African American Culture in the US

[deleteduser]

This could sound like an ignorant statement, however the more I start thinking about it the more i realise how distructive the African American culture is. It could be called the urban culture however most of the residents in the urban areas now tend to be the African Americans, Mexicans, Mixed with some whites. Please dont take this the wrong way I want to learn something from the replys I want to be more informed about what its like to be a minority. Through my eyes i see things and interpret them threw the eyes of a typical middle class male...this is what i see. I see on TV either in the media and or espically popular music the wrong images being portrayed. The main topics would include money, degrating women, sex, drugs, dealing drugs, shooting people, crime, and others. Its discusting this is true of all music but I think most would agree more apparent in Rap. Many african americans or urban people see and hear these people with lots of money and start to idolize them, and want to be like them. They dress like what they see on TV and act the way the they do. For instance one of my good friends is black and we were talking about his experiance in college, he grew up in the middle class. He experiance was something along these lines. He went to a well respected college that is known for affermative action. Well as he started to socialize and network throughout the campus he soon realized that many of the blacks he thought would accept him would not, for one reason, he was not from a major urban area, thus making him not "hard." I thought about this and maybe it was because they had grown up in differant areas they would not have the same things in common. I asked him about that and he said no, he got along fine with many of them however once he told them where he was from they made fun of him and turned the other cheek.
I personally think that if it was "cool" for teens to get good grades, listen to your elders, and respect one another our society would see a drastic change "i know it sounds funny", however because people would rather hear about bitches being slapped or dealing crack for big faces our society will continually be doomed.

[deleteduser]

Im sorry if this was all over the place

[MuresanForMVP]

hahaha...this is like watching a Honda Civic driving head on towards a full-speed locomotive. I can't wait to see the responses this guy gets.

[hmkpoker]

[ QUOTE ]
hahaha...this is like watching a Honda Civic driving head on towards a full-speed locomotive. I can't wait to see the responses this guy gets.

[/ QUOTE ]

Not really. Do you have any idea how white this forum is?

[hmkpoker]

[ QUOTE ]
I personally think that if it was "cool" for teens to get good grades, listen to your elders, and respect one another our society would see a drastic change "i know it sounds funny", however because people would rather hear about bitches being slapped or dealing crack for big faces our society will continually be doomed.

[/ QUOTE ]

While I don't think crack dealing, bitch slapping, or bling-bling wearing are good ideals for today's youth, you have to understand that the reason getting good grades and listening to your elders isn't cool is because it doesn't get you anywhere today.

Kids need to free their minds, and advocating mindless obedience is not the way to do it.

[deleteduser]

[ QUOTE ]


Kids need to free their minds, and advocating mindless obedience is not the way to do it.

[/ QUOTE ]


How do you suppose this could be done? Change the education system?

[hmkpoker]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]


Kids need to free their minds, and advocating mindless obedience is not the way to do it.

[/ QUOTE ]


How do you suppose this could be done? Change the education system?

[/ QUOTE ]

Scrap the education system. Give them some literacy and computation skills, then let them go, have fun, be creative, and PLAY. There is no reason why children should be forced to sit through six hours of a dumbed-down, boring curriculum followed by hours of homework every day. There is no reason why they should be forced to pledge allegiance to an indivisible theocracy every day. There is no reason why they should have to learn half-cocked, highly biased versions of history. And there is certainly no reason to drill in their heads that they NEED NEED NEED to get into the most expensive college that's out there.

[bisonbison]

I wish white culture put more emphasis on proper spelling. It hurt to read that post.

[hmkpoker]

[ QUOTE ]
I wish white culture put more emphasis on proper spelling. It hurts to read that post.

[/ QUOTE ]

FYP

[bisonbison]

FYP

Um, "It sucked to read that post." "It hurt to read that post."

[hmkpoker]

[ QUOTE ]
FYP

Um, "It sucked to read that post." "It hurt to read that post."

[/ QUOTE ]

/images/graemlins/frown.gif

whoops

[Phil153]

[ QUOTE ]
I see on TV either in the media and or espically popular music the wrong images being portrayed. The main topics would include money, degrating women, sex, drugs, dealing drugs, shooting people, crime, and others. Its discusting this is true of all music but I think most would agree more apparent in Rap. Many african americans or urban people see and hear these people with lots of money and start to idolize them, and want to be like them. They dress like what they see on TV and act the way the they do.

[/ QUOTE ]
Yep, monkey see monkey do.

It's not just a cultural issue though. People with lower IQs naturally gravitate toward violence and sex, it's a language they understand. Their culture is very much an expression of the level of their natural abilities.

Unfortunately, there's no easy solution. A low IQ dooms these inner city dwellers to a life of limited success and few options. For the few that do have natural talent, programs like affirmative action are part of the answer - but even there it's a case of GIGO. When talent starts at 3 standard deviations above the mean it's almost impossible to find a critical mass to bring about change.

[revots33]

[ QUOTE ]
Im sorry if this was all over the place

[/ QUOTE ]

If you are saying that hip-hop culture, the glorification of violence and the "thug life", the disdain for education, etc. are problems in many black communities, me and Bill Cosby (http://www.usatoday.com/life/people/2006-05-16-cosby-excerpts_x.htm) agree with you.

[jokerthief]

[ QUOTE ]
... you have to understand that the reason getting good grades and listening to your elders isn't cool is because it doesn't get you anywhere today.

[/ QUOTE ]

What? I don't know about listening to ones elders but getting good grades will get you further than getting bad grades. I'm puzzled as to what point you are trying to make here.

[hmkpoker]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
... you have to understand that the reason getting good grades and listening to your elders isn't cool is because it doesn't get you anywhere today.

[/ QUOTE ]

What? I don't know about listening to ones elders but getting good grades will get you further than getting bad grades. I'm puzzled as to what point you are trying to make here.

[/ QUOTE ]

There's a little more to "getting good grades" implied in my statement. For example, the rising costs of college tuition and the increase of job exportation is making the traditional plan of "go to school, get a job with a big company with benefits" to be less worthwhile than a more entrepreneurial plan.

However, there's certainly nothing wrong with teaching kids the values of savings and investment. If you suggest that those are values that we should be teaching our children, I certainly agree.

[deleteduser]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Im sorry if this was all over the place

[/ QUOTE ]

If you are saying that hip-hop culture, the glorification of violence and the "thug life", the disdain for education, etc. are problems in many black communities, me and Bill Cosby (http://www.usatoday.com/life/people/2006-05-16-cosby-excerpts_x.htm) agree with you.

[/ QUOTE ]


haha i was actually going to mention bill in my post.

[chrisnice]

I agree with your views on rap. Drugs, murder, etc., its disgusting. Whatever happened to nice warm fuzzy lyrics like those of American icon Johnny Cash.

"Early this morning while making the rounds, took a shot of cocaine and I shot my woman down."

[deleteduser]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]


Kids need to free their minds, and advocating mindless obedience is not the way to do it.

[/ QUOTE ]


How do you suppose this could be done? Change the education system?

[/ QUOTE ]

Scrap the education system. Give them some literacy and computation skills, then let them go, have fun, be creative, and PLAY. There is no reason why children should be forced to sit through six hours of a dumbed-down, boring curriculum followed by hours of homework every day. There is no reason why they should be forced to pledge allegiance to an indivisible theocracy every day. There is no reason why they should have to learn half-cocked, highly biased versions of history. And there is certainly no reason to drill in their heads that they NEED NEED NEED to get into the most expensive college that's out there.

[/ QUOTE ]

You make a good point however most people will not seek additional knowledge, you can give them all the skills you want they are still going to go home and play halo all day. They just dont care about our theocracy.

I really think that this is the key to human life either succeeding or diminishing over the long run. We need to start thinking as a whole instead of individuals, we need to think before we act, and mostly we need to start respecting each other. Its to bad these were not part of the 10 commandments. Peoples willingness to remain ignorant will eventually destroy the human race. I agree that people need to start thinking for themselves and history should start being taught truthfully, some people cant handle the truth, and our counrty wouldnt be nearly as patriotic if they knew the half. Just like most people cant handle being told that when we die you will be gone and life will continue on, so they belive in religion which comes with heaven.

[deleteduser]

[ QUOTE ]
I agree with your views on rap. Drugs, murder, etc., its disgusting. Whatever happened to nice warm fuzzy lyrics like those of American icon Johnny Cash.

"Early this morning while making the rounds, took a shot of cocaine and I shot my woman down."

[/ QUOTE ]



I'll quote myself "Its discusting this is true of all music but I think most would agree more apparent in Rap."

