The Study of Racialism

Diversity Sensitivity v. Freedom of Speech, Chapter CLXXXVII: The Case of Andrew Fraser
By Steve Sailer

July 31, 2005
[url]
http://www.vdare.com/sailer/050731_fraser.htm[/url]

"I may not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it."

If Voltaire were alive today, he'd be spinning in his grave.

The latest collision between "diversity sensitivity," the highest ideal of the present age, and such outmoded concepts as academic freedom has a VDARE.com contributor, Australian law professor Drew Fraser, as the victim.

His crime: having the temerity to write a letter to a local newspaper.

"A Sydney university has banned a controversial law professor from teaching after he publicly aired his views on non-whites and Africans in Australia. Canadian-born Associate Professor Andrew Fraser was cautioned by Macquarie University last week over a letter he wrote to a suburban newspaper…

Connoisseurs of irony will treasure the university's justification:

"Professor Fraser yesterday rejected an offer by the university to buy out his contract and launched a bitter attack on Vice-Chancellor Di Yerbury, describing her as an 'intellectual coward'. Professor Yerbury responded by suspending Professor Fraser from teaching, citing a report in The Australian yesterday in which he claimed a group called Smash Racism was planning to disrupt his classes… 'We have a duty to act decisively to protect his safety and that of others on campus,' she said.

Okay, let me see if I have this straight: The university must keep their professor from saying that immigration raises the risk of criminal violence -- to safeguard him from criminal violence from immigrants and their supporters?

Perhaps not coincidentally, this was happening at the same time that police were arresting several East African immigrants in the attempted July 21 terrorist bombings in London.

In effect, Fraser is being prevented from expressing views on politics -- although professors pontificating about politics is a much-loved feature of public life throughout the Anglosphere.

So what about Professor Fraser's statement that Africans tend to have low IQs and high testosterone levels?

Here at VDARE.com, unlike at almost every other outlet (and, apparently, Macquarie University), our first question is not whether it's politically correct to say something. Instead we ask: Is it true?

And it is true. Africans do tend to have low IQs.

The average IQ of sub-Saharan Africans in Africa has been studied many times over many decades. It keeps coming out almost two standard deviations below that of Europeans and nearly two and half standard deviations below that of Northeast Asians.

Richard Lynn and Tatu Vanhanen’s landmark book IQ and the Wealth of Nations (2002) summarizes 32 published studies of representative samples of individuals in black African countries: No researchers found an African average national IQ higher than 80.

Of course, a selective immigration system -- which we don’t have -- could mitigate part of this IQ shortfall by picking unusually talented applicants, of which there are certainly some from all countries.

For example, a friend of mine who was getting his Ph.D. at UCLA came from a family of nine children in Cameroon in West Africa. Eight of the nine earned advanced degrees from Western universities, and the oldest was a surgeon and oncologist who had shared in the prestigious Albert Lasker Award for Clinical Medical Research.

(Naturally, the West's brain-draining of Africa's smartest people just contributes to the continent's poverty. But that’s another story.)

Here in America, the massive National Longitudinal Study of Youth found that the mean IQ of blacks who were the children of immigrants was 90, about five points above the norm for African-Americans. The logic of regression toward the mean suggests that their immigrant parents probably averaged even higher IQs.

One little-discussed reason why American political and media elites in Washington D.C. favor mass immigration so much more than the rest of us is because they prefer the fairly well-educated, polite, and hard-working immigrants from Africa's best families who flock to the D.C. area over the capital's native-born African-Americans, whom our leaders privately view as ignorant, surly, lazy, and crime-prone.

(Naturally, importing immigrants to out-compete our black fellow citizens doesn't solve their problems. It just makes them worse. But that’s another story too.)

Unfortunately, the African immigrants' kids often assimilate toward the values expressed in the most charismatic force in African-American culture: gangsta rap.

Will the children of African immigrants to Australia hip-hop down the same disastrous trail? The Israeli example is not encouraging. According to the Associated Press, the young Falasha Jews whose parents were airlifted from Ethiopia have found

"an unlikely source of solace, pride and identity -- America's black culture. The fact that most of these Ethiopian teens have never visited the United States or even met a black American doesn't prevent them from embracing rap music and hip-hop fashion, along with sometimes misguided stereotypes gleaned from MTV, movies and news reports."

What about Fraser's contention that blacks have more testosterone on average?

This hasn't been studied as much as IQ. But the scientific evidence supports Fraser once again.

