monsanto because Monsanto knew they were going to lose that lawsuit. That’s right. It sold the company to a German bigger conglomerate so they could take the losses for it. Correct. That’s exactly. You’re 1000% accurate. 1000%. It’s just amazing to me Monsanto again, another Jewish company. It’s always the Jews who are behind these things.

It seems like. And this is something that I hope people realize is that there is a plan for global domination. Actually there are several competing plans. There’s the Jewish one, the banking cabal, the WEF. There’s the Chinese plan for global domination and there’s the Muslim Islamic plan for global domination. So there’s really three competing sources trying to dominate the planet right now and they’re going to get in A fistfight about it.

We’re all going to die. But the one people who don’t have a plan is the American people. All we want to do is be left alone. Leave us alone. Go away. Leave us alone. You’re right on that. I do want to say that I don’t think that we’re too far to bring it kind of home. I think what we need to be able to do is we need to recognize areas that we’re different.

And instead of trying to force us all into the same instead of, you know what black people and white people are the same in the sense that we are human beings and we have human emotions and we have things of that nature. But there are different physical characteristics of our metabolic makeup and other things that are different. And what we need to do is instead of trying to force us into the same box and say that how we’re all the same and focus on our similarities, which is important, I think we do need to focus on our similarities.

But by focusing on our similarities, we also need to not neglect the areas that we’re different and focus on some of the areas that we’re different and then tailor things in society to address the areas where we’re different so that we can be better as a society as a whole. Am I saying that in an accurate way? I think you’ve captured the nexus of it there. And that is, if we’re going to stay together as this union of states and of people, we have to all be pulling the rope in the same direction.

That’s kind of what I heard you say here. We all have to be pulling. We can’t win this game if we’re pulling in ten different directions. But the disparity that goes on is that the blacks complain that they’re not getting enough, that they’re getting by on welfare in this, but they’re taking that out of some working stiffs paycheck. Some other guy is working to pay for that. Why should he have to support them in the city? One of the things I want to really make here is that if we didn’t have the war on poverty and we didn’t have minimum wage laws, we wouldn’t have the illegal immigration problem we have here right nOw, and we wouldn’t have these illegal aliens streaming across the border, because those jobs that the illegal aliens are doing would be done by black Americans or white Americans.

That’s all they get. I think back to George Bush when he said, well, these are jobs Americans won’t do. My answer to that is, George, those are jobs Americans won’t do for what they’re being paid because it costs more than seven or $10 an hour to live in this country, if you’re going to live at all. But I think I may have said this on one of your previous shows.

My first job, minimum wage, buck 60 an hour, but a buck 60 back then, we had silver coins. If I was getting paid six quarters in a silver dime today, that’s worth about 35, $38. Exactly. You can live on that as a minimum wage. Let’s say 35. You got $35, 40 hours a week. Hey, you’re not living bad you can do okay. But our monetary system, including the coinage, was debased.

And we’ve lost that. We have been robbed of this. And this is not the fault of the American people. This is the fault of these infiltrators who came in and who run our banking system. Nixon took us off the gold standard in 1970 and we’ve lost 90% of the value of the dollar since then. It was never convertible, but it was gold backed. If I can slightly disagree with you in a respectful manner, I’m going to slightly disagree with you there.

I agree with the premise of what you said, but I’m going to slightly disagree that it is the American people’s fault because we were not educated enough to know to hold our government to account about that. But that was not the American people’s fault because they didn’t know. But it is the American people’s fault that we are not holding the government accountable for taking us off the gold standard because we didn’t know better.

So there’s a little bit of blame to go there, but there’s also blame to not go around because we didn’t know any better. But that’s just like we don’t hold our government to the Constitution because we don’t understand the Constitution. Because we’ve been told that in order to understand the Constitution you need to have a law degree, which is a load of crap. Well, it’s sad but true.

And our know, going back to George H. W. Bush, they’ve looked at the Constitution really as an encumbrance on them being able to do their job effectively. And the Democrats are worse at this than the Republicans. But the Republicans are really a opposition party in name only. They don’t really oppose the Democrats. And people need to realize that the purpose of both of the parties is to keep the status quo in place.

It doesn’t matter if we have a Democrat president or a Republican president. Everything’s always the same. I mean, nothing ever changes. It just goes on and on. And our Republic has failed. It’s been failed for a long time, probably since they killed JFK. That’s the last time we had a president that really mattered and who really did anything. I mean, I liked Reagan at the time, but I was naive and young then.

But since then, examining Reagan’s record, he was an unmitigated failure. We talk about the Ali north situation, how they were distributing drugs in the black inner city. It was Reagan who also signed the first amnesty that let three and a half million illegal aliens become citizens. And by the way, we’ve had seven other amnesties since then, and we’ve gained over 25 million new citizens through amnesty process. We just don’t hold government accountable.

I mean, the government doesn’t give a shit about the people. And voting is a joke these days. It’s been a joke for some time, but the Biden theft of that election really made it front and center how much of a joke it is. You’re 100% right on that. We just don’t hold the government accountable anymore anyway at all because the people are stupid. But they literally have been deliberately dumbed down.

I think it was George W. Bush that said, stop throwing the Constitution in my face. It’s just a damn piece of paper. Yeah, that was George W. Jr. The. I mean, we can’t hold our government accountable anymore. AnD here’s why. If you and I go to a school board meeting and we say, hey, wait a minute, we don’t like what you’re teaching. We don’t like you putting homosexual pornography in our fourth graders library books.

And no, I won’t sit down. I want to answer that. Why is this in there? They will pick you up and throw you out and arrest you right there. So our government has ended our ability to hold him accountable by using the police as their muscle, as their thugs. And no one wants to have their life disrupted with police charge, being arrested, being charged. You’re having to go defend yourself.

You’re talking a minimum of 30, $40,000 even on something minor, like causing, disrupting a school board meeting. We’re just not allowed to say anything where we’re just supposed to go along and get along. And it’s not going to work much longer because when this financial system collapses, and it will, I’m amazed they kicked the cam down the road this far. I’m just amazed that it’s gone this far.

But this thing is going to break. It is going to collapse. We’re either we’re going to go into a Zimbabwe type hyperinflation or the government’s going to be declared bankrupt and no one will accept it and it’s going to be utter pandemonium. And so what I’m advocating here is we may have racial differences, and I’m tired of pretending that black people can do all things they can’t. There is IQ disparity there that prevents them from doing certain things.

Math is not racist. Computers aren’t racist because they’re hard to use. It’s just that the people trying to use them don’t have the intellectual horsepower to use them properly. And that’s not a racist thing to say, it’s a reality. And we have to identify these things upfront point blank if we hope to solve them. Let me just say in your defense, because I know people are going to say this, it’s like, yeah, listen, I know Mike, okay, he is not saying that every single black person has a low IQ and that no black person is capable of doing anything because it applies to every single black person.

No, neither he nor I are absolutists. But the statistics that we are discussing are bearing out in. I mean, the statistics are the statistics. And when you’re talking about measuring of IQ across the board, the statistics are the statistics. But that doesn’t necessarily mean that every single person that has dark skin is an idiot and that can’t do anything. But overall, looking at the statistics, what we’re talking about is statistic based.

Remember that poll that I showed the other day about how the support for Israel is going down? Okay, so I got so much flak because I showed that in another one I was doing with Scott Bennett. People just came out of their seats angry that we were talking about that and they were talking about how our belief is that the older generation is watching the news and that’s why they’re believing what they’re believing.

And the people that came out of their chairs saying that we were just. I’m not going to watch this. You’re just bashing old people. No, we’re not bashing old people. We’re just talking about the statistics of the study and the poll. That doesn’t mean that it’s absolutists, but it does mean that taken as a whole, the numbers are the numbers. And why don’t reject the numbers. When we opened this discussion today, we were discussing about the median mean IQ of blacks versus whites versus Asians.

And if you look at a bell curve distribution to that median, that’s going to be the middle number. That’s going to be right at the peak of the distribution, going to have half of them are going to be to the left on the low side and half are going to be to the right on the high side. And it’s the same distribution for whites, except it shifted 25 points to the right.

But the distribution is the same. A bell curve is a bell curve. It’s just what it is. And what I’m saying is that the average black IQ is lower. There is disparity in the IQ. You can deny it till the cows come home. I love what your T shirt says, by the way. You may want to read that to the people it sAys, nor reality. But you cannot ignore the consequences of ignoring reality.

That’s reality we’re dealing with here. So we’re at the point where states are dismissing the teaching of math and English language and science to graduate in order to push black kids through. Well, it doesn’t help the black kid to do that. It hurts him because now he doesn’t have mean. I’ll tell you a story. I worked with a guy who graduated from Chaparral High School in Scottsdale, Arizona.

It’s a good first ranked high school. Nice white neighborhood. But he was a black guy. He was dumb as a box of rocks. I’m telling you, he was dumb. He was. Never failed a grade and he graduated at the bottom of his class. But they graduated him anyway. Do you know why? Because they didn’t want the negative statistic of him showing up as a fail. Two reasons. These are more personal, okay? One is that the teacher who fails him doesn’t want to have his mom coming down there and say, you a racist, you failed my son.

Teacher doesn’t want to deal with that because suddenly, then, now that racism charge is whirling around and the administration has to do something about it. That’s one reason. And two, the teacher doesn’t want to have to teach him again next year, right? And so they passed him anyway. They didn’t help this guy at all. I mean, this guy couldn’t read a comic book. That’s how bad he was.

But he graduated high school, okay? And did that help him? No, it didn’t help him. It penalized him because he’s still not functional. He’s not functional literate. He’s struggling. If they would have failed him a couple of times and if he could have got through the course, he would have been better off. At least he could read comic books and simple things. As it was. He had to have his friend read comic books to him.

I’m telling you, it’s that bad. This doesn’t help the blacks. It hurts them and it hurts society as a whole, too, because it hurts all of us. It hurts all of us, right? And so here’s some things. We’ve got some real adjustments coming in this world. Can we continue to afford a permanent welfare state? No. Can we afford third and fourth generation, soon to be fifth generation welfare? People out there who live their whole life never contribute a thing? Can we afford it? No, we can’t.

What’s going to happen to them? How are they going to survive? What are they going to do? Well, they’re going to have to have some skills and go to work. Can we afford to give a free education to everyone? We might not. I want to see our people educated. I want everyone to have access to education. But when they begin to fail, if they don’t sharpen up and pick up their game and study harder and do what it takes, they got to be shown the door because nobody can afford to waste money on them to produce a guy like my friend Ted who went to Chaparral High School.

Nice guy. Love the guy. He’s a great guy. I mean, nicest guy in the world, but he can’t read. And he, he was employed as a clerk in a deli where he would serve potato salad in milk carton stuff. People would come in and want to buy the store’s deli products and stuff. Nicest guy you ever want to meet but couldn’t read and write. And it was a problem.

And so how do we deal with these millions of people out there who our system has failed, like has doing things the way we’re doing? All I’m suggesting is let’s at least have an honest dialogue about these topics with black America, with white America, with Asian America, so that we can find workable solutions that benefit everyone. That is what I’m advocating for. We’re never going to have a perfect world, but can we try to make this one more perfect? Yes, I think we can.

One of the things I’m really fond of saying is that we have no problems we can’t solve. Right? We just have to have the political will to solve them in spite of opposition to solving them. We have people who make money off of this education system. We have people who make money off of the welfare system. And we’ve got to stop their incentives of making money and find something that functions for the purpose it’s intended.

And that’s what my whole piece here is about. Everything is about that. That’s a great place to not necessarily stop, but that’s a great place to kind of wind up, because what you just said there is exactly correct. This is the race baiting and all this other stuff. There is an entire industry out there that is promoting this, and it survives based on its requirement for survival, is predicated upon the people buying into the notion that what they’re selling is true.

And until the people start to start to stand up and question it. And that is going to involve tackling some difficult questions and getting in and debating some of these difficult questions and having thick enough skin to be able to deal with some hard truths, we’re never going to resolve this. And sadly, I think, as I always say this, I always say this, but I talk about everybody’s going to get the red pill someday, and the red pill being a euphemistic term for the matrix, take the red pill and you wake up in the blue pill, you wake up back in your old life and you never see.

But the red pill being a euphemistic, it’s a euphemism for understanding the way the world really works, right? So everybody’s going to get the red pill someday. Sadly, for those of us like you and I, we’ve already taken the red pill. So it’s not necessarily something that, I mean, it’s difficult to swallow. It’s always going to be difficult to swallow. But for some people, that red pill is going to be a suppository and it’s going to be a big, giant suppository that’s going to be inserted with, that’s going to have freaking spikes on it, and there’s not going to be any lubrication, and it’s going to be extraordinarily painful until people get to the point where they can not necessarily embrace it, but understand the situation that we’re facing and be willing to have a difficult conversation about it.

All we’re doing is prolonging the inevitable, and we’re making it worse. One of the difficult things for people to realize is that you send your kid to school or you take a test or you join the military, or whatever you do, you have to realize that there’s an average in there and the average is the median. It’s the middle half the people are below average. Sorry, but half people are above average.

But that’s just how it is, and we didn’t make it up. This is just what the statistics say. And you’re right, it’s a bitter pill to swallow that some people out there may be below average in their abilities. I mean, I’m below average in my athletic abilities. I wish I could perform better, but I can’t. Other people are. Artistically, I’m awful. Stick figures are a challenge for me.

Are you trying to say that you can’t play in the NBA, Mike? I probably will not be successful. I would probably get crushed. I can tell you a story about that. About my twelve year old son when he went to a basketball camp and he was maybe five foot three, five foot four inches tall, might have weighed 85 pounds. And we show up there, and he’s in the twelve to 14 year old group.

Well, the 14 year old black kids were six foot five, and we’re weighing over 200 pounds. And my poor old son didn’t have a chance, and he figured out pretty quick. But that’s just the reality. But we need to have a dialogue, and we need to be able to talk to our black fellow Americans and Hispanic fellow Americans, Asians and other whites and say, look, what we’re doing isn’t working.

It’s not working for your kids. It’s not working for our kids. Let’s do something better. Let’s find a way that we can get these kids productive in our society so they can sustain themselves without resorting to a life of crime, without selling drugs, without doing these things that is going to jeopardize them, because those activities jeopardize the safety of their life. If you’re selling drugs, you’re probably not going to live that long on the street because you’re a target.

If you’re doing drugs, it’s even worse. But we’ve got to find a way to restore our country to a productive state because we’ve lost that state. We have lost our productivity in this country. We can blame it all on Bill Clinton for shipping everything to China, but it’s more than that. There’s business interest behind this, and we’ve got to reinvigorate ourselves. We have to re energize this country to where we’re back on the upswing again.

This is a great country. We’ve got all the resources in the world we need. And I spoke with you briefly about this little white paper I’m working on, and the theme of it is Fortress America. How do we make the United States entirely self reliant? How do we not have to depend on foreign entanglements? We don’t need to depend on international trade. We don’t need to import goods and services from other countries.

We can do it all ourselves. That’s what Vladimir Putin did with Russia, and it’s been a remarkable success for Russia. We need to do something similar here and return to a fortress America, which, by the way, was the prevailing foreign policy between World War I and World War II. It was advanced by the likes of Charles Lindbergh, who did not want us involved in World War II, and we were sort of connived into getting there.

Roosevelt helped, is another conniver. But how do we do what’s best for the American people? I don’t want to become some global one government, one world run by, whether it’s the Islamists or whether it’s the Chinese or whether it’s the WEF or the Jewish Zionist groups. I don’t want any part of them. I want to have our own sovereignty here in our own country. I would like to open the border a bit and invite Canada.

If any of their provinces want to join the United States in this, we would welcome them. They’re a very similar population. And how do we not restore this country to what it was? But how do we build something better than what it was? How do we build this into something that is going to tackle the 21st century here? We’re 23 years into it already. We have 77 years more to go.

How do we build something that was better than what we had in the previous century? And how do we have more opportunity for more People? I ran for governor of Arizona 2006. I got crushed. I just got crushed. But my thought was, and I was ridiculed for this, is, how does government do the most good for the most people, the most cost effectively? And that’s really what government should be based on.