[joel2006]

As one of the few African-Americans who frequent these forums I'll address some of the OP's questions. However, I'd like to start by pointing out that confusing Rap or Hip-Hop culture for A-A culture is a huge mistake. It may be the part of A-A culture that you are most familiar with, but it's only a small part of the whole culture. Also keep in mind that more than half of the market for H-H cultural products is white kids (this started all the way back with the Blues, continued with Jazz, then Rock and Roll, then R+B like Motown). I agree that H-H cultural products (music/movies/videos/books) are currently rife with much negative imagery and have been for about the last ten years (basically since the advent of NWA), but that isn't the same as saying that the actual culture (the way folks live) is the same. These images get pushed because they sell, to both blacks and whites. Some of the black businessmen and rappers pushing these images are just poor and ignorant, some of them are middle-class frauds fronting to get paid. That being said, there are real problems, like the devaluing of education for example, or the lack of wealth, poor nutrition and health (blacks are the most likely to die from treatable diseases like diabetes). The root causes of many of these problems are too complex to be addressed here, but in my opinion the A-A cultural leadership for the last thirty years (such as it is) is at least partly to blame for failing to deal with these problems, prefering instead to scream racism at every available opportunity into every available TV camera (which is not to say that racism against blacks doesn't exist or isn't still a very serious problem). It doesn't help that the rise of the Republican Party since Reagan has been in part due to a deliberate strategy to revive white supremacist ideas in less explicit garb (The Southern Strategy, anyone ?). One need only note the obsession on this site with Affirmative Action, or the links between Race and IQ, to find examples of this. A lot of the negative imagery is appealing to whites because it allows them to maintain their sense of superiority, although it has changed over the years. When I was a kid whites claimed superiority in every possible way, now many of them are willing to concede black superiority in arenas athletic and sometimes musical, although nowhere else. But this is a fairly recent change (last thirty years or so) and has come about in part because sporting events are as about as close as one can come to a meritocracy and it fits with the idea of blacks as animals. That being said there is no evidence that blacks are better at sports in general, even though certain fairly small subgroups of blacks may have some advantages in certain areas (short sprints for example), as certain subgroups of whites do also (powerlifting). But is this dominance due to genes or envirnoment or some combination of the two? It is probably not a coincidence that the Kenyans and Ethiopians who dominate long distance running descend from ethnic groups that are mostly short of stature and slight of build and have lived at high altitude for hundreds of centuries. But, Hey why let a few facts get in the way of what some people want to believe?

[MidGe]

[ QUOTE ]
However, I'd like to start by pointing out that confusing Rap or Hip-Hop culture for A-A culture is a huge mistake. It may be the part of A-A culture that you are most familiar with, but it's only a small part of the whole culture.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well said! The interesting point is why would the OP be most familiar with this aspect. The obvious answer would be that it exercices a dangerous fascination for the OP. /images/graemlins/smile.gif

[guesswest]

I think a lot of what he's describing is actually just the culture of poverty as oppose to anything specific to an ethnicity. Blacks are more likely to figure in that 'culture' only because there's proportionally way more blacks in that demographic. Faced with a poor array of opportunities escape routes become subject to idolization - black kids in a [censored] neighbourhood may idolize rap stars, whereas street kids in Sao Paulo want to be pro-soccer players, but the details are all that change, it's just a fundamentally human thing.

[deleteduser]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
However, I'd like to start by pointing out that confusing Rap or Hip-Hop culture for A-A culture is a huge mistake. It may be the part of A-A culture that you are most familiar with, but it's only a small part of the whole culture.

[/ QUOTE ]


I totally agree with you I know of the rich culture the AA's had pre and post slavery. I wanted to address what I see, as i mentioned as a white middle class kid and then see it through your eyes. Seeing kids black and white idolize the rappers on tv and movies. I dont care that they ware their pants to their knees or walk with a fake limp, however the majority of these stereo types are retards looking for trouble. I know I sound a little bit general however i want to push my point to an extreame to get a better response. Their always loud, cocky, and inconsiderate. Obvoiusly this is not the case for all people who take on this image however from what I see it is the majority. Enlighten me..

[one_eye_mike]

It doesn't help that the rise of the Republican Party since Reagan has been in part due to a deliberate strategy to revive white supremacist ideas in less explicit garb (The Southern Strategy, anyone.

What in heck are you talking about? Where you're getting this I have no idea. The rise of Reagan and conservatism in the early 80's had to do with the backlash to the Carter administration and the general malise of the ecomony. I'm old enough to have voted then. You've got it all wrong.

[joel2006]

I've gotten what all wrong? Are you saying that the Southern Strategy didn't exist? That Reagan didn't declare his candidacy near Philadelphia Miss. (where three northern Civil Rights workers were brutally murdered) with a speech that talked about the importance of "States Rights" and that this wasn't a deliberate attempt to woo Southern whites who were upset about the end of legal segregation? Since before the formation of this country "States Rights" was code for 'A State's right to treat its Negroes as it pleases' i.e. Slavery and later Jim Crow. I'm not talking about the rise of 'conservatism', I'm talking about the rise of the Republican Party, two totally different things. Many Southern Democrats (Strom Thurman, Jesse Helms, etc.) and their constituents were fairly conservative, but they were still Democrats (the Republicans were after all the party of Lincoln whom they erroneously blame for freeing the slaves) as long as their party supported segregation. When Johnson, and later, Carter used the might of the Federal Gov. to force the South into ending segregation, the Republican Party took note and implemented the SS to get these disgruntled Dixiecrats to switch parties. Part of this strategy was the demonization of blacks in ways that weren't explicitly racist, the whole myth of the 'Welfare Queen' for example (which Reagan implemented in Cali first), or their favorite, Affirmative Action which they liked to call 'Reverse Racism', never mind the fact that studies show that the primary beneficiaries of A-A were white women. That's what the heck I'm talking about.

[guesswest]

The primary beneficiaries of AA were/are white women? Could you clarify that or link a study or something, I've never heard that before...

[BPA234]

I've read your post twice. I think you are either ignorant or racist.

[deleteduser]

[ QUOTE ]
I've read your post twice. I think you are either ignorant or racist.

[/ QUOTE ]




I really hope you werent refering to me...

[joel2006]

Given the high math proficiency most posters here possess, I would think that the info on white women and A-A would be fairly obvious. After all Blacks (12%) and Hispanics (12%) together don't equal the percentage of white women (>34%) in the US population. Because of the the excellent job the far right has done in branding A-A as 'Racial Quotas' many white people, even white women don't realize that A-A laws are written to help ALL minorities (including women). The following quote comes from an article in the Badger Herald but this info is widely available on the web.

For instance, the Bush administration uses racial preferences and affirmative action as though they were interchangeable. By its nature, a preference is giving someone who is less qualified the upper hand; conversely affirmative action is law that provides qualified people an opportunity to succeed. Furthermore, while the term “racial preferences” skews the discussion about affirmative action to only include race, the actual law is written to include women and people with disabilities as well as people of color. In fact, white women have been the largest beneficiaries of affirmative action based on levels of upward mobility, access to higher education, post-graduate income levels, post-graduate job placement, and graduation rates.

The whole article can be found at http://badgerherald.com/oped/2003/01/24/affirmative_action_b.php

[MidGe]

[ QUOTE ]
Because of the the excellent job the far right has done in branding A-A as 'Racial Quotas' many white people, even white women don't realize that A-A laws are written to help ALL minorities (including women).

[/ QUOTE ]

Since when were women a minority in the USA??? LOL

[joel2006]

Gabrie30 he's not referring to you, he's responding to Phil153 who is in fact a diehard racist.

[vhawk01]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Because of the the excellent job the far right has done in branding A-A as 'Racial Quotas' many white people, even white women don't realize that A-A laws are written to help ALL minorities (including women).

[/ QUOTE ]

Since when were women a minority in the USA??? LOL

[/ QUOTE ]

They arent. Thats the point. But they ARE (or at least were) a minority in college admissions, medical school admissions, and other areas. They are an under-represented group. My ideas on AA are slanted towards professional school admissions, which is slightly different than AA in general. But thats why, AFAIK, women are the beneficiaries of AA.

[BPA234]

No I wasn't referring to you. Although, you're post was unintelligent, ignorant, uneducated and embarrassing. But, not necessarily racist.

[guesswest]

Thanks for a thorough answer joel, it wasn't a loaded question - I just didn't know that.

Tho I'm evidently no expert on the procedural aspects of AA (and maybe someone who is can change my mind), it seems like a horribly inaccurate way of addressing social injustice. If AA worked by gauging applicants socio-economic status, access to education etc, that'd be great - and statistically we know that'd give places to a proportionally higher amount of minorities, with a rightful claim to those spots.

But I have a huge problem with kid a and kid b growing up in the same affluent suburb, playing in the same sandpit and having access to exactly the same education and opportunities, then kid a getting refused on his college application with the same grades as kid b because kid b is black/female/disabled/whatever. Surely that's exactly what social injustice IS?

[joel2006]

No it isn't, because your example conveniently left out the advantages that kid a has (assuming it's a white male) In other words A-A exists for a reason and if both kids had had equal chances A-A would have never existed. They didn't and in fact they still don't, although women in particular are doing much much better.

[guesswest]

It wasn't my intention to 'conveniently' exclude anything, nor do I have entrenched views either way on AA. At this point in history I can't identify any disadvantage a particular minority facees in circumstances where they live in the same neighbourhood, go to the same school and are in the same social group as white male a. Maybe I'm oblivious to it, if so I'm listening.

You're right of course that your average/representative white male had and still has more opportunities than your average/representative minority kid, and such is the reason for AA. But selecting by race, gender etc is playing the numbers, it's saying applicant x is more LIKELY to have been disadvantaged. To be disadvantaged, as best I can tell, refers to access to education, income etc - so why not select by those factors in the first place and get a much greater hit rate while simultaneously removing injustices like the one in my example?

[joel2006]

We are basically in agreement, I just don't think there's any perfect way to implement A-A. And many (if not most) college admission programs take income into account.