Andrew Sullivan, a prescription testosterone user, has written a long article in the New York Times Magazine (The He Hormone, April 02, 2000) about the powerful effect of his prescription testosterone injections on his behavior. In it, Sullivan pointed out:

"Even more unsettling is the racial gap in testosterone. Several solid studies, published in publications like Journal of the National Cancer Institute, show that black men have on average 3 to 19 percent more testosterone than white men. This is something to consider when we're told that black men dominate certain sports because of white racism or economic class rather than black skill."

The relevant question is not just hormone levels in the bloodstream, but the varying power of the male hormone receptors. Men with stronger androgen receptors tend to behave as if they have higher levels of testosterone and other male hormones. A team of geneticists led by Rick Kittles of Howard U. documented that race accounts for 20 percent of the variations in the gene that controls the strength of the body's androgen receptors. Men of African descent tend toward the high end, men of East Asian descent toward the low end, whites generally near the middle.

Keep in mind that 80% of the variation observed was within racial groups. Which is about what you'd expect from observing the world around you. In every racial group, there exists a wide variety of physical and personality types among men, from the most hyper-masculine to the most gentle.

Still, few who watch sports on television, follow Olympic running results, are familiar with crime statistics by race, or examine interracial marriage patterns, will be surprised that blacks on the whole score highest on those androgen receptor gene alleles associated with greater masculinity.

Let's discuss the larger issue: Why is truth-telling important? What's so useful about free speech? Wouldn't it be better just to bury our heads in the sand about things like race and IQ?

No -- because everything that is true is causally connected to something else that is true. In contrast, lies, ignorance, and wishful thinking are dead ends.

If, as National Review’s Austin Bramwell kindly suggested the newest issue of The American Conservative, my articles are more interesting and insightful than those of the better-paid purveyors of the conventional wisdom, the main reason is simply because I follow the chains of cause and effect wherever they lead.

The promotion of ignorance is cruel, not kind, because facts are useful while twaddle is just a dead end.

Two examples:

1. Prostate cancer may correlate positively with male hormone and receptor levels, so it's not surprising that

"African-American men are at substantially higher risk of developing and dying from prostate cancer than Caucasians in the United States. African-American men living in the San Francisco area have a risk of developing prostate cancer that is 120 times that of Chinese men living in China… A systematic study of black men in Nigeria found that prostate cancer incidence was actually much higher than previously reported and may be as high as that noted among black men in the US (Osegbe 1997)"

2. Tony Blair and Sir Bob Geldof did their considerable all to make African poverty a big deal at the recent meeting of the G8 countries. But little good will come of it -- for the simple reason that nobody in polite society is allowed to talk about sub-Saharan Africa's most fundamental problem -- its average IQ of around 70.

Because African-Americans score around 85, and they share about 80% of their genes with their African cousins, it seems likely that the difficult environment in Africa (malnutrition, disease, disorder, poverty, and so forth) depresses the typical African's IQ substantially below his or her genetic potential.

Perhaps the most cost-effective way to raise IQs in Africa is to attack the IQ-lowering medical syndromes caused by a lack of micronutrients, such as "endemic cretinism," which stems from too little iodine in the diet. Western countries started fortifying salt with iodine and flour with iron back before WWII, and that quickly eliminated what had been substantial problems here.

UNICEF issued an important study of poor countries' micronutrient deficiencies last year. I wrote in VDARE.com about what we could be doing to help the Third World raise its average IQ, here and here.

But almost no one else in the press was interested -- because they know they will get in trouble, like Professor Fraser, if they mention African IQ.

See, "nice" people think it's more moral to let endemic cretinism and the like ravage poor countries rather than to bring up IQ in polite society.

Only EVIL people try to get the world to notice the problem…and do something about it.

But we can’t make problems go away by pretending they don't exist.

As Enoch Powell pointed out in his continually-denounced but never-refuted 1968 immigration speech:

"The supreme function of statesmanship is to provide against preventable evils. In seeking to do so, it encounters obstacles which are deeply rooted in human nature…. Above all, people are disposed to mistake predicting troubles for causing troubles and even for desiring troubles: ‘if only’, they love to think, ‘if only people wouldn't talk about it, it probably wouldn't happen.’

And Powell’s conclusion is equally valid today:

"All I know is that to see, and not to speak, would be the great betrayal."

[Steve Sailer [email him], is founder of the Human Biodiversity Institute and movie critic for The American Conservative. His website www.iSteve.com features his blog.]

