December 23, 2010

Uniqueness

Jay Matthews delivers breathtaking news in the Washington Post: acceptance rates to get into Thomas Jefferson High School for Science and Technology, perhaps the hardest public science school in the country (average exiting SAT score of 2220 out of 2400):
Looking at applicants of different ethnicities, the crux of Meikle's question, 184 African Americans applied and four (2.3 percent of those applying) were admitted. With Hispanics, the figures were 225 applied and 13 (5.8 percent) admitted. In the multiracial category, 190 applied and 21 (11 percent) were admitted.

The number of whites (1,277) and Asians (1,243) who applied was close, but their admission rates were not. Of whites, 166 (13 percent) were admitted and 276 Asians (22.2 percent) were admitted. 

So,  Asians first, whites second, Hispanics third, blacks fourth. What an astonishing result! Who has ever seen that rank ordering before in any competition involving test scores and grades? It's an anomaly!

Of course, no attempt is made to compare this to the countless similar situations where similar results are seen. We're only supposed to to talk about Thomas Jefferson HS. What is it about TJHS that leads to such remarkable results?  We're simply not supposed to notice any similar pattern elsewhere, and thus preserve our intellectual virginity for thinking about the Virginia school. People who have actually learned things from general patterns are considered unwanted gatecrashers.
 

56 comments:

Anonymous said...

The figures for Asians are outstanding.

From what I heard, the school has a large percentage of Chinese and Indian students.

Tom in VA said...

An awesome comment on the Washington Post's website in response to Matthew's latest story on TJ, from a self-described current student there. The last two paragraphs are golden.

"This is starting to get ridiculous.

The second round, as you say, considers "personal characteristics." Students who demonstrate a strong interest in science and technology have a strong advantage because it is only those students who will be truly happy in the TJ environment. TJ admissions can evaluate students based on other factors (such as morality, which already is taken into account with the 2nd essay on the TJ admissions test), but really, as a current TJ student myself, I can honestly say that focusing on an interest in science and technology is especially important when evaluating potential students...

Frankly, minority or not, people who do not demonstrate a very strong interest in science and technology will, simply, not enjoy the TJ experience. I have many friends interested in going into the liberal arts in college, but was unable to pursue their liberal arts interests at TJ because of the lack of space to take liberal arts courses. Thus, their time at TJ was absolutely miserable. I have a friend very into neuroscience, and she considers TJ her second home.

TJ does not do affirmative action; it is completely merit-based. People who not only have strong test scores and high grades, but also have a strong interest in science and technology get in. TJ is a SCIENCE and TECHNOLOGY school. It is only right that they base their admissions on such qualities. If you are looking for a school that focuses on other subjects/traits, go look somewhere else. If your kid is not interested in the sciences, regardless of whether they be a minority or not, they will not enjoy TJ. If they do not get in, consider it a blessing--TJ would've probably been a horrible experience for them.

Affirmative action, in and of itself is discrimination. This is especially evident in the midst of the college application process. I know of various people who have gotten into excellent, top-tier schools. Instead of congratulating them on their merits, however, students generally say, "Oh, he got in because he's Native American/Hispanic/African American." At TJ, that is not the case. Everyone gets in because they deserved it. Not because of their race.

In the end, TJ's system is for the best. Even the minorities at TJ are strongly against your articles, Jay Matthew. Once the minorities start criticizing articles that supposedly support them, you better think twice about writing about the same topic in the future."

Posted by: equan_3 | December 22, 2010 10:12 PM | Report abuse

Tom in VA said...

An awesome comment on the Washington Post's website in response to Matthew's latest story on TJ, from a self-described current student there. The last two paragraphs are golden.

"This is starting to get ridiculous.

The second round, as you say, considers "personal characteristics." Students who demonstrate a strong interest in science and technology have a strong advantage because it is only those students who will be truly happy in the TJ environment. TJ admissions can evaluate students based on other factors (such as morality, which already is taken into account with the 2nd essay on the TJ admissions test), but really, as a current TJ student myself, I can honestly say that focusing on an interest in science and technology is especially important when evaluating potential students...

Frankly, minority or not, people who do not demonstrate a very strong interest in science and technology will, simply, not enjoy the TJ experience. I have many friends interested in going into the liberal arts in college, but was unable to pursue their liberal arts interests at TJ because of the lack of space to take liberal arts courses. Thus, their time at TJ was absolutely miserable. I have a friend very into neuroscience, and she considers TJ her second home.