[Phil153]

[ QUOTE ]
I've read your post twice. I think you are either ignorant or racist.

[/ QUOTE ]
And I think you're adding nothing to the discussion. Without debating the causes, the groups in question do indeed have a lower average IQ. That's a fact. More importantly, a FAR smaller percentage have a 120+ IQ. If you're saying this has little bearing on their culture, then the ignorance is all yours.

[MidGe]

[ QUOTE ]
Without debating the causes, the groups in question do indeed have a lower average IQ. That's a fact.

[/ QUOTE ]

Hello Notable Twit, /images/graemlins/smile.gif


So what? Obviously IQ tests are there to measure whatever the other groups have of, in superior numbers. No one can make any claim about IQ tests and what intelligence is. The latter can't yet be measured/quantified as far as I know.

[Phil153]

[ QUOTE ]
Gabrie30 he's not referring to you, he's responding to Phil153 who is in fact a diehard racist.

[/ QUOTE ]
Please discuss the cogency of my arguments rather than using baseless name calling. If they're not at all fact based, they should be easy to refute. If they are fact based, then you have no business calling me a racist. I don't call you a victim of PC brainwashing.

[Phil153]

[ QUOTE ]
[Intelligence] can't yet be measured/quantified as far as I know.

[/ QUOTE ]
Good one midge.

[MidGe]

That's ok!

I love your avatar, by the way. Not the way I imagined you, but hey /images/graemlins/smile.gif.

Glad to share with you the continent that has the oldest extant civilisation on earth. /images/graemlins/smile.gif

[guesswest]

Phil, did it occur to you that we might be offended by your bigotry and vitriol as oppose to your 'arguments'? Nobody is calling you a racist because you pointed out some factoid about IQ distributions, they're calling you a racist because of your incendiary use of language and your gleeful willingness to demean and dehumanize a significant percentage of humanity.

I credit the majority of 2+2ers with intelligence, and I tend to think almost everyone here would be happy to discuss this or any issue without resorting to ad hominems had you presented your views as part of a considered dialogue - you didn't and you never have.

[BPA234]

There is no point debating with you. A debate allows room for discussion and learning. Debating with you, would be like arguing about the existence of Santa Claus with a 5-year old.

Regarding the IQ question: I assume you are referring to a relatively recent study that put blacks behind whites, and whites behind Asians and Jews. I read an article about the study and I distinctly remember the researchers responsible for the study stated that the statistical differences were not that significant and should not be used to support any racist ideology.

Further, as it relates specifically to African Americans, the argument is laughable in light of their historical treatment in the US. If you took any group of people, say you and 100,000 of your friends and parked them in China and duplicated the treatment of enslavement, loss of language, culture and religion for several hundred years followed by 100 years of inequality, I guarantee you that the consequences for you and your friends would be very similar and the challenges that your progeny would face, would be the same.

Your assertions and statements are intransigent and racist. Racism, in and of itself, is a pernicious
form of social retardation, the consequences of which the world has seen enough of in the last century.

Finally, the OP's statements and your support statements are without value, because you are labeling an entire race of people in the US on the output of a minority percentage. If that is the criteria, than Jerry Springer and Cops are all I need to define white people.

Sorry. But, there is no Santa Claus.

[Phil153]

[ QUOTE ]
I assume you are referring to a relatively recent study that put blacks behind whites, and whites behind Asians and Jews. I read an article about the study and I distinctly remember the researchers responsible for the study stated that the statistical differences were not that significant and should not be used to support any racist ideology.

[/ QUOTE ]
No. I'm referring to almost every IQ test undertaken in the history of civilization in every country in the world. I'm talking about SAT scores across decades. The body of evidence is overwhelming. I suggest you educate yourself on it before entering these debates.

These are excellent, unbiased summaries of all the research and viewpoints. The original studies are all referenced and you can read them for yourself:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_and_intelligence
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_and_intelligence_(Average_intelligence_gaps_a mong_races)

Anyway I'm not posting again in this thread as I don't want to hijack the discussion. I assumed the effect of lower IQ (whatever the cause) on culture would be obvious and beyond debate, but apparently not. The postmodern crowd who consider politics more important than reason and compassion have done their job well.

[joel2006]

Phil153-I referred to you as a racist because you are clearly a white supremacist with a special animus towards people of African descent. Don't let my post post count or registration date fool you, I have been reading 2+2 daily since 1999. In that time you have made many, many posts on the issue of race and IQ (I stopped taking you seriously when you tried to use the racial makeup of Nobel Prize winners as proof of the intellectual inferiority of black people, as if there were no cultural or environmental impediments that might have affected those results). I haven't responded to any of them for two reasons; one is that it's obvious you have a huge emotional investment in your position and are unwilling to even consider changing it, and two, I used to have this debate all the time when the Bell Curve came out and I'm just tired of it. But I have read many of your posts and your not just the garden variety racist that I come across all the time, but a really special case devoted to lots of pseudo-scientific arguements to try to legitimise your position. You remind me very much of some of the guys I've met in Mensa who seem to devote a great deal of their time and energy to this topic. Your arguments aren't fact-based, although they do distort some factual information for their purposes, but it's not like they can't be refuted. It just takes a lot of time and energy. Yes it's true that blacks score lower on IQ tests, but given the environmental and cultural conditions they have endured over the last 400 years this shouldn't be a surprise to anyone. But that's not enough for you, your position is that this is due to some irrevocable genetic deficiency. That is why I called you a racist, since this is just the old white supremacist position dressed up in postmodern pseudo-scientific garb. If I wasn't about to head out to check out the Borgata's new poker room I might go point by point and show the flaws in the whole Bell Curve argument, but I'd really rather go play poker. Maybe some other time.

[FlFishOn]

[ QUOTE ]
I wish white culture put more emphasis on proper spelling. It hurt to read that post.

[/ QUOTE ]

It's worse than you think. While this post sits in the bottom tenth percentile of 2+2 it's likely close to median for HS grads across America, maybe higher.

[madnak]

Higher. Way higher.

[FlFishOn]

[ QUOTE ]
If that is the criteria, than Jerry Springer and Cops are all I need to define white people.

[/ QUOTE ]

Ok with Springer. I wish he wasn't white like me but...Cops is not a really white show, last I looked.

[FlFishOn]

"I assumed the effect of lower IQ (whatever the cause) on culture would be obvious and beyond debate, but apparently not. "

There is an entire segment of the academic and social service 'industries' that do everything possible to obscure this bothersome fact.

[FlFishOn]

[ QUOTE ]
Phil, did it occur to you that we might be offended by your bigotry and vitriol as oppose to your 'arguments'? Nobody is calling you a racist because you pointed out some factoid about IQ distributions, they're calling you a racist because of your incendiary use of language and your gleeful willingness to demean and dehumanize a significant percentage of humanity.

I credit the majority of 2+2ers with intelligence, and I tend to think almost everyone here would be happy to discuss this or any issue without resorting to ad hominems had you presented your views as part of a considered dialogue - you didn't and you never have.

[/ QUOTE ]

Wow. You're way out of line here. It's called projection and/or denial. Check it out.

[FlFishOn]

[ QUOTE ]
There's a little more to "getting good grades" implied in my statement. For example, the rising costs of college tuition and the increase of job exportation is making the traditional plan of "go to school, get a job with a big company with benefits" to be less worthwhile than a more entrepreneurial plan.


[/ QUOTE ]

Just because you blew your shot there's no reason to knock America's easiest path to success.

[FlFishOn]

[ QUOTE ]
Higher. Way higher.

[/ QUOTE ]

Sorry to hear that. I should get out more.

[guesswest]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Phil, did it occur to you that we might be offended by your bigotry and vitriol as oppose to your 'arguments'? Nobody is calling you a racist because you pointed out some factoid about IQ distributions, they're calling you a racist because of your incendiary use of language and your gleeful willingness to demean and dehumanize a significant percentage of humanity.

I credit the majority of 2+2ers with intelligence, and I tend to think almost everyone here would be happy to discuss this or any issue without resorting to ad hominems had you presented your views as part of a considered dialogue - you didn't and you never have.

[/ QUOTE ]

Wow. You're way out of line here. It's called projection and/or denial. Check it out.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm not really sure exactly what you're accusing me of here, but it's certainly not hard to find posts from phil that back that claim up. It's absolutely apparent that he plain just doesn't like blacks.

[madnak]

Really, I think the average poster in this forum is at least 2 standard deviations above the norm. And through the 2+2 site as a whole, I'd bet on at least 1. I get the impression many of the posters spent their lives in accelerated learning programs and advanced placement courses, interacting with other "smart people," and that they have very unrealistic standards. The elitism is a bit disturbing.

[BPA234]

I am referencing the people on the show, not the host. In both cases, I think you find an overwhelmingly negative representation of white people.

[FlFishOn]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Phil, did it occur to you that we might be offended by your bigotry and vitriol as oppose to your 'arguments'? Nobody is calling you a racist because you pointed out some factoid about IQ distributions, they're calling you a racist because of your incendiary use of language and your gleeful willingness to demean and dehumanize a significant percentage of humanity.

I credit the majority of 2+2ers with intelligence, and I tend to think almost everyone here would be happy to discuss this or any issue without resorting to ad hominems had you presented your views as part of a considered dialogue - you didn't and you never have.