I don't think I want to touch that hot potato

August 3, 2005
Little-Noticed Crisis at Black Colleges
By SAMUEL G. FREEDMAN
New York Times
HOUSTON

IN a classroom of white walls and black students, an air-conditioned sanctuary from a sweltering July morning, Devon Moore walked toward the front table with his homework. He had clipped out a newspaper article and now gave a one-sentence synopsis of its subject, safety problems in pickup trucks. He identified a word new to him, "adjacent," and a word that used a prefix or suffix, "faulty." He was less than four weeks from starting his freshman year of college.

Devon had passed up a senior-class trip to Atlanta to enroll in the Summer Academy at Texas Southern University here, and at the outset of the eight-week session, he had wondered why. Having graduated from high school, he figured, "I already knew everything there was to learn." That illusion crashed and burned on Day 1, when the math instructor taught a lesson on slope and even gave an overnight assignment.

For some 185 incoming freshmen like him, and indeed for Texas Southern as an institution, the summer courses in reading, writing, and math form one front in a battle to reverse a disturbingly low graduation rate. Of the students who received diplomas last May, only 6 percent had earned their degree in the normal four years, and only 21 percent in six years. Those numbers, incredibly, reflected improvement from prior rates.

In its problem and its challenge, Texas Southern has plenty of company. Nationally, the historically black colleges and universities have a six-year graduation rate of 38 percent, according to The Journal of Blacks in Higher Education. That is slightly lower than the figure for black students at all other institutions, and roughly 40 percentage points lower than for blacks at elite schools. The situation amounts to a little-noticed crisis in the very institutions that, for their size, play a disproportionate role in educating African-Americans.

A half-century after Brown v. Board of Education, 40 years after Lyndon Johnson's speech endorsing the concept of affirmative action, and two years after the Supreme Court upheld racial diversity as a factor in admissions, the approximately 80 historically black colleges and universities still enroll more than 10 percent of the African-American students in higher education and award close to 20 percent of degrees.

These black institutions have produced leaders from Thurgood Marshall to Jesse Jackson to Spike Lee. Their step shows, marching bands, and fraternities and sororities have become integral elements of African-American culture. It is a commonplace in black churches and neighborhoods for parents to believe that their children will have better outcomes in black colleges than in mostly white ones, because the black schools provide a more nurturing, supportive environment, free of white presumptions that blacks are intellectual inferiors or expectations they should portray the role of hip-hop gangsta.

But what happens when the truism appears less and less true? What happens when an education emergency is ignored except by those enduring it?

These are precisely the questions Texas Southern has dealt with, particularly since Priscilla D. Slade became president in 1999. The university has its roots in the civil rights struggle, because it was created by the State of Texas in reaction to the lawsuit of a black man who had been denied admission to the state's all-white law schools.

From that rather cynical genesis, Texas Southern has gone on to educate such political figures as the Congressional members Barbara Jordan and Mickey Leland. With about 11,000 students, 85 percent of them black, it teaches five times as many African-Americans as does the flagship campus of the University of Texas in Austin.

What pushed the six-year graduation rate nearly into single digits earlier this decade were factors, both educational and financial, that affect scores of black institutions nationwide. With the desegregation of colleges and universities in the South and the increased recruiting of black students by top universities, what W. E. B. DuBois famously called the "talented tenth" no longer heads to places like Texas Southern by default. In fact, the top 10 percent of graduates from any Texas high school are guaranteed admission to the state university system.

As a result, the students who come to Texas Southern arrive less prepared and sometimes less committed than their forebears. Roughly one-third of them require remedial classes before they can enter college-level courses. More than 100 of the available spaces in the Summer Academy went unclaimed, even though the program charges no tuition and provides a stipend for books that is worth several hundred dollars.

WHY don't they attend? That's the question of the decade," said Dr. Jacqueline Fleming, the director of Texas Southern's academic center. "The single biggest factor is a lack of motivation. Their world is BET, ghetto rap, going to school dressed like you're going to a club. They're here because their grandmother said to be here, or because their parole officer said it was this or jail."

Having taught at Barnard College, Dr. Fleming has seen plenty of anti-intellectualism in more rarefied settings, too. But those students came from families with means and with multigenerational legacies of college education. More than 40 percent of Texas Southern's students represent the first generation in their families to attend college and more than one-quarter have annual household incomes below $20,000.