It shouldn’t be based on how do I go to government and get rich like so many of our politicians do? But how do we do them? Like it or not, blacks are here. We’re stuck with them. I didn’t bring them over. I never owned any slaves. I’ve got my family records here in the cabinet right next to me here. My family’s lived in central Missouri for over 200 years.

And prior to the civil war, 50 years before the civil war, I’ve got the records. I can guarantee you we’ve never owned any slaves ever. And so why do they want to penalize me for something that my family was never involved in, even though my family is an older American family here, been here for many generations, and I hear this talk of reparations and stuff. And you know what? I could go along with reparations on one condition, and that is we’ll give you reparations, but you’re going to take repatriation back to your country of your ancestors origin with it.

And we’ll give you a grub steak. Here you go. Go to Ghana, go to Iberia, go to one of. So I dismiss the reparations argument as illegitimate argument number one, and it’s really fallacious. I don’t know what they’re pandering to, but they’re trying to get some racial animus between the whites and blacks again. Well, I think really, I’m on board with that, because the groups of people out there that are promoting the reparations argument, they are basically the Marxists.

They’re the Marxists. They’re the ones with the Marxist ideology. So if you want your reparations, I’ll cut you a check and you can take your ideology and you can leave the country. And then what happens is, now we don’t have to listen to you anymore. So in my opinion, that is a very inexpensive way to get rid of your ideology from spreading in the black community. And then we can actually have people within the black community who want to support and who are very patriotic and love America and want to take advantage of the opportunities that the greatest.

That people are literally dying, literally dying trying to get here, because they know that this is a place where they can actually have an opportunity. So I’m absolutely all for that. Because why is it that everybody. You talk about how bad this country is. Well, why is it that everybody wants to come here then? Let me tell you something, Ron. I’ve got a friend who lives in Cameroon.

He’s a white guy from Virginia. His dad worked in the Reagan cabinet, okay? And he lives in Cameroon. He’ll never leave it. But now he’s got three wives, all black, and he’s never coming home. And one of his mother in laws got in her. A big storm came, and it tore down her hut. So he had to pay to build her a new hut, literally a hut. And so if you want to go back to Africa and all that, that’s what you can look forward to, is living in a hut, because that’s what they’ve got there.

I don’t want to bag on the Africans, but I’m going to tell you something, number one. No African, black African society has ever developed a written language, ever. There are no African written languages, period. They never invented the wheel. Not enough innovation to invent the wheel. And furthermore, they never invented a chair, never had the device, a chair, something to sit on. So you look at these things, and you look at the blacks who live in the United States today or anywhere in the Western world.

They should be the happiest people in the world that they were brought here. It may have been against their will, but their descendants who live here now are living better than they are in Africa today. And you look at what’s going on in South Africa now. I don’t know of any government in the world that the blacks run that is actually doing well. They all seem to be pretty unmitigated failures.

I mean, how many times has the US been in to save Haiti? I mean, it’s been at least 319 50, 319 72, and more recently here, when the Clintons were in there trying to rebuild Haiti. We can’t fix it. I look at South Africa, which was the apartheid state, which was built by the Dutch Boers and the Brits to create a first world country, a first world infrastructure.

It was the wealthiest, most prosperous country in the African continent, and the blacks took it over when they did away with apartheid. Well, first of all, there’s been a flight of whites out of South Africa, number one. And number two, the black population has exploded and the country is falling apart. They inherited a first world infrastructure, first world power grid, and it’s fallen apart. They can’t keep the power on.

The crime and the violence is going through the roof every week. Whites are being murdered on the farms out there, and now they’re having food shortages. So I don’t really have a lot of faith in the ability of the blacks in Africa to ever succeed. I just don’t think they have it. When you look at the average IQ, I sent you that article there that said that 20 countries with the most rapidly growing populations all have IQs less than 67.

And so we’re going to be overrun in this world by idiots. And if we as white people have made some mistakes on this, and one of them has been sharing our innovations and sharing our technology with the rest of the world, we should be hoarding these things, because in the wrong hands, all we’ve done is increase the population numbers, and we’ve harmed ourselves by letting the people who don’t produce, these are parasitical people who can’t produce anything.

And maybe they should be living out there in the bush someplace. I don’t know. I don’t want to go too out on far on a limb here, but if we’re going to make this country work, we’ve got to address these issues. We’ve got to have these discussions. We have to have them publicly. We have to hold our politicians, if they’re still going to serve, accountable for what they’ve done to us and how they malmanage this.

And it goes back to kind of what I was talking about just several minutes ago when I said, let’s look at the things that. Let’s analyze the statistics for what they really are and have an honest discussion without emotion and find solutions that benefit everybody, not just one group. And let’s not pretend that things aren’t happening because it might hurt somebody’s feelings. And that’s really the crux of the matter.

What the Marxists have successfully done is they have attached information to emotion. And now if you say anything that makes you feel unnervous or makes you feel bad, then it’s like, well, you can’t talk about that because, oh, that hurts my feelings. Well, the moment that we attached information to emotion, and instead of actually analyzing information for the sake of the information and trying to understand the information for the purpose of getting a true understanding, when you go to court and the judge and the jury are making decisions, they don’t make the decision based on how they feel about the information that’s presented to them.

Well, you hope they don’t the facts right. You hope they don’t make it about what they feel right. Because that’s how prosecutors get. And the thing is, our legal system, everybody cops a plea because nobody can afford to defend themselves in our system anymore. It’s too expensive. So you cop a plea and you take what they give you, and prosecutors win. That’s a whole nother discussion about how to structure our legal system.

But you understand the point of what I was trying to make there. As long as we try to process information from an emotional standpoint as opposed to a logical standpoint, from understanding what the information means and completely cutting the umbilical cord to the emotional factor of it, we’re never going to be able to have an honest conversation and be able to move forward. Because like you said, and you’ve said it a thousand times, if you’ve said it once, is that all of our problems can be solved.

Because our problems are man made problems, thereforE, they can be solved by man. And until we are willing to step up to the plate and have difficult discussions that talk about the problems that we have, we’re hitting the accelerator, going over the cliff, and we’ve got to do something to where we fix it and step on the brakes and solve the problems before we get to the cliff.

Well, you’re right, Ron. And so even if we weren’t facing this economic collapse that’s coming, we can’t afford to nurture and grow the permanent underclass, because that’s what we’ve been doing since 19, 64, 65 when Johnson put these things into place. War on poverty. We’ve gotten more poverty. If we keep on this track, we’re going to have even more poverty. We are literally rewarding mediocrity. Oh, no, we’re rewarding failure.

That’s the Washington Way. But the underclass is a permanent parasite that’s attached itself to us, the entitlement spending is the biggest line item on the budget, next to interest. Interest is now a trillion a year now. And these are the two biggest expenses we have. So we can’t afford it anymore. We cannot afford a permanent welfare state. The country just doesn’t flat doesn’t have the money. So how do we retool and reeducate the people who have become dependent? Like I said, you and I had this, an offline discussion.

And it’s about, all right, I’m walking along through the national forest here and I come across a dead bear. And right next to the dead bear is this cutest little bear cub you ever saw. I mean, it weighs maybe 1520 pounds. It’s just adorable. So I pick it up and I take it home. Okay? So I feed it, I give it formula, I give it meat. I teach it what to do, what to eat, how to do it.

And this thing grows up and now it’s an 800 pound bear. Well, Fish and Game has figured out that I’ve got this bear and they’re going to take it away and liberate it out into the woods. How is that thing going to survive when it’s never had to hunt or forage or do anything on its own if you just dump it out in the woods that way? We’ve got probably 40 million people in this country, 45 million people who are like that bear Cub, who have never had to earn a living by themselves by legitimate means.

So what are we going to do with them? How are we going to retrain them, educate them so that they’re capable of sustaining and supporting themselves when there is no welfare safety net? How are we going to do this? Because they’ve never had to do it before. What’s going to happen when the government checks stop or when the government checks don’t pay for your expenses for the month? What are we going to do with these folks? How are we going to do it? This is a problem coming.

And the first thing that comes to mind is, are they going to become violent? I don’t care if you’re white or black, but any welfare recipient out there, you cut the welfare off and they got no other choices. What are we going to do? How do we survive? What do we do? And these are things that people need to be concerned about today because this financial collapse is imminent.

We have been malmanaged into this position. I don’t use mismanage. Mismanagement implies incompetence. Malmanagement deliberate, infers evil intention. And this has been malmanagement of the United States government and the United States policies toward the American people. And so how do we get out of this? We got to let these people go in the street and starve. They’re not going to do that. They’re going to be kicking indoors and home invasions and carjackings and all that kind of shit is going to go through the roof.

So how do we prevent these things from happening? And how do we provide, create an environment that people can work their own way through their problems to survive in this world? And this is what we need to be talking about. This is what needs to be on the table. If you want to have a debate about this, open it up. Let’s put this on Primetime, every network. Amen.

Let’s let people talk. Let’s let people say what they need, how they need it, what’s going to help them, what’s going to hurt them, because like I said, the government doesn’t spend a penny, that doesn’t steal from somebody else through taxation. And that’s what I mean. How much better would white people be living today if the Great Society was never created? We didn’t spend those 20 as of 2010, $22 trillion.

Like I said, it’s probably double that by now. So how do we solve these? This is all I’m trying to do is I’m trying to buck the false narrative. And the reason that I asked for this time was because someone said, oh, he’s disdainful towards blacks. No, I’m disdainful towards the lies that are told about blacks. And I want people to say, well, let’s be realistic. All right, so there’s an IQ disparity.

How do we deal with this? How do we work through this problem? How do we structure this so these people can still be successful? Yes. Look, there are problems out there, and we’re not trying to point the problems out because we’re pointing fingers and laughing at people. That’s not the objective here. The objective here is to have an intelligent, logical discussion on solutions and be solution oriented to resolve the problems that we face.

And until we have the courage to be willing to possibly be offended and have these discussions, all we’re doing is we’re just hastening our demise. Even know, listen, I know Mike. I’ve had the pleasure of getting to know him a lot better, really? Just recently. But we first had an interview probably, I think it was over a year ago, and I’ve seen a lot of the stuff that, I’ve seen a lot of your work and I’ve read a lot of your work.

And you know what? We love human beings. We love humanity. We don’t have any malice in our hearts. I don’t. And I absolutely believe that Mike doesn’t have malice towards our fellow humans. What we want is we want everybody to flourish and succeed within the confines of the best way that we possibly can. And there are roles for everybody in society. God does not make junk. Everybody here is here for a purpose.

And our purpose is not to be leeches off of the governmental tit. That is not what we were designed to be. We were designed to be here to flourish and to be an integral part in our own specific way for the betterment of society. And until we actually get to the point where we’re willing to have hard discussions on how best to facilitate that, we’re just spinning our wheels and hastening our demise.

I don’t know how to say it any better than that. Let me finish up with this statement here, Ron, and we can call it a day after this, because you sort of beat this horse to death right now. Yes. But my wish for black Americans, white Americans, Asian Americans, is not that they survive, but they survive and thrive. And they do it on their own accord, with their own means, because it’s not fair to ask another American to pay taxes to support them.

They pay their own way that the life they live, how good or how bad it is because of what they made it. And let’s create the environment to where everyone can survive and thrive. And that’s all we can ask for. Some are going to accept the challenge and do really well, and some are going to fail. And race has nothing to do with that. That’s just people. Look, I know a lot of white dirt bags, okay? Amen to that.

I’m not painting the blacks with this, but it’s just that we have to recognize that we have similarities. We have to recognize that we have differences. How do we reconcile these things? To create a societal structure that allows everyone to reach their highest level possible. Right. That’s it. I think that’s a great place to stop right on that point, because that’s dead center target. So, guys, listen, thanks for putting up with us again, but you know what? I’m glad, Mike, that you and I got to spend another session.

I enjoy our time immensely. There’s very few people that. Well, I shouldn’t say very few, but actually, that number is growing in terms of people that have come into my circle, whose time I truly enjoy spending with. And you are definitely one of those people, sir. So I appreciate your time today. Thank you, sir. And I want to thank the listeners. We’vE gone another, what, hour and almost 50 minutes again.

And if anybody’s got the patience to put up with an hour and 50 Minutes interview, I thank you for giving us so much of your mind share because there’s a lot of competition out there on the Internet. I mean, nobody has enough time to watch them all. And some of them are really good. I just hope that we qualify. I hope that we’re good enough to have kept your interest for this long.

And thank you so much for giving us your time. And I hope that you hear the message that we’re saying and with the ears to hear what we’re saying, that we’re not trying to be belligerent or badgering, but we are trying to come to solutions for the betterment of humanity. This is not a matter of trying to pick fights or whatever. We want what’s best for everybody. The driver on this thing is that what we’re doing now doesn’t work.

And we can see it. A lot of people can see it. White people see it. Black people see it. Asians see it. We see that this is fucked up how it is. Let’s change it. And the first step on that is, number one, correctly identifying the problem and then discussing it openly so everyone has input. Everyone, hopefully can get enough of their needs met that it’s an acceptable set of solutions.

Well, I think society is definitely fitting into the insanity definition of doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result. Ron, thank you so much for making the time for me, and thank you for listening to us. I really appreciate know this is one of these videos that might not seem like the most important one you’ve ever seen in your whole life, but it just might be.

When it comes to black criminality and denial all over the country, this one is a little scary. Yeah. Scarier than lighting a cigar in a little English pub outside of Biggleswaid, England. You heard me. So this week. So this week, the Christian Science Monitor ran a story about all these great progressive district attorneys all over the country. Yeah, it’s worse than we thought. Where have we done stories in the last month or two? Here we’ve done stories in Philadelphia How George Soros and the Black Lives Matter teamed up.

Soros with his millions, Black Lives Matter, with their endorsement to elect a district attorney in the city of Philadelphia who’s down with the cause. I thought I didn’t really hear that much about this happening all over the country. Well, I guess we could write about a book, good old things about good old Colin doesn’t hear about, because this is happening all over the country. Chicago, Kim Fox, same thing.

GeorGe SOros money, Black Lives Matter endorsement. And they all say the same thing. It’s like black people are relentless victims of relentless white racism all the time, everywhere. That explains everything, especially why cops are always arresting black people for no reason whatsoever. And that’s why we have to stop arresting people for small crimes. Let me tell you what a small crime is. A small crime is something that happens to somebody else.

If somebody comes along and steals your handbag or your watch, if it happens to you, it’s a major crime. If it happens to my budy sitting right here, that’s a minor crime. And that’s what the attitude is. We’re not going to prosecute black people for small crimes. Ditto. In St. Louis. I mean, in St. Louis, we did a story just a few weeks ago where this old Vietnamese guy, a black guy, came along and beat the hell out of him.

We have it on video. We have testimony. We have witnesses. We have all this stuff saying, yeah, this guy beat the hell out of this guy. And a year later, he died. 18 months later, he died. Two years later, the district attorney, the newly elected district attorney of St. Louis, came in and said, oh, yeah, we can’t take that case to trial. And she got elected the same way, by the way, George Soros put a lot of money into her campaign.

Black Lives Matter supported her. And it’s like, hey, she’s down with the cause. Everybody knows that. That’s how she got elected. Now we have the Christian Science Monitor running a big story on this trio, the Three Stooges. Now, we have to call them the Four Stooges, because they’ve got one other guy down in Corpus Christi. He’s saying the same thing. He’s saying, we have to stop arresting black people for committing minor crimes.

Wow. Then he goes, no. And not only that, we have to. And all these guys say the same thing, and they act like they just made it up, like, ten minutes before. It’s some burst of genius. He goes, yeah, we got to stop arresting people and get people some job training. Yeah, that’ll do it. Okay, here’s the. I mean, that’s insane. There’s so much job training out there.

There’s so much free job training. I mean, for the last 50 years, they’ve been doing nothing but adding and adding and adding and adding to it. There’s so much job training there’s more training than there are people who want to take the slots in these training. Oh, and by the way, hate to burst everybody’s bubble, but the fellows are not overly eager to work as long as they can have a lifestyle equivalent to 45, 55, $65,000 a year through housing and welfare and other benefits, cash benefits.

