Imagine for a moment that you’re on a sports team that has never won a championship game, that only rarely wins a game at all, that comes in near or dead last in the rankings season after season after season. And imagine you want to win for once – not just a few games, but a winning season, making it through playoffs and into the finals, and maybe even take home the championship, something your team has never done before. But looking at your team, most of the players aren’t that great, those that are don’t work together well, they fight amongst themselves more than the other teams, each of them tries to steal the glory from the other players only to fail spectacularly when they do. Your current coach, who’s been coaching the team for decades, tells the players it’s not their fault that they keep losing, the refs are just biased against them, the game is rigged, and everyone deserves an equal number of points regardless of how well they play. When refs make a call against them, they start a fight instead of accepting the call and playing better to overcome the setback. Instead of focusing on improving as players or as a team, they’re taught to complain about the rules of the game itself. Don’t hate the player, hate the game. But along comes a new coach offering a new style of management. The new coach wants to kick the worst players off the team while making the remaining players train harder to improve their skills and organize around supporting the best players on the team. They’re expected to show good sportsmanship even if the refs sometimes make a bad call, and channel any anger or frustration over those calls into playing harder. If you were on the team and wanted to actually win once in a while, which coach would you want leading you?

As black Americans riot, loot their neighborhood stores, and burn down black owned businesses over the death of a methhead who likely died because of an overdose of multiple drugs and not because of the knee on his neck (fentanyl overdoses are known to cause breathing problems and Floyd had no serious injuries to his neck or elsewhere from the officers who arrested him) who cared so little about black lives he once threatened to shoot a pregnant black woman during a robbery/home invasion and his own black kids didn’t even recognize him on tv, we must ask what is so different about the black community that they could be trolled by the media into destroying their own cities to protest the death of a man who contributed nothing to the black community. That they would do this at a time when the media has warned against any and all mass gatherings aside from these protests due to fears of coronavirus, which blacks are dying from at a higher rate than whites, even as the media tells white conservatives to avoid mass gatherings such as the recent Trump rally in Tulsa, should make the left wing media’s total disregard for black lives obvious even as they heap lip service on the Black Lives Matter movement and organization, but blacks across the country have chosen to ignore the warnings about a disease that has killed tens of thousands of black Americans so far this year in order to protest the death of about ten unarmed blacks per year by police. Blacks have never been the most successful race in America (and are even less successful in most of the rest of the world), but American blacks, who have a significantly higher average IQ than their African cousins, aren’t usually as collectively stupid as they have been so far in 2020 as they destroy their own communities and risk death by a disease much deadlier than the police to protest the death of a man who would likely have died from the drugs in his system regardless of whether or not the police arrested him (though they did overwhelmingly vote to re-elect Barack Obama in 2012 after his disastrous war in Libya screwed up a once prosperous African nation so badly that you can now openly buy black slaves there, effectively re-establishing the African slave trade thanks to America’s first black President). If black Americans want to improve their situation, they need honest and constructive criticism of their current problems as a group and the underlying causes of those problems.

As hundreds of millions of dollars are being donated by corporate interests to the Soros-affiliated Black Lives Matter organization behind the protests that turned to riots that have destroyed their small business competition and are preventing the reopening of the economy in the wake of the coronavirus shutdown, it’s hard to see how any of that money will be spent in ways that actually improve the quality of life or economic prospects of the average black American, let alone make up for the destruction of so many local and black owned businesses caused by the riots. It’s unclear how the money BLM has raised is actually being spent aside from the few million paid to the organization’s staff and consultants and the 6% of their funds that have gone to the local chapters that they claim are supposed to be running the show, and many activists have raised questions about just where the money is going. The pseudo-socialist elites like Soros who are funding the movement for their own purposes likely do not have the best interests of the black population at heart, and the millions raised in previous years do not seem to have been used to help the black community prosper and improve.