[/ QUOTE ]

Wow. You're way out of line here. It's called projection and/or denial. Check it out.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm not really sure exactly what you're accusing me of here, but it's certainly not hard to find posts from phil that back that claim up. It's absolutely apparent that he plain just doesn't like blacks.

[/ QUOTE ]

Facts not in evidence, as far as I can see.

[Taraz]

[ QUOTE ]
It wasn't my intention to 'conveniently' exclude anything, nor do I have entrenched views either way on AA. At this point in history I can't identify any disadvantage a particular minority facees in circumstances where they live in the same neighbourhood, go to the same school and are in the same social group as white male a. Maybe I'm oblivious to it, if so I'm listening.


[/ QUOTE ]

As a minority who grew up in an affluent white community I recognized the following disadvantages:

Harassment by police
Harassment by teachers
Harassment by peers
Teachers who expected me to fail
Teachers who expected me to be a drug user
Teachers who expected me to be a "bad kid"
Having every viewpoint of mine be the "minority viewpoint"

I could go on if you would like. I could also provide specific examples if necessary.

[sightless]

[ QUOTE ]
I agree with your views on rap. Drugs, murder, etc., its disgusting. Whatever happened to nice warm fuzzy lyrics like those of American icon Johnny Cash.

"Early this morning while making the rounds, took a shot of cocaine and I shot my woman down."

[/ QUOTE ]

You do realise that there was only one Johnny Cash, however, 99% of rap does sing about "gangsta lifestyle". People didn't go out and immitate Johnny Cash... like they do with "gangsta rap".

[FlFishOn]

[ QUOTE ]
I agree with your views on rap. Drugs, murder, etc., its disgusting. Whatever happened to nice warm fuzzy lyrics like those of American icon Johnny Cash.

"Early this morning while making the rounds, took a shot of cocaine and I shot my woman down."

[/ QUOTE ]

So sad. Why on earth would anyone attempt to find equivalence between Cash and rap? To bring rap up? Impossible. To bring Cash down? Shame on you.

[vhawk01]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I agree with your views on rap. Drugs, murder, etc., its disgusting. Whatever happened to nice warm fuzzy lyrics like those of American icon Johnny Cash.

"Early this morning while making the rounds, took a shot of cocaine and I shot my woman down."

[/ QUOTE ]

You do realise that there was only one Johnny Cash, however, 99% of rap does sing about "gangsta lifestyle". People didn't go out and immitate Johnny Cash... like they do with "gangsta rap".

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, you are right. Johnny Cash is the only conceivable example of non-rap music that anyone on this site could come up with. Shame on us.

[deleteduser]

[ QUOTE ]
No I wasn't referring to you. Although, you're post was unintelligent, ignorant, uneducated and embarrassing. But, not necessarily racist.

[/ QUOTE ]


It was the idea i was trying to bring out, i could have just posted "Music and Culture" and went from there however that just sounds to general. I wanted to bring out one particular theme that i see day to day, which was clearly stated. I wanted to seek other peoples "feelings" about this not a textbook answer. I know im not the most intellegent person on this fourm, I would appreciate a more constructive response where we both could learn something from one another. If you want to live your life looking down on others for their lack of intellegence and hoards of ignorance so be it, but just remember your part of that problem. Your also are not as smart as you think you are and until you realize that, you will remain ignorant as the rest of them.

[madnak]

[ QUOTE ]
So sad. Why on earth would anyone attempt to find equivalence between Cash and rap? To bring rap up? Impossible. To bring Cash down? Shame on you.

[/ QUOTE ]

How about to bring the light of context to the situation, and make it clear that the specific content of an artwork isn't necessarily sufficient to indict that artwork. Also perhaps to point out that the situation is much more complex than it may appear to be.

[guesswest]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
It wasn't my intention to 'conveniently' exclude anything, nor do I have entrenched views either way on AA. At this point in history I can't identify any disadvantage a particular minority facees in circumstances where they live in the same neighbourhood, go to the same school and are in the same social group as white male a. Maybe I'm oblivious to it, if so I'm listening.


[/ QUOTE ]

As a minority who grew up in an affluent white community I recognized the following disadvantages:

Harassment by police
Harassment by teachers
Harassment by peers
Teachers who expected me to fail
Teachers who expected me to be a drug user
Teachers who expected me to be a "bad kid"
Having every viewpoint of mine be the "minority viewpoint"

I could go on if you would like. I could also provide specific examples if necessary.

[/ QUOTE ]

Where did you grow up? And do you think that experience varies by area etc? I'm also really intrigued what exactly you mean by the last example?

I certainly wasn't meaning to suggest racism isn't alive and well in the US - just that it can't be taken as a given in the way it was when AA programs were initiated, and accordingly AA programs should evolve and assess the root causes of social injustice instead of assuming a disadvantage is present on every minority application. Basically I agree with what the previous poster said, that there's no perfect way to implement AA, but the simple minority->disadvantaged formula is too clumsy at this point and is creating injustices as well as curing them.

[Taraz]

I grew up in a Los Angeles suburb. I don't think it mattered much where I was though. I really believe that if you are one of the only kids of a certain race in a community it can be very difficult.

The whole "minority viewpoint" thing is complex. An opinion that differed from my peers' was often dismissed with a comment like, "Oh whatever, you're just saying that cause you're black." At times I was also expected to produce some insight that was representative of what all black people think. If my answer was unsatisfactory I wasn't "black enough". It sucked that everyone else's ideas and opinions were there own but I didn't get that same ownership all the time.

In a lot of ways this wasn't necessarily a disadvatage though. I think it actually helped me form a lot of my opinions about life and about different subjects since I was expected to produce something different from my classmates.

With all that said, I feel very priveleged to have grown up where I did and to have had the access to education that most do not.


I think AA is flawed as well, but I also think it is very very important to have a diverse student body in college. I wasn't really trying to say anything particular about AA programs though. My point is just that growing up in the same area and attending the same schools doesn't necessarily give the minority student equal footing.

I will say however that if black kid A and white kid B have the exact same application, I think the school should be more inclined to accept kid A if black people are underrepresented on campus.

I do think affirmative action of some sort is necessary until we can accurately compare the potential and accomplishments of two students who have had incredibly different experiences. Imagine a rich white kid who has money for after school tutors and SAT classes, whose school has 2 sets of books for every student and high tech science labs and computer labs, and is offered his choice of 15 AP courses. Now what about the black kid who can't afford those tutors, has a 10-year-old textbook that is missing pages, and whose school only had one AP course? How do you know the white kid is the better student? Does it really mean that he is more accomplished if he scored higher on a standardized test? I just don't see how anyone can make that judgement. There should be baseline scores that everyone must have, but I really think there is so much more to examine than just grades and numbers.

[aeest400]

In my opinion, the most nuanced and thoughtful commentator on African American culture and certain pathologies within it is John McWhorter, a black professor of linguistics at Berkeley. His bio and links to some of his articles can be found here (including a few about the corrosive influence of hip-hip):

http://www.manhattan-institute.org/html/mcwhorter.htm

Many conservatives like him, but his generally political views are not conservative, more like an old school neoliberalism.

For those big on the IQ conspiracy, remember that Jews were once also considered intellectually inferior. They seem to have gotten smarter in the last 50 years.

[guesswest]

I support AA too, or at least I support a similar type of program. And likewise agree diversity on campus (all kinds of diversity) is important.

The example you give of the white kid with access to an excellent education contrasted by the black kid with access to a rudimentary education, is exactly what AA was for in the first place, and why we still need it. And I agree standardized testing means very little in such instances. It's also precisely why I feel AA should function as an initiative that gauges access to education, socio-economic status etc, as oppose to race.

I believe organizing AA this way would better tackle institutionalized racism, but it'd do so inadvertendly, simply because there are proportionally many more minorities in that demographic. It'd also justly handle those rarer cases where it's the other way round - there are white kids in poverty and upper-middle class black kids nowadays, that was more or less unheard of when AA was introduced. Such instances remain the exception, but where they do exist I feel like AA type programs should be selecting the disadvantaged kid.

Arranging AA this way would not only better tackle institutionalized racism, it'd go some way to tackling other social injustices that the present system doesn't even take into account - ruralism, religiousity etc. And a secondary benefit, but an important one, would be the removal of the burden many black college kids carry in terms of their peers (whether they say it out loud or not) viewing them as having not really earned their place. Just my thoughts.

[Metric]

Jews have a long history of persecution in Europe -- instead of making excuses for themselves, they consistently overachieve at intellectual pursuits. Honestly, one has to admit that it appears that some groups of people simply have "it" (whatever "it" is) -- and some groups can't be made to have "it", no matter how hard we as a society (or any other society) tries through any number of social programs and government spending.

I'm very willing to admit that this could be wrong, of course, but the fact that the majority of people who feel that it is wrong express their view merely by flying into a fit of something akin to name calling does not inspire me with confidence in the PC line.

[12AX7]

[ QUOTE ]


I will say however that if black kid A and white kid B have the exact same application, I think the school should be more inclined to accept kid A if black people are underrepresented on campus.



[/ QUOTE ]

So how about of it's reversed? If whites are under represented, should the white be favored? I've seen some TV documentary that claims. "Blacks are under represented in NFL management. Blacks are 12% of the populace, but not on NFL management".