And so the Christian sides monitors calls that progressive. And it’s like, yeah, this is fantastic news because everybody knows the prisons are full of black people in there for no reason whatsoever. Look at that article I’m posting. You’ll see it up here. Look at the article. Do you see one mention of one person who was a victim of the criminality that these district attorneys are just dismissing? Wholesale scale in Chicago.

We just had, well, we had two wild stories in Chicago with Kim Fox. One, this happened on video. A large group of black people beat the hell out of a cop, leaving him with permanent brain damage. Kim Fox threw out all the charges. She said somehow the ten people said somehow this single white cop dropped an end bomb on him and he was attacking them for no reason whatsoever.

So she just tossed out the charges. Every cop in Chicago knows what that means. And then there was another oNe. This is like one of her first things on the job. We have a police report on this town, and she’s the prosecutor of Cook County. So a little town outside of Chicago, somebody’s riding with a convicted felon, is riding with a shotgun seat in the car. He has a gun.

There’s a loaded gun in the glove compartment. The guys have all sorts of other bad things going on. But she dropped the charges on them because according to the police report that we did a video on this one. The police report said the guy who was sitting in front of the gun said he didn’t know the gun was in there. And it wasn’t his gun. Well, the gun was stolen.

She just dropped. It was a stolen car, too. Stolen car, stolen gun, everybody goes free because that’s how these district attorneys are rolling. And if that doesn’t alarm the hell out of you, it should. So I just landed over here a couple of days ago. First thing I did, I picked up a copy of the Guardian, front page on the Guardian. And it’s like word for word, except word for word, lifted from a paper in the States, except worse.

I’ll put the headline up here. I forget exactly what it said, but it said something like history of racial bias means that prosecutors in England have to start dismissing charges, wholesale charges against black people who have been arrested. I mean, they don’t even do the little dance that they do in the States, calling it people of color. They go, oh, no. Black people are being arrested in England for no reason whatsoever.

So we got to start letting them out and dropping all the charges and make cops take sensitivity training courses and stuff like that. Nobody talked to any victims. Nobody talked to any witnesses. Nobody talked to anybody. Basically, now we’re down to the point where we’re just taking the word of, like, convicted felons. We’re taking the word of the worst of the worst instead of listening to the best of the best.

The cops and people in England, people in Philly, people in St. Louis, people in Chicago, people in Corpus Christi, they all think tHat’s going to work out okay. Everything’s going to be just fine as long as we don’t make the black kids angry. I was talking to a patron of this channel just the other day. He was saying, Colin, Colin, you got to do more numbers. And I said, if you do my numbers, I’ll keep contributing.

I said, sure, I’ll try to squeeze more numbers in here. But every time I go to do a story about numbers, I realize that whatever number we’re seeing is actually as bad as it is, is actually way, way worse because of things we’ve talked about here many times before. Witness intimidation, stitches for snitches, jury tampering, cradle to prison pipeline, and city officials not wanting to arrest black people, not wanting to criminalize black people when they break the law.

I was thinking about this when I saw this story out of San Francisco. We did this story a couple of months ago, but I find myself thinking about it a lot. It was a story about how in San Francisco, the city is only, like, 6% black, yet the number of failures to appear in traffic court is about 50% black. That is proof positive to the supervisors and the powers that be in San Francisco that the cops are picking on black people for no reason whatsoever.

And to quote one of the supervisors up there, we have to do better. Those numbers are bad, right? Traffic numbers, traffic court. 50% failure to appear. 6% of the population. Okay, let’s watch this video, and let’s see this video. Take these numbers that are bad and blow them into horrific. The driver of this silver Toyota is in a red zone facing the wrong direction in the Bayview section of San Francisco.

Upon further inspection, the driver is still in the car enjoying some barbecue chicken he got from here. But you can’t park in the red zone. Well, I’m not parked. You are parked. Okay. I’m going to move. Well, I think it’s a little late now. It’s a little late because San Francisco police rolled up inside the driver for driving on the wrong side of the street. The driving and parking habits of people who either frequent or live in the Bayview leaves a lot to be desired.

This driver is double parked at a corner, but his flashes are on. So I guess to him, that makes it all right. There are cars parked on the sidewalk on just about every street in the Bayview in clear violation of San Francisco parking codes. But as one parking officer told me, I don’t write tickets because I want to go home at the end of the day. So instead, they place these green warning flyers on vehicles illegally parked on the sidewalk.

Can’t park on the sidewalk, man. Okay, how you move. There are sections of San Francisco where parking on the sidewalk will almost guarantee you $100 plus fine. But in the Bayview, simply because DPT workers are threatened with bodily injury, many are refusing to write tickets. And while I was there, I also noticed that parking meters also appear to go unenforced. For the record, I was even threatened for taping.

So I can say it’s pretty sketchy out there. Put me on your TV. Blue in the Bayview section of San Francisco. Stanley Roberts, Crown Four News. Okay, here’s one thing you have to know about the Bayview area of San Francisco. If you don’t live there, you wouldn’t know this unless you had access to a super sophisticated research tool, which I call Bing. Anyway, if you look up the Bayview Area, this is where the heaviest concentration of black people are in San Francisco.

So the people writing traffic tickets, the people writing tickets for cars on the sidewalk and whatever, they won’t write tickets up there because they’ve received too many threats. So what does that do to those numbers? What does that tell us about the attitude of elected officials and unelected officials in the Bay Area when it comes to crime? What it tells us is that black people are not really criminals when they break the law.

They’re really victims of white racism that have somehow forced them to break the law and to get caught. Isn’t that amazing? They won’t enforce traffic laws in Bayview. You know what? California is a place where they do enforce traffic laws. It’s not like the East Coast. I remember when I first went to California a long time ago on the East coast, basically, people do. Not pedestrians, especially, but cars more.

So people just kind of, like, take traffic laws as suggestions. And when I got to San Diego, I remember I saw a red light across the middle of the street. I turned around, I was the only one in the middle of the street. There were 30 people waiting on the curb looking at good old Colin for breaking the law. Luckily, my white privilege helped me get out of that mess.

But isn’t that crazy? Like, the numbers are already incredibly bad. Now we find out, as bad as they are, they’re actually way, way worse. The attitude of elected officials is just unbelievable towards black criminality. So if Bayview is one of the area’s highest concentrations of black people, the tenderloin is not too far behind. So I thought I would just throw this story in there as well, just because we can.

Lady walking through the Tenderloin area with the kids, some black dude comes up and the NBC affiliate, to its credit, identified him as a black person, came up and punched the lady in the face. That’s how they roll there. So if we have a high concentration of black people in Bayview and Tenderloin, have you ever been across the bridge to Marin County? That’s where George Lucas lives. I was standing in line at a movie theater there a couple years ago.

There’s only like three people in line. I turned around and the guy behind me was George Lucas and his girlfriend. I think he was a girlfriend. Girlfriend, man, I don’t think they were married yet. Anyway, so that’s how white that place is. So when you have a high. Police in San Rafel are asking for help identifying three young women they say assaulted and robbed a 92 year old woman at a shopping mall.

KPIX Five’s Katie Nielsen is here now to explain what happened. Katie? Betty? Police in San Rafel call this a brazen attack because it happened at 330 in the afternoon last Saturday in the busy parking lot of Northgate Mall. Police say while the woman was not seriously injured, it’s important they find the three suspects in this case. This type of crime is unacceptable, so we should find these people.

Police say the three women in the pictures assaulted the elderly woman right after she left the mall. Officers say the woman was about to get in her car when a silver Nissan sedan drove up next to her. They say the girl seen in the video wearing the bun in her hair, jumped out of the backseat, assaulted the elderly woman, grabbed her purse, then jumped back in the car as it sped away.

But not before the surveillance cameras got a good look at the three women and the silver car. It was calculated. It definitely looked like it was calculated. Police say surveillance video like this one from the mall shows the three suspects were carefully choosing their victim. She was just completely frantic, Emmanuel said. The elderly victim came into the bank where she works immediately after the robbery. They helped her call police, still shocked at what happened.

I just don’t expect people to be doing this specifically in this area. It’s just really safe. I’ve been up here for a couple years and I felt pretty safe in Marin County. So it’s just sad to hear that that would happen to such an elderly lady. There’s really only one kind of crime that’s really kind of overwhelmed my ability to gather them all together and to put them all together.

So I’m just going to tell you and ask you to take my word for it. It’s these crimes in parking lots, in nice parking lots, there’s a whole lot of them. They’re a lot of unreported, and the ones that are reported don’t seem to really cause a lot of fuss. But there’s an enormous amount of criminality in nice shopping center parking lots all over the country. I learned that here from one of the viewers of this channel.

His wife belongs to one of these Facebook neighborhood mom groups, which they would not let me join because I’m not a mom, I guess. Anyway, on this mom thing, they have a lot of information about, like, this happened like four or five, six times in a little mall near my house called the Conquer Mall, fellas and or their lovely ladies just stalking people in the parking lots, beating them, stealing their purse and getting the hell out of there.

Just another facet, another little piece of evidence to document the greatest lie of our generation, the biggest hoax of our lifetime that we expose here, the myth of black victimization. I mean, we saw it on full display over the weekend, right? And a couple of nights before the NFL football. I mean, we’ve got 200 NFL guys now kneeling down, all to support the fact that black people are relentless victims of relentless white racism all the time, everywhere.

That explains everything. And it’s not what Roger Goodell said. They’re not out there protesting because Trump called him a bad name. It’s amazing how often people that are, like, famous, like Godell or these football players or all these people who write headlines, it’s amazing how often they can just say something and be totally unchallenged and people would just read it and go, yeah, that makes a lot of sense.

Trump caused, Trump caused all this. That sure as hell is a lot easier than saying anything that might make the black kids angry. Greetings from old Warden near Biggles Wade. Anyway, on this channel. When we talk about how we turn the victims into the predators and the predators into the victims, I think some people think we’re kind of exaggerating around here, but we’re not exaggerating. And this story, the story of one of the biggest hoaxes of the last couple of years, well, this is a good case in point, invoking the lessons of a fairy tale to punish real life convicted liars.

From WNYT Albany in HD, News Channel 13 LivE at Five begins right now. Good evening and thanks for joining us. I’m Jim Kimmel. Good evening. I’m Benita Zon. Three years probation and 200 hours of community service. That’s the sentence handed down today to two former U Albany students convicted of lying about a fight on a CDTA bus. Dan Levy was in court and joins us with reaction. Good evening, Dan.

Jim, Benita, good evening. In the presentencing report, the Department of Probation recommended incarceration for Asia Burwell and Ariel Lagudio. And up until the moment of sentencing, there was noticeable concern on the faces of the defendants and their families. And when those young women realized that jail time had been averted, there was palpable relief throughout the courtroom. We’re ready to proceed. From Asia Burwell and Ariel Lagudio could have avoided the trial.

All they had to do was say they’re sorry. I just think it’s unfortunate that these young ladies chose criminal convictions rather than telling the truth and apologizing. Both women had one final chance to apologize on their sentencing day. Neither one did. I know about the importance of abiding by our society’s laws, and it was never my intent to break any of them. But a jury decided they did break the law by lying to authorities about being victims of a racial attack on a CDTA bus 18 months ago.

I’ve seen the video. The jurors saw the video, all of the videos from the bus. What occurred on that bus is nothing close to what you reported, Miss A. Goodio, and you reported, Miss Burwell, their punishment, three years probation and 200 hours of community service. If there were three white girls on that bus with a busload of black people and they were drunk and disorderly, do you for 1 second think we would be here right now? Racial overtones that were pervasive during the trial continued even after sentencing.

This is a judge, unfortunately, in this situation that may be viewing it from his vantage point, he cannot stand in the shoes of Ms. Burwell. She is an African American woman who has experienced what America has done to her racial bias at the University of Albany campus is real. I don’t think there is a student, a black student or a student of color who could tell you otherwise.

At the end of the day, the judge admonished both young women for manipulating the village, just like the boy who cried wolf. But the moral of that story is that no one believes liars, even when they tell the truth. Defense attorneys have already filed an appeal of today’s sentencing. And so remember what we’re looking at here. They have everything on video. They have the black women attacking the white kids on video.

They have the audio of the black women laughing and joking amongst themselves while they are dialing 911. Remember, that’s a little news you can use here when you dial 911. Oftentimes there’s like a five second gap between the time you think they’re listening and the time they really are listening. They’re listening to you while you think you’re still on hold. That’s what happened to these lovely ladies when they were talking about how much fun they just had pulling one over on those crazy white people.

And then all of a sudden, there is no doubt as to what happened there, right? We know that it was all on video. They made it all up. They told lie one after another. Then after the trial, after they get sentenced to three months probation and what, some community service, the father comes out and says, oh, if they were white, this would never have happened. Yeah, show me the video, Mr.

Fantasy Land. And then we got the lawyers coming out going, oh, yeah. Everybody knows at the University of Albany, there’s a whole bunch of white racism there. I mean, that’s why they did it. That’s why they made up this story. That’s why they made up this fictional story of hate crime because of white racism, forced them to do it. Gab, this was a huge hoax. We had Hillary Clinton tweeting about it.

We had the president of the university giving a big virtue display speech. At a Martin Luther King. No, at a Reverend Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. Day breakfast. Everybody was saying the same thing. Oh, no, not on my watch. White racism. No, not on my watch. Nobody would even take a second to think, oh, we’ve seen a lot of these hoaxes, and this seems kind of unusual behavior.

No. They were so Eager to. People say, I cherry pick. No, what we cherry pick, we cherry pick examples of big trends. The national media Cherry picked this story of this hoax, and it’s just the first, it’s just the middle hoax. How many were before that? How many are after that? And every time nobody asks, hey, is this the hoax like the one before that? No, nobody says that.

What about community service? I don’t even know what that means. What are they going to do? Get these young ladies jobs in a daycare center? That’s what community center is. Community service is unless they’re out there picking up trash on the highway with other drunk drivers. It’s like, no, I don’t want these people anywhere near civilized people. And there’s no repentance. There’s no, sorry about that. The enormous amount of cost that was incurred, the enormous amount of damage that was done to the people who were accused of this.

Remember one of the girls that was found guilty, her brother threatened one of the people she accused of beating him up. He had to leave the school. Her brother was a member of the San Diego, now Los Angeles Chargers. And all they get is a couple of months of probation and community service. Three years probation with a promise. I mean, she got up there, start reading her little fairy tale, whatever she read there.

She basically, her and her lawyers went outside in court and goes, oh, yeah, never mind that. Here’s what we really think. We’re the victims of white racism. That’s why we had to go out and fake this hate crime. That’s how bad it is now in this country. That’s how unwilling people in the press are to call out these hoaxers, these tricksters, these lawyers, these clowns that attack these white students and let them get away with it for so long.

And now we have it all captured on more than a dozen cameras, and they’re still out there going, oh, no, we didn’t do nothing. No, didn’t do nothing. Where are the reporters? Where are the public officials? Where is anybody with some stones to sit up there and say, hey, you guys are lying your asses off. And I don’t care how many black kids that makes angry. There are few, if any, issues more explosive than the question of whether there are innate differences in intelligence among the various races.

Here it is especially important to be clear as to what is meant and not meant by intelligence in this context. What is not meant are wisdom, skills, or even developed mental capabilities in general. Virtually everyone recognizes that these things depend to some extent on circumstances, including upbringing in general and education in particular. Those on both sides of the question of race and intelligence are arguing about something much more fundamental, the innate potential for thinking, the ability to grasp and manipulate complex concepts without regard to whatever judgment may or may not have been acquired from experience or upbringing.

This has sometimes been called native intelligence, the mental capacity with which one was born, but it could more aptly be called the mental potential at the time of conception. Since the development of the brain can be affected by what happens in the womb between conception and birth, these things can happen differently according to the behavior of the mother, including diet, smoking, and intake of alcohol and narcotics, not to mention damage that can occur to the brain during its passage through the birth canal.

