The Husks of Dead Theories

National Review ^ | April 24, 2009 | John Derbyshire

[reaganaut1]

...

The unhappy fact is that different ethnic groups exhibit different profiles of results on tests. Attempts to devise a test on which this does not happen have all failed, across decades of effort, criticism, and analysis.

Nobody knows why this is so; but the fact that it invariably, repeatedly, and intractably is so, makes testing hazardous — and ultimately pointless — under current employment law. Yet still employees must be selected somehow from applicant pools, and there must be some clear, fair criteria for their subsequent promotion. The state of the law now is that almost anything an organization does in this area will open it to litigation.

Ricci v. DeStefano takes place in a time of general public exhaustion over racial inequalities. We’d really rather just not think about it. Fifty years ago it all seemed cut and dried. Just strike down old unjust laws, give the minority a helping hand, give the non-minority some education about civil rights and past disgraces, and in a few years things will come right.

We coasted along under those assumptions for a generation. When it became obvious that things were not coming right in the matter of test results, scholars and jurists got to work on the problem.

Liberals, with their usual coarse stupidity, naturally assumed it was just a matter of spending more money on schools. This theory was tested to destruction in several places, most sensationally in Kansas City from 1985 to 1997. Under a judge’s order, the school district spent $2 billion over twelve years, pretty much rebuilding the school system — and the actual schools themselves — from the ground up.

[reaganaut1]

This is a good essay, but even Derbyshire is being coy, maybe at the behest of his editors, when he writes about test differences that "Nobody knows why this is so". He was more direct in a previous article from NRO discussing the James Watson controversy: Speaking the Unspeakable Race, I.Q., and the mainstream .

[Pessimist]

It’s interesting that when we look at other animals, we have no such taboo against considering some smarter than others, or more or less violent than others - even among a given species.

I watch “Breed all About It” on the animal channel sometimes, and they note that certain breeds are “intelligent”, or “energetic”.

Somebody ought to do a parody of that show using races of people! :)

[Enterprise]

Yet, time and again, foreigners come to America and do spectacularly well in school while their own "ethnic" peers fail miserably.

It still is not that America doesn't have equal opportunity. Instead, America has millions of lazy asses.

[staytrue]

when we look at other animals, we have no such taboo

Actually, regarding other animals, we practice eugenics to produce desired traits, physical and mental. I suspect that women (despite their outward declarations of being fair, nurturing, compassionate, liberal, etc.) practice eugenics too, when deciding on a mate.

Lots of people decry the abuses of alchohol which are many, but one of the most important is to overcome the use of eugenics by females and to keep the genetic pot stirred up.

[Oatka]

Nothing to do with intelligence, but I read of the tribulations of a movie director some years back. He was making a film that had scenes of Roman soldiers marching into battle.

The site was near a New Mexico reservation, so the producer thought he could save a few bucks by hiring the the Indians as extras. For the next week the director went mad as he tried to get them to march in cadence - he swore it was in their genes. They just could not do it. They finally had to get a bunch of non-Indian college types to make it work.

For some reason, what came to mind was the old Civil War trick when training new recruits who didn’t know their left from their right - mostly farm kids. They’d tied a sprig of hay to one foot and of straw to the other, and when they marched the sergeants would sing out “hayfoot, strawfoot”. That later became a term of derision the old pros called the newbies.

[allmendream]

My dad worked with an Ethiopian fresh off the boat, about as black black black as can be, worked as a night guard at a building so he could do his PhD work in economics.

He asked my dad...”What is wrong with black people in America?”

To me it is obvious that it isn't race, it is culture. Many “black” Americans are over 50% of European ancestry, while this guy fresh off the boat from Africa had 0% European ancestry.

The problem is that they and are a bunch of “lazy asses” with a culture that values athletics over academics and thinks you are “acting white” if you learn anything or speak intelligently.

A guy with a strong work ethic and a first class mind straight out of Africa has far more chance of realizing the American dream and taking advantage of the wealth of opportunity that this great nation offers.

[Oatka]

Thanks for the link. I particularly liked:

Science is ethically empty. It dumps babies on society’s doorstep without offering any advice (any collective advice, as science: individual scientists, as citizens, should and do give us their opinions) about what to do with those babies. Hey, we’ve split the atom! Where d’ya wanna take this — nukes, power stations, radiation therapy, or what? When y’all have it figured out, let us know, y’hear? We’ll be out on the golf course.

[Pessimist]

“..but one of the most important is to overcome the use of eugenics by females and to keep the genetic pot stirred up.”

LOL! Excellent!