The totalitarian nature of United States politics showed forth yet again when a Harvard university PhD dared to mention that Hispanics have lower IQ's than whites, they have always had lower IQ's than whites, and they will continue to have lower IQ's than whites into the indiscernible future. He then mentioned that there is a high correlation between having a high IQ, getting a good education, and earning a high wage. He dared to mention that Hispanics make half as much money, on average, as native white Americans, and therefore were simply a public burden to the country. Here's the strangest thing. These facts, these figures, are readily published by the government itself and are known, they are uncontested, by the entire scientific community.
IQ tests are not some sort of arcane, tricky subject. We have given Hispanics millions of IQ tests and recorded the results. Their IQ is definitively established, beyond all scientific doubt. We have been giving these tests for decades, so it is also definitively established, beyond all scientific doubt, that their IQ isn't changing as time passes either. It is the same with the IQ of all other groups -- blacks, whites, Asians, and everyone in between, we have been giving IQ tests to all of these groups for decades and know definitively what their average IQ scores are. It is simply a fact that Hispanics have lower IQ than whites, and it is also a fact that their IQ scores have not risen a significant amount vis a vis whites in all the decades we have been testing the two scores. This is indisputable truth.
The correlation between IQ, educational achievement, and income are also indisputable facts. There is a robust correlation between SAT scores and later college success, which is why so many colleges use them to screen college applicants, and SAT tests are indistinguishable from IQ tests. People with high IQ's always score highly on SAT tests, and those with low IQ's always score poorly on SAT tests, in a 1:1 direct ratio. The same is true if you look at PISA test scores versus the IQ tests we take of various nations. Those with higher IQ's also have higher PISA scores, and those with lower IQ's have lower test scores. At the macro level, IQ is the sole, absolute, and definitive factor that determines the level of educational success your ethnicity can expect to achieve. In addition, your level of educational attainment is the best predictor of income among all other factors.
Education is the source of high paying jobs, and the more elite institution you are educated in, the more high paying job you will have. Again, your education level is a 1:1 ratio to your income at a macro scale. Nothing else compares, nothing else even comes close as a determining factor. Democrats and Republicans, liberals and conservatives alike repeat endlessly, as a mantra, that education is the solution to every single problem on Earth and the sole and only way out of poverty. They never stop stressing how important education is to a child's future and how everyone needs to achieve academically in order to propel America's future economy. Obama gives this speech every day, practically every hour of every day to adoring crowds.
Logic is simply moving from established premise to established premise until you reach an obvious conclusion. If A=B, and B=C, and C=D, then A=D. Everyone in the world accepts that A=B. Hispanics have lower IQ's than whites. This is an indisputable fact. Everyone in the world accepts that B=C. IQ is robustly correlated to educational attainment levels. This is also an indisputable fact. Everyone in the world accepts that C=D. Educational attainment levels are robustly correlated to income levels. This is also an indisputable fact. Richwine was fired for completing this logical chain, for putting these isolated truths together in a row, and coming to the inevitable logical conclusion that everyone along the way admitted to, Richwine has been fired for saying A=D. People with lower IQ's (Hispanics) make lower incomes (than whites). I don't think I've ever seen such a thing before. It's okay to say A=B, B=C, and C=D, but if you say A=D you're fired. I wonder what Aristotle would think if he were teleported to see the results of his treatise on logic in action.
The anti-logic and facts crowd will sputter and say it wasn't his causal connection between low IQ and low income that got Richwine fired, but his assertion that Hispanic IQ's would stay that way and not magically transform overnight in the future. It's racist to think IQ's remain the same within groups between generations. We're supposed to believe that these numbers fluctuate wildly and randomly each time a mother gives birth. However, this, too, is absolute madness.
Liberal authors have done decades long scientific studies charting the IQ, educational attainment, and income levels of Hispanics unto the fifth generation living here in America. The answer they came to was that there was no significant improvement after the second generation which managed to learn English and therefore improved over the first generation immigrants to America. From there on, each new generation actually became worse off than the last. So we have had five generations of Hispanics and all five of them failed to have their IQ's 'wildly fluctuate at random' like liberals would insist we believe as an article of faith. Empirically, we have already run this test five times and the results were the same all five times. Rather than a wild fluctuation, the Hispanic-white IQ gap has remained the exact same for almost a century. These facts are well documented and published by liberals who complain about the lack of progress Hispanics have made. Why should we believe that, magically, the 6th generation of Hispanics living in America will pole-vault their way up the IQ chain and suddenly all become the next Einstein? What evidence is there for this belief? Why would a sane person believe that five times in a row we came up with the exact same IQ scores, generation after generation, but the next generation's IQ scores are absolutely random and have nothing to do with any of the data from the past 100 years?
Any reasonable person, looking at this from a dispassionate, disinterested perspective would assume that if a test shows the same results five times in a row, a sixth test will most likely come out the exact same. That is the totality of what Richwine said concerning Hispanic children's future prospects. He didn't even say what the cause was. He just said that, given what we know, this is what we should expect. Nothing more. He was fired for believing in a rational, ordered universe. If he had instead believed that this world was completely arbitrary, that there were no patterns, that everything happened without a cause, and no conclusions can ever be drawn about anything, he would have been praised as a 'leading academic' who had fully embraced the '21st century.' But for believing in a scientific universe that operates under fixed laws, he was fired as a 'primitive, ignorant, bigoted, blah blah blah.' Never mind that he's a PhD from Harvard, the most prestigious school on Earth. He must be a lower life-form incapable of tying his shoes because, after all, he doesn't believe in miracles.