TJ does not do affirmative action; it is completely merit-based. People who not only have strong test scores and high grades, but also have a strong interest in science and technology get in. TJ is a SCIENCE and TECHNOLOGY school. It is only right that they base their admissions on such qualities. If you are looking for a school that focuses on other subjects/traits, go look somewhere else. If your kid is not interested in the sciences, regardless of whether they be a minority or not, they will not enjoy TJ. If they do not get in, consider it a blessing--TJ would've probably been a horrible experience for them.

Affirmative action, in and of itself is discrimination. This is especially evident in the midst of the college application process. I know of various people who have gotten into excellent, top-tier schools. Instead of congratulating them on their merits, however, students generally say, "Oh, he got in because he's Native American/Hispanic/African American." At TJ, that is not the case. Everyone gets in because they deserved it. Not because of their race.

In the end, TJ's system is for the best. Even the minorities at TJ are strongly against your articles, Jay Matthew. Once the minorities start criticizing articles that supposedly support them, you better think twice about writing about the same topic in the future."

Posted by: equan_3 | December 22, 2010 10:12 PM | Report abuse

Formerly.JP98 said...

I'm pleasantly surprised that not all the commenters on the WaPo piece are blaming the differences on socio-economic status.

Darwin's Sh*tlist said...

The fact that results like this tend to be depressingly uniform (nearly as much so as the finalists for the Olympics 100m dash) is getting tougher to ignore.

After nearly a half-century of experimentation, have we not produced an educational model - anywhere, in a country of over 300 million - that consistently yields any other result? For that matter, has any other industrialized country produced any educational results approaching ethnic parity?

I guess that progressives' commitment to scientific education doesn't extend past cell biology.

Anonymous said...

Steve,

As someone living in the DC area, I've had the pleasure of being amused by Matthews for years. He's remarkably clueless, a gift that keeps on giving. You really should add him to your rotation.

By the way, the race issue pops up every few years with TJ. The powers that be just can't seem to figure out why Asians - so many of whom are the children of poor or working-class immigrants - get admitted so often compared to blacks and, particularly, Hispanics - so many of whom are the children of poor and working-class immigrants.

In the last go-around, some county officials suggested soft quotas based on percent of population. White parents - apparently forgetting their liberal beliefs when it hits close to home - protested in a major way, arguing that the only fair way to base admissions was on how the kids scored on the admission exam. (Why that logic ends at the high school level they never explained.)

The county/school decided to square that circle by simply adding five or ten percent more slots to the incoming class and designating those slots to under-represented minorities. For some reason, Matthews never followed up to see how those additional kids did.

Anonymous said...

Off-topic but interesting aspect of the muni bond crisis. Prichard, AL stops paying pensions (not stops paying into the pension fund, but stops paying retired city employees their pensions). From Wikipedia:

The racial makeup of the city was 84.53% Black or African American, 14.18% White, 0.30% Native American, 0.12% Asian, 0.02% Pacific Islander, 0.07% from other races, and 0.79% from two or more races. 0.57% of the population were Hispanic or Latino of any race.

asdfasdfasdfasd said...

And as long as we're speaking of uniqueness, why bunch Jews together with whites? Let's see the figures for Jewish acceptance.

And you're right. No MSM bitching about the SURPRISING results of NBA and NFL drafts. Liberal MSM operates on the basis of racial favoritism--for whatever reason, some races are given more sympathy, respect, concern, and support.

When blacks do well, the world is turning in the right direction and the promised land is before us. If NFL team were to be all black, if every coaching staff were to be all black, and if the owners were to be all black, then liberal MSM will hail it as the triumph of diversity, a first for black America and all of America, and we should all be so happy. No one complains about lack of Mexicans, whites, Asians, and Arabs in the NFL running back position(or any position), but MSM still bitches about there not being enough black quarterbacks and coaches.

