Posted on 04/24/2016 9:05:52 AM PDT by MinorityRepublican
A few years ago, two economics professors, Quamrul Ashraf and Oded Galor, published a paper, “The Out of Africa Hypothesis, Human Genetic Diversity, and Comparative Economic Development,” that drew inferences about poverty and genetics based on a statistical pattern.
The world’s most genetically diverse countries (using their measure of what counts as genetically diverse) are in sub-Saharan Africa, which is the world’s poorest region. The least genetically diverse countries are in places like Bolivia, which have low incomes but not as low as in that region of Africa. There’s an intermediate level of genetic diversity among the residents of the middle-income and rich countries in Asia, Europe and North America.
Genetic diversity arises from migratory distance of populations from East Africa. Countries in east Africa have the highest genetic diversity because this is where humans evolved. Populations that settled in other parts of the world descend from various subgroups of people who left Africa at different times. Thus, these groups are less varied in their genetic profiles.
Ashraf and Galor put this together and argued that this is “reflecting the trade-off between the beneficial and the detrimental effects of diversity on productivity.” Their argument was that a little bit of genetic diversity is a good thing because “a wider spectrum of traits is more likely to be complementary to the development and successful implementation of advanced technological paradigms,” but if a country is too genetically diverse, its economy will suffer from “reduced cooperation and efficiency.” Thus, they wrote, “the high degree of diversity among African populations and the low degree of diversity among Native American populations have been a detrimental force in the development of those regions.”
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
That is not necessary a bad thing. I've met a couple of Africans here in the States and they're very proper. Industrious too. Quite a contrast from Black Americans.
But rather the problem with Europe is the Islamic Invasion.
Read the book “Guns, Germs, and Steel” by Jared Diamond.
Margaret Sanger and the progressives were ahead of the Nazis...
That probably has something to do with it, but is not a complete explanation. For example, the early Native Americans in what is now Mexico and Central America built advanced civilizations in very lush jungles, where it is difficult to imagine that scarcity was an issue.
Another factor is that Africa seems to be a hotbed for various infectious diseases. When a child becomes deathly ill, the energy his or her body was using for growth (including brain development) is diverted towards trying to stay alive. Even if the kid survives, his brain development might be permanently impaired. Also, malnutrition has an adverse effect on brain development. Without addressing the issues of infectious disease and malnutrition, African children will always be less intelligent, less able to progress towards a more advanced civilization.
Adversity makes you stronger.
I really do not have time for these “Poor Poor Me Bcause I am Black” stories. But I wonder what, if anything they have to say about Japan. Probably the least diverse of any first world country.
I am sure the finding of these two economics professors, Quamrul Ashraf and Oded Galor mainly tells us that Poor Poor Africa’s miseries are all due to the evil White devils.
Economics professors?? PHDs from the Paul Krugman school of victim economics, ya think?
Oh, the rule of law, private property rights, a Bill of Rights in our case, just a few examples. Of course it could be the aftermath of colonialism, which has been over for almost fifty years and was barely a blip in the long history of Africa. And how has Africa fared since the colonizers left? A descent into tribalism and re-primitivism generally speaking. Rhodesia / Zimbabwe? The RSA? The Sudan is back where it was when the Mahdi rose in the late 19th century. And now Africa has to contend with exploitation by the Chinese as well as the white man. What to do, what to do...
“IQ?”
Some of those countries have average IQs in the 50s.
http://www.targetmap.com/viewer.aspx?reportId=2812
The Cro-Magnons won the brains vs. brawn war with the Neanderthals. That long and brutal conflict selected for higher IQ and other qualities, but the Africans did not assist.
Aztecs, Toltecs, Mayans and Incans potentially had the same problem in the “New World”, with regards to banana pickin’.
Still doesn’t explain the near stone age culture/behavior of Sub Saharan Africa. Or even North American Indian Tribes who still had harsh winters. Or Inuit Eskimos who suffered perhaps the worst winters.
Um, average IQ about 70. This leads to low impulse control, lack of ability to plan, propensity toward violence, propensity toward sloth—just off the top of my head.
Hence the need for progressives to ban ddt...
Lack of moving vans
Couldn’t this racial diversity be seen as the effect of an endless cycle of invasion, murder, and rape? Not a good environment for the creation of a stable and prosperous society.
Of course, the impact of Islam in creating those conditions in Africa cannot be ignored.
Yep peoples who's relatives had to adjust and deal cold temperatures in the northern hemisphere had to put more energy into basic survival. This placed a premium on intelligence because the stupid froze or starved to death.
Walter had an article in the past on what stymied Africa from becoming anything less than a third world country. It stemmed from #1 tribalism, #2 the inability to make seaports because of tribalism and #3 no seaports to sail from in meaningful ways. Good thinking.
Neat map-—thanks.
.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.