In 1994, Free Press Paperbacks released a book entitled "The Bell Curve: Intelligence and Class Structure in American Life" authored by Richard J. Herrnstein, formerly Charles Sanders Peirce Professor of Psychology at Harvard University, now deceased (1994) and Charles Murray, Chief scientist, American Institutes for Research. The book met with immediate criticism across the country because it set out to scientifically prove the difference in intellectual proficiency among various social classes and ethic backgrounds, the most criticized being ethnic differences.
We at Afromerica read the Bell Curve and were very impressed at the ability with which any two minds could so articulately and persuasively convince, not only themselves, but millions of others like them that the white race is proven to be by indubitable scientific discovery, more intelligent than Blacks. According to this discovery, it is nothing shorter than the laws of nature and [if in fact] the graces of God that the findings are believable.
While attributing this remarkable feat of human positioning among the cosmos to our notable authors, we could not help but feel challenged - in some lower and more primitive form of inquisition - to question their reasoning as to why this study of ethnic intelligence meant so much to them and to their kind to which they would go to such extremes as to declare themselves supreme? What fiendish apparition of narcissism could drive men of such ingenuousness to this point?
To use the word "challenged" to describe what we felt so many times during the reading of the Bell Curve would be a grave understatement but bests describe the feeling of any other scientifically proven underling to the now intellectual superiors. To be so absolutely, double-handedly, not to mention indefensively positioned among humanity as the lowest in a tri-existence under the Creator of humanity, would awaken even the murdered from the prison of oppression. Though many of us remained neutralized in the depths of that grave, we at Afromerica awoke at the voice of the one who created us in His image to answer this scientific error.
After considerable reflection in the mist of divine disclosure, the relationship between surfacing racial intolerance and the unceasing psychological exaltation of Euro-superiority began to come clearer. It was around this time (1994) that the merging social forces of increased wealth and the reinforcing of racial preeminence began to emerge. Not conspicuously, but chiefly as a type of reminder and sort of a warning to all minorities of what the findings of the Bell Curve proved to be true. This fact leaped from the pages of the scientists' cryptic message and into the mind of a chosen few - on the opposite end of our spectrum - and subconsciously and without failure, tainted and inflamed the minds of those alike then surfaced in many forms within our society as a further weapon of racial partitioning.
Far fetched? Maybe. But while we are within the realm of science, remember that query is the mother of science and the father of query is inspiration. Thus, if it takes an inventive or even brilliant mind to concoct a scientific conclusion of intellectual difference among the races, then a mind imagining what could become of that discovery seems not so far fetched. Both are a result of and a child of inspiration. Therefore, with much due respect, the minds of the Bell Curve deserve credit for their accomplishment. With all consideration was the book accepted by its peers and by its subjects, and assuming the findings were correct there should be no resistance or misunderstanding of a moral evaluation and possible discovery of a deficiency in its entire premise.
Since proof - backed by logic and reason - seems to be the method with which the authors successfully rated the races on intelligence, then with proof, logic, and reason will we inevitably prove the authors' overwhelming self-absorption and the result of this study as the cause of American society's racial dilemma, particularly the animosity between conversant Blacks and whites. Despite society's attempt at softening race relations through legislation and media influence (which stereotypically passes along the illusion of successful cultural assimilation), there are racial problems that lie deep within the heartland of this country. And the Bell Curve is a prime example of why.
The first question to the author's should have been, "Who wants to know?" For what Godly or otherwise earthly reason was this study published? Was it an attempt to rekindle the fire of white superiority after its decline in the aftermath of the 60's Civil Rights movement? Was it an attempt to regain some sort of self-esteem on part of white intellectuals and to pass the residue of that regained self-esteem along to the rest of the wounded American Euro-culture? Or was it the next phase of racial chauvinism devised to impede the advances of the Black race by destroying what sense of self-identity they secured during the 60's movements? Whatever the reason, one must question the intentions of the authors.
Quite possibly, and what may even be reasonable to assume on a level they can appreciate, would be that they wrote the Bell Curve as a harmless sociological study with the intent of providing information for social leaders to better serve society. In all its glory, the latter will we at Afromerica assume to be correct so as to approach the following evaluation with all impartiality. We will now analyze key concepts and findings from The Bell Curve and convey these conclusions to you.
To get right to the meat of this evaluation, we are going to skip the first two parts made up of twelve chapters, but not without an overview of their contents. The first part entitled "The Emergence of a Cognitive Elite," which attempts to lay the groundwork for the book by distinguishing a difference in classes with and without education, occupational differences among the classes, and the so-called "economic pressure to partition" the classes. Part two is entitled "Cognitive Classes and Social Behavior," which further categorizes society by class and intelligence in terms of poverty, schooling, employment, family life, welfare dependency, parenting, crime, and citizenship. The point is to show that people with higher IQ's have exceeded in each of the above areas and that people caught in the low-end of the above situations tend to have lower IQ's.
To give an example of the mindset we will be up against throughout the length of this evaluation, here is a quote from the beginning of chapter two - Cognitive Partitioning by Occupation, which will follow with what we will call an "Afro Interpretation." (We will put all Bell Curve quotes in italics).
"People in different jobs have different IQs. Lawyers, for example, have higher IQs on the average than bus drivers…Here we start by noting simply that people from different ranges on the IQ scale end up in different jobs."