The economic impact hobbles black colleges and institutions themselves. For in higher education, the prevailing rule of fund-raising is that the rich get richer. Texas Southern has an endowment of $6 million; across town, Rice University has $3 billion. The best endowed historically black institution, Howard University in Washington, ranks 132nd in the nation with $371 million, according to a survey by the National Association of College and University Business Officers.

The interest from a large endowment means money for scholarships, research grants and support services, among other things, and all are vital for institutions dealing primarily with students from the working class or below. The gap between the money available from federal Pell grants and even the modest costs here - about $7,200 yearly for tuition, room and board for Texas residents - has widened substantially over the past decade. Classes compete with jobs for priority. Dr. Bobbie Henderson, director of a center providing social services to students and their families, recently had to find housing for a dean's list student, already working at McDonald's, who had been reduced to living with her 16-month-old daughter in a car.

Against these obstacles, President Slade has undertaken a variety of efforts, from a partnership with a nearby high school to the Summer Academy to on-campus day care for students' children to several fund-raising drives. The radio and television host Tavis Smiley has given $1 million of a projected $10 million over 10 years to the journalism school, which now bears his name. Former President George H. W. Bush, a Houston resident, leads a capital campaign with a goal of $50 million. Some $15 million has already come in, and a new science building is under construction.

Without an array of wealthy alumni, Dr. Slade has turned to corporate leaders and private philanthropists in the city in a separate attempt to build up the paltry endowment. "This is my hit list," she said in her office in late July, brandishing a roster of prominent people to call. A professor of accounting and dean of the business school before being named president, she makes her sales pitch based not on pity or compassion but on bottom-line competitiveness.

"You live in the city of Houston," she said, recalling a recent appeal to an executive. "You have a business in the city of Houston. I'd venture that 10 percent of the people who work for you went to Texas Southern. We prepare individuals to work for you. You should want them to be as well prepared as possible. And you know who educates the largest number of those students."

E-mail: sgfreedman@nytimes.com

What we are left with is a environmental-social-cultural-ethnic gap unique to U.S. African Americans (although no greater than the IQ gap of the 19th-century Irish or the early 20th-century Jews) that oddly matches a symmetrical reverse gap among Asian-Americans (which also cannot be genetic since it does not appear overseas).

Given all the above, informed but sterile debates about the IQ gap seem to hover around the question of "whose fault is it." Informed but fruitful debates seem to address the question "what should we do about it."

Take it away, Barbara...

Selectivity in immigration accounts for the fact that Africans are often better educated than other immigrants and, therefore, more competitive. The average African in Africa is not the same as the average African coming to America. This is the case-at least for West African immigrants-in Great Britain.

The same can be said about East Indians (who are not from the Caribbean) and other South Asians. The average Pakistani is illiterate. Only 25% of the population can read. In India the average IQ is around 80 or 85. The people who immigrate to this country from those areas represent the atypical South Asian-the ones who are from higher castes or better off families who are educated in highly renumerative fields like engineering. That's why they have some of the highest family incomes in the U.S.

I read a Steve Sailor article about this once before.
http://www.vdare.com/sailer/national_iq.htm

He seems to believe "race" plays a huge role in IQ (from the articles I've read from him), however there are some ethnic loopholes/tangles like Black Americans and Black Africans being the same race, but having the same supposed IQ gap that makes White and Black Americans different races. And if Africans can go from a 70 IQ in Africa to a 90% average in America is it really genetic?

Interview with Drew Fraser
I wrote about the suspension of Australian professor Andrew Fraser earlier this week. Here's an interview with him conducted by Michael Duffy, whom I wrote about a month ago for his insight into the eugenic basis of Steven Levitt's abortions-cut-crime theory.
Michael Duffy : Well there've been some amazing scenes in the past week or two at Macquarie University in northwestern Sydney over a major free speech controversy. The vice-chancellor, Di Yerbury, publicly apologised for comments about immigration made by associate professor of law, Andrew Fraser. The professor had a letter published in the local newspaper which was prompted by the settlement of Sudanese refugees in the area.

Fraser regretted the steady erosion of what he calls Anglo-Australians' distinctive national identity. Fraser works in the Department of Public Law, and he wrote, 'Experience practically everywhere in the world tells us that an expanding black population is a sure-fire recipe for increases in crime, violence and a wide range of other social problems. Last week the university tried to persuade Fraser to resign, and when he refused, they suspended him from teaching.

We recorded the following interview just before the 2 o'clock class that Andrew Fraser was about to go into, and as we go to air now, Andrew Fraser is holding an informal class because he's been locked out of the classroom that he normally uses-due to security concerns.

