Ideology and Racial Differences?

[Tooting Carmen]

What about the black students in Sweden? There was no slave holding in Sweden, neither racial opression on blacks, but interesting fact the swedish black students are much worse in the school than ethnic swedes. Makes no sense to deny the reality, there are visible differences between races.

Granted, but is most of the African migration to Sweden made up of professionals or menial workers? From what I understand, most Black people in Sweden are Somalis, and they are (both home and abroad) among the poorest and lowest-achieving groups of all.

[Petalpusher]

IQ tests are not completely unbiased. They are influenced by maths and language education. Flynn effect is an example of that, past IQ scores are lower than modern in most countries, even more so in third world.

That's why it's more relevant to see them as brackets, not comparing 5% difference when you have more than 10 times that difference all over the world.

Yes but what about Afro-Brazilians? Most pertinently, how do they compare to Afro-Americans?

I don't know the exact stats, and at what point you define black, white, triracials etc.. there, is whole other can of worms.

[Lioncourt]

Granted, but is most of the African migration to Sweden made up of professionals or menial workers? From what I understand, most Black people in Sweden are Somalis, and they are (both home and abroad) among the poorest and lowest-achieving groups of all.

Somalia today might be the poorest, but reason for that is the constant war there. In the past actually Somalis owned Bantu slaves and were better off then most Africans.

[Tooting Carmen]

Somalia today might be the poorest, but reason for that is the constant war there.

Caused in large measure by the clannish set-up of their own society.

[Tooting Carmen]

That's why it's more relevant to see them as brackets, not comparing 5% difference when you have more than 10 times that difference all over the world.

Plus also the rather salient and obvious fact that individual variation is ultimately larger than group variation.

I don't know the exact stats, and at what point you define black, white, triracials etc.. there, is whole other can of worms.

Which precisely shows that such racial determinism when trying to describe differences between people - including on the issue of intelligence - is much of the time subjective, arbitrary and contingent on time and place.

[Petalpusher]

Plus also the rather salient and obvious fact that individual variation is ultimately larger than group variation.

That would apply to Albania vs Finland then too in your example, and the difference is much lower than any African compare to any other group on average, as well as not so relevant as they are both very tiny nations (barely 10M combined). I think you would be hard pressed to find African individuals with extremely high IQ as it's too far out of the normal deviation of the averages, or at least in greatly reduced proportions. And they better not have a high deviation because imagine for all the countries in the 60 average what would be the bottom deviation... This is already a significant difference between Europeans and East Asians, who have lower deviations, both ways (some positives and negatives about it)

Which precisely shows that such racial determinism when trying to describe differences between people - including on the issue of intelligence - is much of the time subjective, arbitrary and contingent on time and place.

The fact Latin America is mostly a triracial continent, doesn't invalidate the fact fundamental differences between races exist. It's like saying huskies and dalmatians are not seperate races because a Dalusky exist.

[Tooting Carmen]

That would apply to Albania vs Finland then too in your example, and the difference is much lower than any African compare to any other group on average, as well as not so relevant as they are both very tiny nations (barely 10M combined). I think you would be hard pressed to find African individuals with extremely high IQ as it's too far out of the normal deviation of the averages, or at least in greatly reduced proportions. This is already a significant difference between Europeans and East Asians, who have lower deviations, both ways (some positives and negatives about it)

Point taken, but still too much determinism in this argument. Several countries in Europe, the Middle East and Asia used to be deeply impoverished - Ireland, Norway, the Gulf Arab countries, Singapore, Taiwan, South Korea (which until the 1980's was actually poorer than the North) - are now pretty prosperous. What changed? Did eugenics magically alter the IQs of those nations?

The fact Latin America is mostly a triracial continent, doesn't invalidate the fact fundamental differences between races exist. It's like saying huskies and dalmatians are not sperate races because a Dalusky exist.

But as you inferred yourself, where does one race begin and another one end? Can someone who is triracial still be regarded (socially at least) as White, Black or Amerindian depending on their physical appearance and/or genetics? And within the Caucasoid race, where exactly is the division between 'European' and 'MENA'? Jews, Turks, Cypriots and Kavkazians are essentially intermediate between both; furthermore, Southern Europeans in particular can sometimes look MENA and Iranians and Levantines (less so other non-transcontinental MENA groups) can sometimes look European.

[Petalpusher]

Point taken, but still too much determinism in this argument. Several countries in Europe, the Middle East and Asia used to be deeply impoverished - Ireland, Norway, the Gulf Arab countries, Singapore, Taiwan, South Korea (which until the 1980's was actually poorer than the North) - are now pretty prosperous. What changed? Did eugenics magically alter the IQs of those nations?

Norway discovered oil, and Ireland corporate tax heaven, they both score randomly and not that high actually but in the European variation and statistical uncertainty. Gulf Arabs were brought oil exploitation on the other hand, their IQ hasn't changed, it's still around 80, even if (only) some parts became rich recently. Now you are plugging in very different characteristics to infer "intelligence" like wealth, politics, fluke events and random developpements. Those are gonna be more tenuous to assess intelligence or success, even there are likely some relation in the grand scheme of things and through time.

But as you inferred yourself, where does one race begin and another one end? Can someone who is triracial still be regarded (socially at least) as White, Black or Amerindian depending on their physical appearance and/or genetics? And within the Caucasoid race, where exactly is the division between 'European' and 'MENA'? Jews, Turks, Cypriots and Kavkazians are essentially intermediate between both; furthermore, Southern Europeans in particular can sometimes look MENA and Iranians and Levantines (less so other non-transcontinental MENA groups) can sometimes look European.

It's a question for Latin America for the most part. That shouldn't concern other peoples in the world, people know what they are everywhere else. Well supported by genetics, if needed.

[Tooting Carmen]

Norway discovered oil, and Ireland corporate tax heaven, they both score randomly and not that high actually but in the European variation and statistical uncertainty. Gulf Arabs were brought oil exploitation on the other hand, their IQ hasn't changed, it's still around 80, even if (only) some parts became rich recently. Now you are plugging in very different characteristics to infer "intelligence" like wealth, politics, fluke events and random developpements. Those are gonna be more tenuous to assess intelligence or success, even there are likely some relation in the grand scheme of things and through time.

Well precisely. There are lots of factors besides average IQ rates that determine a society's prosperity and success.

It's a question for Latin America for the most part. That shouldn't concern other peoples in the world, people know what they are everywhere else. Well supported by genetics, if needed.

We can all surely agree that East Asians and Black Africans are different races to Europeans with little or no room for confusion, but what about the difference between Europeans and MENAs, which arguably gets people even more heated up than differences between Europeans and other major racial groups? Like I said, there are some ethnic groups and nations which are difficult to classify as either European or MENA at all.

[Lioncourt]

That would apply to Albania vs Finland then too in your example, and the difference is much lower than any African compare to any other group on average, as well as not so relevant as they are both very tiny nations (barely 10M combined). I think you would be hard pressed to find African individuals with extremely high IQ as it's too far out of the normal deviation of the averages, or at least in greatly reduced proportions. And they better not have a high deviation because imagine for all the countries in the 60 average what would be the bottom deviation.

Africa will have many people several deviations above average there (like people with 115 IQ where average is 70), because these people will have access to good education and upbringing. IQ is really meaningless to use if the tested person is taken from the field. In Bulgaria for example there are plenty of smart, educated people whose grandparents worked in agriculture. That's because access to modern education methods have greatly improved.