But I don't think the equivalent to losing your fingers means your arm muscles are also now less capable, only that you can no longer manage to reach that capacity yourself. Its a pedantic difference in how it manifests in reality, but the difference is huge in the scientific details.
Yeah, I'm focusing that because, using your analogy, IQ is like measuring your grip strength. Yes, grip strength at relative age will be determined by genetics in a large part, but there will be an environmental impacts that can effect grip strength. Sure, we can infer that there will be a trend that stronger gripped children may be pre-disposed to being stronger gripped adults, but this isn't a certainty because of environmental factors.
It isn't a certainty, but if we can show a consistent trend in one direction or another we can better accommodate and adjust expectations towards both an individual or a group.
In the case from OPs picture however, the "environmental factors" is just a handwave excuse they could not define nor name to ignore the uncomfortable truth of black people's lower intelligence as a whole because it would ruin their "we are the same species" indoctrination.
Well, there's nothing to suggest that black people are a different species. The fact that blacks and whites can have fertile children makes that a pretty straight-forward answer.
More than anything, I feel like looking at why black IQ's are low would show very clear cultural results that they would need to hide under racialism. Leftism causes lower IQ's in populations due to a large number of environmental factors, not least among them is a major effort to remove meritocracy as a social filter. Several decades of social deconstruction, anti-meritocracy, anti-family policy, random violence, low quality food, high crime, magical thinking, vice addiction, rampant corruption, predation culture, and low information clearly cause major IQ collapse in a society.
Black communities in America may never have been worse since the Left began revolutionizing them. The success of the Civil Rights movement may have successfully done more damage to black populations in the US than slavery, Jim Crow, and mandatory illiteracy ever did. Indians on reservations seem to be going the same thing, and even White communities are destroyed through similar efforts with de-industrialization in the midwest, or the Progressive hell-hole of the Pacific North West.
Leftism is an anti-civilization death cult that seems to kill everything it touches. It is no wonder the bloodiest era in human history takes place immediately after the Progressive Era... unless we admit that we are still in it.
Well, there's nothing to suggest that black people are a different species.
That's also playing into their language games as well. Because the implication behind "same species" is "exactly the same, race is just a construct" which then will fall behind a response like yours when called out. Humans are full of genetically definable categories, "race" is just a very large one that is much easier to see with our eyes.
Several decades of social deconstruction, anti-meritocracy, anti-family policy, random violence, low quality food, high crime, magical thinking, vice addiction, rampant corruption, predation culture, and low information clearly cause major IQ collapse in a society.
And you could say many of these are created their own form of eugenical polluting of the gene pool with the worst possible candidates. There is a lot to be said about black culture highly rewarding "Low IQ" behaviors with a lot of chances for mating, with a strong effort to violently suppress any "High IQ" candidates from doing so.
This is the case across much of the modern world in general, but you can see it demonstrated in black culture much more plainly (and Arabic or Russian in many ways).
I don't disagree that Leftism is a cancer that is causing much of these issues, and likely might be the original root. My only caveat is that in your position there lies the implication that if we just "fixed" the environmental/cultural issue they would become much more identical to the rest of us, sans some adaptation pains.
Species isn't a social construct, though. It's purely a biological one built off of the ability for members of a genetic population to reproduce fertile offspring. There's no debate in any of that.
The biological race concept does work, but it's never used appropriately in any cultural settings. We know that there are a specific number of phenotypes within human populations, but most people don't even know what their phenotypes are, and the breadth of variance among things like intelligence and physicality among phenotype groups is so wide it's not actually useful knowledge from a cultural perspective. Hence, "race" is simply not treated as a biological concept, but as a political one. I agree with that sentiment because that ends up being how it gets used. No one ends up actually caring what their genetic profile is, they just want to know what they can assert random people to be based off of a single look with no knowledge. Moreover, it is a useful political tool to manipulate people into clientele groups for ease of control through a party boss system.
My only caveat is that in your position there lies the implication that if we just "fixed" the environmental/cultural issue they would become much more identical to the rest of us, sans some adaptation pains.
I believe this is absolutely true, and I believe that the history of the US has shown that in localized environments these groups will tend to integrate well over time. This process takes somewhere around 5 generations, though. The constant rolling flood of immigration with no time to assimilate, integrate, nor interbreed prevents social cohesion from forming.
I think the easiest way for me to explain this is to say: I believe that "American" can be (possibly is) an ethnic group through ethnogenesis. The problem is that we have to allow for ethnogenesis to take place. This does not happen in an instant, and takes a long time for populations to intermix and settle. You kind need net zero or net negative migration for five to seven generation for such a thing to take place. What we've seen in history is that typically if political balkanization is not present these groups do naturally integrate into a shared nation over time and make progress doing so. But what's been happening is that all the gains made in 2-3 generations are suddenly reversed in 1 or 2. There is no reason that American blacks who've lived in the north for 300 years should be acting like "America isn't my country" or "This country isn't my people". They may not even have ever been slaves (those that were are almost universally genetically related to their masters as well). That's all Communist racial subversion. They are effectively foundational American stock, taught to hate their fellow Americans by Communists attempting to revolutionize the country into Racial Socialism.