Andrew Fraser, welcome to Counterpoint. Let's run through the story from the start. How did the university initially respond to your letter to the Parramatta Sun ?

Andrew Fraser : Oh, their initial response was just make it clear that you're not speaking on behalf of the university, and that's all they said.

Michael Duffy : Now, what's the exact law there, can you actually sign a letter to a newspaper with your title at the university?

Andrew Fraser : Well, I just sent them an email with my signature attached to it. I'd never even thought about it, personally, but then the reporter or the letters editor at the Sun phoned me up and discovered obviously that I was an academic, and that made him all the more interested in the letter.

Michael Duffy : I understand the vice-chancellor has apologised to representatives of the Sudanese community for the fact that you signed the letter like that. Are you saying that that was an accident?

Andrew Fraser : Partly an accident-but the fact is that because I'm an academic and teach and research in areas such as American constitutional history and Australian immigration law, I actually do know more about subjects like race, racial differences and racial conflict than the ordinary citizen.

Michael Duffy : Okay, so that's an important point-you're actually speaking within your area of expertise.

Andrew Fraser : Yes.

Michael Duffy : Di Yerbury also told the Sudanese people that the university as a whole dissociates itself from your views. Does the vice-chancellor actually have the power to do that-to dissociate an entire organisation from a particular view?

Andrew Fraser : Well, I don't think the organisation per se has ever taken a view on these subjects. I would be very surprised to learn when, where, and indeed how they would take such a view...

Michael Duffy : Has anyone at the university criticised the factual content of your claim regarding a link between an expanding black population and crime?

Andrew Fraser : No.

Michael Duffy : So why do you think they're so upset?

Andrew Fraser : Because-for example-the issue of sub-Saharan African IQs, which are somewhere in the neighbourhood of 70 to 75-this is a fact that is well known to psychologists but they prefer not to talk about it.

Michael Duffy : I understand that the IQ of Asian people on the same scale is actually higher than that of Europeans.
Andrew Fraser : Yes. Somewhere in the neighbourhood of 105, apparently.

Michael Duffy : Is this racism? Racism is attributing certain characteristics to certain races, isn't it, so in a technical sense-not a moral sense-is what you're saying racist?

Andrew Fraser : Well, I prefer to call it racial realism. It's just recognition that races, or descent groups, if you prefer, are different across a whole range of characteristics. Cognitive ability being one. But athletic ability being another. If you want to think in those terms, black Africans clearly stand out as being superior in many respects to white Europeans.

Michael Duffy : It's interesting, isn't it, that you're a university academic; you spoke out on this subject that should be verifiable according to scientific research, and yet the university has not tried to enter into that discussion-at least, so far.

Andrew Fraser : Well, as the controversy broke, I provided Professor Loxton with the text PDF files of the basic references involved.

Michael Duffy : Just to stick with the story of the university's response, for the moment, we'll come back to your views later, perhaps-I understand that on 26 July, that's last week, you met with Tim Sprague, the university director of human resources, who offered to buy out your contract. Did he say why he was making that offer? I should just say that the university has said that he didn't talk about the fact that it was affecting the university's capacity to attract foreign students. What do you say to that?

Andrew Fraser : Well, in our initial telephone contact, he told me that the university wanted to buy out my contract because they were suffering reputational damage and loss of students as a consequence of the controversy. The next day, when I spoke to him face to face, he told me essentially that the university was a business, it had a business plan; that business plan was oriented to attracting foreign students, and the controversy over my public comments was impacting adversely on their attempt to get into that market...

Michael Duffy : And what was your decision? What did you decide?

Andrew Fraser : I decided not to because, essentially, while they were going to buy out my contract financially, on the personal level they were refusing to extend to me the status of honorary associate, you know, with email access and so on that most retired academics who are still active in research and scholarship customarily receive.

Michael Duffy : And they've declined to do that for you?

Andrew Fraser : Yes. So in effect what they were offering me was a dishonourable discharge.

Michael Duffy : Andrew, let's talk briefly about your views, then. You've said the white Australia policy should never have been discarded. What ill effects do you think that that discarding has had on Australia, as of today?

Andrew Fraser : Well, as we can see in this controversy, I mean, it has bred enormous-so far suppressed-ethnic conflict. As far as I can see there are a great many ordinary white Australians who really do believe that they are losing their country. And moreover feel fearful about making any sort of public complaint about that loss. So it seems to me that is one of the major unreported costs of a multiracial society.