However blacks are 51% of the NFL player ranks. I don't see anyone screaming for white numerically equality there... where the jobs are worth what? Millions per year? After all whites are what about 75% of the US population... seems we need some more white football players?

If you want a meritocracy, seems to me the race question should simply not be on the application.

Now my question for you. Why are blacks always trying to force there way into white institutions. Can you not accept that some of us simply want to be apart from things african? Does *everything* have to be africanized and "pimped out"?

Can we have some other option that white flight, please???

Maybe some us just simply are repulsed by African things on an inner emotional level. Why should that preference not be respected? In the end, no logical argument will change it. Because it's the same as someone who doesn't like brocolli or whatever. It's just built in and not really subject to change. This is something that needs to be brought out into the light.

As whites, why can we not have organizations with "White" in the title like you have? Without being compared to Nazis and Klansmen?

Some examples: National Society of Black Engineers, The Black Information Technology Forum, National Black MBA Association, blah, blah, blah.

Strange, I never see token Asians or Native Americans in TV commercials. What's so special about the black minority?

I seem to recall in Rwanda, black on black racism was occuring.

Personally I believe blacks are *more* racist than whites. For whatever reasons. Apparently Larry Elder believes the same.

In his book, "Then Things You Can't Say in America", Chapter 1 is titled, "Blacks are More Racist than Whites".

To be honest I'm not sure the africanization of America is a good thing. Seems like wherever your people are the majority, things are not good. Even when whites are nowhere to be found. This appears to my untrained eye, to be a world-wide phenomenon.

Just in the U.S. figures I've seen indicate that the black rates are as follows:

AIDS - 800% of the average
Violent Crime - 300% of the average
Out of Wedlock Birth Rate - 250% of the average

Which means the difference is even worse since the black population figures into the average. That's a sketch of a violent, sexually indiscriminate culture just based on those numbers.

Whites world-wide are the minority. So perhaps we should be claiming a need for the preservation of our culture. Not the other way around.

Seems we built the last standing super-power, despite our mental inferiority to jews and asians, and our physical inferiority to africans. Sadly I'd have to guess that's because the one thing we really have a flair for is mechanized warfare. And the conviction to win. Though also, sadly, in recent times we've let everyone convince us to have white guilt over slavery and the Holocaust.

I for one had nothing to do with either. So I refuse to carry any guilt for either. As I see it, in the here and now, white bashing has become the trend.

Don't believe me... watch this little skit with Jim Carrey in it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=04il1iAoIZ0

At time 03:15 "Black Spock" uses the term "Caucasoid" and there's a laugh track! Had "Pet Detective Kirk" called anyone a "Negroid" *that* would have been racist.

Tell you what. If Africa is so wonderful and important... why not go back? Repatriate and fix the place? Yeah right, that's going to happen!

I admit it, it was wrong for your people to have been brought over here against thier will. I'm as angry at the slave traders as you are.

But I'll tell you who should really be pissed at all of us. The Native Americans.

[ QUOTE ]
I do think affirmative action of some sort is necessary until we can accurately compare the potential and accomplishments of two students who have had incredibly different experiences. Imagine a rich white kid who has money for after school tutors and SAT classes, whose school has 2 sets of books for every student and high tech science labs and computer labs, and is offered his choice of 15 AP courses. Now what about the black kid who can't afford those tutors, has a 10-year-old textbook that is missing pages, and whose school only had one AP course? How do you know the white kid is the better student? Does it really mean that he is more accomplished if he scored higher on a standardized test? I just don't see how anyone can make that judgement. There should be baseline scores that everyone must have, but I really think there is so much more to examine than just grades and numbers.

[/ QUOTE ]

By this logic... since the Kennedy family had access to much better education and resources than I did, (as well as every other upper echelon family) should there not also be some equalizing policy for me, even though I am white?

Personally I don't see how blacks can go around claiming to be oppressed. If they were truly oppressed, Oprah could not have become a billioniare.

Just in my own life I've worked in many a Fortune 500 where blacks held higher rank than myself. I.E. I worked for the blacks and I'm white. They had bigger paychecks, better homes. Thier kids go to better schools. So where's the oppression? Yet they are eligible for Affirmative Action!?

Blacks go all the way up to the white house. Can you say, "Condoleeza Rice" and "Colin Powell"? I thought you could.

I think it's time for instituionalized anti-white racism to come to an end.

For all the white bashing that has become fashionable, it seems to me that the Afro-Saudi region's BS is what's going to cause the final war. Oil, Judiasm, Christianity, Islam, African problems of all sorts from disease to over population... all from that region.

I say America should get off oil and leave that region to it's own devices, since essentially, that's the only reason we're really there, IMHO.

[MidGe]

[ QUOTE ]
But I'll tell you who should really be pissed at all of us. The Native Americans.

[/ QUOTE ]

Indeed... ever done any research on this? Broken treaties over and over again. Guess by who? Go back where you came from. Go and fix the problems in Europe, if that is where you came from.

IMO, you are a racist of the first order. You don't even realise what you are. I do hope you are a minority in the USA, otherwise there is little hope for it.

[MidGe]

[ QUOTE ]
So how about of it's reversed? If whites are under represented, should the white be favored? I've seen some TV documentary that claims. "Blacks are under represented in NFL management. Blacks are 12% of the populace, but not on NFL management".

However blacks are 51% of the NFL player ranks. I don't see anyone screaming for white numerically equality there... where the jobs are worth what? Millions per year? After all whites are what about 75% of the US population... seems we need some more white football players?

[/ QUOTE ]

Interesting, hey! Where the selection is without bias (athletic achievements), the african americans have a larger representation. /images/graemlins/smile.gif

[vhawk01]

Its not your racism (blatant as it may be) that bothers me. Its your utter lack of a grasp on logical principles. Your lengthy post is so chock-full of non sequiturs, strawmen and uncountable other fallacies that it makes baby Jesus cry.

[kurto]

[ QUOTE ]
The main topics would include money, degrating women, sex, drugs, dealing drugs, shooting people, crime, and others. Its discusting this is true of all music but I think most would agree more apparent in Rap.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is true, so long as you exclude all Hair bands, metal, a lot of other rock bands and some country.

The funny thing is, I remember in the early 80's, being at a friend's house who's parents blocked MTV because all the videos glorified either sex or violence. That was before you really saw any blacks except for Micheal Jackson and maybe Rockwell.

I also fondly remember a professor at the Univ. of Massachussetts who edited a montage of metal bands videos and then played it side-by-side to the rape scene in The Accused (the Jodie Foster film) and showed how the Rock videos were pretty much soft porn rape videos.

[guesswest]

Will second vhawk - clearly a diehard racist, but it's such a non-sensical post it's difficult to find something specific to take issue with, he neatly refutes himself.

Metric - it may or may not be the case that IQ is a useful measure of intelligence, and it may or may not be the case that IQ is biologically determined. But if we accept, for the sake of argument, that it's both of those things, it in no way follows that any race is inherently more intelligent, it just says one might be right now. Given the respective environmental history of the two groups in your example, if intelligence is an evolving trait it wouldn't be surprising to find differences since those groups have experienced and evolved through vastly different environments. But as society becomes more racially integrated and homogenized you'd expect to see IQ standardization, not through inter-breeding as the likes of phil have suggested, but through shared environmental stimuli and a shared sense of the extent to which IQ is reproductively dis/advantageous. And it seems that's exactly what is happening, since the IQ gap is closing.

[Metric]

[ QUOTE ]

Metric - it may or may not be the case that IQ is a useful measure of intelligence, and it may or may not be the case that IQ is biologically determined. But if we accept, for the sake of argument, that it's both of those things, it in no way follows that any race is inherently more intelligent, it just says one might be right now. Given the respective environmental history of the two groups in your example, if intelligence is an evolving trait it wouldn't be surprising to find differences since those groups have experienced and evolved through vastly different environments. But as society becomes more racially integrated and homogenized you'd expect to see IQ standardization, not through inter-breeding as the likes of phil have suggested, but through shared environmental stimuli and a shared sense of the extent to which IQ is reproductively dis/advantageous. And it seems that's exactly what is happening, since the IQ gap is closing.

[/ QUOTE ]

Excellent post -- this is very close to my own view, in fact. Intelligence by group is clearly a dynamical thing, not a "set in stone" thing. So even though it may be rather obvious that group X is better at certain things than group Y is today, it could all be different tomorrow.

Mainly what I find irritating is the culturally ingrained impulse to reject the possibility that group X is better than group Y when it comes to any kind of intellectual ability, no matter how obvious it may be.

[FlFishOn]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
So how about of it's reversed? If whites are under represented, should the white be favored? I've seen some TV documentary that claims. "Blacks are under represented in NFL management. Blacks are 12% of the populace, but not on NFL management".

However blacks are 51% of the NFL player ranks. I don't see anyone screaming for white numerically equality there... where the jobs are worth what? Millions per year? After all whites are what about 75% of the US population... seems we need some more white football players?

[/ QUOTE ]

Interesting, hey! Where the selection is without bias (athletic achievements), the african americans have a larger representation. /images/graemlins/smile.gif

[/ QUOTE ]

Are you somehow suggesting that athletic team management is NOT merit based? Somehow the best man is not getting the job? I think not. There's too much money involved.

[vhawk01]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
So how about of it's reversed? If whites are under represented, should the white be favored? I've seen some TV documentary that claims. "Blacks are under represented in NFL management. Blacks are 12% of the populace, but not on NFL management".