This statement could be examined and no fault may be found in it, for it would be reasonable to assume that a lawyer, who spends half of his workday reading, has to read and understand what he reads, which would take a high level of concentration and cognitive ability to perform on a continual bases. The ability and desire to do a lawyers job takes someone who is intellectually well read and who has the patience and interest in that field. However, this does not necessarily explain how IQ came into the equation.
The bus driver may have the same capabilities to read and to comprehend what he is reading (say reading the newspaper), but may not have the desire or the patience to study law. This does not say that he is intellectually inferior to the lawyer. Why the authors of Bell Curve decided to include intelligence as a factor of human capability is a question we will answer and evaluate in respects to examples like that above.
Giving the authors the benefit of the doubt, we examined the above example more closely and agree with the authors that people in positions that require more concentration tend to have higher IQs than people who have jobs that do not require high concentration. That is reasonable to conclude; however, how many bus drivers are there that have higher IQs than lawyers, and why was not these statistics recorded? Probably because the point of the study is to justify the partitioning of society based on scientific research that points to individual superiority rather than human capability and blatant classism or racism.
So to set the stage for this ingenious effort to justify separating the superior from the infidels, the authors addressed the issue from a seemingly logical standpoint - which is no more logic or scientific than common knowledge disguised - at which they cleverly inflate the egos of anyone eager to live up to and gain from this fabrication of western condescension. To add more icing to this cake of scientific catering, part two does not address differences of racial IQ - this has its own part - it addresses differences among the white race itself.
We at Afromerica again pondered the relevance of this study. This is the equivalent of researching the eating habits of Penguins and comparing among the penguins which ones ate most and why. Not to say that the eating habits of penguins are not interesting enough to research, but who ate most among the penguins and why adds nothing more to the development of penguins or to the world.
It is understandable to research the potentials of the human intellect and even to further classify the results into divisible form, but to use that knowledge to further divide a society into groups to even further determine who is deserving of what and to what degree certain people will be treated is a suggested fixation of totalitarianism. Why do we - or the penguin society - need to know which penguin ate most and are fat only to divide the fat penguins from the thin penguins? The Bell Curve is no more than a guidebook to social segregation.
Once part two finished enunciating the differences of intelligence among the white race in categories of poverty and wealth, occupation and economic dependency, and so on, which now endorses the authors as experts and confirms their neutrality, then comes part three, "The National Context, " which addresses racial intelligence and it is in this area the authors will shine among their peers. By now, the reader (and student) fully trusts the author's opinions, their method of research and their innocuous target. This now gives the authors an academic right to indoctrinate the reader's mind. Anything they say from here on out is law, natural, and god-given. There is nothing loss to the world to occasionally take a blow for the good of your people.
So without further hesitation, here is Afromerica's rebuttal to and interpretation of The Bell Curve. Because this is the study of morality and the measure of ethical aptitude of the authors' findings in addition to the minds of their followers, science cannot contribute much to it except from example data obtained from The Bell Curve. No statistics or recorded data can measure the moral capabilities and differences among humanity except by natural ethical standards and laws, in which society has no legal documentation or legislation thereof; thus, the findings here cannot be verified in any lab in the country or world but can only be accepted and comprehended by the abilities of the human soul.
Part three opens with this summary:
"Part II was circumscribed, taking on social behaviors one at a time, focusing on casual roles, with the analysis restricted to whites wherever the data permitted. We now turn to the national scene. This means considering all races and ethnic groups, which leads to the most controversial issues we will discuss: ethnic differences in cognitive ability and social behavior, the effects of fertility patterns on the distribution of intelligence, and the overall relationship of low cognitive ability to what has become known as the underclass. As we begin, perhaps a pact is appropriate. The facts about these topics are not only controversial but exceedingly complex. For our part, we will undertake to confront all the tough questions squarely. We ask that you read carefully" (267).
Here the authors are careful to emphasize that the findings are not going to be pleasant, then with creative audacity they then extend a pact, preferably to anyone who may find the data offensive, and with boldness, to anyone who may not understand the data, which is "exceeding complex." In other words, they are offering people a chance to hide from the results of what they wrote. They then ask the reader to read carefully and that is what we did.
The above excerpt from The Bell Curve is an example of what Webster meant in his definition of the word white, nothing more than an allusion to the characteristics of western existence. Let us look at the definition:
2.a: of, relating to, or being a member of a group or race characterized by reduced pigmentation b slang : marked by upright fairness (a white man if there ever was one)
3 : free from spot or blemish: as a free from moral impurity : INNOCENT b : unmarked by writing or printing c : not intended to cause harm (white lie).
According to Webster, the character with which the authors undertake this next section is not to be misinterpreted. They are only reporting to society what they find. No one should take offense to the facts and the facts should be accepted as true and beyond dispute, also to be included in the overall operation and advancement of society.
If pondering why we at Afromerica included the definition of white into this study, it is because this entire façade of intelligence measuring for social classification is all part of an obviously organized effort to secure some as supreme and some as inferior. The strategy is, if there is a section of humanity that the rest of humanity can completely trust because of some stipulated definition of innocence, then this gives the superiors the power to say, do, and classify anything, and anyone, what and however they want. The sad part is, those who have been labeled by these superiors as "underclass" or less intelligent, has accepted by popular demand, the exaggerated findings of the innocent.
© Nov. 2017
Sorry white Person, Did You Say Something?
Did You Say Something?
The Economy is Not Good,
If These Things Are Mostly True, and Go
Real Knowledge versus Internet Propaganda,
Learn the Difference
Why Black Men Deny Christ
more Black men are rejecting the Messiah