I think it's the way we grow up. From childhood, we see MLK as our Jesus, blacks as suffering saints(from all those PBS documentaries), blacks as the coolest(from pop culture), blacks as the baadest(from sports), black as the most spiritual('magic negroes' like Oprah and Morgan Freeman's narration). So, it just seems wrong that blacks don't do well in some areas and that many remain poor or dysfunctional.
Though HBD people know why this is the case since they have a rational view of race, most Americans have been fed the irrational chickensoup of NOBLE(AND HIP/COOL/BADASS)NEGRO CULT.

Jews and blacks are two people we are so supposed to love UNCONDITIONALLY. We are supposed to want blacks to succeed, even above us, which is why so many whites love billionairess Oprah and prez Obama. And we are supposed to believe everything about Jewish power and influence is good--or even to believe that Jews have no undue power and influence.
So, we can bitch about whites and Asians doing better than blacks, but we cannot bitch about blacks doing better than whites in sports or Jews doing better than whites in business and media.

Anonymous said...

B-W difference = -0.89 SD
H-W difference = -0.45 SD
A-W difference = +0.36 SD

Henry Canaday said...

The Washington Post magazine did a story on TJHS awhile ago, with a rather sniffy title, something like, “Would You Want Your Child to Attend This School?” But the body of the article made it seem like a pretty swell place. Apparently, TJHS bills itself as a school for the science-inclined, rather than for the gifted. Or perhaps literature, history and other non-science studies are such a wreck in high school, no one cares to encourage excellence at them.

bleach said...

The comments on that article are all against Mathew's assumptions of discrimination, so that's a positive sign. Americans are not the total zombies our elites want to think we are.

Anonymous said...

All hail to our future Chinese and Indian overlords(in addition to the Jewish ones we currently have of course)!

Toadal said...

Steve said: "What is it about TJHS that leads to such remarkable results? We're simply not supposed to notice any similst pattern elsewhere, and thus preserve our intellectual virginity for thinking about the Virginia school. People who have actually learned things from general patterns are considered unwanted gatecrashers."

John Rosenberg, another political gatecrasher of discriminations.us recently reported on Black over representation at Columbia University, "The Journal of Blacks in Higher Education reports that blacks make up 14.5% of this year’s freshman class at Columbia. Since according to the U.S. Census blacks make up only 12.9% of the U.S. population (as of 2009), they are clearly “overrepresented” (in the language of the preferential) there. Is Columbia doing anything to correct this imbalance, and the necessarily corresponding "underrepresentation" of other groups?"

Blacks made up 14.5% of Columbia University Fall 2010 freshmen , while only 2.8% at the University of California, Berkeley.

This is an interesting outcome, but what are the numbers behind this fact?

The Collegeboard reports American Blacks averaged 429 and 428 respectively on the 2009 SAT in Critical Reading and Mathematics tests from a pool of 196,961 Black test takers. The Black Critical Reading standard deviation (SD) was 98, while the Mathematics SD was 97.

This means of the 197 American Black test takers who were 3.2906 standard deviations above the Black mean, they achieved the following average scores:

The Black Talented 0.1% (1 in 1000)
===================================

The talented 0.1 percent Black SAT Critical Reading score: 751
3.2906 x 98 = 322.5 + mean = 751 SAT

The talented 0.1 percent Black SAT Mathematics score: 747
3.2906 x 97 = 319 + mean = 747 SAT

The 197 black U.S. high school seniors, who averaged good but not excellent SAT scores, is a pretty shallow pool to draw upon when you consider Columbia University admitted 202 Blacks to their Fall 2010 class. It makes one wonder what percentage of this pool Columbia admitted, perhaps, ten to 15 percent? This is unlikely with Caltech, Harvard, and Yale elbowing to the front of the queue. I would place a small bet that the average Columbia University 2010 Black freshmen had a *much* lower SAT score. This result is pretty demoralizing to the 1000s of white or Asian seniors with a perfect 800 mathematics score who were pushed to the rear of Columbia's admission queue.

So why bother to apply?

The Academic Ranking of World Universities (ARWU), commonly known as the Shanghai ranking has been criticized in the English press since its, "ranking is heavily weighted toward institutions whose faculty or alumni have won Nobel Prizes" and it does not measure "the quality of teaching".

Obviously, ARWU ranking has nothing to do with the caliber of 2010 current crop of undergraduates, however, it is interesting to note that Columbia fell from 7th to 8th in the ARWU ranking this year while merit oriented, Berkeley maintained its position in 2nd place. Perhaps Columbia will fall even lower next year.