However blacks are 51% of the NFL player ranks. I don't see anyone screaming for white numerically equality there... where the jobs are worth what? Millions per year? After all whites are what about 75% of the US population... seems we need some more white football players?

[/ QUOTE ]

Interesting, hey! Where the selection is without bias (athletic achievements), the african americans have a larger representation. /images/graemlins/smile.gif

[/ QUOTE ]

Are you somehow suggesting that athletic team management is NOT merit based? Somehow the best man is not getting the job? I think not. There's too much money involved.

[/ QUOTE ]

/images/graemlins/grin.gif Are you serious? Professional coaching is far from a meritocracy. I don't necessarily believe this is all driven by racial issues, and in fact is probably primarily driven by how difficult it is to actually judge the merits of the candidates. But coaching/managing and playing are completely different. Players are about the closes thing we have to a meritocracy. Managers are not much more so than the average job. This is what opens the window for discrimination.

[MidGe]

[ QUOTE ]
Are you somehow suggesting that athletic team management is NOT merit based? Somehow the best man is not getting the job? I think not. There's too much money involved.

[/ QUOTE ]

I am not saying it is not merit based, altough I strongly suspect it is not exclusively merit based. Firstly, inclusion in the selection pool would already have a strong bias and secondly, I am certain, other factors will come into play.

The same, of course, applies to CEO of large businesses where even more money is involved than in sport, and to politics. You are not going to tell me that Bush is the best USA born citizen for the job of president! /images/graemlins/smile.gif

Straight athletic performance (100m whatver) otoh is a less biased figure and more importantly directly measurable, it only involves Da man and the pool is larger and less biased.

[Copernicus]

[ QUOTE ]
Will second vhawk - clearly a diehard racist, but it's such a non-sensical post it's difficult to find something specific to take issue with, he neatly refutes himself.

Metric - it may or may not be the case that IQ is a useful measure of intelligence, and it may or may not be the case that IQ is biologically determined. But if we accept, for the sake of argument, that it's both of those things, it in no way follows that any race is inherently more intelligent, it just says one might be right now. Given the respective environmental history of the two groups in your example, if intelligence is an evolving trait it wouldn't be surprising to find differences since those groups have experienced and evolved through vastly different environments. But as society becomes more racially integrated and homogenized you'd expect to see IQ standardization, not through inter-breeding as the likes of phil have suggested, but through shared environmental stimuli and a shared sense of the extent to which IQ is reproductively dis/advantageous. And it seems that's exactly what is happening, since the IQ gap is closing.

[/ QUOTE ]

I dont think there is enough "selection pressure" for any significant movement in average IQs (if IQ is indeed genetic). A "genetic" 90 IQ will survive and reproduce as succesfully as a "genetic" 125 IQer.

In fact, to the extent that there is a correlation between financial success and IQ there will be even less upward pressure on average IQs, since there will be social constraints on inter-marriage between different "IQ classes" which would have tended to depress the lower IQ reproduction rates.

[vhawk01]

Copernicus,

I thought that was what he meant by selection pressure, that there is a pressure in favor of lower IQ reproduction. I don't mean to sound elitist and quote Harvey Danger, but "only stupid people are breeding..."

[Copernicus]

[ QUOTE ]
Copernicus,

I thought that was what he meant by selection pressure, that there is a pressure in favor of lower IQ reproduction. I don't mean to sound elitist and quote Harvey Danger, but "only stupid people are breeding..."

[/ QUOTE ]

I may have read to much into guesswests "the IQ gap is closing". My reaction to that was a claim that the gap is closing because lower IQs were selected against...upward pressure on IQ.

If he meant that the gap is closing because of the higher reproductive rates of the less affluent (and IF there is correlation between financial success and IQ) so averages are being pulled down, I could more readily accept. But I wouldnt call that "Selection pressure" in the sense of beneficial alleles being reproductively favored over less beneficial alleles. That is just the social and technical environment trumping the biological imperatives and allowing the less fit to survive and propogate. (eg take away welfare or even refuse to increase welfare for additional children and there may be real biological survival pressure, albeit incompatible with humane treatment)

[vhawk01]

Yes, that is exactly what I thought he meant, especially from recent posts of his on this topic that I may or may not be remembering correctly.

[guesswest]

I meant both really, tho I was thinking more of upwards pressure. It's true that the intelligentsia are being outbred, but by the same token IQ scores as rising accross the board. The reasons for that are likely complicated, but I suspect lower IQ ranges are in fact selecting marginally for IQ. In my reply to metric the given was that IQ is exclusively biologically determined - in reality I don't think that is a given, I think IQ development is much more complicated and has all kinds of social factors involved. There's also an assumption that the higher the IQ the better, if the goal is reproduction it may be that a very high IQ is as bad as a very low one.

Ultimately, whether homogenization will see IQ scores go up or down to reach it's level I don't know - but if IQ is a product of natural selection, you'd expect to see IQ standardize one way or another since we all more or less now share the same environment. The only issue, as Copernicus mentions, is environmental pressure, and whether the kind of pressue that'd impact IQ development still exists or whether we've structured our society to neutralize it - but I suspect it does, I think intelligence is still reproductively significant in this society.

[FlFishOn]

[ QUOTE ]
This is what opens the window for discrimination.

[/ QUOTE ]

Prove it. Find one successful suit for employment racial discrimination at the pro sport level (that won't actually be proof but it's a start).

[vhawk01]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
This is what opens the window for discrimination.

[/ QUOTE ]

Prove it.

[/ QUOTE ]

Prove that a method of hiring that makes it difficult to determine true merit opens up the door to discrimination, or prove that the discrimination actually happens? My point was the former, which I think is pretty self-evident.

Btw, shouting "Prove it" at people isn't a very useful debate tactic.

[12AX7]

The point I'm making is that for some reason a meritocracy is OK when blacks have the merit, but when whites have the merit we have to have Affirmative Action.

*Then* the percentages start flying. "Oh 12% of the population is black, but only 5% of management is black". But when the situation is reversed, and the blacks have the upper hand, there's no corresponding handicapping system to benefit whites (or Asians or Native Americans either, to my knowledge.)

Is that not essentially institutionalized reverse discrimination?

If poor blacks can get into institutions with lower LSAT scores, why not poor whites? Just to pick the most talked about instance of this.

Seems to me, this simple observation will continue to fuel anti-black sentiment until it is abolished.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
So how about of it's reversed? If whites are under represented, should the white be favored? I've seen some TV documentary that claims. "Blacks are under represented in NFL management. Blacks are 12% of the populace, but not on NFL management".

However blacks are 51% of the NFL player ranks. I don't see anyone screaming for white numerically equality there... where the jobs are worth what? Millions per year? After all whites are what about 75% of the US population... seems we need some more white football players?

[/ QUOTE ]

Interesting, hey! Where the selection is without bias (athletic achievements), the african americans have a larger representation. /images/graemlins/smile.gif

[/ QUOTE ]

Are you somehow suggesting that athletic team management is NOT merit based? Somehow the best man is not getting the job? I think not. There's too much money involved.

[/ QUOTE ]

[12AX7]

Feel free to point out the strawmen and fallacies. I'm interested.

Was just writing from my personal observations and experiences, though some of the stats came from USA today and the Department of Justice.

Look, you're all believers in the free market right? Isn't the premise of a free market that the price of a goods in a free market represents all that is know about the good at the time the price is struck?

What happens to real estate prices when an area goes black? They go down, true? Doesn't that say it all?

What happens to the crime rate? Doesn't that say it all?

Eddy Murphy himself used to say in one of his stand ups, "Attack of the Black People, Oh No! Crime Rate is up, Property Values are Down!"

And so what if this weren't true? Shouldn't one have the right to associate, or *not associate* for any reason I choose. Or to use At Will type terminology... for "any reason or no reason". And why shouldn't that extend to my neighborhood and place of work or business?

That's all some asking for, is to not have africana crammed at them by the law.

So fine, suppose you say that it's a mistake to confuse correlation with causation. It can still be a valid way to bet, true?

So just for the sake of argument, let's say the various negative statistics about African-Americans were suddenly exactly the same as the average. Suppose I'm simply repulsed by thier culture, physical presence and habits like grabbing thier crotches. Should there not have some option other than white flight? Why is it others basically have to succeed when the blacks show up? Geez, you don't expect me to socialize with women I don't find attractive, right? It's really in the same level.

The bottom line is this. There are many who simply don't want anything to do with African culture, etc. It's a personal preference and it's not really amenable to logic. It is emotional. To paraphrase a famous lawyer, "You can't argue a man into liking a glass of beer." Those who feel that way should recieve as much respect as those who want to completely immerse themselves in africana, true?

Further, there are many that feel this way who are not Supremacists, who are not neo-Nazis, who are not Klansman. Who would in fact support "equal in the eyes of the law" for everyone. Who in short, have no desire to oppress anyone, but rather to just live peacefully in thier own way. This is where I stand. Equal in the eyes of the law, but no more. Hence no race based Affirmative Action.

[ QUOTE ]
Its not your racism (blatant as it may be) that bothers me. Its your utter lack of a grasp on logical principles. Your lengthy post is so chock-full of non sequiturs, strawmen and uncountable other fallacies that it makes baby Jesus cry.

