I would think that political correctness would destroy the data base for the last couple of decades. Not just for race; but, the accommodation of Feminism and Socialism and the illogic of new age religions.
Researchers need to keep double books!
They do keep double books. They also use quite a bit of double speak and newthink to hide their actual beliefs and goals. When The Bell Curve came out, it was attacked by both academia and the popular press. The given reason was that it was "racist" for pointing out that on average, blacks are approximately one standard deviation below whites on the IQ scale. It also noted that Oriental Asians test highest, followed by Jews, Anglos, Hispanics and Blacks.
The book revealed the thinking in academia, and made a lot of things clear to me. This wasn't because the book said so, but because I could observe public policy decisions and the thought template only made sense if I applied the motivations claimed in the book. For shorthand, I'll use the term "controllers" to describe the people in academia, politics, etc., who push the agenda.
The controllers are concerned about several things:
1. Lower IQ people have more children and start reproducing at a younger age. A high IQ woman who enters into a profession may have one child at age 36. A low IQ woman may have the first of five children at age 16, and her first daughter is having a child by the time the high IQ woman is having her first child.
2. Advanced societies are becoming more segregated by IQ. Racism kept high IQ Blacks in the Black community, where they provided societal stabilization. Now, high IQ Blacks leave the Black community, leaving behind an increasingly low IQ and less productive Black community. This can be seen in inner cities like Detroit.
3. Increased opportunities for women are having a similar effect as the fall of racial barriers. Where a successful man used to look for a "good wife," he is now more likely to marry a colleague. Doctors marry doctors, lawyers marry lawyers, shop clerks marry shop clerks.
4. Colleges rely much more on competitive (IQ) testing than they did in the past. When Harvard started doing entrances by IQ testing, as opposed to the previous "legacy" method, over a four year period, the average student from the first year would have been at the bottom of the class if he'd entered four years later.
5. They consider this segregation by IQ to be a bad thing. As racial, religious and gender barriers have fallen, the new method of segregation is by IQ, resulting in a distinct two class system, where one class is increasingly rich and successful and the other is increasingly poor and unsuccessful.
A few of their solutions:
1. Reduce the number of low IQ births. This is why Planned Parenthood has most of their clinics in minority neighborhoods. It's also why the UN steadfastly pushes for abortion and birth control in third world countries.
2. Require companies and colleges to accept some less qualified applicants, reducing the polarization by IQ by creating a cross section of IQs within the individual groups. IQ testing for jobs is illegal. Colleges now frequently consider other factors besides testing and high school accomplishments. Financial aid is now almost entirely "need based," whereas it used to be almost entirely performance based. Current employment laws encourage employers to set the application bar at "good enough to do the needed job" rather than hiring the best applicant. If we use math skills as an example, previously, an employer would make a test with problems from extremely simple to problems far more complex than the job required. They would then hire the best test score based on the premise that a person that could do the higher math would make fewer mistakes than the person who could only do the level of math required for the job. Now, the questions must be "job related." This means that the test only requires math capability commensurate with the job being offered. By setting the test as pass/fail, a candidate that writes 70 and an applicant that writes 100 both pass and move into the "acceptable job pool." At that point, hiring is done by factors other than capability, giving a lower IQ candidate a similar shot as a higher IQ candidate.
The reason some of the employment laws seem so crazy is because the "controllers" cannot be honest about their true agenda. If you apply the template I offered at the beginning of this post, it all comes into focus.