Anonymous said...

I just met two hugely successful screenwriters who went to Thomas Jefferson, so whatever kind of filter they use is producing more than future scientists and engineers.

eh said...

Of course, no attempt is made to compare this to the countless similar situations where similar results are seen.

The guy doesn't seem like an intellectual giant. Or particularly HBD aware. Or all that courageous, which is a must if you want to write honestly about all that and keep your job. Being independently wealthy would help too I guess.

Would be interesting to know how many of the Asians are immigrants, or the children of immigrants. Because I imagine, given the way Whites outperform Blacks and Hispanics, and how competitive this school seems to be, that there's a 1:1 relationship between admission of Asians and displacement of Whites. Which is a shame, because this is America after all. Meaning a country founded and developed by Whites -- "posterity" etc.

Anonymous said...

I wonder if ACORN will label those results "Secret Apartheid" like they did with Stuyvesant, Bronx Science, and Brooklyn Technical in NYC, when similar results showed up in those schools. Luckily, for NYC, the rich liberal parents of New York decided destroying their best high schools would not happen like it did with CCNY in 1969.

Anonymous said...

Assuming the following average IQs:

Whites: 100.6
Asians: 106
Hispanics: 94
Blacks: 85

and assuming IQ amongst each group is normally distributed with a standard deviation of 15, we may ask: If the students were picked by ranking their IQs and admitting the N highest scoring, how many of each race would be admitted?

Answer:

For N=459 (actual total number of admitted single-race students )

Model Prediction:

Asians: 276.5
Whites: 166.7
Hispanics: 13.3
Blacks: 2.8

Actual numbers:

Asians: 276
Whites: 166
Hispanics: 13.3
Blacks: 2.8

It is clear that the model agrees well with the empirical data.



Disclaimer: The author is not suggesting that readers draw any specific conclusions from these results. The inputs for the model were chosen to be consistent with well-known, published results of average IQs is the US. The author chooses not to interpret the meaning of IQ or to what degree it is culturally or genetically influenced.

Anonymous said...

Jay Mathews has been attacking TJ for at least a decade now. He's wading into dangerous territory if this article is discussed as much as his articles were when I was a student there, especially now that the school is majority Asian. The elephant in the room is now trumpeting at high volume.

stari_momak said...

"The powers that be just can't seem to figure out why Asians - so many of whom are the children of poor or working-class immigrants "

Hmmm, I'll bet it is not the case that the Asian children applying are mostly working class.

But you know what, who cares? I'm guessing this high school was built and paid for by whites. Why should we allow these institutions to be overrun with Asians?

Anonymous said...

Thomas Jefferson High is hardly unique. All around the country, the most elite high schools are being disproportionately dominated by East Asians and upper caste Indians. And what percentage of whites at these schools are actually Jewish?

I suspect that gentile children are increasingly being squeezed out of the most elite areas of academia by the three aforementioned groups.

dfasdfasdf said...

Whites: 100.6
Asians: 106
Hispanics: 94
Blacks: 85

------------

Asians are not naturally smarter than whites. Let us assume IQ is 70% genetic and 30% environmental. Higher Asian IQ stats could be the result of more studying and academic exercise among Asians.

Amount of mental preparation does matter on IQ tests.

Also, how trustworthy are Asian IQ scores(from Asia)? Are they of ALL Asian students or only of affluent Asian students?

And, maybe Asian immigrants to the US tend to be the educated kind--smarter than the average Asian(just like African immigrants to the US tend to be among the better educated among Africans).
I recall reading that East Asian IQ is more like 99 than 106.

alonzo portfolio said...

@Asdafasdetc.:

In '96 I met an honest black guy in Berkeley. We were waiting our turn for hoops, when a fight broke out among a bunch of brothers. He turned to me and said, "black people are messed up, man."

sadfasdfasdf said...