[/ QUOTE ]

[12AX7]

Copernicus,
I think the reality is that higher IQ demographic groups tend to have a financial and material bias that causes them to self limit thier number of offspring.

On the other hand, the lower IQ groups may not be doing this.

So because of the phenomenon of Economic Man, the natural selection pressure on IQ may be downward.

I've seen census data that indicates the African American population is reproducing faster than the average. If the oft stated statistic that African American IQ's average 80 is to be believed, the two taken together seem to support said assertion.

Back when a large family was an asset to survival, I tend to believe high IQ peoples would've decided to have more children. But in more modern times, wherein children are a drag on household resources (as opposed to say a family farm of times gone by) then having less children seems to have become the norm for those interested in quality of life.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Will second vhawk - clearly a diehard racist, but it's such a non-sensical post it's difficult to find something specific to take issue with, he neatly refutes himself.

Metric - it may or may not be the case that IQ is a useful measure of intelligence, and it may or may not be the case that IQ is biologically determined. But if we accept, for the sake of argument, that it's both of those things, it in no way follows that any race is inherently more intelligent, it just says one might be right now. Given the respective environmental history of the two groups in your example, if intelligence is an evolving trait it wouldn't be surprising to find differences since those groups have experienced and evolved through vastly different environments. But as society becomes more racially integrated and homogenized you'd expect to see IQ standardization, not through inter-breeding as the likes of phil have suggested, but through shared environmental stimuli and a shared sense of the extent to which IQ is reproductively dis/advantageous. And it seems that's exactly what is happening, since the IQ gap is closing.

[/ QUOTE ]

I dont think there is enough "selection pressure" for any significant movement in average IQs (if IQ is indeed genetic). A "genetic" 90 IQ will survive and reproduce as succesfully as a "genetic" 125 IQer.

In fact, to the extent that there is a correlation between financial success and IQ there will be even less upward pressure on average IQs, since there will be social constraints on inter-marriage between different "IQ classes" which would have tended to depress the lower IQ reproduction rates.

[/ QUOTE ]

[12AX7]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Phil, did it occur to you that we might be offended by your bigotry and vitriol as oppose to your 'arguments'? Nobody is calling you a racist because you pointed out some factoid about IQ distributions, they're calling you a racist because of your incendiary use of language and your gleeful willingness to demean and dehumanize a significant percentage of humanity.

I credit the majority of 2+2ers with intelligence, and I tend to think almost everyone here would be happy to discuss this or any issue without resorting to ad hominems had you presented your views as part of a considered dialogue - you didn't and you never have.

[/ QUOTE ]

Wow. You're way out of line here. It's called projection and/or denial. Check it out.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm not really sure exactly what you're accusing me of here, but it's certainly not hard to find posts from phil that back that claim up. It's absolutely apparent that he plain just doesn't like blacks.

[/ QUOTE ]

And what is so awfully wrong if one "just plaun doesn't like blacks"?

Suppose it was one of the mid-east races currently out of favor for terrorism, would there be such a fuss being raised about it.

Why exactly aren't people allowed to have race based preferences.

Geez, I'm very attracted to Asian women. And yes, it is thier physical features and culture that attracts me. Suppose I did not have an equal aversion to things african. Would my preference for asian ladies make me a racist? Same for Jewish women? I find many of them attractive as well. Anyone else here a Fran Dresher fan. /images/graemlins/smile.gif

[12AX7]

Actually I think the Native Americans should be pissed at us for bringing Africa over here, more than anything else. Given the current world climate, being the last superpower standing is probably something to be thankful for.

But yes, in retrospect the means by which North America was acquired seems morally suspect. Unless you are into Natural Selection or Machiavellism, or some such.

What difference does it make now where one tries to go? Europe is becoming Africanized too. Slavers even transported slaves to French Polynesia. I think other than Iceland, there's no where you can go. And with US military bases up there, I suspect even there, there is some africanization in progress.

As for the chip on African American's shoulder about slavery. I agree. It was wrong. But consider this. If all was the same, but thier ancestors had not been brought over here... where would they be today? Living in grass huts and committing black on black racists attrocities as in Rwanda?

African Americans are the single most well off group of blacks in the world today, or so I've read.

To be honest, I'd say it's mostly this generation too. The blacks that actually had to fight for thier civil rights were not as gangsta oriented. Though even as kid, I can recall gangs saying, "The white gangs run from the black gangs that run from the Puerto Rican gangs". In any event I worked in a 70-90% black area for a number of years, I've seen the change first hand.

Had MLK's promise really been lived up to folks would be saying to thier real estate agents, "Where's the black neighborhood? Those are the safest places to be. Since those folks had to fight for thier rights, they really respect thier freedoms."

Yeah, sure when was the last time you heard that?

More likely the unspoken question is, "Where are the blacks, how long until the get here and the place goes down the tubes?"

If you ever seen it happen to an area, that's exactly what happens too. Inglewood, California comes to mind. Compare it in pre-bussing days to post bussing. It basically became an annex of Compton, true? I've seen it occur in large areas of S. Fla. as well.

It seems where ever there's africanization, things decay. Unless the media has been lying to us all our lives about those areas. Which I suppose could be true. But I've seen nothing that refutes that correlation.

As for the number of racists in the USA. Well, there's plenty of them *of all colors*. Seems to be a human tendency, for whatever reasons.

However, I'd really say are many more racially concious people in the USA than are willing to admit it. Primarily because the media has successfully demonized any show of white pride. These people are not neccesarily people who want to recreate the Old South or the Third Reich.

What you don't seem to realize is that there are many who may not care for africana, that are not Supremecists or the like. They simply don't care for things African and want to be apart from it.

Perhaps if you are honest with yourself, you may be one. Assuming you are not black, what's the probability you are going to marry black?

In any event, I don't care for any of the Superecists groups any more than I care for the Black Panthers. Both groups would push thier agenda on me by law and by force, given the chance.

As stated previously, *thats* what I'm against more than anything. Any group that seeks to impose it's agenda on my life.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
But I'll tell you who should really be pissed at all of us. The Native Americans.

[/ QUOTE ]

Indeed... ever done any research on this? Broken treaties over and over again. Guess by who? Go back where you came from. Go and fix the problems in Europe, if that is where you came from.

IMO, you are a racist of the first order. You don't even realise what you are. I do hope you are a minority in the USA, otherwise there is little hope for it.

[/ QUOTE ]

[12AX7]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
So how about of it's reversed? If whites are under represented, should the white be favored? I've seen some TV documentary that claims. "Blacks are under represented in NFL management. Blacks are 12% of the populace, but not on NFL management".

However blacks are 51% of the NFL player ranks. I don't see anyone screaming for white numerically equality there... where the jobs are worth what? Millions per year? After all whites are what about 75% of the US population... seems we need some more white football players?

[/ QUOTE ]

Interesting, hey! Where the selection is without bias (athletic achievements), the african americans have a larger representation. /images/graemlins/smile.gif

[/ QUOTE ]

By the way MidGe, I'm not a supremecist. I'll be the first to concede that from a natural selection standpoint, blacks may have the lead. And the same IQ stats that are used to deride blacks indicate Asians have the highest IQ's. So I can't say that whites lead there either.

At worst, I'd call myself a sepratist, or afro-averse, or anti-bussing.

This isn't about supremacy for me.

It's about freedom of choice.

[MidGe]

[ QUOTE ]
Actually I think the Native Americans should be pissed at us for bringing Africa over here, more than anything else. Given the current world climate, being the last superpower standing is probably something to be thankful for.

[/ QUOTE ]

OK! Start to do something about redressing the violations of treaties then!

Raise taxes to buy back the land stolen and give it back to the legal and rightful owners.

[guesswest]

12: Freedom of association is about who you're friends with, who you hang out with, who you choose to buy goods from etc. Of course you have that right, however much the way in which you choose to exercise it demonstrates ignorance.

Keeping minorities out of colleges/workplaces is not about freedom of association, it's apartheid. You don't have any ownership over public places and public services, and to suggest that you do or should have any kind of greater right in that regard is exactly what white supremacy is.

[MidGe]

[ QUOTE ]
12: Freedom of association is about who you're friends with, who you hang out with, who you choose to buy goods from etc. Of course you have that right, however much the way in which you choose to exercise it demonstrates ignorance.

Keeping minorities out of colleges/workplaces is not about freedom of association, it's apartheid. You don't have any ownership over public places and public services, and to suggest that you do or should have any kind of greater right in that regard is exactly what white supremacy is.

[/ QUOTE ]

Uhh? I have made no mention of freedom of association???

Keeping minorities out... is apartheid! Yes, I agree!??

I am not getting your point here.

[guesswest]

That was in response to 12AX7, not you /images/graemlins/grin.gif

[MidGe]

np /images/graemlins/smile.gif

[FlFishOn]

[ QUOTE ]
However, I'd really say are many more racially concious people in the USA than are willing to admit it. Primarily because the media has successfully demonized any show of white pride.

[/ QUOTE ]

I see this as key. To state that you believe blacks and whites might be different in any way is to invite attack. If you hold any public position it is suicide. The fact that none of these differences can be considered, from a public policy point of view, is a huge disservice to both blacks and whites. It's unlikely to change either.

[vhawk01]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
However, I'd really say are many more racially concious people in the USA than are willing to admit it. Primarily because the media has successfully demonized any show of white pride.