Nor have the variety of socialist programs that blacks have voted for through the Democratic Party improved their community much. The average black household is more than twice as likely to receive some form of welfare than the average white household and three times as likely to receive direct cash assistance. But despite the fact that whites, who pay more in taxes to find these programs, have large portions of our wealth redistributed every year to blacks through socialist programs like, EBT, Section 8, Medicaid, and TANF, no amount of free food and shelter seems to be enough to help black Americans rise economically. Rather, the opposite seems to be true, as blacks learn to settle for free stuff and a welfare lifestyle rather than pushing themselves to succeed. Nor do the affirmative action programs that exist in admissions to most colleges help blacks, as they appear to actually lower academic performance and graduation rates among black students as they increase the number of black students in the colleges that practice affirmative action. And despite the claims that the high crime rates in black communities – some of which exceed the crime rates of even the most violent third world countries – are caused by poverty and a lack of opportunity, no amount of free stuff to alleviate poverty or affirmative action to provide opportunity has brought the crime rate in the black community down to anywhere near the low level in the white community. Crime has dropped since the early 1990s due to the removal of lead from gasoline, but the massive gap in crime rates between blacks and whites has remained even as levels of lead exposure among blacks have dropped massively and can no longer be used to explain away their high crime rates. Despite being only 13% of the population, blacks commit more than half the murders in the US, and a solid majority of their victims are black (though they kill hundreds more whites and members of other races each year than the other way around). If BLM actually cared about black lives, the thousands of extra blacks murdered by other blacks beyond the number who would be murdered if they had the same murder rate as whites would be a higher priority than the dozen or so unarmed black men killed by police each year (many of whom were engaged in violent crime or, like George Floyd, didn’t die strictly due to police violence). But they’re not, and the progressive left will never so much as admit that blacks have a higher violent crime rate for reasons other than poverty, let alone find a solution to it.

Nor can historical racism explain the difference in outcomes between blacks and whites. East Asians were considered colored under Jim Crow laws in many southern states (their segregation from whites was upheld in the 1927 Supreme Court case Lum v. Rice), while lighter skinned immigrants from Mexico and south and central America were generally considered white and given the privileges that came with that status. The Japanese specifically were put into internment camps during WWII, facing even stricter legal discrimination than blacks during that time. And yet, if you’re the descendant of Japanese Americans who lived here through internment and segregation, odds are you make more money than the average white American, while Hispanic/Latino Americans whose ancestors were often considered white during that time have a lower average income. Black immigrants from Africa and the Caribbean also have a higher average income (though this may be due in part to selection bias), as do immigrants from India, while the Jews, who regularly claim to be the most oppressed group in history, have a much higher average income than white Americans and are roughly 20 times as likely to be billionaires as the average American after running our central bank for most of the past century. Black Americans are doing significantly better than blacks in any other part of the world, including the descendants of the black Africans who sold most black Americans’ ancestors into slavery. If historical discrimination and multigenerational trauma were as big a part of the reason for the American black community’s problems as leftists like to claim, Jews should be among the poorest people in the world, while blacks in places that spent very little time under colonial rule, such as Ethiopia and Haiti, should be among the most prosperous black communities in the world. Instead, the opposite appears to be true.

This isn’t to say that no systemic racism exists – after all, we have a media that tells blacks it’s important to have mass gatherings during a pandemic while telling white conservatives to avoid mass gatherings, so if the Wuhan Flu is anywhere near as dangerous as the media says, our left wing media is actively attempting to kill thousands of blacks by encouraging them to increase their risk of contracting the virus while telling white conservatives to avoid any possibility of contracting the virus (unless they actually believe the virus is a hoax or the threat is overblown, in which case they’re just suppressing conservative voices as usual). We also have a drug war which was escalated in part by Nixon, whose staff has since admitted that part of the reason for his push to increase drug arrest was to suppress blacks who had mostly switched to voting Democrat by that point. But while there is some evidence of racial bias in arrests for drug crimes, where blacks make up a larger percentage of drug arrests than drug users, there does not seem to be any anti-black bias in enforcement of violent crimes, where blacks are much more likely to commit rape, assault, and robbery according to victimization studies and crime reports, and the racial breakdown of people accused of violent crime is much closer to the racial breakdown of people arrested for violent crime than it is for drug crimes. According to the National Crime Victimization Survey from the Bureau of Justice, blacks are more than twice as likely to be offenders of violent crime as to be victims, bigger than the difference between men and women, while whites and Asians are more likely to be victims than perpetrators of violent crime. Whites commit about 2.3 times as many total violent crimes as blacks (while making up about 5 times as much of the population) according to the NCVS, and according to the FBI’s Uniform Crime Report, 2.5 times as many whites as blacks are arrested for violent crimes, so whites seem more likely to be arrested than blacks after adjusting for their crime rate (though this may be affected by differences in racial classification between the two and may vary by specific crime; the NCVS hasn’t provided a racial breakdown for specific crimes since 2006). There’s also evidence that police are equally if not more likely to use excessive and deadly force against white suspects than black suspects according to a study by a black Harvard professor. So the claims of systemic bias by police against black Americans seem largely exaggerated, and if blacks are targeted more by police, it probably has more to do with the fact that police are called on to deal with black suspects far more often than to protect black victims.