What do you make of this?

http://www.gladwell.com/2007/2007_12_17_c_iq.html

"Flynn then talked about what we've learned from studies of adoption and mixed-race children—and that evidence didn't fit a genetic model, either. If I.Q. is innate, it shouldn't make a difference whether it's a mixed-race child's mother or father who is black. But it does: children with a white mother and a black father have an eight-point I.Q. advantage over those with a black mother and a white father. And it shouldn't make much of a difference where a mixed-race child is born. But, again, it does: the children fathered by black American G.I.s in postwar Germany and brought up by their German mothers have the same I.Q.s as the children of white American G.I.s and German mothers. The difference, in that case, was not the fact of the children's blackness, as a fundamentalist would say. It was the fact of their Germanness—of their being brought up in a different culture, under different circumstances. 'The mind is much more like a muscle than we've ever realized,' Flynn said. 'It needs to get cognitive exercise. It's not some piece of clay on which you put an indelible mark.' The lesson to be drawn from black and white differences was the same as the lesson from the Netherlands years ago: I.Q. measures not just the quality of a person's mind but the quality of the world that person lives in."

Could it be that white women attract smarter black males than white men do with black females? Could it be that most white guys who have children with black women are really dumb losers?

And in the German case, could it be that black GI's of higher caliber had children with German women than was the case with white GIs? Suppose most German women were less willing to go with a black guy than with a white guy. Thus, the black guy had to be of an higher quality in order to attract the German female.

Well, that may have been the case in the past. Today, many white women seem to go for any black stud thanks to our trash culture.

adfasdfadsf said...

"I just met two hugely successful screenwriters who went to Thomas Jefferson, so whatever kind of filter they use is producing more than future scientists and engineers."

Most screenwriting is an exercise in mechanical engineering.

adfasdfadsf said...

"Meaning a country founded and developed by Whites -- 'posterity' etc."

Did 'posterity' mean domination of whites at all cost, or did it mean preservation of fair system of laws for all Americans?
If whites all lazy and non-whites were industrious, did Founding Fathers mean that lazy whites should rule over industrious non-whites?
I've come across this 'posterity' argument many times, and I've no idea if it means 'white christians must rule' or 'the constitutional system of rule of law' must endure.
If the former, is it a kind of permanent affirmative action in favor of whites?
Well, it certainly has its advantages(wink wink), but maybe it would have been better if the Founders had worded it more clearly, like 'White gentiles must rule'.

But, this causes problems. What if the white masses prefer the product of non-whites? What if whites prefer black music and athleticism over the white kind? Won't blacks gain more money and dough? What if gentiles prefer Jewish doctors, lawyers, and financial experts to gentile ones. Won't Jews grow more powerful?
Suppose a research company prefers smart Asian students to Beavis and Butthead?
So complicated.

Henry Canaday said...

Perhaps TJHS threatens the nice racket The Washington Post has had going with its Kaplan subsidiary. The Post’s editorialists and reporters do everything they can to keep the public school system mediocre at best and students trapped in this system, and then Kaplan is there to help the inmates, er, graduates, cram for tests to get into the better colleges they want to attend.

I’m not paranoid. I just live in Washington.

Anonymous said...

In the last go-around, some county officials suggested soft quotas based on percent of population.

How exactly is that a "soft quota"? It sounds like a plain old quota to me.

White parents - apparently forgetting their liberal beliefs when it hits close to home - protested in a major way

I've never seen any evidence that white parents possess those "liberal beliefs". If they did have them, quotas would not have to be imposed by the courts.

Anonymous said...

And as long as we're speaking of uniqueness, why bunch Jews together with whites?

Then while we're at it, why not break out the white score by all its constituent parts. German, French, Amish, Mormon, Catholic ...

Jews are no more unique than any other group of whites.

Sideways said...

And the first comment after the article seems to be complaining that the subjective part of the evaluation work to weed out blacks and hispanics, hahaha

Anonymous said...

I just met two hugely successful screenwriters who went to Thomas Jefferson, so whatever kind of filter they use is producing more than future scientists and engineers.

But Michael Blowhard insists artists aren't any smarter than anyone else!

stari_momak said...

"Did 'posterity' mean domination of whites at all cost, or did it mean preservation of fair system of laws for all Americans? "

The term is ourselves and our posterity and the sentence makes clear that the system of government is being established for 'our posterity". Two distinct entities, the system being established, and the people establishing. And if that isn't enough, the actions of the first Congresses -- limiting militia service to 'free white males', limiting naturalization to 'free white citizens', should make it crystal.