Yeah, I'm focusing that because, using your analogy, IQ is like measuring your grip strength. Yes, grip strength at relative age will be determined by genetics in a large part, but there will be an environmental impacts that can effect grip strength. Sure, we can infer that there will be a trend that stronger gripped children may be pre-disposed to being stronger gripped adults, but this isn't a certainty because of environmental factors.
It isn't a certainty, but if we can show a consistent trend in one direction or another we can better accommodate and adjust expectations towards both an individual or a group.
In the case from OPs picture however, the "environmental factors" is just a handwave excuse they could not define nor name to ignore the uncomfortable truth of black people's lower intelligence as a whole because it would ruin their "we are the same species" indoctrination.
Well, there's nothing to suggest that black people are a different species. The fact that blacks and whites can have fertile children makes that a pretty straight-forward answer.
More than anything, I feel like looking at why black IQ's are low would show very clear cultural results that they would need to hide under racialism. Leftism causes lower IQ's in populations due to a large number of environmental factors, not least among them is a major effort to remove meritocracy as a social filter. Several decades of social deconstruction, anti-meritocracy, anti-family policy, random violence, low quality food, high crime, magical thinking, vice addiction, rampant corruption, predation culture, and low information clearly cause major IQ collapse in a society.
Black communities in America may never have been worse since the Left began revolutionizing them. The success of the Civil Rights movement may have successfully done more damage to black populations in the US than slavery, Jim Crow, and mandatory illiteracy ever did. Indians on reservations seem to be going the same thing, and even White communities are destroyed through similar efforts with de-industrialization in the midwest, or the Progressive hell-hole of the Pacific North West.
Leftism is an anti-civilization death cult that seems to kill everything it touches. It is no wonder the bloodiest era in human history takes place immediately after the Progressive Era... unless we admit that we are still in it.
That's also playing into their language games as well. Because the implication behind "same species" is "exactly the same, race is just a construct" which then will fall behind a response like yours when called out. Humans are full of genetically definable categories, "race" is just a very large one that is much easier to see with our eyes.
And you could say many of these are created their own form of eugenical polluting of the gene pool with the worst possible candidates. There is a lot to be said about black culture highly rewarding "Low IQ" behaviors with a lot of chances for mating, with a strong effort to violently suppress any "High IQ" candidates from doing so.
This is the case across much of the modern world in general, but you can see it demonstrated in black culture much more plainly (and Arabic or Russian in many ways).
I don't disagree that Leftism is a cancer that is causing much of these issues, and likely might be the original root. My only caveat is that in your position there lies the implication that if we just "fixed" the environmental/cultural issue they would become much more identical to the rest of us, sans some adaptation pains.
Species isn't a social construct, though. It's purely a biological one built off of the ability for members of a genetic population to reproduce fertile offspring. There's no debate in any of that.
The biological race concept does work, but it's never used appropriately in any cultural settings. We know that there are a specific number of phenotypes within human populations, but most people don't even know what their phenotypes are, and the breadth of variance among things like intelligence and physicality among phenotype groups is so wide it's not actually useful knowledge from a cultural perspective. Hence, "race" is simply not treated as a biological concept, but as a political one. I agree with that sentiment because that ends up being how it gets used. No one ends up actually caring what their genetic profile is, they just want to know what they can assert random people to be based off of a single look with no knowledge. Moreover, it is a useful political tool to manipulate people into clientele groups for ease of control through a party boss system.
I believe this is absolutely true, and I believe that the history of the US has shown that in localized environments these groups will tend to integrate well over time. This process takes somewhere around 5 generations, though. The constant rolling flood of immigration with no time to assimilate, integrate, nor interbreed prevents social cohesion from forming.
I think the easiest way for me to explain this is to say: I believe that "American" can be (possibly is) an ethnic group through ethnogenesis. The problem is that we have to allow for ethnogenesis to take place. This does not happen in an instant, and takes a long time for populations to intermix and settle. You kind need net zero or net negative migration for five to seven generation for such a thing to take place. What we've seen in history is that typically if political balkanization is not present these groups do naturally integrate into a shared nation over time and make progress doing so. But what's been happening is that all the gains made in 2-3 generations are suddenly reversed in 1 or 2. There is no reason that American blacks who've lived in the north for 300 years should be acting like "America isn't my country" or "This country isn't my people". They may not even have ever been slaves (those that were are almost universally genetically related to their masters as well). That's all Communist racial subversion. They are effectively foundational American stock, taught to hate their fellow Americans by Communists attempting to revolutionize the country into Racial Socialism.