Liberals will argue that the cause of low Hispanic IQ, and thus low Hispanic educational attainments, and thus the cause of low Hispanic income levels, are all easily fixable things a few social programs will accomplish once they seize power. However, this argument cannot be made in good faith. Democrats have had control of the education system for decades, they have run the schools that Hispanics live in, they run the colleges Hispanics receive affirmative action to enter, and so on. Everything is already set up in such a way that Democrats can do anything they wish to improve Hispanics' environments. We have showered nurturing on them non-stop and the result has already been nothing, zip, nada. If they really expect us to believe that somehow the 6th generation of Hispanics will be different, they should at least present some program that is different from all the ones that have come before that will "this time, really!" change the foreordained results. And if they submit no such program, if they show no such data-driven studies showing their program works, what on Earth are they talking about?
We are to be fired if we don't believe that doing the same thing as before will come up with radically different results for the 6th generation of Hispanics living in America? If we believe Hispanics, living in the same circumstances as before, will likely end up around where their parents did, we are to be fired from our jobs. If we instead believe that they will all be rocket scientists, magically, for no reason at all, just by random chance, we will be 'at the forefront of our field' and probably awarded the Nobel Peace Prize.
Is this argument really being made in good faith? They propose no solutions, no data, no experiments, that show that Hispanic IQ can be changed from generation to generation. However, they will persecute anyone who says it can't be. It must simply be acknowledged as an immutable truth, in the face of all the evidence, that Hispanic IQ is random and will soon all be Stephen Hawking level just by us doing nothing at all about it. All we have to do is welcome them into our country with open arms, pass amnesty, and allow free immigration of Hispanics into our country, and unlike all the Hispanics who live everywhere else in the world, their IQ's will magically rise a standard deviation from our USA twinkle fairy dust. In addition, all we have to do is wait one more generation, and 6th generation Hispanics living in America will magically rise a standard deviation in IQ through magical 6th time's the charm twinkle fairy dust. And any belief contrary to this assertion is beyond the pale extremist fringe nutcase Nazism.
The truth is IQ is genetic, and this has been proven definitively by the Minnesota trans-racial adoption study. Even when black children are adopted at birth into middle class white homes, their IQ stays about the same as fellow blacks born into ghetto poverty. When half black-half white children are adopted into white middle class homes, they have an IQ halfway in-between blacks and whites, just like as if they weren't adopted into a middle class home. Changing the environments of children doesn't change their adult IQ's. Thus, it doesn't change their educational attainment, thus, it does not change their incomes. We have already done the study and already discovered the answer to this question. The case is closed. Done. Over. Dead. The facts are in and the ship has sailed.
There is endless additional evidence that IQ is genetic, all of it indisputable. Identical twins have as closely correlated IQ to each other as they have to themselves on different days. Meanwhile, fraternal twins, who share the exact same environment at all times just like identical twins, only have as correlated IQ's as regular siblings do. Only the genetic variation mattered, the environmental closeness had no impact whatsoever on their IQ correlations. Adopted children have a whopping 0%, zero percent, correlation to the IQ of their adoptive parents. While of course having a 50% correlation to the IQ of their biological parents, whom they have never met in their life, due to sharing 50% of their genes. The studies are so definitive and so numerous that it is absolutely unquestionable that IQ is genetic.
Common sense also dictates that IQ is genetic. Otherwise, different species, like frogs or bats, would randomly and suddenly be smarter than human beings. If each new generation of parents who give birth to their children simply rolls the dice to see how smart they will be, then fruit flies should occasionally prove physics theorems and ants should suddenly come out with phasar rays and conquer the world. If we accept that genes must be the cause of inter-species differences in intelligence, it only stands to reason that there could be yet more genes for intelligence that some humans have and others don't. It's just another if A=B, and B=C, then A=C logical equation. It's absolutely indisputable logic. As it so happens, the Chinese are currently doing a study of high IQ geniuses by sequencing their genomes and comparing them to normal IQ controls. They will find the specific genes that geniuses have and normal people don't, that must be the genes for intelligence. All we are waiting for now is for the study to be published. Everyone already knows what the results of the study will be, or else we wouldn't have gone to such an expense sequencing smart people's genomes in the first place. Everyone knows intelligence is genetic. Absolutely everyone does. Otherwise, they wouldn't stereotype the children of inbreeding as stupid. If genetic faults were not the cause of inbred stupidity, what other reason could there be? And yet the same liberals who mock people who believe in a genetic cause of IQ regularly insult their opponents as 'inbred hicks.' How can you get any more hypocritical than this?
However, Richwine needn't even assert this proven beyond all doubt case. All Richwine said, all he needs to say, is that scientific reasoning, that rationality itself, that simply staying sane, insists that future results are likely to mirror past results when nothing else has changed. Richwine didn't have to say that intelligence is genetic to prove his point about Hispanics. All he has to do is say that things have always been this way and therefore he sees no reason to believe they'll be any different tomorrow.
Richwine was fired for saying, "I expect the sun to rise tomorrow, given that it always has for the last five thousand years of recorded history up until today." That is all he said, and all he needed to say to prove that further Hispanic immigration was a bad idea. But in America, today, asserting that the sun will rise tomorrow is a firing offense.
Life was better under communism.