UGLIER AND UGLIER

The chart in the next column was presented to a conference of the Personal Testing Council of Southern California, Newport Beach, on Oct. 1987, by Linda S. Gottfredson of the U. of Delaware. It shows the distribution of blacks and whites as they relate to the IQ recruitment ranges for four occupations: truck driver (minimum 80), police officer (90), secondary teacher (100), and physician (110). Although the two groups overlap, the average is clearly shifted by some 20 points in favor of the whites.

[CHART: IQ range for blacks and whites; indicates whites have higher average, esp. at higher IQ levels.]

There is no reason to doubt the raw data, but is the lower rating of the blacks due to cultural reasons (including the consequences of discrimination) or is it hereditary (racial), and if both, what is the relative importance of the two components?

Another gray area, again due to lack of knowledge, but this time for a very ugly reason: the academic establishment is afraid of the answer.

Prof. Hernstein of Harvard was shouted down as a fascist and prevented from lecturing merely for showing that the learning abi-lity of carrier pigeons was more influenced by heredity than envi-ronment, and any scientist courageous enough to research this touchy subject rigorously is unlikely to get money for such heretic studies from the "liberal" champions of academic freedom.

Racism is perhaps the ugliest manifestation of collectivism, and though once the monopoly of fascists, it is fast becoming a hidden characteristic of the Left. I do not mean the overt antisemitism of the Nicaraguan Stalinistas or the covert antisemitism of the Soviets and their viceroys, ugly as they may be. I mean the utter contempt for the non-whites of the Third World exhibited by Schroeder, Weicker, Markey and the other "liberal" champions of civil rights.

They rail against South Africa, and increasingly against the "iron fist" of Israel, but they have nothing to say about the murderous racism of the rest of Africa, nor about that of the Arab countries, nor about the way in which other countries deal with disturbances without the testimony of television. What theory will explain all of these undisputed observations?

I know only of one: they are embarrassed by repression, real or alleged, when perpetrated by countries belonging to their own West; but they do not care what Third World people do to each other, because in their hearts they regard them as subhuman.