But simply pointing out how wrong the left’s assessment of both the black community’s problems and their proposed solutions to those problems is isn’t – and shouldn’t be – enough. The rioting the left continually provokes black Americans into will likely worsen every election year until a real solution to the black community’s problems of poverty and crime can be found. If the Trump right wants to win over a sizable number of black votes, or if the far right wants to avoid being trolled into a costly race war by globalist elites who want to destabilize our country and instead turn all races against the rootless elites who have been playing us all for fools, we will have to offer the black community a real solution to their plight, a lasting and long term solution that gives them the opportunity to rise above their current problems.

The first step is to acknowledge that the differences in outcomes between white and black Americans have less to do with systemic factors that affect blacks and whites differently and more to do with cultural and genetic differences that cause whites and blacks to behave differently. There are significant genetic differences between different races. About 5% of the genes that differ between humans are exclusive to particular geographically bounded hereditary groups – what most of us would refer to as races, but what university academics must be careful to differentiate from race with technical mumbo jumbo in order to not have their research defunded by the socialist/progressive/social justice left. Even if social conceptions and divisions of race from 50+ years ago were not based in genetics, we can divide people into clear genetic hereditary groups that correspond closely enough to the racial groups most people are familiar with – Europeans/Caucasians, Sub-Saharan Africans, East Asians, South Asians/North Africans, and Native Americans have similarities within their groups and differences from other groups that make them distinct groups that can be identified by their genes.

In addition to the portion of our genome that’s exclusive to particular racial hereditary groups, there are millions of genes that are more common in certain racial and ethnic groups than others. For example, the MAOA gene affects the development of neurotransmitters in your brain, and one particular variant/allele of that gene (known as the two repeat allele) makes you more prone to impulsive and violent behavior. That allele is recessive and exists on the X chromosome, meaning a woman must have two copies of the allele while men only need one copy for the gene to express itself and result in impulsive and violent behavior, making men more likely to display such behavior than women. About 5% of black men have that particular allele, as compared to 0.1% of white men. That gene is not a perfect predictor of violent behavior, but it is a contributing factor to the significantly higher violent crime rate seen among black men in particular.

Another gene, the ADRA gene, affects empathy and emotional memory. The ADRA2b allele is associated with a greater ability to remember emotions and what causes them, affecting your ability to predict other people’s emotions and understand how your actions affect others. That gene appears to be about 5 times as common in Caucasians as in full blooded Africans, but closer to twice as common in American whites as American blacks, and even more common in certain Asians than in Europeans. The ADRA2b allele may partially explain why Asian and European communities seem to be more cooperative and peaceful on average than African and African American communities.

Just as there are genes that impact our personality traits, there are also genes that impact intelligence. Over 1000 genes have been identified that impact intelligence. Considering that intelligence is estimated to be somewhere between 50-80% genetic, and that there have been significant differences in average IQ between blacks, whites, yellows, reds, browns, and whatever other racial or ethnic groups don’t want to consider themselves part of one of those categories that have remained fairly stable for decades even as environmental, social, and economic factors changed significantly, it’s likely that most of the difference in average intelligence between different racial and ethnic hereditary groups is due to genetic differences. Intelligence has a significant impact on both educational attainment and career success that likely explains a lot more of the difference in attainment between the average member of different races than discrimination.

In order to understand the difference in outcomes between different races, we have to understand the genetic differences that cause them. No one gene completely determines a person’s personality or intelligence – heck, 1000 genes don’t completely determine either of those things, but they do have a strong enough impact on them that they can’t be ignored, particularly when talking about group averages and large scale societal trends such as violent crime rates and average incomes. People who want to see blacks succeed beyond where they’re at today often reject the genetic argument for our different levels of success because admitting that the differences between us are genetic makes them seem inherent and unchangeable, making it unacceptable within their worldview. But the opposite is true – we live in an evolutionary world where humanity has changed immeasurably just in the past few thousand years and is continuing to change. Populations are shaped by their environment and evolve to adapt to their environment very quickly.