Genetic mental potential would therefore mean the potential at the moment of conception rather than at birth, since native intelligence has already been affected by environment. Similarly, if one is comparing the innate potential of races rather than individuals, then that innate potential as it existed at the dawn of the human species, may be different from what it is today, since all races have been subjected to various environmental conditions that can affect what kinds of individuals are more likely or less likely to survive and leave offspring to carry on their family line and the race large disparities in the geographic, historic, economic, and social conditions in which different races developed for centuries open the possibility that different kinds of individuals have had different probabilities of surviving and flourishing in these different environmental conditions.

No one knows if this is true, and this is just one of the many things that no one knows about race and intelligence. The ferocity of the assertions on both sides of this issue seem to reflect the ideological importance of the dispute, that is, how it affects the vision and the agendas of intellectuals. During the progressive era, assertions of innate racial differences in intelligence were the basis for proposing sweeping interventions to keep certain races from entering the country and to suppress the reproduction of particular races already living within the country.

During the later 20th century, assertions of innate equality of the races became the basis for proposing sweeping interventions whenever there were substantial statistical differences among the races in incomes, occupational advances, and other social outcomes. Since such disparities have been regarded as presumptive evidence of discrimination, given the presumed innate equality of the races themselves, even if there are no innate restrictions on the range of intelligence among individuals from different races.

This is not to say that there can be no induced differences in average mental potential or average developed capabilities in a given race, whether induced by differential reproduction rates between different social classes within a given race, in a given environment, or by other influences. What is also important to keep in mind is the question of both the magnitude and the duration of whatever differences in either intellectual potential or developed capabilities that may exist as of a given time.

These and other possibilities need to be examined separately, empirically, and carefully. In principle, all the factors affecting intelligence can be dichotomized into those due to heredity and all the remaining influences which can be put into the category of environment. However, life does not always cooperate with our analytical categories. If environment can affect which hereditary traits are more likely to survive, then these two categories are no longer hermetically sealed off from one another.

If, for example, we take some characteristic that is widely agreed to be affected primarily by genetics, height. For example, it has been argued that the average height of Frenchmen has been lowered by massive casualties in war as a result of the decimations of French soldiers during the Napoleonic wars, or during the First World War, or both, since the biggest and strongest men have been more likely to have been taken into the military forces and sent into battle.

Thus, two races with initially identical genetic potential for height can end up with different heights and different genetic potentials for height in future generations if one race has been subjected more often to conditions more likely to kill off tall people at an early age before they reproduce sufficiently to replace their numbers and maintain their share of their race’s gene pool. Similarly, some have sought to explain the overrepresentation of Jews among people with high intellectual achievements by differential survival rates within the Jewish population.

It would be hard to think of any other group subjected to such pervasive and relentless persecution for thousands of years as the Jews. Such persecutions, punctuated from time to time by mass lethal violence, obviously reduced Jews survival prospects. According to this hypothesis, if people of only average or below average intelligence were less likely to survive millennia of such persecutions, then regardless of Jews initial genetic intellectual potential, a disproportionate share of those who survived physically, and especially of those who could survive as Jews without converting to another religion to escape persecution, were likely to be among the more ingenious.

Despite a tendency to think of heredity and environment as if they were mutually exclusive and jointly exhaustive. There are many other ways in which environment can change heredity, so that races that may have initially had the same genetic potential for intelligence can end up with different genetic potentials as a result of their different environments. Widely available subsidies for individuals who are less successful economically, who as a group may average lower IQs than very successful individuals, can lead to an increase in the number of babies born to teenage dropouts, for example, while higher rates of taxation of individuals with higher levels of education and higher earnings can lead to the latter having fewer children than otherwise as a result of their unwillingness to produce more offspring whose chances of getting the amount and quality of education required to maintain the living standards into which they were born would be reduced if their parents income and time were spread out over a larger number of children.

If both sets of individuals and families are of the same race, then the average intelligence of that race could be reduced not only in the next generation, but in subsequent generations as well, since a larger portion of the offspring of that race would be supplied by the less successful members than if such policies of subsidies and taxes did not exist, even if races as such did not initially have different genetic potential.

The fact that the genes of less successful members of a particular race become a growing proportion of all the genes passed on to subsequent generations can reduce the average hereditary potential of the race as a whole in much the same way that environmental factors can reduce heights not only in the next generation but in subsequent generations as well. Two different kinds of environment can influence such an outcome.

One, an external environment which produces various activities of both governmental and nongovernmental organizations to subsidize a counterproductive lifestyle and two, an internal culture in which large numbers of members of a particular racial or ethnic group are willing to live on the dole and spare themselves the efforts required to rise to economic independence. This second requirement, without which the first may not do nearly as much damage, may be entirely environmental, but it can be no less damaging to the race and to the composition of its pool of genes.

The same subsidies may be available to everyone below a specified income level, but if some racial or ethnic groups are from a culture that refuses to adopt a lifestyle of dependency, then these groups escape both the immediate and the longer run consequences of that lifestyle. Here a crucial distinction must be made between environment conceived as the immediate surroundings and environment conceived as including a cultural heritage, which can differ greatly between contemporary groups living at similar socioeconomic levels and facing the same objective opportunities in schools and in the economy.

Whether or not this hypothesis can be validated by empirical research, like the hypothesis about the heights of Frenchmen, it demonstrates that heredity theories and environmental theories of group differences are not hermetically sealed off from one another, since environment can influence the survival rate of hereditary characteristics. Moreover, the question of average mental potential or average developed mental capabilities between races is different from the question whether some races have a limited range of mental abilities, a ceiling on their intellectual potential that is lower than for some other races, as implied by genetic determinists of the progressive era.

While the average Frenchman may not be as tall as the average American, Charles de Gaulle was much taller than most Americans. There is similarly no reason why differences in average IQs between any two groups, racial or otherwise, need to imply that high IQs cannot be achieved by members of both groups. These are questions to be answered empirically. These are also questions relevant to assertions by people like Madison, Grant, and others in the progressive era that whole races must be severely restricted in their reproduction or, in Sir Francis Galton’s words, require the gradual extinction of an inferior race.

Heredity and environment can interact in many ways. For example, it is known that children who are the first born have, on average, higher IQs than their laterborn siblings. Whatever the reasons for this, if families in Group A have an average of two children and families in Group B have an average of six children, then the average IQ in Group A is likely to be higher than in Group B, even if the innate genetic potential of the two groups is the same, because half the people in Group A are first borns while only one 6th of those in Group B are.

In some cultures marriage between first cousins is acceptable or even common, while in other cultures it is taboo. These differences existed long before science discovered the negative consequences of inbreeding, and in some cultures such patterns have continued long after these scientific discoveries. Races, classes, or other social groups with very different incest taboos can therefore start out with identical genetic potential and yet end up with different capabilities. The point here is simply that there are too many variables involved for dogmatic pronouncements to be made on either side of the issue of innate equality or innate inequality of the races as they exist today.

Since there has been no method yet devised to measure the innate potential of individuals at the moment of conception, much less the innate potential of races at the dawn of the human species, the prospect of a definitive answer to the question of the relationship of race and innate mental ability seems remote, if possible at all. Put differently, the utter certainty of many who have answered this question in one way or in the opposite way, seems premature at best, when all that we have at this point, when it comes to race and intelligence, is a small island of knowledge in a vast sea of the unknown.

However, neither certainty nor precision have been necessary for making practical decisions on many other questions. So there needs to be some assessment of the magnitude of what is in dispute and then some assessment of how the evidence bears on that practical question. The genetic determinists of the late 19th and early 20th centuries asserted not merely that there were differences in the average mental capacity of different races, but also that these differences were of a magnitude sufficient to make it urgent to at least reduce the reproduction of some races, as people like Margaret Sanger and Madison Grant suggested, or even to promote the gradual extinction of an inferior race, as Sir Francis Galton advocated the mental test scores of that era, which seemed to support not merely a difference in intellectual capacity between races, but a difference of a sufficient magnitude to make drastic actions advisable, have since then been shown empirically to be far from having the permanence that was once assumed.

Both the magnitude and the permanence of racial differences on mental tests have been undermined by later empirical research. Quite aside from questions about the validity of such tests as regards magnitude, Professor Arthur R. Jensen of the University of California at Berkeley, whose research, published in 1969 reopened the question of racial differences in mental capacity and set off a storm of controversy, provided an insight that is especially salient since he has been prominent, if not preeminent, among contemporaries on the side of hereditary theories of intelligence.

When I worked in a psychological clinic, I had to give individual intelligence tests to a variety of children, a good many of whom came from an impoverished background. Usually I felt these children were really brighter than their IQ would indicate. They often appeared inhibited in their responsiveness in the testing situation on their first visit to my office, and when this was the case, I usually had them come in on two to four different days for half hour sessions with me in a play therapy room in which we did nothing more than get better acquainted by playing ball, using finger paints, drawing on the blackboard, making things out of clay, and so forth.

As soon as the child seemed to be completely at home in this setting, I would retest him on a parallel form of the Stanford Benet a boost in IQ of eight to ten points or so was the rule. It rarely failed, but neither was the gain very often much above this. Since eight to ten points is more than half the average IQ difference of 15 points between black and white Americans, the disappearance of that much IQ differential from a simple change of immediate circumstances suggests that the magnitude of what is in question today is not whether some people are capable only of being hewers of wood and drawers of water.

Professor Jensen’s conclusions, on a practical level, are therefore very different from the conclusions of Margaret Sanger, Madison Grant, or Sir Francis Galton in earlier years. Whenever we select a person for some special educational purpose, whether for special instruction in a grade school class for children with learning problems, or for a gifted class with an advanced curriculum, or for college attendance, or for admission to graduate training or a professional school, we are selecting an individual, and we are selecting him and dealing with him as an individual for reasons of his individuality.

Similarly, when we employ someone or promote someone in his occupation, or give some special award or honor to someone for his accomplishments. We are doing this to an individual. The variables of social class, race, and national origin are correlated so imperfectly with any of the valid criteria on which the above decisions should depend, or, for that matter, with any behavioral characteristic, that these background factors are irrelevant as a basis for dealing with individuals as students, as employees, as neighbors.

FurthermorE, since, as far as we know, the full range of human talents is represented in all the major races of man and in all socioeconomic levels, it is unjust to allow the mere fact of an individual’s racial or social background to affect the treatment accorded to him. Nor was Arthur R. Jensen as confident as the writers of the progressive era had been about the meaning of a mental test score.

Professor Jensen said he had very little confidence in a single test score, especially if it is the child’s first test, and more especially if the child is from a poor background and of a different race from the examiner. He also acknowledged the possible effect of home environment. Professor Jensen pointed out that three out of four Negroes failing the Armed Forces qualification test come from families of four or more children.

In other words, he saw that more than race was involved. Jensen’s article, which renewed a controversy that has since lasted for decades, was titled, how much Can We Boost IQ and Scholastic Achievement? His answer, long since lost in the storms of controversies that followed, was that scholastic achievement could be much improved by different teaching methods, but that these different teaching methods were not likely to change IQ scores much.

Far from concluding that lower IQ groups were not educable, Jensen said one of the great and relatively untapped reservoirs of mental ability in the disadvantaged, it appears from our research, is the basic ability to learn. We can do more to marshal this strength for educational purposes. He argued for educational reforms, saying that scholastic performance, the acquisition of the basic skills, can be boosted much more, at least in the early years, than can the IQ, and that among the disadvantaged there are high school students who have failed to learn basic skills, which they could easily have learned many years earlier if taught in different ways.

As someone writing against a later orthodoxy, one in which only such non genetic factors as test bias and social environment were acceptable as factors behind racial differences in IQ scores, Jensen confronted not only opposing beliefs but also a dogmatism about those beliefs. Reminiscent of the opposite dogmatism of genetic determinists of an earlier time, Professor Jensen wrote in 1969, a preordained doctrinaire stance with regard to this issue hinders the achievement of a scientific understanding of the problem.

To rule out of court, so to speak, any reasonable hypotheses on purely ideological grounds is to argue that static ignorance is preferable to increasing our knowledge of reality. Jensen was also concerned with social consequences as well as with questions of scientific findings. He pointed out that Negro middle and upper class families have fewer children than their white counterparts, while Negro lower class families have more, and that these facts have some relationship to intellectual ability, as shown by the disproportionate representation of blacks from large families among those who failed the Armed Forces Qualification test.

He said that current welfare policies, presumably because they subsidized the birth of more children by black lower class families, could lead to negative effects on black educational achievement. Jensen concluded that these welfare policies and the possible consequences of our failure seriously to study these questions may well be viewed by future generations as our society’s greatest injustice to Negro Americans. To argue, as Professor Jensen has, that environment can have detrimental effects on the average heredity endowment of a race is not to say, as Madison Grant did, that race is everything, or to say, as Francis Galton did, that the gradual extinction of an inferior race is the only solution for those races whose intellectual potential must be written off.

Both Grant and Galton argued as if there is some inherent ceiling to the intelligence of some races, not simply that differential survival rates of people of the same race with different IQs can statistically lower the average IQ, even though the IQ range for individuals of that race may go as high as that of other individuals from other races. While controversies about race and IQ focus on explanations for the differences in median IQs among groups, the magnitude of those differences is also crucial.

Research by Professor James R. Flyn, an American expatriate in New Zealand, concluded that the average IQ of Chinese Americans in 1945 to 1949 was 98. 5, compared to a norm of 100 for whites. Even if we were to arbitrarily assume for the sake of argument, as Professor Flyn did, not, that this difference at that time was due solely to genetics, the magnitude of the difference would hardly justify the kinds of drastic policies advocated by eugenicists.

In reality, the occupational achievements of both Chinese Americans and Japanese Americans exceed those of white Americans with the same IQs. Japanese Americans were found to have occupational achievements equal to that of those whites who had ten points higher IQs than themselves, and Chinese Americans to have occupational achievements equal to those of those whites who had 20 points higher IQs than themselves. In short, even though much research has shown that IQ differences matter for educational, occupational, and other achievements, the magnitude of those differences also matters, and in particular cases, other factors may outweigh IQ differences in determining outcomes.

Incidentally, other IQ studies at different times and places show people of Chinese and Japanese ancestry with higher IQs than whites, though the differences are similarly small in these studies as well. The importance of other factors besides IQ is not a blank check for downplaying or disregarding mental test scores when making employment, college admissions, or other decisions. Although empirical evidence shows that Chinese Americans and Japanese Americans tend to perform better in educational institutions than whites with the same mental test scores as themselves, other empirical evidence shows that blacks tend to perform below the level of those whites with the same test scores as themselves.

Clearly, then, with blacks, as with Chinese and Japanese Americans, other factors besides IQs have a significant influence on actual educational outcomes, even though these other factors operate in a different direction for different groups. None of this means that mental tests, whether IQ tests, college aptitude tests, or others, can be disregarded when it comes to making practical decisions about individuals, even if they do not justify sweeping inferences about genes or discrimination when deciding whom to hire, admit to college, or select for other kinds of endeavors.

The relevant question about tests is what has been the track record of a particular test in predicting subsequent performances? Both absolutely and in comparison with alternative criteria. It is essentially an empirical statistical question rather than a matter of speculation or ideology. The issue is not even whether the particular questions in the test seem plausibly relevant to the endeavor at hand, as even courts of law have misconceived the issue.

If knowing fact a enables you to make predictions about outcome B with a better track record than alternative criteria, then plausibility is no more relevant than it was when wine experts dismissed Professor Orly Aschenfelder’s use of weather statistics to predict wine prices, which predictions turned out to have a better track record than the methods used by wine experts. Even if IQ tests or college admissions tests do not accurately measure the real intelligence of prospective students or employees, however real intelligence might be defined.

The practical question is whether whatever they do measure is correlated with future success in the particular endeavor. Despite numerous claims that mental tests underestimate the real intelligence of blacks, a huge body of research has demonstrated repeatedly that the future scholastic performances of blacks are not underestimated by these tests, which tend, if anything, to predict a slightly higher performance level than that which actually follows. Contrary to the situation with Chinese Americans or Japanese Americans.

While blacks tend to score lower than whites on a variety of aptitude, academic achievement, and job tests, empirical evidence indicates that those whites with the same test scores as blacks have, on average, a track record of higher subsequent performances than blacks. Whether academically or on the job. This includes academic performance in colleges, law schools, and medical schools, and job performance in the civil service and in the Air Force.