Michael Duffy : That sense of loss, you're talking about.

Andrew Fraser : Yes. People often say multiculturalism is working well. But of course the minute one raises any questions about it-for example the antidiscrimination commissioner in New South Wales has been reported as saying publicly my comments could lead to blood in the streets. Now, I mean, if multiculturalism is so fragile a beast that the comments of an academic in a local newspaper could bring the whole edifice crashing down, there's something wrong here...

Michael Duffy : Getting back to the issue of crime, what would you say is the evidence that the settlement of black people around Parramatta will lead to an increase in crime in that area?

Andrew Fraser : Well, if you looked, as I said, to experience elsewhere, in the United States, 90% of interracial crime in the United States is committed by people of black African descent. Black African Americans are four to eight times as likely to commit violent crime as white Americans. If you look at England the same pattern emerges, the same pattern emerges elsewhere in continental Europe, Canada. And if you look at Africa-South Africa for example, there are 30,000 murders per year in South Africa. And black Africa, sub-Saharan Africa, is obviously notorious as a scene of violent crime, war-it's just a fact.

Michael Duffy : Had you always held these views about race?

Andrew Fraser : No. In fact, I mean, I was never very interested in race at all. As we can see, most white Australians do not-or white Canadians-do not actually like to think of themselves as members of a racial group. And I was fairly typical in that. But over the last ten to fifteen years it has become plain to me that members of other ethnic and religious groups are very interested in their particular racial or ethnic identity, and had no hesitation whatever in identifying themselves as members of particular ethno-cultural groups and promoting the interests of those groups. So, in short, what's going on here is everybody else is playing the game of identity politics, and white Australians are willy-nilly being forced to play catch-up in that game...
Michael Duffy : What do you think the university is so afraid of? Why are they making such persistent efforts to respond to what you've done?

Andrew Fraser : Well, you know, this is a funny sort of question, because it seems to me it says something about the distinctive ethnic character of white Europeans. I think what's going on here is that what distinguishes white Europeans from other ethnic groups is a kind of competitive altruism. We really do feel as if we need to sacrifice our interests for the benefit of other groups, and it makes us feel good when we do that. So to be anti-racist is to prove one's moral superiority.

Michael Duffy : Do you think the Sudanese people around Parramatta would have been offended or hurt by what you said?

Andrew Fraser : Well, they claimed to have been. I personally don't believe it. I mean, I think really, once again, it's a stick to beat me and white Australia over the head with. They are a group of people who, once again, have a clear sense of their identity as Africans, and a clear desire to promote their particular ethnic interests.

Below is an interview with Andrew Fraser. He's concerned that white Australians are losing their country and he seems to blame it partly on the black presence in Australia. He uses crime statistics (in other countries) and IQ studies to prove that black immigrants will bring Australia down.

Below is an interview with Andrew Fraser. He's concerned that white Australians are losing their country and he seems to blame it partly on the black presence in Australia. He uses crime statistics (in other countries) and IQ studies to prove that black immigrants will bring Australia down.

There are a few questions that come to mind about this situation. How many black immigrants are there in Australia to begin with and how much crime are they responsible for compared to other immigrants in that country?

If a disproportionate amount of crime is committed by blacks in say the U.S, does this mean that the majority of black people in the U.S. are criminals? Answer no.

If Africans have low average IQs, are these Africans in Australia representative of those with low IQs?

Most immigrants in Australia come from various parts of Asia and the Middle East where mean IQs are in the 80s or 90s (the average IQ in Iraq is in the upper 80s). If there is a correlation between low IQ and crime, why isn't he calling for the deportation of these other people? Recently there was a rash of rapes in Australia committed by gangs of Lebanese youths, for example.

Could it be he is preoccupied with the belief in the inherent inferiority of Africans?

The average IQ of sub-Saharan Africans in Africa has been studied many times over many decades. It keeps coming out almost two standard deviations below that of Europeans and nearly two and half standard deviations below that of Northeast Asians.

I've been curious about these finding for a long time. Has anyone ever seen a copy of the test that was administered? I would really like to see what questions were asked. How would I find that out?

Was the same test (developed in the west I assume) given to each group or was the IQ test developed specifically to test the knowledge of the people in that region?

uhm don't Aussies and Kiwis call all nonEuropeans "blacks"...I don't believe they were speaking about black africans in australia the major crime waves they have in Auss are LEbanese Muslim gangs and SE Asian gangs (more so the Arabs than the SE Asians).