And I know this sounds like sour grapes, but we've had pretty significant amounts of 'Asian scientist ' immigration into this country now for 45 years, and they or their children have been dominating UC's at least for a long time -- even in the early 1990s I remember UCLA being referred to as 'University of Caucasians Lost Among Asians'. Yet has it brought us that much technical advancement over what US whites would have achieved otherwise. Is 'Yahoo!' the equivalent breakthrough to the Apple II? I mean, the personal computer revolution was started by, as far as I can tell, an overwhelmingly white group of people. Ironically, the one Asian I can think of, Apple 'evangelist' Guy Kawasaki, seemed more like a 'vision' guy than a technical guy.

stari_momak said...

Totally off topic, but very isteve-ist. I was watching a debate on C-Span. between Anthoy Codevilla, the conservative law professor, and Jeffrey Rosen, the liberal legal editor for New Republic. (BTW, someone asks about if Jews are unique, and why they should be broken out. Well, all the big 'white ethnics'groups, to my knowledge, have come to have pretty much the same political preferences, on average, as 'old stock' whites (again on average). Jews, on the other hand, vote more to the Dem/left side than even Hispanics. that's one reason they are 'broken out', but I digress).

Anyway, Codevilla is debating Rosen, talking about the "Tea Party' and their views on the constitution. Codevilla says he is a member of his local group, and says taht , being an Italian (by birth) he sees something in the movement more generally that is common in Italy but is, as he put it, 'un-American'. Namely the 'us versus them', 'we against Washington' attitude. Of course Italy's regions, and within regions clans/families are famous for this. But Codevilla says he sees it here, and its something very different from the typical and traditional civic, 'lets fix this' spirit of Americn protest movements.

Anonymous said...

"...children with a white mother and a black father have an eight-point I.Q. advantage over those with a black mother and a white father."

I agree with asdfas.

A black guy who's had a kid with a white woman has succeeded at something that all black men want. He's outcompeted the others in a major way. Like all real winners, he's likely to be above average for his group on a wide range of metrics.

A white guy who's had a kid with a black woman - everything's in reverse. And not just with respect to the father, with respect to the mother too. That's settling, not winning. Why is it shocking to anyone that people who settle tend to be less talented (surely not only in IQ) than the people who don't?

"...the children fathered by black American G.I.s in postwar Germany and brought up by their German mothers have the same I.Q.s as the children of white American G.I.s and German mothers."

The US military tests for IQ. Black G.I.s are less representative of the black mean than white G.I.s are of the white mean because the bottom of the black distribution didn't make the military's cutoff.

I just learned something about Mr. Flynn - he grabs at straws and doesn't mention screamingly obvious explanations when those go against his case.

Anonymous said...

I never understood your posts about Thomas Jefferson High School. I grew up near there and TJ was never considered anything special. If anything it was considered second rate. The top public high schools in the area and indeed in the nation at the time were Washington-Lee in Arlington and Wakefield HS.

When I was there Washington-Lee had the most Merit Scholarship semi-finalists of any public High School in the country. I have no idea then or now how TJ did. It wasn't a top school. No one cared.

But something changed. In the mid eighties the school changed. Their web site doesn't tell this interesting story.

There were so many top high schools in Northern Virginia in the late fifties I imagine because of two factors - race and income. The richest counties in the nation have always been those around Washington DC. The government pays better than private industry. The country is only now awaking to this simple fact.

Secondly Virginia had racial discrimination at the time. When I transferred into W&L in 1958 I had to appear in person before a state board so they could get a look at me. I was light enough.

There were no blacks in my high school and none at George Mason where I first went to college. There were no Asians either.

Somehow all that changed after I went to California. This would make an excellent subject for your new book Steve.

Albertosaurus

Anonymous said...

adfasdfadsf - that German study has been shot down over and over. Its results never replicated.

Im amazed that even a hack like Gladwell would refer to it.

David said...

>The county/school decided to square that circle by simply adding five or ten percent more slots to the incoming class and designating those slots to under-represented minorities. For some reason, Matthews never followed up to see how those additional kids did.<

Or what effect their inclusion had on the kids who EARNED their way in. The disruption, intimidation, and violence. I wager that to report on the effect of their inclusion, the contemptible Jay Matthews would have to have recourse to discipline reports and even police reports more often than would be comfortable for him in the construction of his anti-reality narrative.