Nor is this pattern unique to American blacks. In the Philippines, for example, students from low income and rural backgrounds have not only had lower than average test scores, but have also done worse academically at the University of the Philippines than other students with the same low test scores as themselves. In Indonesia, where men have averaged lower test scores than women, men with the same test scores as women have done poorer academic work than women.

At the University of Indonesia, a long range study by Lewis Terman beginning in 1921 followed children with IQs of 140 and above in their later lives and found that those children who came from homes where the parents were less educated and were from a lower socioeconomic level did not achieve prominence in their own lives as often as other children in the same IQ range who had the further advantage of coming from homes with a higher cultural level.

In short, other factors besides those captured by IQ tests affect performances in various endeavors and affect them differently for different groups. But one cannot just arbitrarily wave test results aside in order to get more demographic representation of racial or other groups with lower test scores as employees, students, or in other contexts. A growing body of empirical data shows that black students mismatched with the particular colleges or universities they attend, fail or drop out more often than other students at those institutions and more often than Black students with the same test scores or other academic qualifications as themselves who attend academic institutions where the other students are on a similar academic level.

The problem is not that these black students are unqualified to be in a college or university. They may be highly qualified to be in some college or university but are mismatched with the particular college or university that has admitted them for the sake of demographic diversity by disregarding test scores and other academic qualifications. A study at MIT, for example, showed that the average black student there had math SAT scores in the top 10% nationwide and in the bottom 10% at MIT.

Nearly one fourth of these extraordinarily high ranking black students failed to graduate from MIT. More generally, students with a given mathematics level succeeded in getting science, technology, engineering, and mathematics degrees more often at academic institutions where the other students were at comparable academic levels. It has been much the same story in law schools. At the Georgetown University Law School, for example, the median test score of black students on the law school aptitude test was at the 75th percentile, hardly unqualified, but that score was lower than the score of any white student admitted to this elite law school.

At the same time, studies at a number of law schools indicate that black students admitted with lower qualifications than other students not only do less well academically while in law school, but fail the bar examination more often than either the white students at their law school or black students with the same academic qualifications as themselves who attend law schools where the other students have academic qualifications similar to their own.

In short, ignoring test scores and other academic qualifications when admitting minority students turns minority students with all the qualifications for success into artificially induced failures by mismatching them with the institutions that admit them under lower standards. A common finding among groups with low mental test scores in various countries around the world has been an especial lack of interest and proficiency in answering abstract questions. A study in England, for example, showed that rural working class boys trailed their urban peers more on abstract questions than on other kinds of questions.

In the Hebrides Islands off Scotland, where the average IQ of the Gaelic speaking children was 85, the same as that among blacks in the United States, the Gaelic speaking youngsters did well on informational items but trailed their English speaking peers most on items involving such abstractions as time, logic and other nonverbal factors. In Jamaica, where IQs averaged below normal, the lowest performance was on the least verbal test.

A 1932 study of white children living in isolated mountain communities in the United States showed that they not only had low IQ scores overall, but were especially deficient on questions involving abstract comprehension. Indian children being tested in South Africa were likewise reported as showing a lack of interest in non verbal materials. Lower class youngsters in Venezuela were described as non starters on one of the well known abstract tests used there.

Inhabitants of the Hebrides likewise gave evidence of not being fully oriented towards such questions. Black American soldiers tested during the First World War tended to lapse into inattention and almost into sleep during abstract tests. According to observers, that black white mental test score differences in America are likewise greatest on abstract questions is hardly surprising in view of this common pattern among groups that score low in various countries around the world, regardless of the race of the particular group.

But the fact that low scoring groups tend to do their worst on abstract questions is also contrary to the claim made by some critics of mental tests that group differences in scores on these tests are due primarily to the words used in these tests or to the culturally loaded subjects in the questions. However, an interest in abstractions is itself something characteristic of particular cultures and not of others.

When H. H. Goddard said of the immigrants he tested at Ellis island that they cannot deal with abstractions, he overlooked the possibility that they had no real interest in abstractions. Even if those who take mental tests try to do their best on abstract questions as on other questions, a lifetime of disinterest in such things can mean that their best is not very good, even if that is not due to a lack of innate potential.

If Asian American youngsters were to do their best playing basketball against black American youngsters on a given day, their best might not be nearly as good as the best of youngsters who had spent far more time on this activity before. Similarly, if black youngsters try their best on a test measuring mental skills that they have not spent as much time developing as Asian youngsters have, neither genes nor a biased test is necessary to explain such results.

If there were some group which assiduously pursued intellectual development and yet ended up with low IQs, the case for genetic determinism might be overwhelming, but there seems to be no such group anywhere. If one chooses to call tests that require the mastery of abstractions culturally biased because some cultures put more emphasis on abstractions than others do, that raises fundamental questions about what the tests are for. In a world where the ability to master abstractions is essential in mathematics, science, and other endeavors, the measurement of that ability is not an arbitrary bias.

A culturefree test might be appropriate in a culturefree society, but there are no such societies. Nor is the importance of particular kinds of abilities constant over time. Even in the same endeavors, criteria that might have been suited to selecting individuals to be shepherds or farmers in centuries past may not be adequate for selecting individuals for a different range of occupations today, or even to selecting individuals to be shepherds or farmers today.

In an age of scientific agriculture and scientific animal husbandry, whether or not whatever factors make for high or low mental test scores make these tests a good measure of innate mental potential. What matters from a practical standpoint is whether those factors are important in education, in the economy, and in life. Disregarding test scores in order to get a higher demographic representation of Black students in colleges and universities, for example, has systematically mismatched these students with the particular institutions in which they have been enrolled.

When the top tier colleges and universities accept Black students whose test scores are like those of students in the second tier of academic institutions, then those colleges and universities in the second tier, which now find themselves with a smaller pool of Black applicants whose qualifications are suited to their institutions, are thus left to accept Black students whose test scores are more like those of students in the third tier, and so on down the line.

In short, mismatching at the top tier institutions has a domino effect across the field of academic institutions, leading to far higher rates of academic failure among Black students than among other students. A widely praised book on the effects of affirmative Action in college admissions, the shape of the river by former college presidents William Bowen and Derek Bach, claimed to have refuted this mismatching hypothesis with data showing that black students graduated at higher rates the more selective the school that they attended.

But what would be relevant to testing the mismatching hypothesis is the difference in test scores between black and white students at the same institutions, and this difference has been less at Harvard 95 points on the combined SAT test scores than at Duke 184 points or Rice 271 points. Other data likewise indicate that black students graduate at a higher rate in colleges where their test scores are more similar to those of white students at the same institutions.

As Bowen and Bach themselves say, there has been a much more pronounced narrowing of the black white gap in SAT scores among applicants to the most selective colleges. That the high rate of college dropouts found among black students in general is not as great at institutions where the racial mental test score gap is not as great is a confirmation of the mismatching hypothesis that Bowen and Bach claim to have refuted.

The fact that access to their raw data has been refused to others suggests that the Great praise showered on their book in the media may reflect agreement with its message and its vision rather than a critical examination of its evidence and reasoning, although this was another way in which Professor Jensen differed from early 20th century believers in genetic determinism, since he acknowledged that, as far as we know, the full range of human talents is represented in all the major races of man.

As for that supposed lower intellectual ceiling, among the beaten men from beaten races disdained during the progressive era were Jews, who were later in the forefront of those whose scientific work made the United States the first nuclear power. And Jews have been wholly disproportionately represented among Nobel laureates worldwide. International chess championships have been won by any number of members of another group of beaten men from beaten races, the SLAvs, and the first human being to go into space was a SLAv.

The idea of an intellectual ceiling for particular races seems unsustainable. Whatever might be said of intellectual averages, there have been studies of blacks with IQs significantly above the national average. These studies having lower cutoff IQ scores of 121, 31, and 141 of these studies, turned up a nine year old girl of apparently pure Negro stock with an IQ of 143 on the porteous mazes test, 180 on the OtiS test, and approximately 200 on the Bennett IQ test.

If there is an intelligence ceiling for blacks, and it is up near an IQ of 200, then its practical significance would be wholly different from what was proclaimed by genetic determinists of the Progressive era, who depicted some races as being unfit for survival in any role above that of the proverbial hewers of wood and drawers of water. No one, of course, knows whether there is a racial ceiling on anyone’s IQ, much less what that ceiling might be.

Although the most common and most heated controversies about racial differences in IQ have centered on black and white Americans, the singling out of any given racial or ethnic group for comparison with the national average in any country creates an implication of uniqueness that is belied by empirical facts. Since the national average itself is simply an amalgam of very different IQ levels among a variety of racial, social, regional, and other groups, there is nothing unique about the average black American IQ of 85 compared to a national average of 100 at various times and places.

Other racial or social groups have had very similar IQs. Studies during the era of mass immigration to the United States in the early 20th century often found immigrant children from various countries with average IQs in the survey of studies of Italian American IQs, for example, found their average IQ to be 85 in one study, 84 in three studies, 83 in another study, and 77. 5 in still another study.

A 1926 survey of American IQ studies found median IQs of 85. 6 for Slovaks, 83 for Greeks, 85 for Poles, 78 for Spaniards, and 84 for Portuguese. Similar IQs in the 80s have been found among people living in the Hebrides Islands off Scotland and in White mountaineer communities in the United States in the 1930s, both groups being of Nordic extraction, people who were supposed to be intellectually superior.

According to Madison, Grant and others, a 1962 study of the children of people from India tested in South Africa found them to have a mean IQ of 86. 8, the same as that of African children there. Although mental test pioneer Carl Brigham wrote in 1923 that the army mental tests during the First World War provided an inventory of mental capacity with a scientific basis, in 1930 he recanted his earlier view that low mental test scores among various immigrant groups in the United States reflected low innate intelligence.

He belatedly pointed out in 1930 that many of the immigrant men tested by the army during the First World War were raised in homes where the language spoken was not English. Although Brigham said in his 1923 book that he and other testers had demonstrated the accuracy of the combined scale as a measure of the intelligence of the groups under consideration, he said candidly in his 1930 article that his previous conclusions were, in his own words, without foundation.

For blacks who took those same studies, their very low level of literacy at the time was likewise a factor to be considered, though few commentators took that into account. One sign of that low level of literacy among black soldiers taking the army mental tests and how that affected the results, was that black soldiers were more often able to answer some of the more difficult questions that did not require understanding the meaning of written words than they were able to answer much simpler questions that did.

In many parts of the Army Alpha test used during the First World War, the modal score of black soldiers was zero, derived by subtracting incorrect answers from correct answers in order to neutralize the effect of guessing. But the actual intellectual substance of some of these questions involved only knowing that yes and no were opposites, as were night and day, bitter and sweet, and other similarly extremely easy questions, questions too simple to be missed by anyone who knew what the word opposite meant.

However, in the army beta test given to soldiers who could not read, some of the questions involved looking at pictures of a pile of blocks and determining how many blocks there were, including blocks that were not visible but whose presence had to be inferred and counted from the shape of the piles. Yet fewer than half of the black soldiers received a score of zero on such questions, which were more intellectually demanding but did not require the ability to read and understand words.

Given the very small quantity and very low quality of education received by that generation of blacks, even those who were technically literate were unlikely to have a large vocabulary of written words. So it is hardly surprising that the completely illiterate black soldiers did better on more challenging questions than did blacks with some ability to read. In addition, one section of one of the army tests required information such as the color of sapphires, the location of Cornell University, the profession of Alfred Noyes, and the city in which the Pierce Arrow automobile was manufactured, why blacks would have had any reason to know any of these things at that time is a mystery, and why such questions could be considered measures of either black or white innate intelligence is an even bigger mystery.

But here, as in other very different contexts, statistical data that seemed to fit prevailing preconceptions among intellectuals have been accepted and proclaimed with little or no critical examination. During the Progressive era, one of the strongest arguments advanced for eugenics was that the tendency of people with lower IQs to have larger families would, over time, lead to a decline in the national IQ. But the later research of Professor James R.

Flynn showed that in more than a dozen countries around the world. The average performance on IQ tests rose substantially by one standard deviation or more in a generation or two. Only the fact that IQ tests are repeatedly renormed in order to keep the average IQ at its definitional level of 100 as the average number of questions answered correctly increased has concealed this rise. And only the fact that Professor Flynn went back to the original raw scores revealed the facts which the renorming had concealEd.

Much has been made of the fact that the average IQ among blacks has remained at about 85 over the generations, suggesting that the tests are measuring an unchanging genetic potential. But the apparent permanence of the performance of black Americans on IQ tests is an artifact of the renorming of those tests. The average number of questions answered correctly on IQ tests by blacks in 2002 would have given them an average IQ of 104 by the norms used in 1947 through 1948, which is to say slightly higher than the average performance of Americans in general during the earlier period.

In short, the performances of blacks on IQ tests have risen significantly over time, just as the performances of other people in the United States and in other countries have, even though the renoming of those tests concealed these changes. While the persistence of a gap between blacks and whites in America on IQ tests leads some to conclude that genetic differences are the reason the large changes in IQ test performance by both black and white Americans, as well as by the populations of other whole nations around the world, undermine the notion that IQ tests measure an unchanging genetic potential.

The fervor and persistence of the racial IQ debate cannot be assumed to be a measure of its practical implications, as distinguished from its ideological importance for competing social visions. Anyone with experience teaching in American schools or colleges may well question whether either the average black or white student is working so close to his or her ultimate mental capacity as to make that ultimate capacity a matter of practical concern.

As already noted, even the leading advocate of genetic theories of IQ differences, Professor Arthur R. Jensen, has seen scholastic achievement as amenable to different teaching methods and has treated IQ differences as an overestimate of differences in intelligence between children from lower socioeconomic classes and others. Since concrete capabilities matter much more in the real world than do abstract potentialities, educational outcomes are the practical issue. However much this practical issue has been overshadowed by ideological issues, the leading scholar in the opposing environmentalist school of thought, Professor James R.

Flynn, expressed the narrowness of the practical issues in 2008. The race and IQ debate has raged for almost 40 years. I have been entangled in it for 30 years. It has been a constant and unwelcome companion. Rather like living with an uncongenial spouse from an arranged marriage, it has occupied the time of legions of scholars and laid waste acres of trees. Will we ever see the end of it? At least the debate is entering a new and more sophisticated stage.

Given the relatively high values for Black IQ in infancy and age four, the focus should now be on whatever causes the decline of black IQ compared to white with age. If that can be settled, the main event will be over. Professor Flynn has argued that the culture in which most black Americans grow up has had a negative effect on their intellectual development. He pointed out that the offspring of black and white American soldiers who fathered children with German women during the American occupation of Germany after the Second World War had no such IQ differences as that among black and white children in the United States.

Professor Flynn concluded that the reason for results being different in Germany was that the offspring of black soldiers in Germany grew up in a nation with no black subculture. There is other evidence that the black subculture has a negative effect on intellectual achievement. An empirical study published by the National Bureau of Economic Research found that a higher percentage of black schoolmates has a strong adverse effect on achievement of blacks and, moreover, that the effects are highly concentrated in the upper half of the ability distribution.

In other words, brighter black students do not perform as well in settings where there are many other black students around them. Contrary to the theory that what is needed in educational institutions is some larger critical mass of black students in order to make them feel socially comfortable and thus able to do their best work academically. Yet, the unsubstantiated critical mass theory has flourished from academic journals to Supreme Court briefs.

Another study focusing on the effect of ability grouping on the performances of students in general mentioned among its conclusions, schooling in a homogeneous group of students appears to have a positive effect on high ability students achievements and even stronger effects on the achievements of high ability minority youth. In other words, high ability minority youngsters do better in classes that are intellectually homogeneous rather than racially homogeneous or in which there are many members of their own race.

The negative effects of the black subculture on intellectual development are manifested in other ways as well. A study of high IQ black adults found that they described their childhoods as extremely unhappy more often than other blacks. This study was done long before the current reports of academically striving black students being accused by their peers of acting white. Empirical studies during this later era show a negative correlation between black students’academic achievement and their popularity among other black students.

