So I guess the summation of our exchange, and the things upon which we agree, can be; “Wow, there seems to be something about the American Negro that keeps him from integrating into a functional society. I wonder why?” And that puts us back firmly at square one to discuss ad infinitum just what those reasons may be. I am convinced that a much lower than average IQ accounts for the Negro’s lack of success, while you agree that their lower IQ could possibly be a contributing factor but is no more important than many others. Would that be an accurate assessment? Thanks, I’ve enjoyed the interaction.
OK.
I'm far more interested in actual life achievements than IQ numbers. I like to keep in mind what happened in the Harlem Renaissance period, when Harlem was the destination for black immigrants from around the country, attracting both people seeking work from the South, and an educated class who made the area a center of culture, as well as a growing "Negro" middle class.
The remarkable blossoming of Harlem Negro productivity in music, theatre, art, and literature as well as religious and political leadership, rested on a support system of black patrons, black-owned businesses and publications. It was a community with black doctors and pharmacists, black preachers and educators, etc. who themselves contributed to a healthy middle-class milieu in which 90% of the children grew up in homes headed by married parents, and were themselves primed for achievement.
The Harlem Renaissance was a period which showcased the possibilities of a whole people's buried potential.
I'm sure the concurrent eugenics movement, with its prim Sangerites narrowly fixated on questions such as comparative IQ scores, must have been either uninterested in, or perplexed by, this manifestation of Negro creativity. It was an interesting period, both for its its brief brilliance and in the complexities of its decline.