How quickly can people adapt? It depends, but one indicator is the fox domestication experiment that took place in Russia. Russian researchers took a species of fox that had never been domesticated and selectively bred them to see how many generations it would take to domesticate them. The first generation behaved largely hostile to the researchers, often reacting with fear and anger and attempting to attack their handlers even when being fed. But some of the foxes were more hostile than others, and some were more passive and showed occasional signs of friendliness. The ones who showed more friendliness and less hostility were selected to breed more while the ones who showed the most hostility to their handlers were not allowed to breed. It took 6 generations for the first fox who behaved like a mostly domesticated animal – showing affection to humans, only attacking their handlers when provoked, making noise and movements to attempt to communicate with their handlers – was born. Within 10 generations about 18% behaved like domesticated animals. At 20 generations, over a third did, and by 30 generations about three fourths did. Today, after over 40 generations, nearly all of the foxes born behave like fully domesticated animals.

If 40 generations is at least enough time to cause as major a change as going from a wild, hostile animal to a friendly domesticated animal, something which involves a significant population wide shift in a large number of genes affecting personality, it’s likely that 40 generations would be more than enough time to close the gap between blacks and whites – assuming the right kind of selective pressure. 40 generations in humans is about 1000 years, which may seem like a long time, but significant shifts in behavior would be seen within just a few generations. American blacks have already been adapting to white society for centuries, and it’s likely the harsh selective pressure of the slavery and Jim Crow eras, as well as the mixing of some European DNA into most American blacks during that time, helped accelerate the process and explains why American blacks are doing so much better than blacks in Africa and places like Haiti where they did not intermix and did not face the same levels of selective pressure from whites. And if the differences between blacks and whites are not as big as the differences between domesticated and wild animals, then we can expect it to take less time to catch black Americans up to white Americans – provided they face harsher selective pressure to remove the worst members of their population from their gene pool and encourage the best to breed more.

No serious evolutionary biologist believes selective pressure would not work to cause significant changes in a population. Of course the tens of thousands of years of evolutionary separation between different racial hereditary groups living in different environments, particularly after the development of organized civilizations which came with their own forms of selective pressure, caused us to develop different traits, and of course we are continuing to evolve and adapt to our ever changing environment. Noted evolutionary biologist Richard Dawkins has even stated that eugenics obviously would work, and that any objections to it (of which he has many) must be made on ethical grounds because the scientific evidence solidly supports the idea that you can change the traits of a human population over time through selective pressure, just as you can for any other species. So the question for the black population, once they’ve accepted the scientific evidence that they are more prone to violent crime and less capable of attaining economic success due to genetic differences, is not whether or not they can change this fact – of course they can. The question is whether or not they should, and if so, how they should and what the selective pressure needed to cause the changes they want to make to their people should look like. Is it more unethical for blacks to selectively remove the most aggressive, impulsive, unteachable, and crime prone members of their community to improve the community as a whole, or to continue to be mired in poverty and crime, unable to rise above their current station in life, to remain the butt of every racist joke for generations to come?

Even if blacks choose not to use eugenic selection to improve as a people, there are many ways biological realism can help them. Even if you reject the idea that race is genetic and not just skin color, skin color matters more than people like to admit. Darker skin makes it harder to produce enough vitamin D from sunlight, so black people need to live in areas with more sunlight (closer to the equator) to get an adequate amount of vitamin D, and may be healthier working outdoors rather than adopting the indoor office work lifestyle of lighter skinned whites and east Asians who need less sunlight to be healthy. Vitamin D deficiency increases your odds of developing schizophrenia. American blacks are about 3 times as likely to develop schizophrenia as American whites, and black and brown immigrants to western and northern Europe have a similarly higher risk of developing schizophrenia which seems to increase the further north you go. This may help to explain why northern cities that never had Jim Crow laws and outlawed slavery far earlier often have even higher violent crime rates among the black population than southern cities where historical oppression supposedly affected blacks there more. Perhaps blacks in northern cities like Detroit, Chicago, and New York would be better off moving south to sunnier climates where they can be healthier, and perhaps whites in the deep south – particularly Florida, the sunniest state in the country and the one state where there seems to be an abundance of crazy white people – should move further north to climates where they don’t get too much sun.

Environment can affect people in a lot of ways, both the natural environment and the social, political, and economic environment, but often those effects are the exact opposite of what the left likes to claim. Take gun control, for example. White leftists claim greater availability of guns increases violent crime. The exact opposite seems to be true. Blacks and Hispanics have about half as high a gun ownership rate as whites, and yet commit far higher rates of violent crime. Blacks are also much more likely to be arrested for gun control and weapons law violations according to FBI arrest rate stats, making up about 43% of those arrested but only about 6% of gun owners, one of the few areas of crime (along with drug laws, another victimless crime) where blacks actually are disproportionately far more likely to get arrested relative to whites after adjusting for differences in behavior between blacks and whites, and in this case it’s because of the policies of Democrat politicians that blacks overwhelmingly vote for.