An opposite pattern was found among white Americans and Asian Americans. In England, lower class whites show a pattern strikingly similar to that among American blacks who resent academically achieving classmates. British physician Theodore Dalrymple reports lower class schoolchildren being beaten up so badly by their lower class classmates as to require hospital treatment simply because they are doing well in school. There is other evidence against the critical mass theory.

In earlier times, from 1892 to 1954, all black Dunbar High School in Washington sent 34 graduates to Anhurst College, usually very few at any given time, and certainly nothing that could be called a critical mass. 74% of those black students graduated from Anhurst, 28% of these graduating as Phi Beta Kappas. Dunbar did not promote a black subculture. As Senator Edward Brooke, one of its alumni, put it, Negro History Week was observed, and in American history they taught about the emancipation of the slaves and the struggle for equality and civil rights, but there was no demand by students for more, no real interest in Africa and its heritage.

We knew about Africa as we knew about Finland. Yet the critical mass theory continues to flourish with no evidence behind it, but with a peer consensus among the intelligentsia, which is apparently sufficient for many. The cultural explanation of black white IQ differences is also consistent with the fact that very young black American children do not lag behind very young white American children on mental tests, but that the gap begins and widens as they grow up.

Research as far back as the 1920s found this pattern, as Oto Kleinberg reported in a 1941 summary. A study by Lacey, for example, showed that the average IQ of colored children dropped steadily from 99 to 87 in the first four school grades, whereas the white IQ remained almost stationary. Wells also noted that Negro children were equal to whites at ages six, seven, and eight, only slightly inferior at ages 910 and eleven, and showed a progressively more marked inferiority from the ages of twelve to 16.

Professor Jensen offers an alternative genetic explanation for this pattern, but a similar pattern was also found among Low IQ European immigrant groups in studies in 1916 to 1920 and among white American children in isolated mountain communities studied in 1930 and 1940. So it is not a racial peculiarity in a genetic sense. Professor Flyn’s explanation of this same pattern is consistent with the data cited by Kleinberg, but these data are completely inconsistent with the prevailing multiculturalists’doctrine that all cultures are equal.

Flyn’s cultural explanation of black white differences in IQ is also consistent with the otherwise puzzling anomaly that the mental test scores of white soldiers from various Southern states during the First World War were lower than the mental test scores of black soldiers from various northern states at that time. Striking differences between the regional cultures of the south and the north in times past have been noted by many, including Alexis de Tocqueville, Frederick Law Olmstead and Hinton Helper in the 19th century, and Gunnar Mir Dahl in the 20th century.

Moreover, those differences went back for centuries, when similar differences existed in different regions of Britain among people who would later settle in the American south and others who would later settle in New England. Some of these cultural differences have been detailed in cracker culture by Grady McLiney and in Albion seed by David Hackett Fisher, as well as in My book Black Rednecks and White Liberals. The fact that whites who came out of that Southern culture scored lower on mental tests than Northern whites as well as whites from some Southern states.

Scoring lower than blacks from some Northern states is much more difficult to reconcile with genetic theories than with cultural explanations. In fact, neither of the two main explanations of mental test score differences by the 20th century, intelligentsia, genetic differences, or racial discrimination, can account for white Southerners scoring low on the army mental tests in the First World War. But the cultural explanation is consistent with both blacks and Southern whites scoring low on these tests at that time.

Much has changed in the south and later generations, and especially in the latter decades of the 20th century, in part as a result of interregional migrations, which have changed the demographic and cultural makeup of the south, perhaps more so than other regions of the country. However, as late as the middle of the 20th century, most blacks in America had been born in the Old south, even when they lived in the North.

So the culture of the south, which ConnoR Murdal saw as common to both blacks and whites born in that region, lived on in black ghettos across the country. Many features of that culture have continued to live on today, often insulated from change by being regarded as a sacrosanct part of black culture and identity. There is another striking phenomenon which cannot be explained by either the hereditary or the environmental theory of IQ differences as heredity and environment are usually conceived.

That is, the fact that females are several times as numerous as males among blacks with high IQs, despite the fact that black males and black females inherit the same genes and are raised in the same homes and neighborhoods. Yet a cultural explanation seems more consistent with these findings as well. Since the particular culture in which most blacks have lived for centuries, like the culture of white Southerners in the past, has emphasized especially macho roles for males, it is hardly surprising if such a culture inhibited the intellectual development of both blacks and whites, especially males, in the south, there may be another, but different environmental reason for the male female differences in IQs among blacks.

There is evidence that females in general are less affected by environmental disadvantages of various sorts than our males. This possibility is independent of the peculiarities of the culture of the south, which would apply to other groups with a very different culture but who have low IQs for other reasons. Which factor carries more weight is hard to determine. Since there was no mass mental testing of white southern females during the era when there was mass mental testing of white southern males in the US army, we have no way to know whether there was a similar IQ difference between the sexes in the white southern population at that time.

However, there are data on sex differences between males and females among Jews back during the early 20th century when Jews scored below average on mental tests. In that era, Jewish girls scored higher than Jewish boys on mental tests. Further evidence that the male female difference in IQs among blacks is cultural is that black orphans raised by white families show no such female superiority in IQS. In addition to both sexes having higher average IQs than other black children, it should also be noted that the male female difference on average IQs among blacks is only a few points, but due to the characteristics of a bell curve, a small difference in average IQs translates into a large difference in male female representation at high IQ levels.

Since these high IQ levels are common among students at elite colleges and among people in elite occupations, their impact on demographic representation in such conspicuous places can be considerable. There is other evidence that environment cannot be usefully defined solely in terms of current gross external circumstances, such as income levels or even levels of education. More important, environment cannot be defined solely in terms of surrounding circumstances at a given time.

During the era of mass immigration to the United States, for example, it was common for Italian and Jewish children to be raised in similar low income neighborhoods and to sit side by side in the same classrooms. Yet the Jewish children began to improve educationally before the Italian children, who were mostly the offspring of southern Italian parents. Nor was this at all surprising in light of different cultural attitudes that prevailed among Jews and among southern Italians long before these children were born.

Even uneducated Jews respected education, while the imposition of compulsory education in southern Italy was not only resisted but evaded and in places even led to riots and the burning of schoolhouses. However similar the immediate circumstances of Italian and Jewish schoolchildren were on the Lower east side of New York, each trailed the long shadow of the cultural history and tradition in which they were raised, and those histories and traditions were very different just as the preferences of progressive era intellectuals for genetic explanations of group differences led them to give little attention to cultural explanations of intergroup differences in educational achievement, so the preferences of intellectuals in the second half of the 20th century for external social explanations, racial segregation, and or discrimination in schools being prominent, led them to likewise overlook cultural explanations.

But research on a school in a large metropolitan area in the north from 1932 through 1953 found IQ differences between Jewish and Italian children attending that school to be as persistent over the years as black white IQ differences in racially segregated schools in the south and IQ differences between Jewish and Puerto Rican youngsters in that same school to be not only as persistent but as large as IQ differences between black and white youngsters attending different racially segregated schools.

In the Jim Crow era South, there were similar IQ differences among Mexican American and Japanese American youngsters living in the same school district out west at a place and time where there was little occupational difference among their parents. Cultural differences with educational consequences are not peculiar to the United States. When Maori students, admitted under preferential policies at New Zealand’s University of Auckland, fail to show up for tutorials as often as other students, their academic failures cannot be attributed automatically to institutional racism or to not having enough role models, not if the purpose is to advance Maoris rather than to protect a vision.

It should be noted that an internal explanation of racial differences, even if it is cultural rather than genetic, deprives intellectuals of a moral melodrama and the opportunity that presents to be on the side of the angels against the forces of evil. There are, of course, times to take moral stands on particular issues, but that is very different from saying that issues in general or racial issues in particular are to be automatically conceived in ways that create a moral melodrama.

Yet internal explanations of economic outcome differences among Americans have become so taboo that it was literally front page news in the New York Times when a conference was held on the possibility that a culture of poverty existed and that this culture helped explain disparate economic and other outcomes among the poor in general or blacks in particular. Near the end of the 20th century, another firestorm among the intelligentsia was ignited by the publication of a major study of intelligence testing in general and the social implications of its results by Richard J.

Hearnstein and Charles Murray in their book the Bell Curve. Although most of the data and analysis in this book dealt with samples of white Americans, its two chapters on ethnic differences in mental test scores dominated discussions of the book and especially attacks on the book. Yet one of the most important and most ignored statements in the Bell curve appears there completely italicized. That a trait is genetically transmitted in individuals does not mean that group differences in that trait are also genetic in origin.

As an example of that principle, it is known that differences in height among individuals are due mostly to genetics. But the difference in height between the people of North Korea and South Korea cannot be explained that way because North Koreans were not shorter than South Koreans before. Drastic differences in living standards between the two halves of Korea began with that country’s partitioning after the Second World War, with North Korea being run by a draconian dictatorship that left its people in dire poverty.

So although genetics may explain most differences in height among most individuals and groups, it cannot explain all differences in height among all groups. Whether there are or have been environmental differences of comparable magnitudes between other groups at various times and places in ways that would affect mental capabilities is a question that is open to empirical investigation. But what the Bell Curve says about the relative effects of heredity and environment on intergroup differences is that there is simply no foregone conclusion either way, which is the opposite of what was said by most of the intelligentsia in either the progressive era or the later liberal and multicultural eras.

While the Bell Curve says that the instability of test scores across generations should caution against taking the current ethnic differences as etched in stone, it also refuses to accept the arguments of those who deny that genes have anything to do with group differences, a much more ambitious proposition. Authors Hernstein and Murray declared themselves resolutely agnostic on the relative weight of heredity and environment in ethnic differences in cognitive abilities, because the evidence does not yet justify an estimate saying that existing evidence is inadequate to reach sweeping conclusions on a complex question like the existence or non existence of differences in innate mental potential among races might not seem to be something to stir heated controversies unless someone can point to definitive evidence one way or the other, which no one has.

Even if such definitive evidence were possible, its practical effect would be questionable given the limited magnitude of the differences in scientific dispute today. If science were to prove, for example, that the innate mental potential of blacks is 5% more than that of whites, of what practical value would that be except to alert us to an even greater waste of potential than we might have thought? But that would tell us nothing about how to stop this waste.

Moreover, the practical relevance of concerns about the limits of mental potential seem questionable when it is by no means clear that either black or white American students are operating anywhere close to those limits. Nevertheless, the Bell curve has been widely treated in the media and even among many academics as if it were just a restatement of the arguments of people like Madison Grant, despite the fact that one, only two of its 22 chapters deal with ethnic differences, and two, their conclusions as to both facts and policies are as different from those of the progressive era as from those of the later liberal and multicultural eras.

Like James R. Flyn, Hernstein and Murray mention the fact that the children of black and white soldiers on occupation duty in Germany after the Second World War do not show the same IQ differences found between black and white children in the United States. Though Hernstein and Murray do not discuss it at length or offer any explanation, it is simply part of a general presentation of evidence on both sides of the issue in a book that refuses to pretend that current knowledge permits a definitive answer that would validate the racial views prevailing among intellectuals in either the progressive era or the later eras.

Whatever the merits or demerits of the Bell Curve in general, neither seems to explain the heated reactions it is provoked. Perhaps the fact that Hernstein and Murray publicly discussed the taboo subject of race and IQ at all, and did so without repeating the prevailing social pieties, was what offended many, including many who never read the book. The authors of the Bell Curve also did not share the prevailing optimism among people who see an environmental explanation of intergroup differences in cognitive ability as showing such differences to be readily amenable to enlightened social policies.

Hernstein and Murray pointed out that environmental differences among groups are passed on from parents to children, just like genetic differences, so their conception of environment is clearly not limited to current surrounding socioeconomic conditions but includes the cultural heritage as well. Moreover, they did not see the mental tests, which convey unwelcome news about the intergroup differences in current mental capabilities, as being the cause of those differences or due to culture bias in the tests themselves.

Just as Franz Boaz had to argue against the dogmatism of the prevailing vision of race among the progressives in the 1920s in order to get his empirical evidence to the contrary even considered so, the authors of the Bell Curve have had to do the same in a later and supposedly more enlightened time. Even being agnostic about ultimate answers to the very complex questions that they explored was not enough to save them from the wrath of those whose social vision and agenda they undermined in an all too familiar pattern.

The analysis and evidence in the Bell Curve were often sidestepped by critics who instead attacked its authors as people with unworthy motives. John B. Judas of the New Republic dismissed the Bell Curve as a combination of bigotry and of metaphysics using linguistic ledger domain. Michael Lind of Harper’s Magazine called it part of an astonishing legitimation of a body of racialist pseudoscience representing a right wing backlash and covert appeals to racial resentments on the part of white Americans.

Time magazine called the book a work of dubious premises and toxic conclusions. Such arguments without arguments were not confined to the media, but were also used by academics, including a number of well known Harvard professors. Professor Randall Kennedy, for example, declared that Hernstein and Murray were bankrolled by wealthy supporters of right wing reaction, as if large scale research projects of all sorts, including those at Harvard, are not bankrolled by somebody.

And more fundamentally, as if an arbitrary characterization of those who financed the research says anything about the validity or lack of validity of the work itself. Professor Stephen J. Gould depicted Hernstein and Murray as promoting anachronistic social Darwinism and a manifesto of conservative ideology. Professor Henry Lewis Gates said that the most pernicious aspect of Murray and Hernstein’s dismissal of the role of environment is the implication that social programs to advance blacks are futile.

Though Professor Gates did not quote anything from the bell curve to substantiate this claim, Professor Nathan Glaser likewise questioned the motivations of the authors and concluded that even if Hearnstein and Murray were correct in saying that currently prevailing beliefs are based on an untruth, I ask myself whether the untruth is not better for American society than the truth. By falsely portraying the authors of the Bell curve as genetic determinists and then offering little besides vituperation against them, intellectuals may inadvertently promote the false conclusion that there is no serious argument or evidence against genetic determinism with certainty remote and the magnitudes now in dispute of questionable social consequence.

The ferocity of the attacks on those who deviate from the prevailing orthodoxy may signal little more than the sanctification. Systemic racism requires contributions from us all, especially those of us who haven’t experienced it ourselves. Now, I’ve been saying this for a while now. I’m going to keep saying it because I think it’s important. We white Americans need to do a better job of listening. When African Americans talk about the seen and unseen barriers you face every day, we need to recognize our privilege.

Recognize our privilege smile Though your heart is aching smile Even though it’s breaking when there are cloud in the sky you’ll get bound if you smile to your fear and sorrow smile and maybe tomorrow land that life is still worthwhile if you just now recognize our privilege recognize our privilege and practice humility rather than assume that our experiences are everyone’s experiences. We all need to try, as best we can, walk in one another’s shoes to imagine what it would be like to sit our son or daughter down and have a talk about how carefully they need to act around the police because the slightest wrong rule could get them hurt or even killed.

Down goes Fraser. He got the cone on his head. Just white supremacist theory that Jews are driving for, quote, open borders to replace. To commit white gEnocide, as they call it, to replace America as it looks today, with Muslims and Mexicans and other people. Jews are the ones who want to welcome refugees, because it’s a conspiracy. And the truth is that, yes, there are Jews in Pittsburgh who are working to resettle refugees.

That is true. White Americans who feel that they’re losing their country, they’re losing ownership of the country, and they’re mean. We are becoming more diverse, more multicultural, and they are. In the end, they are not the future. In the end, the power they still have will go away. That we’re witnessing the end of white America as we know it. The question is, how long and how expensive will the funeral be? BROwn people and black people and Muslims and immigrants are coming to replace our white civilization.

And the Jews job is basically to pass as a white person. But in fact, do the biding of these people that we. There are many people who are biologically and even halakically Jewish. That is to say, they are Jewish. They brainwashed people to subscribe to the notion that most desirable utopian reality that could be hoped for in human affairs would be a complete admixture of the nations, of the ethnic groups, and of the cultures.

It’s a kind of utopia. Just the fact that the whole world will mix up with each other, that in, I don’t know, 70, 80 years, there will be no white people anymore, only cappuccino colored. Look, that’s the only way. This is only solution. But when the diversity becomes so extreme that you have almost, like, Balkanized groups, that there are no actual traditional communities, all the traditional communities are outnumbered completely by newcomers, and the newcomers keep on and on, rolling in.

