Irony knows bounds: Black Crime Claims Life of Apologist for Black Crime

David Ruenzel knew, better than most, about the white privilege that killed him.

As a writer for the Southern Poverty Law Center, one of this favorite topics was rooting out racism. And how white racism is permanent. White racism is everywhere. And white racism explains everything.

This mantra of the Critical Race Theory and the Southern Poverty Law Center applied to all white people because, even if they were not personally cracking the whips, or breaking the skulls, white people benefitted from a racist system that did all that — and a lot more.

Ruenzel was writing about white privilege for the Southern Poverty Law Center as far back as 1997 — long before it became the rage at college campuses, newsrooms, churches, high schools and even grade schools.

By the time of his death, Ruenzel had accumulated many of the trappings of the white privilege he exposed: The job. The home. The intact family. And most importantly in his case, white privilege endowed Ruenzel with an expectation of safety in the Oakland neighborhood where last week two black people are suspected of killing him.

The Caucasians ended up here with an average IQ of 100. The Mongoloids arrived with an average IQ of about 104. The Negro came here with an average IQ of 85. Why is it so difficult to accept the fact that their low IQ is the reason for their inability to assimilate into a civilized society or even create a functioning society of their own anywhere else on the Earth.

Average IQ doesn't mean everyone of a particular subgroup has that for an IQ, it means statistically that this is the average score.

If IQ was the telling issue here, how does one deal with the fact that of the total of at or below 85 IQ people in the US, 45% of them are white and 32% of them are black? That gives us roughly 13 to 1 (conservative estimate weighted to your side) 85 or below IQ white people for every black one. If IQ was even remotely a significant factor in this then there should at least be a somewhat equivalent crime rate (per 100,000 or other similar metric) between the two groups and I don't believe that is so.

I assert that the only reason that this isn't currently equal or close is that over the ~60 years of great society meddling, the primary target of that meddling was Americas black subset.

I believe that as a target group they are pretty much at the bottom of the barrel for elitist political usefulness and that the effort will switch to concentrate on either the Hispanics, or the general population as a whole.

Black people were "low hanging fruit" as a voting block to be swayed by political largess without alerting the general taxpaying public to a rapid run up in entitlement costs.

Now, there is essentially no effort to hide or mitigate the outrageous expense to provide public welfare, plus, the government schooling system has done a great job in turning out generally low analytical subjects and the percentage of overall population receiving benefits is right at the edge of insuring perpetual reelection of the class distributing the largess.

Remember, it's taken 60 years of focusing on the black community along with the overall ~120 years of progressivism to get us to where we are. The incrementalist creep isn't something an individual signs up for, it takes generations of hammering in sure-to-fail ideas that sound good, and when they fail off to the next. Hammering in abortion, free love, cash assistance for a short time that trends over to perpetual over the years, media pounding racism and differences, clowns like Sharpton and Jackson, etc...

Pre ~1960, north of 70% of black families were nuclear, dad went to work, mom got the kids off to school, bills had to be paid, etc... Now that figure is around 20% (IIRC). That is catastrophic. They didn't just have an IQ collapse to create that disaster, it's been encouraged.

Average IQ doesn't mean everyone of a particular subgroup has that for an IQ

Yeah I'm familiar with the definition of the word "average". While, as you noted, it doesn't mean everybody in the subgroup has that IQ what it DOES mean is that statistically half of the individuals in that group have higher and half have lower IQs. Therefore if an IQ of 85 is average and is considered dull normal/mildly retarded then HALF of the group has an even LOWER IQ, meaning that approximately one half of Negros are mildly to severely retarded! I don't know why this is so hard for people to understand. It's very simple math. To suggest that a group, where half its number are mildly to severely retarded, isn't negatively affected by that fact is almost laughable. The relation between crime rate and IQ is well established and a quick search will provide you with hours of reading.

If IQ was the telling issue here, how does one deal with the fact that of the total of at or below 85 IQ people in the US, 45% of them are white and 32% of them are black?

If you assumed that the population of the U.S. was evenly distributed between blacks and whites then the percentages you provide would be difficult to explain BUT you've failed to note that 72% of the American population is white therefore comprising 45% of the 85 and below IQ group is not surprising and statistically lower than expected. Your figures actually support the facts (imagine that). Blacks comprise just 13% of the general population but represent a very disproportional full third of those with IQs of 85 or less.

If IQ was even remotely a significant factor in this then there should at least be a somewhat equivalent crime rate

There is. The crime rate is proportional to the percentage of the population comprised of a certain IQ range. Again a very simple search will yield volumes of information linking IQ and crime. Percentage-wise more Negros have IQs in the criminal range than whites.

I assert that the only reason that this isn't currently equal or close is that over the ~60 years of great society meddling, the primary target of that meddling was Americas black subset.

I agree that the government hasn't done the Negro any favors, to lay the blame for their plight solely at the feet of government is to ignore glaring facts. Our federal government has had NO effect on any of the many African nations and yet they remain mostly undeveloped with populations having average IQs of between 60 and 70. The low IQ explanation makes far more sense than to blame the condition of the Negro on the Federal government. The truth is not politically correct but it is still the truth.

I agree that the government hasn't done the Negro any favors, to lay the blame for their plight solely at the feet of government is to ignore glaring facts. Our federal government has had NO effect on any of the many African nations and yet they remain mostly undeveloped with populations having average IQs of between 60 and 70. The low IQ explanation makes far more sense than to blame the condition of the Negro on the Federal government. The truth is not politically correct but it is still the truth.

The low IQ correlation does nothing to explain how they went from being within 10-15% of parity and rising with average America before the "great society" and their condition now.
It's actually more correlative to associate the cause of their IQ discrepancy WITH those programs.
One thing I've taken from this discussion... THOUSANDS of people and groups have and are doing studies on this, and everyone has a ****ing agenda on it. One group even took black children with a tested IQ of 83 (average), exposed them to mediated learning whereupon they tested average 97, and the people doing the study dismissed it because that result wasn't good enough to make them PERFECTLY EQUAL!!! ARRRRrrrrrggggggg...
So... How's the fishin' where you are 762X51?

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.