Part of the reason why violent crime is higher in black and brown communities than in white communities is likely that in white communities where gun ownership rates are high, violent crime is much more likely to result in the criminal’s death. This creates an environment where criminals (and therefore people who are more crime-prone) are regularly removed from the gene pool, resulting in much lower crime rates in the long run, while in black and brown neighborhoods criminals are much more likely to survive and benefit from their criminality, resulting in the genes that make them crime prone being more likely to be passed on. Modern gun control may only have been around for a few generations, long enough to make small changes in the frequency of genes that contribute to criminality but not long enough to explain the full difference. Historically, whites have practiced selective removal of criminals for large portions of their history – the Romans used crucifixion for hundreds of years to remove criminals and anti-social types from the European gene pool, and hangings and public executions of criminals were common for much of later European history, long enough to have a significant impact on their gene pool, while the African populations American blacks are descended from typically did not have organized or codified legal systems that sought to remove bad actors from their populations until after contact with Eurasian peoples. If blacks want to catch up in removing criminals from their communities but don’t want to use direct eugenics to remove people with specific genes from their gene pool, perhaps rolling back gun control and encouraging the more responsible members of their community to own and learn to use guns so they can defend their communities from the criminals who prey on them would be a good step in that direction, though whites (particularly white urban leftists) who live near their communities will be understandably wary of the most violent people in America wanting higher rates of gun ownership, even if they will go to great lengths to hide that fact and conceal their racism by arguing for gun control on other grounds.

If black Americans want to improve their situation, they will need to change their strategy, both culturally and politically. Welfare programs enable the least capable among them to survive at the expense of the most capable, preventing them from evolving to be more capable, and eliminates the need for stable families. Gun control enables the survival of criminals at the expense of the innocent. Many of the policies blacks are tricked into voting for by white leftists are terrible for their community; even the most virulent racists who want to lynch black criminals would be better for their community than white leftists who want to make criminality thrive in the black community, and the meritocratic portion of the conservative movement and Republican Party that prides itself on valuing individual ability over group identifiers would likely do far more good for the black community than the progressive movement and Democratic Party that have tricked blacks into destroying their own families and communities for decades. Simply leaving the Democrat plantation for the Trump Republicans will be enough to get the black community started on the path towards a better future. But it may not be enough in the long run. Blacks do have some genetic strength, such as higher rates of genes like the 577R allele of the ACTN3 gene that makes your muscle fibers more powerful and makes those who have it capable of running faster, and they seem to have plenty of musical talent if their history of inspiring jazz, rock, rap, and other new genres of music is any indication. Preserving those strengths as they try to remove their weaknesses may not be easy, and in the case of their strength and speed it may not even be necessary as we head towards a more automated and tech-centric future where intellect will likely matter even more and physical ability even less than they do now in our modern era where intellectual work generally pays far more than physical work. Blacks will need to do some soul searching as a community to determine what direction their people need to head in to survive and thrive in the future and how best to get there.

Notes

https://www.unz.com/article/or-did-george-floyd-die-of-a-drug-overdose/

https://dailycaller.com/2020/06/18/black-lives-matter-spending-millions-travel-consultants/

https://www.amren.com/features/2015/10/welfare-whos-on-it-whos-not/

https://web.archive.org/web/20130511043833/http://www.law.berkeley.edu/faculty/rubinfeldd/SanderFINAL.pdf

https://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2018/02/an-updated-lead-crime-roundup-for-2018/

https://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/rhovo1215.pdf table 12

https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2018/crime-in-the-u.s.-2018/tables/table-43

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/jul/11/no-racial-bias-police-shootings-study-harvard-prof/

https://www.nytimes.com/2002/12/20/us/gene-study-identifies-5-main-human-populations-linking-them-to-geography.html

https://pastebin.com/w5c8ftd4

https://www.unz.com/pfrost/a-genetic-marker-for-empathy/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lyudmila_Trut

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2020/feb/17/richard-dawkins-slammed-for-saying-of-course-eugen/

https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/323919

https://academic.oup.com/ije/article/36/4/751/665657

https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2014/07/15/the-demographics-and-politics-of-gun-owning-households/