But the feelings and futures of poor wittle underprivileged minorities (sic) are the only thing importance and significance. Certainly not the students whose future work will support the depraved and insane society that disregards them as second- or third-class citizens.

Even the first-class citizen is, today, no better than a second-class citizen - and this, in his own country.

B Lode said...

And in the German case, could it be that black GI's of higher caliber had children with German women than was the case with white GIs? - home keys guy

That is a very important question. The young German ladies would almost certainly have preferred a man who spoke a few words of German for the first few dates - a great way to break the ice for an American. People with higher IQs learn foreign languages faster. The black GIs who could afford to wine & dine Germans were getting paid well and/or saving well, and learning German fairly fast; their IQs would surely not have averaged 85. More likely 105.

Anonymous said...

A lot of the mulatto children born in post-war Germany were the result of rape.

dasdfadsfasf said...

"The term is ourselves and our posterity and the sentence makes clear that the system of government is being established for 'our posterity'. Two distinct entities, the system being established, and the people establishing. And if that isn't enough, the actions of the first Congresses -- limiting militia service to 'free white males', limiting naturalization to 'free white citizens', should make it crystal."

I see your point and I'm inclined to agree--that the Founders wanted US to be a mostly white and Western nation.
Even so, does 'ourselves and our posterior' mean rule by Anglo/Northern European protestants or did it mean Irish Catholics too? DId it mean whites in general or certain kind of whites? Did it exclude Polish Catholics, Russian Orthodox, Greeks, etc?
When Founders made that statement, US was overwhelmingly Anglo-white. 'Ourselves' meant not all whites but certain kinds of whites.
And there were much Anglo resistance against Irish Catholics and later immigrants from Southern and Eastern Europe. To Anglo nativists, 'our posterity' would have meant permanent rule by Wasp Anglos, right?
So, is it wrong for there to be so many Catholics on the Supreme Court? Is it wrong for Jews to be better at movie making?

third eye said...

I think the "sell American industry/jobs to China and then invite a billion or so to come and take what's left" minions, sometimes take us for suckers.
This creepy enthusiasm, unique among the world's races, for wiping themselves and their works (the greatest in recorded history, IMHO) off the map...
I can only conclude these China-cheerleaders are working for the big-business elites busy de-industrializing and de-jobbing this country.

As for the Asians being the heirs of the founders of the United States. Don't think so. They are founders of another country altogether. Not necessarily bad but not quite what the lads in the Civil War thought they were dying for.
What do you think Confucious had in mind down the road? In China I mean? A bunch of Germans taking his sayings to heart, creating a new China? How about Sun Yat Sen? Well, I can't really think of any Asians analagous to the Founding Fathers of the U.S., but that's just the point. The Constitution and the philosophy behind America emerged from a brew of western civilization, influenced somewhat by native Americans--after all, this was only the 18th century.

All great nations/empires fall eventually, and from within. The ancient Romans did get lazy, etc. etc.,but 500 years later, during the Renaissance,their sculpture still looked like Romans.
The thing that really, really flabbergasts me is how these corporate traitors get jobless American youth to enlist voluntarily is an organization committed to getting them maimed and/or killed to some extent. What are they fighting for? Killing for? An America the very people sending them to war are giving away to non-Americans? Insane. Not even jobs promised to the survivors, because, I guess, the surviving veterans are not "hard working" enough.
Before you get on the Chinese bandwagon, please go over there and live. And take a few thousand whites with you if possible. And send back a report.

David said...

>The young German ladies would almost certainly have preferred a man who spoke a few words of German for the first few dates<

Dates?

Are you being sarcastic?

http://preview.tinyurl.com/kvva3s

"'Every town in southwest Germany could tell stories of rape by black soldiers', which was 'no different to the Russian practice of systematic rape,'" according to historian Götz Aly.

Yeah, the ladies in their sitting parlors freely chose among the beaus who bashfully offered them flowers and asked them for dates. Fiddle-dee-dee!

What Germany went through after WW2 is horrific. Yet you trivialize rape and the offer of sexual favors in return for physical safety as: "ladies on dates"? Shame on you.

Truth said...

"Yet you trivialize rape and the offer of sexual favors in return for physical safety as: "ladies on dates"? Shame on you."

And for you to trivialize every woman's inalienable right of free association with your tawdry, sensationalist, numerically-impossible, loser fantasies is unconsionable.