It has a very alienating effect. Folks like me, who were Caucasian, of European descent, for the first time in 2017, will be in an absolute minority in the United States of America. Absolute minority. What has happened to our capital city? Under the watch of these sorts of people, including Birmingham, places like Hansworth are 97%, 98%, 99% in Inner Birmingham. Non white. They’ve all gone. They’ve gone to Kingstanding.

They’ve gone to Terry Bar, they’ve gone to Erlington, they’ve got out to these other areas. Why have they gone? Because they don’t want to remain, that’s why. They’ve been passively and semi democratically, ethnically cleansed. That’s what’s happened amongst Brahmajan people in the middle of our country, in the middle of England. They talk about some of these districts in the centre of Birmingham, the centre of Wilbur Hampton, as the occupied territories.

The occupied territories is a term Palestinians use, but this is a term that English people are using about their own cities. Everything that you take for granted here. Thank you, white man. Thank you, Whitey. Right, and we’re getting pushed around, shamed. If you’re proud of your history, you’re doxed, you get a death threat, really. And this is when we’re 65%. What’s the country going to look like when we’re 42%? And it’s your kids, by the way, that’s your children.

Those are your babies in school. You’re not seeing it now, but the newborns now are half non white, half white. So when your children are in school, they’re in elementary school, they’re in high school, and they’re in the minority, and this is the way the country is now. What is that going to look like? Is that going to be a good quality of life for them? Is that a future that you want for them? Or do you really believe that these other groups are going to be as benevolent to a white minority as we have been to them? Do you think that’s going to happen? I think we’ve been pretty benevolent under the circumstances.

These people come here, we give them welfare, we give them Social Security, we give them an education, we give them health care, and we’re nice to them, we give them affirmative action, take our place in school and everything, and, hey, take an Oscar while you’re at it. Take a goodie bag full of all of our inheritance. I think we’re very good to them. I don’t think that’s going to be reciprocated in 20 or 30 years.

And it’s very telling. These people have no problem, they really don’t, with racism, they have no problem with slavery, they have no problem with colonialism, they have a problem when it’s the white man doing it to somebody else. They see it in racial terms, because when they look at what’s happening to the white man and we say, our culture is dying, our people are dying, our country is going away, we’re not going to exist in so many years.

They say, yeah, remember when you did that to us? So what does that expression really mean? It means, I don’t care about people getting eliminated. I don’t care about racial oppression, subjugation, genocide. I care when it happens to my own. I don’t care when it happens to you. So when they say, oh, what the white man did was really wrong, they don’t mean it’s wrong intrinsically. They don’t mean that it was wrong that we exerted ourselves on the world.

They mean it was wrong that one group did it to their group. But when their group does it to us, they see that as justified. They see that as a righteous vengeance. Even though we didn’t perpetrate it, they see it as totally justified. Pluralism and minorities having rights and peace and nonaggression and all this other stuff we’re the only ones really concerned about. That’s it. Bad as fuck, bro.

Today, this country is built for white people, by white people. And no matter how much we fuck shit up, it ain’t never gonna change off. Fuck y’all up. Don’t mind. Matter of fact, we got a two for one rule, nigga. One of ours, two, or yours. Innocent motherfuckers dying because y’all big ass niggas don’t want none. There’s more of us for you, Dick. It shall day. According to the National Crime Victimization Survey, in 2010, 62 593 blacks were the victims of white violence.

During that same year, 320,082 whites were the victims of black violence. That’s five times as many violent attacks. But that number is misleading since the black and white populations are not the same size. When 38 million black AmericANs commit five times as many violent crimes on 197,000,000 whites as they receive, what you discover is that black perpetrators violently assault white victims 25 times more frequently. And when it comes to a specific kind of violent crime, aggravated assault, the number of black on white crimes is 200 times higher than white on black.

You. I think that we should just fucking kill all you motherfuckers. It. But anyways, as I was saying, if we really want a change in this world, we have to kill white people. We have to start killing them. Otherwise, there will be no change at all. They will continue to do what they do, and they will be entitled about it and spoil. We have to kill them. I can’t stress that enough.

Like, we need to start interbreeding with their women, fucking their women, having as many children as possible so we can interbreed into their families and get our race going. Mitch McConnell, we have to get him out of the fucking Senate because he is the epitome of white people. Same with Trump. They lie, they use their hypocrisy and they’re terrible fucking people. I just, I’m really at this point with white people.

Like, I just, we really need to fucking get rid of, you know, get them out of our fucking country. They’re not even fucking from here to fucking begin with. They’re fucking from some other fucking place, and then they come here and try to act like it’s theirs. This is why we need to kill them. If anybody’s serious about this shit, I think I’m going to start a group on having talks about how they’re privileged and how they get away with everything.

So fuck you, motherfuckers. And it’s on SA. I know that the white people know that we are going to come up with a solution to the problem. I know it because they have retina scans, they have what they call racial profiling, DNA banks, and they’re monitoring our people to try to prevent the one person from coming up with the one idea. And the one idea is how we are going to exterminate white people, because that, in my estimation, is the only conclusion I have come to.

We have to exterminate white people off of the face of the planet to solve this problem. Now, I don’t care whether you clap or not, but I’m saying to you that we need to solve this problem because they are going to kill us. And I will leave on that. So we have to just set up our own system and stop playing and get very serious and not be diverted from coming up with a solution to the problem.

And the problem on the planet is white people. Um. Be hard to follow that one. Touchdown. Text down. Wrong person. Wrong person. There y’all go. Defect. That’s right. That’s right. Ten. Punch him. Punch him. Punch him. Duty. Punch him. Don’t think. Um. Shut up, man. We beat up this little kid like you. I’m you. Put on the ground. Sam. Sam. Ram. Ram. Ram. Critical point in history. Give black people their rights or we will burn this country to ashes.

I don’t see no white militia. So to the boogie boys, the three percenters, and all the rest of you scared ass redneck. We here. Where the fuck you at? We in your house. Let’s go. NFAC, motherfucker. Worst nightmare. Go ahead. Real life military for a minute. What are you. I just told you what I was. What are you in question. Everywhere you go, you invade, steal, rape, Bob and kill it.

Then you steal people’s culture. Do you have the nerd to have an attitude about it? What about reparations? Thank you. Of course not. What you did what the anti feeding did. Like Yamah. Do you know that black men account for 6% of the US population, yet account for 42% of all police deaths? So they’re 42% of all cop killers are black men despite them being only 6% of the US population.

It. Okay. Do me a favor, come over here behind your back. Take your hands. I got. Keep the Taser on. Get the fuck out of your background. It. Yeah, but I think you’re doing no Alapami. Make it open. If I fight in the four minutes and. Yeah, you know what I mean? After all of Bishop, Ram Sa, everything. Yeah, without fucking water. Here’s Ram. It’s. You better be a bit.

And I might be highlighting it. Yeah, I slap the fuck out. Kill them guy. You talking just me. Just. Man, why move by one guy? Better not. Better mad. Oh, my God. Are you retired, boy? You’re shanking. You’re shanking this team. Look at the floor. Oh, yeah. Stay away with cheese, nigga. Do it, do it, do it. Oh, shit. Oh, shit. Oh, shit. Yes. That nickel, it was this nigga, bro.

You better go help your homie. Your voice. See my number? Dama. Oh, who, nigga? Don’t touch me, nigga. Don’t touch me, nigga. Don’t touch me, nigga. Don’t. Quit touching me, nigga. Yeah, don’t bitches hurt, nigga. Don’t bitches hurt, nigga. Sam, 67 years old, bro. Like, come on, man. Coughing bitch. Go laying a coffee. Kill yourself. I said you ain’t gotta everything, bro. Give it to him, nigga. Give it to him, nigga.

Run your shit, niggas. Bro. What do you want? I’ll give you somebody else. What you got? Hey, what you got, nigga? You got money? What you got? You got money, nigga? What’s your father also? Ten. Don’t know more. Timo Sam sa joke team from this ain’t no joke team, blood. Like, don’t. You can’t. Hey, go me. Don’t get them up to me. All right, Mark. Oh, yeah, they got to get on his.

Oh, Lord. Oh, this boy. Oh, my God. Why are you doing this to the stop? Oh, my God. What the bullshit right here? What the fuck? You number 54, Joy. Looking at your thing without it. But still my door deal. Costo Cola. Ella. Was there one day. What? Bring him again. Bring him again. Oh, dear. Oh, yeah. Make out the measuring them will be nothing but love. Make them wait.

You wait. Wake the fuck up, bitch. Nine guys I know. Y’all probably put some dick in that mouth, man. I’m gonna take a credit card. Yeah. What the for you out of ten, right? I’m gonna get a bill. Get a double. Leave me alone. Please. Popping on that shit. I don’t even know you. Please leave. Right? You have a heart. You seem trouble, bitch. You see? Please leave me alone.

Bitch, where are you from, bitch? Please leave me alone. Please, leave me alone. Please leave me alone. Stop. Leave me alone. Leave Me alone. Somebody out there’s. Oh, yeah, I’m a guess. What it? That it? Oh, shit. They got this diamond. Diamond. Damien O’Rourke and his family say this violent fight was unprovoked. They were kicking me and punching me in the face. They weren’t aiming for men. They’ll step in the face.

Damien and his family just moved to the area, thinking it’d be a nice place to live. We don’t know what we’re going to do now because we can’t even let our kid go out there and play. Risha Price says she got the call Saturday afternoon saying Damien was badly beaten just blocks away from their home. When she reached her 13 year old son, her heart broke. This is what she saw.

Sam It’s a great disquiet in all of our people about the radical and manifest changes that are happening. They look around and they think, what’s it going to be like in 50 years, in 100 years, in 150 years of which will be reduced to a third of the population, to 20% in 180 years time? What will happen to our culture then when we have to play the minority game, that if anyone makes the slightest tangential criticism of it, we stick up our hand and say they’re incorrect.

They’re incorrect. We want redress and this sort of thing, but to play all those games in our own country, that is ours. But the truth is, when we fought in wars in the past, when we conquered large stretches of the earth in the past, we didn’t have tolerance in our hearts. We had glory and strength and heroic courage and racial feeling. That’s what we had. Let’s talk about what we’re doing to white people.

This video has gone super viral, and I’m sure there’s a reason why. So let’s talk about it. Younger, tall with the Today we’re going to react to a mega viral video by Charlie Chon. This got 3. 8 million views titled what are we doing to White people? You guys have been requesting that I react to this. I have not seen it yet. So this is going to be a completely just blind reaction to what he says in this video.

Let’s hear it. There’s been something going on for a while now that we’re being told not to notice more to the point that we’re asking white people not only to ignore, but to accept the rising tide of racial hatred against white people. In the past decade, there has been a noticeable cultural shift in what constitutes acceptable speech as it relates to white people. Back when I was a kid, in the early two thousand s, the mainstream American culture preached about respecting each other’s differences and not seeing color.

Nowadays we say that not seeing color is racism, that you must see color. But the more I see how things are unfolding, the more I’m convinced that this is wrong. Back then, saying something offhanded about white people were seen as not appropriate, just as it would be to say something offhanded about people of any other race. But that soon gave away to our current times, in which there exists virtually no limit to what racial minorities can and do say about white people.

This is a realization that I went through a while back too, and you guys know this from my story of realizing, oh, maybe leftism and wokism is not for me, that you really can say or do anything to a white person without repercussion. And they have certainly fallen below on the hierarchy as far as being concerned about racial hatred or bigotry. You can direct all of your racial hatred and bigotry towards white people and virtually nothing will be done about it.

And he talks about this idea of race neutrality versus seeing race all the time. The colorblind future is, I think, what we should be moving towards because your race says nothing about you. It says nothing about how good of a person you are, how bad of a person you are, your morals, your values, anything. It says nothing about you as a person. Yet we are now pushing this idea that we have to talk about race and that it must constantly be a part of our conversations, and I just reject that.

I think neutrality is going to be the future where we say race has nothing to do with who you are or what you are, and we can look beyond that. I believe this is the natural outgrowth of a perverse ideology that teaches us that everything, every societal ill, is the fault of white people, and that whatever prejudice acts we may inflict upon them does not constitute discrimination. Because we don’t have the power to discriminate.

And alarmingly, this is particularly pronounced in the younger generation. But is it true? Do we not have the power to discriminate? Well, let’s see. First, let’s take a look at the racial hatred at the interpersonal level. In today’s society. It has become somewhat fashionable to think things and say things about and to white people. That would not be acceptable if it was said about any other race. And we’re being taught that this double standard is not wrong, that it is rather a form of empowerment.

They’ll attribute negative experiences that they’ve had with white people to their whiteness. You had an argument in line at the grocery store with a white person. They were acting entitled because they were white. A white driver cut you off when you were driving. They need to check their white privilege. Your actions, your conduct, and your existence, in other words, boil down to your whiteness. And ashamedly. At one point in time, this was how I used to think as well.

And beyond the people in my circle, I noticed that many people of color have this sort of blase attitude, an attitude most particularly pronounced when there are no other white people around. Things are being said not just behind closed doors, but out in the open. Not just between close friends, but between complete strangers. So here’s the thing. This is something that I’ve experienced countless times. So I know that there are other people who are experiencing it, too.

I know it must resonate with at least some of you. The difficulty here is that no matter how many anecdotes I share, they are just that, anecdotes. And people who refuse to believe that this is happening will just chalk it up to my experiences being a fluke. Or worse yet, they’ll say I’m lying. So I’ve compiled some TikTok videos. I want you to take a look at the things that are being said about white people, especially by the younger generation.

The kind of statements people wouldn’t dare say about people of any other race. It’s funny, because if you want to find examples of this sort of stuff, TikTok is probably the best place to go. I mean, it’s a cesspool for racial hatred against white people. We just reacted to TikTok haters on this channel, so you guys can go and check out that video. But a lot of it is just racial hatred being spewed at other people.

And white people in particular are bearing the brunt of it. As I said before, if you want to throw racial hatred at somebody white person is the one to pick because nobody will do anything about it. And it comes from this idea that because maybe white people were favored in history or there was racial bias in history towards people of color, we reconcile that and make up for it by racially discriminating against white people in the present.

And to me, that’s not the answer. The answer is, again, race neutrality. If you are antiracism, if you are antisegregation, then stop perpetuating it. Take a look at what is stunningly in vogue in today’s society and ask yourselves, where does this lead to? Years down the line, you have a token white and you’re hanging out with your friend, group of color. You need to ask permission from everybody in the group to bring your white friend.

Don’t just bring them. I might not be in the mood to deal with white shenanigans that day. Dude, imagine saying, if you have your token black friend of the group, you need to ask all the other white people in your group if it’s okay to bring that black friend because they might not be up for these black shenanigans. Wow. That’s all I’m saying. And another thing, it feeds into their ego.

Don’t let them think they’re a good white person. Accomplices ask, how can they support black and indigenous people of color? And sometimes I really don’t know what to say. But here’s one easy way. Just don’t have baBies. About white American culture. Being grounded is a punishment to them. That’s what they call punishment. The least grounded, least balanced, most destructive race considers being grounded a punishment. Yeah. They also say really violent phrases.

They say things like, kill two birds with 1 st. Why do we have to kill the birds? Why is everything so violent? It’s one’s language and phrases. Reflects one’s nature. I’m losing IQ points. So that new Jeffrey Dahmer movie on Netflix is the perfect example of the sensationalization of white violence. People have a much easier time sympathizing with white criminals than they do with black victims. And people think these shows are harmless.

But they actually contribute to a much bigger issue. It contributes to the viewpoint that white people are less violent than everyone else. And white violence is something to be consumed in media, and that’s it. What is with Caucasian people and their inability to read a room? Like, y’all act like you don’t understand because y’all be the first ones during a conversation about the Holocaust to get so mad when black people be like, you do realize that the original Jewish people were black, right? White people do not need to explain to anybody about us all bleeding red.

Because, baby, you all are the people that need to learn that lesson. Clearly, history shows that you all are the people that like to pillage and eradicate, enslave and oppress. Oh, gosh, tell me you don’t know anything about history without telling me you don’t know anything about history. And it’s so interesting that she’s saying white people need to learn the message that we all bleed red while being blatantly racist in this entire video.