[/ QUOTE ]

I see this as key. To state that you believe blacks and whites might be different in any way is to invite attack. If you hold any public position it is suicide. The fact that none of these differences can be considered, from a public policy point of view, is a huge disservice to both blacks and whites. It's unlikely to change either.

[/ QUOTE ]

If there is any merit to your claim, which I think there probably is (obviously no situation is perfect) you have ONLY centuries of overt and violent racism to blame. If we as a society have swung the pendulum back slightly too far in some instances it is at least a mistake made with good intentions. Does it seem fair that you are completely intolerant of any sort of 'erring on the side of caution' in light of American history?

[FlFishOn]

[ QUOTE ]
If there is any merit to your claim, which I think there probably is (obviously no situation is perfect) you have ONLY centuries of overt and violent racism to blame.

[/ QUOTE ]

Two points.

The cause is not the issue. The difference is the issue.

Africa was a developmentally retarded in almost every respect before it came into contact with whites. Again, the why of it isn't important but recognizing that blacks and whites are different would be the first step to reducing racial strife and fixing many social ills.

[vhawk01]

I dont actually believe that is true, but I am always on the side of the truth for truths sake. In other words, I agree with you that misrepresenting evidence and mealy-mouthing for the sake of political correctness is wrong no matter what the outcome. I just don't share your opinion that it is this apparent lack of recognition of inherent differences that drives racial strife and social ills. How, specifically, is this the case? Are we less effective at structuring our social programs because we simply won't admit that 'black people are just stupider?' I'm not trying to put words in your mouth, but I know you have made similar arguments in the past.

[vhawk01]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
If there is any merit to your claim, which I think there probably is (obviously no situation is perfect) you have ONLY centuries of overt and violent racism to blame.

[/ QUOTE ]

Two points.

The cause is not the issue. The difference is the issue.

Africa was a developmentally retarded in almost every respect before it came into contact with whites. Again, the why of it isn't important but recognizing that blacks and whites are different would be the first step to reducing racial strife and fixing many social ills.

[/ QUOTE ]

Also, I do believe that the WHY of this question is fundamentally important. Have you read any of Jared Diamond's books on the subject? Guns, Germs and Steel specifically addresses exactly what you are saying, and does a fair to middling job of proposing causes.

[FlFishOn]

[ QUOTE ]
I dont actually believe that is true, but I am always on the side of the truth for truths sake. In other words, I agree with you that misrepresenting evidence and mealy-mouthing for the sake of political correctness is wrong no matter what the outcome. I just don't share your opinion that it is this apparent lack of recognition of inherent differences that drives racial strife and social ills. How, specifically, is this the case? Are we less effective at structuring our social programs because we simply won't admit that 'black people are just stupider?' I'm not trying to put words in your mouth, but I know you have made similar arguments in the past.

[/ QUOTE ]

It is unarguable that black children do worse on almost every metric (save self-esteem, how ironic) than whites. Even when you control for income this holds. Yet US social policy will never (likely) take this differential into account. Everyone loses when the policy of 'one size fits all' is ideologically mandated.

[ QUOTE ]
Are we less effective at structuring our social programs because we simply won't admit that 'black people are ...

[/ QUOTE ] ...different? There can be no doubt.

[madnak]

[ QUOTE ]
It is unarguable that black children do worse on almost every metric (save self-esteem, how ironic) than whites.

[/ QUOTE ]

What? This is outrageous enough to require some evidence.

[guesswest]

Fish - what exactly would you like society to do about this???

It may be the case that certain groups on average perform worse/better on metrics, but 'average' is the key word here. There's plenty crossover - there are super-high IQs and very low IQs in every group, the point of the egalitarian principle is that we should give everyone equal opportunity, since the possibility of great achievement exists in anyone.

I don't reject out of hand your basic suggestion that the US has oversteered in such a way that there now exists embedded dogma to the effect that everyone is identical. But if you're talking about structuring society around average distributions of skills - well, I'd really like to know what structure you have in mind, because I can't imagine any policy along these lines that wouldn't create huge social injustices.

[FlFishOn]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
It is unarguable that black children do worse on almost every metric (save self-esteem, how ironic) than whites.

[/ QUOTE ]

What? This is outrageous enough to require some evidence.

[/ QUOTE ]

One hour with Google.com and you will have it. Try infant mortality, out of wedlock birthrate, high school graduation rates, criminality for starters.

[FlFishOn]

[ QUOTE ]
Fish - what exactly would you like society to do about this???

[/ QUOTE ]

It's not my area of expertise.

The one thing I do know is that our failure to recognize differential ability and differential tendencies is inefficient.

How about this: We decriminalize the discussion of the facts in the case. That'd be a fine first step.

[madnak]

What about sports scores and penis size?

Anyhow, I'm specifically talking about your idea that blacks have higher self-esteem. I don't think it's even meaningful to talk about "almost every metric."

[Riddick]

I know of a black culture. Don't know of any African-American culture though.

[Riddick]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I wish white culture would put more emphasis on proper spelling. It hurts to read that post.

[/ QUOTE ]

FYP

[/ QUOTE ]

FYP

And yes, it needs to be "hurts" in order to maintain consistency in tense.

[Riddick]

[ QUOTE ]
It doesn't help that the rise of the Republican Party since Reagan has been in part due to a deliberate strategy to revive white supremacist ideas in less explicit garb (The Southern Strategy, anyone ?).

[/ QUOTE ]

White supremacy? /images/graemlins/confused.gif Didn't Ronald Reagan extend the Voting Rights Act? Didn't Reagan sign MLK Jr day into a national holiday? Didn't Reagan appoint tons of blacks as judges and to other government offices, many of them "firsts"? The first black four-star Army general?

Oh, and chief, the "Southern Strategy" is from the early 60s. Reagan had no southern strategy. Thanks for coming out.

[Cyrus]

[ QUOTE ]
I realise how destructive the African American culture is.

[/ QUOTE ]African Americans are practically dictating world fashion. Have been for at least two decades.

We must be doomed.

/images/graemlins/smile.gif

[bobman0330]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I wish white culture would put more emphasis on proper spelling. It hurts to read that post.

[/ QUOTE ]

FYP

[/ QUOTE ]

FYP

And yes, it needs to be "hurts" in order to maintain consistency in tense.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is some low-quality grammar nittery. It's ironic that all you crazy anarchists are against government enforcing laws, but then you make up non-existent rules about tense consistency and try to cram them down people's throats. /images/graemlins/tongue.gif

[vhawk01]

[ QUOTE ]
Fish - what exactly would you like society to do about this???

It may be the case that certain groups on average perform worse/better on metrics, but 'average' is the key word here. There's plenty crossover - there are super-high IQs and very low IQs in every group, the point of the egalitarian principle is that we should give everyone equal opportunity, since the possibility of great achievement exists in anyone.

I don't reject out of hand your basic suggestion that the US has oversteered in such a way that there now exists embedded dogma to the effect that everyone is identical. But if you're talking about structuring society around average distributions of skills - well, I'd really like to know what structure you have in mind, because I can't imagine any policy along these lines that wouldn't create huge social injustices.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is exactly what I mean, good post guess. Basically, even if Fish is correct that we as a society refuse to consider that, on average, certain groups perform slightly (and it is slightly and decreasing all the time) worse on certain metrics, I still don't accept the premise that THIS is what is causing the societal problems that we may (imagine, exaggerate) have. There are huge differences among white children, but we simply can't have 15 different 1st grade classes. Our education system is set up in a very egalitarian way, and I don't think its political correctness that is keeping it that way, at least not in the way that Fish implies. Its mostly practicality. I think Fish is seeing two problems, one being PC run amok and the other being a fundamental difficulty in educating children on a wide range of ability-levels, and is incorrectly assigning one to be the cause of the other. I'd like to see both evidence of this assumption and any potential solutions or alternatives.

[FlFishOn]

[ QUOTE ]
Basically, even if Fish is correct that we as a society refuse to consider that, on average, certain groups perform slightly (and it is slightly and decreasing all the time) worse on certain metrics, I still don't accept the premise that THIS is what is causing the societal problems that we may (imagine, exaggerate) have.

[/ QUOTE ]

Differential criminality has grown over the previous 50 years. Wouldn't everyone be interested in bringing black criminality down to white levels? America would be instantly improved across-the-board with blacks getting the biggest boost.

So how do you do this if you start with the assumption that blacks and whites are identical? You will then fail, as we have so far. The key, IMHO, lies in the differential out-of-wedlock birthrates. Fathers in households prevent criminal children. Blacks are female raised in the vast majority. So if you were to structure some programs that incentivized fathers-led households for blacks you make some headway in a generation.

Can it happen? Not a chance in today's America.

[vhawk01]

Really, crime rate? THAT is what you chose as your statistic-du-jour? And let me guess...even adjusted for income level...rich black guys still get pulled over more than rich white guys? I hate to just dismiss your post out of hand but...I'm gonna.

[FlFishOn]

[ QUOTE ]
I hate to just dismiss your post out of hand but...I'm gonna.

[/ QUOTE ]

Ignorance is bliss.

[vhawk01]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I hate to just dismiss your post out of hand but...I'm gonna.

[/ QUOTE ]

Ignorance is bliss.

[/ QUOTE ]

Tru dat, homie.