Anonymous said...

"A black guy who's had a kid with a white woman has succeeded at something that all black men want. He's outcompeted the others in a major way. Like all real winners, he's likely to be above average for his group on a wide range of metrics."

Get over yourselves. White women age horribly.

Anonymous said...

I am an Indian American who is surprised by the obsession with Asians on this blog.

America belongs to the whites, Jews, blacks, and Mexicans. It just does.

Aside from Hawaii and some parts of California, Asians have litte to zero influence on American life (for good or bad).

What's more, ongoing financial and political collapse in America will limit opportunites for new immigrants and their descendants.

Asians have the most to lose in America in the coming years, they really do.

Anonymous said...

dasdfadswhatever:

It's called the X chromosome, which contains alleles important to cognition.

JSM said...

"...children with a white mother and a black father have an eight-point I.Q. advantage over those with a black mother and a white father."

And, then, too, there's the question about what happened to the fetus during pregnancy? Did that black woman take her vitamins? Did she eat well? Take drugs? Go to dr. appts.?
It's an inarguable fact that black women on average get less prenatal care, have more premature births, more crack babies, etc.
So the womb experience of a kid whose black mother couples with a white man cannot be expected to be an exact mirror image of a white woman, black man.

Inheritance (genes) vs. environment (what mom did during preg) question again. But so what? You can't follow black women around and monitor everything they ingest

Anonymous said...

Stevie boy, yer killin em! "intellectual virginity", the eventuality formality, dude's in the best shape of his life, lyrically.

Anonymous said...

Get over yourselves. White women age horribly.

I think the extra hotness when younger is more important. I mean, seriously, is anyone really going to think "Yeah, I'm totally going to date Black and Asian women cos they get slightly less ugly when older than White women do"?

I mean, seriously, this has to be the lamest thing that people bring up to defend Asian and Black women. The small relative decline in attractiveness due to faster aging of the skin in Whites is nothing when thrown into the chasm in attractiveness between the old and young in the first place, and probably still doesn't change anyone's relative ranking of attractiveness.

none of the above said...

David:

Is there any reason to expect including the top black and hispanic kids would have introduced violence or disruption into the school? We're not talking about bringing in the kids on the brink of expulsion, but the black and hispanic kids who were getting mostly A's in their science and math classes, were notably brighter and more capable than most of their classmates, but weren't quite as brilliant as the competition. It's bad policy, because the less capable kids admitted on AA grounds won't benefit as much from the advanced education as the kids they displaced, and their classmates may suffer if the teachers have to spend more time helping the AA kids keep up. But it sure doesn't seem likely to introduce a whole lot of violence or overt disruption.

Anonymous said...

"'Every town in southwest Germany could tell stories of rape by black soldiers', which was 'no different to the Russian practice of systematic rape,'" according to historian Götz Aly."

The French were also shocked during WWI by the amount of rape perpetrated by black American soldiers, even though through the filtering process, they must have represented some of the best blacks that could be found (so the French general thought.)

B Lode said...

Right right right. No white chick ever voluntarily dated a black man.

Go away. I've been railing against black-on-white rape for twenty years and I've been called worse by better people than you.

Anonymous said...

I think a lot of the German rape stories were lies. Imagine being a fraulein and producing a bastard child who is clearly not aryan. Last year her dad was cheering on the destruction of the local Jews and her brother was killing Poles. Of course she claimed rape.

Severn said...

I am an Indian American who is surprised by the obsession with Asians on this blog.


This blog is obsessed with IQ, and with those groups believed to possess a lot of it.

Anonymous said...

Every town in southwest Germany could tell stories of rape by black soldiers'


Not that the white soldiers (of any country) were any more restrained.

Anonymous said...

"Not that the white soldiers (of any country) were any more restrained."

The French General made it clear it was the blacks who were overwhelmingly and disproportionately represented among rapists in France after WWI. They are in any statistical study. All the soldiers convicted of rape in Japan in recent years were black. Given what I have seen and experienced of blacks having lived in a heavily black east coast city all my life, this is no surprise. Everybody knows it. Even blacks themselves.

Truth said...

"The French General made it clear it was the blacks who were overwhelmingly and disproportionately represented among rapists in France after WWI."

"The" French General, huh? No wonder their army sux, they only have one.