Oh, my gosh. Suppress greatness because you all simply don’t have it right. Here go y’all goblins who don’t even live in the city, which, by the way, the QTip people are the last ones to ever talk about somebody stealing anything. Y’all wouldn’t be in this country had it not been for y’all stealing it. So y’all are more focused on people looting and trying to get necessities and things they need.

And yes, the TV is necessity. Thanks. You feel like you’re better than because people are out here stealing. And you would know, first of all, if you are a male monster, that is how your ancestors got everything from stealing. And that’s a behavior that’s very common among white women. You may have not intended that, but there are many white women who act exactly like you. If you could find it in your heart this holiday season to donate to the discriminated white fund, you’d be helping millions.

Nothing says high protein like cicadas and cheese. Make sure you. And nothing says Caucasity like that right there. What? Caucasity looks like roaming Asian grocery stores like it’s an amusement park. You know, there’s so many examples in this video, and you could probably put together a compilation that just goes on for days of people saying stuff like this. This is just the tip of the iceberg as far as anti white racism.

Oh, anti white racism. People hate to hear that, right? And they’ll say there’s no such thing as being racist towards a white person because they hold all the power. They hold all the privilege. Do you all need more examples? Because this is pretty hefty. This is pretty hefty. And this could go on for days. They’re both white women. We are inherently a danger in spaces for black, Indigenous and other people of color simply by existing.

It’s white cis men who are a part of the far right winged ideology of fascism that is a true threat. And the terrorism to this country. What does this sound like to y’all? Does it sound a little genocidal? Because it does to me. When you’re saying that people are a danger simply by being born, by existing, they’re dangerous to BIPOC, Indigenous, whatever you want to say, then what’s the remedy? If you are a danger simply by existing, not by being a bad person, being a racist person, being a bigot, but simply by being born white, how do you solve a problem of people existing? Just a question, IPOC.

StanD in the street and scream at the top of their lungs, I hate all white people. I want all white people to go, die, die, white devil, you cracker. What did I say? I said genocide. And then this video says BIPOC saying that all white people need to unalive is not racism. Do you see the slippery slope that you exist on? If you allow this rhetoric to continue without calling people out, without saying that it’s wrong, you get ideas like this that white people needing to die is not a racist statement.

I don’t have words. I don’t have words. That’s still not racism. You can’t be racist to white people. It’s impossible. The system is not set up that way. You can insult white people, but it is not racism. Me calling a white person a tub of mayonnaise and like a flower looking ass, that’s not racism. You went all the way to Africa to physically take black people from their homes, shove them in on boats where a lot of them got diseases and died, told them where they could sit on a bus, told them which schools they could go to, which water fountains they could use, which bathrooms they could use, and that’s sugarcoating it.

Those are just turns. I’m not even describing all the disgusting things that happen, and they don’t even want revenge. They are letting you guys skate by asking for equal rights. That’s it. And you’re still saying, never mind the millennial Zoom, but okay, so let’s break down a few other things that said here. You can’t be racist towards white people because racism is a system. False. We’ve talked about this many times on the show.

Racism is not a system. It’s simply thinking that a race is inferior or superior simply by just having that prejudice and that discriminatory mindset. So, yes, you can be racist towards white people. It has nothing to do with powers and systems. And even if it did, black people, people of color, Asians, whatever, have lots of power and lots of privilege, really, by just living in America, but also by being afforded preferential treatment in all of our institutions, although Asians are not really getting the fair end of that treatment there.

It’s mainly black and Hispanic people. But I digress. There’s plenty of power and privilege to be held by African Americans, Hispanic people, Native Americans in this country. So let’s go ahead and set that aside. Now. She says that white people did all of this stuff in history, and now all that we’re asking for is equal rights. I mean, all of these videos would say differently. All of the preferential treatment, the affirmative action, the black owned categories, all of this different stuff would say something different.

The riots in the streets would say something different. Now, that’s not all black people are all leftist activists, but it is quite a few of them who believe that. There are many who believe that white people are inherently racist. And there seems to be this inability with people who think like this to separate history from the present day. The white people who are living right now, for the most part, were not the ones who were contributing to Jim Crow.

They were not the ones who were holding back the civil rights of black people. They certainly were not the ones who were enslaving black people. So why is it that you feel the need to punish white people in the present day for things that were done in the past? It does not make sense. Do you know the countries that punish people for the things that their ancestors did? North Korea, the Soviet Union back in its heyday, China and the CCP.

Is that really who you want to be in line with? Does it really make sense to punish people who are living in the present for things that were done in the past? Not even to mention that many of the white people living right now do not have ancestors that in any way contributed to discrimination and racism. It just makes absolutely no sense. They are not as angry as they should be.

Y’all are getting off easy and you’re still saying no. You. Some people look at that and chalk it up to the grumblings of the powerless. That’s the idea that when you have a power disparity, the less powerful sort of. Has this general society given leeway to complain about the more powerful. The villagers complaining about their king doesn’t have the same ring as the king, making Snydering crude comments about the villagers.

But that’s not what’s going on here. Because although certain segments of our society refuse to believe this even as evidence mount before our very eyes, in one side of the political aisle, people of color actually have greater power than white people. That is the truth. That is not being acknowledged by the people that need to hear it, because this gets in the way of them wielding that power in the way they want, malignantly.

I’ve heard from somewhere that politics is downstream of culture, and I think that is certainly correct. We have a mainstream culture that tells us it’s okay to hold prejudice and hateful view of white people. And our politics is then infused with this energy. And we see active, overt and on the books racial discrimination of white people that those who are perpetuating this hatred is refusing to see as discrimination.

They’ll say, no, this is remediation. These are the same people who are making tenuous arguments that some of our race neutral laws discriminate against people of color. And this is certainly evidence that in one side of the political aisle, people of color have more power than white people. Because if we didn’t have the power, we wouldn’t be able to put into place practices and policies that does this.

That’s what power is. Things like Minneapolis local government agreeing to a contract with the teachers union that says white teachers must be fired first. New York City’s government enacting a policy of having white seniors go to the back of the line on life saving COVID treatment. A college professor that says white people should be killed and facing no repercussions. Cornell University banning white people from rock climbing lessons.

One of many, many instances of liberal colleges doing the utmost. I love that he just has the receipts for all of this. And it should be mentioned that the reason that all of those people are able to make the TikToks that they make and post them publicly with blatant racism is because they have power and because they have privilege. You will not see a white person do the same about any other race.

I don’t know. Aside from what Nick Fuentes, who nobody likes, you will not see a white person do the same because they do not have the power or the privilege to be able to do those things. And most of them don’t want to exercise that power or privilege because they’re not racist, they’re not bigots, these are not the ideas that they hold in their brains. But all of these people are very, very comfortable espousing their racism.

To exclude and ostracize white students. BIPOC only events equal no whites. But they don’t have the guts to say that, even though that is what that is. That’s what makes this different than the Merck grumblings of the common villager. The villagers have surrounded the palace, demanding Mary Antoinette’s head. The power dynamics have shifted. That is a fact. Progressive medialogists do not cover these stories. Some people out there have no idea that this is going on.

But worse, some others out there know but agree with what’s going on. And for those people to convince themselves that this is not racial discrimination, they play mind tricks and word games. They use phrases and talking points like punching up. You can’t be racist to white people. You can’t oppress the oppressor. Meaning I’m acting oppressively, but I’ve designated you as the oppressor. So everything goes. Or Abram X Candy’s infamous words, the only way to remedy past discrimination is current discrimination.

Or when people are things like, what we’re doing to white people is not racism, because racism is prejudice plus power, and we don’t have the power. They use all this mind bending apparatus to dilute themselves into believing what they are doing. Faces no more conjuring. Absolutely. So they’ve safeguarded their own racist opinions. And you know what this leads to? Moral atrocities. That’s what it leads to. When you feed into this delusion that you cannot be racist and you cannot be discriminatory, even though you are doing racist and discriminatory things, guess what? The threshold gets higher and higher and higher for what you’re able to do and justify with your own word games and your mind games that you’re playing, as Charlie talks about in this video.

So let’s see how far this goes if nobody calls it out. And luckily, he’s doing this. And this has been a really great video so far. And there’s a reason it got 3. 8 million views, because a lot of people feel this way, but they’re not saying it out loud, but in the back of their minds, perhaps in their subconscious minds, is racial revenge. We experienced it. You experienced it, too.

See how you like it. And it’s funny, because when they say we experienced it, most of them have not experienced it. Most of them have lived in a free and equal America, but they feel somehow just deeply related to what their ancestors have gone through. And they feel no need to recognize the progress that we have gone through as a country and as just a civilization at large.

No recognition of progress, always this deep, identifying with the struggles of ancestors that they have not experienced themselves. So it really isn’t even. We experienced it now. You experience it, too. It’s people in the past who looked like us experience it now. People who look like the oppressors of the past are going to experience it now that people of color are using our newfound power to act this way and then pretend like none of this is going on leads me to believe that we would have done the same thing that white people did, worry to be in their historical position, because such acts have its roots in human nature, not white people nature.

And one can only imagine what might happen in the coming decades when the demographics of the US will have shifted such that white people will no longer constitute the majority. When the younger generation you’ve just seen have graduated from elite schools and hold positions of power in our institutions, our government, corporations, entertainment, news media and so forth, how they might, in wielding the levers of society, be able to rationalize, using their adult brain, the hatred that was embedded in their minds during their adolescent rut row.

That’s exactly how it happens. Hatred is fueled, and especially in youth. And then the youth grow up and they take on positions of power, and then they’re able to use the hatred that they feel so deep inside to come up with legislation and policy that affects your everyday lives. And you know what Charlie just said there? A lot of people call that what the great Replacement theory. And that’s a boogeyman that white supremacists are using.

Are you going to accuse him of being a white supremacist for calling out what is true, that they will no longer constitute the majority, and that there are minority individuals who have a laundry list of grievances with white people who have done nothing to them that will soon be in positions of power? How do you think that works? What do you think happens in the wake of that? And people laugh when I say, if we continue on this track, in 50 years there’s going to be a civil rights movement for white people.

I stand by that statement. If something is not done to alleviate the division that we’re feeling right now and educate people on why they should not have so much hatred for white people in our current world, the cycle will continue. What we’re seeing is just the beginning. To the white people who are watching, I just want to say you are not an oppressor for refusing to accept an ideology that teaches people to hate you, that teaches you that you are inherently bad, that your children are inherently bad, that you are inherently racist.

No matter what you do or how you think that you need to repent by taking affirmative steps in your life to redress harms that your ancestors may have done, or the racist actions of other white people. In fact, you are not an oppressor, period. You did not choose to be born white, just like any of us did not choose to be born our race. And to ask of you at the individual level, for example, to give your life in service of people of color, to be used as fiscal barriers at protests to give away your house to black people instead of your children, all actual things that have been publicly demanded of white people.

To ask this of you is morally reprehensible collective punishment. You are not under any obligation to carry yourself in any sort of way that others demand of you just because of the color of your skin. This you need to do this, and you need to do that because you benefit from privilege. Thing is bogus. It is just a way for people harboring emotional animus to attack you, to say that the accomplishments you’ve achieved in your life isn’t yours, and to silence you.

It is not you. It is this ideology that is wrong and perverse. It is one cloaked in a shroud of pseudojustice and self righteousness, all the while extreme toxic fumes of racial hatred. It blames all white people for the actions of their ancestors, something you have no control over, while absolving black people of personal responsibility for their own individual actions. By holding that black people commit acts of harm, for example, towards another community, that’s a fault of white supremacy.

White people are controlling them like puppets on the string. It’s a backwards, transgressive ideology. If you don’t have any hate in your heart but want to fight it as a matter of principle, this does not make it racist or bigoted. I can’t imagine how many people need to hear this. And I hope out of the 3. 8 million people that watched it, it really landed on the core audience that needs to hear it.

And it is people, and particularly white people, that are consumed with this idea of white guilt or needing to reconcile the acts of their ancestors. I hope it landed on those ears in particular, because there are so many who are subservient to this belief that they need to do something about what was done in the past and that they need to give away whatever power and privileges they have to other people because of what their possible ancestors did at this point, not even their ancestors, just because they look white.

So I hope it landed on those ears. If you refuse to accept their premise in your head, but are too afraid to voice your opinion, you are neither a coward nor a bad person. If you’re of a liberal bent, but there’s a small corner in your brain telling you as you’re watching this video that perhaps some of this is wrong, listen to your intuition, maybe you think, oh, I agree with most of what the progressive left teaches about racial justice, but just not with some of this disagreeable stuff, only at the extremes.

I’m here to tell you that the rob starts at the core. This racial hatred of white people is a natural outgrowth, part and parcel of an ideology that tempts to indoctrinate us into believing that there is current systemic oppression going on, that all racial disparities we see today is the sole result of oppression by white people. When there are other more plausible explanations to be had that these same people are silencing as impermissible hate speech, they’re telling you, shut up, you’ll take it and you’ll like it.

But contrary to what they’re saying, you don’t have to take that. You can believe that the things that have been done in the past were morally wrong, as well you should, all the while believing that what is currently going on is also wrong, that we’re going backwards, that this is history rhyming with itself, the tables turning in an eye for an eye manner. As the great Muhammad Gandhi once said, an eye for an eye will leave the whole world blind.

But those driven by hatred would sooner gouge everyone’s eyes out. They realize that true victory for people of color would have been having history record that when the power dynamics shifted, we treated white people with the kindness that their forefathers may not have shown our forefathers, but now it will say, when we gained the power, we turned around and started doing some of the same stuff to white people.

Segregation, social ostracization, hatred sanctioned by government and law. That is a very, just profound point, that you have the power right now to do something great and do something that societies before us were not capable of doing. And that is just even the playing field. Let it be. Move forward with neutrality and treat everybody with kindness and respect. But people are choosing not to do that. They are choosing, in fact, to do the very same things that they’re criticizing.

Much like Ibrahimax Kendi said and that we talked about in this video, that we fix past discrimination with current discrimination. When you hear it said out loud like that, for me it goes, wow, there’s no way that that is right. There’s no way that that is the way that we are going to move forward as a progressive society. There’s just no way. But people are, I don’t know, feel enlightened by the idea of just retribution and carrying on what has always been done.

And that is really, really unfortunate. This video is a great synopsis of what’s happening right now. And we’re doing all of this while pretending like we’re doing something valiant. Yep, we’ve missed our bus, but that doesn’t mean that there can’t be a course correction. So to some people of color watching who are engaging in this sort of hatred, whether or not you’re acutely aware, the same people that act like white people as a collective are not people, but rather some pernicious alien force that has come to invade the earth with this video, I implore you to ask yourself, what are we doing to white people? As some people love to say, do better.

I love that ending on do better because that’s so often what they say in response to videos like this. Do better. You need to discriminate. Do better. Be racist. Do better. Fantastic. There’s a reason this video got the views that it got. I think this was a fantastic 16 minutes synopsis of what’s happening right now to white people. And what I think is unfortunate, and I guess I should note, is that it often takes somebody who is of minority status to be able to say these things out loud and be received in this way.

And for people to actually be open to this sort of message, it often has to come from a minority, which is why I think I’ve grown in popularity. People like Candice have grown in popularity. Charlie Chon is probably going to take off after this video. If a white person were to make this very same video titled what Are We Doing to White People? I wonder what the reception would be.

I’m sure a lot of people would feel far more comfortable being blatantly racist in the comments, which just goes to show that what Charlie is talking about in this video is very clear. It’s true, it’s happening, and we need to do better. Guys, what are your thoughts on this video? Leave a comment down below. Had you seen it before and you’ve been wanting me to react? Have you just seen it for the first time now? Let me know your thoughts.

And please, as always, like subscribe, click the notification bell to be notified every single time we post a video for you guys, which is every single day. And let me know, are there other videos like this on the internet that you want me to react to and hear my response? This one was a good one, was a doozy. So, yeah, here’s to more and more people calling out this message and what is in fact happening right now, where we are actively discriminating against people in the name of progress.

.