Black Global Ruling Elite

One of my favorite activities is reversing arguments, in order to make a point. It is using the structure of an argument to contradict someone’s claim or to demonstrate the fundamental irrationality of their worldview. Also, sometimes it can just be an act of playful silliness, a game of rhetoric. Either way, it requires imagination to take an argument in an unexpected direction.

To be able to reverse an argument, you have to first understand the argument. This requires getting into someone else’s head and seeing the world from their perspective. You need to know your enemy. I’ve long made it a habit to explore other ideologies and interact with those advocating them. It usually ends in frustration, but I come out the other side with an intimate knowledge of what makes others tick.

The opposing group I spent the most time with was HBD crowd (human biodiversity). HBDers are filled with many reactionaries, specifically race realists and genetic determinists. The thing about reactionaries is that they love to co-opt rhetoric and tactics from the political left. HBD theory was originated by someone, Jonathan Marks, making arguments against race realism and genetic determinism. The brilliance of the reactionaries was to do exactly what I’m talking about — they reversed the arguments.

But as chamelion-like faceless men, reactionaries use this strategy to hide their intentions behind deceptive rhetoric. No HBDer is ever going to admit the anti-reactionary origins of human biodiversity ( just like right-libertarians won’t acknowledge the origins of libertarianism as a left-wing ideology in the European workers movement). The talent of reactionaries is in pretending that what they stole was always theirs. They take their games of deception quite seriously. Their trolling is a way of life.

“There’s only one thing we can do to thwart the plot of these albino shape-shifting lizard BITCHES!” Their arguments need to be turned back the other way again. Or else turn them inside out to the point of absurdity. Let us call it introducing novelty. I’ve done this with previous posts about slavery and eugenics. The point I made is that, by using HBD-style arguments, we should actually expect American blacks to be a superior race.

This is for a couple of reasons. For centuries in America, the most violent, rebellious, and criminal blacks were eugenically removed from the breeding population, by way of being killed or imprisoned — and so, according to HBD, the genetics of violence, rebelliousness, criminality, etc should have decreased along with all of the related genetically-determined behavior. Also, since the colonial era, successful and supposedly superior upper class whites were impregnating their slaves, servants, and any other blacks they desired which should have infused their superior genetics into the American black population. Yet, contradicting these obvious conclusions, HBDers argue the exact opposite.

Let me clarify one point. African-Americans are a genetically constrained demographic, their ancestors having mostly come from one area of Africa. And the centuries of semi-eugenics theoretically would have narrowed those genetics down further, even in terms of the narrow selection of white genetics that was introduced. But these population pressures didn’t exist among other African descendants. Particularly in Africa itself, the complete opposite is the case.

Africa has more genetic and phenotypic diversity than the rest of the world combined. Former slave populations that came from more various regions of Africa should also embody this greater genetic diversity. The global black population in general, in and outside Africa, is even more diverse than the African population alone. As such we should expect that the global black population will show the greatest variance of all traits.

This came to mind because of the following comment:

“Having a less oppressive environment increases variance in many phenotypes. The IQ variance of (less-oppressed) whites is greater than (more-oppressed) blacks despite less genetic diversity. Since women are on average more oppressed (i.e. outcasted more for a given deviance from the norms and given norms that take more effort to conform to) their traits would be narrower.”

The data doesn’t perfectly follow this pattern, in that there are exceptions. Among certain sub-population in oppressed populations, there sometimes is greater IQ variance. There are explanations for why this is the case, specifically the theory that females have a greater biological capacity for dealing with stressful conditions (e.g., oppression). But for the moment, let’s ignore that complication.

The point is that, according to genetic determinism, the low genetic diversity of whites should express as low IQ gaps, no matter the environmental differences. It shouldn’t matter that, for example, in the US the white population is split between socioeconomic extremes — as the majority of poor Americans are white and the majority of rich Americans are white. But if genetic determinism is false (i.e., more powerful influences being involved: environment, epigenetics, microbiome, etc), the expected result would be lower average IQ with lower class whites and higher average IQ with higher class whites — the actual pattern that is found.

Going by the data, we are forced to conclude that genetic determinism isn’t a compelling theory, at least according to broad racial explanations. Some HBDers would counter that the different socioeconomic populations of whites are also different genetic sub-populations. But the problem is that this isn’t supported by the lack of genetic variance found across white populations.

That isn’t what mainly interested me, though. I was more thinking about what this means for the global black population, far beyond a single trait. Let us assume that genetic determinism and race realism is true, for the sake of argument.

Since the African continent has more genetic diversity than the rest of the world combined, the global black population (or rather populations) that originated in Africa should have the greatest variation of all traits, not just IQ. They should have the greatest variance of athleticism to lethargy, pacifism to violence, law-abiding to criminality, wealth to poverty, global superpowers to failed states, etc.

We should disproportionately find those of African ancestry at every extreme across the world. Compared to all other populations, they would have the largest numbers of individuals in both the elite and the underclass. That means that a disproportionate number of political and corporate leaders would be black, if there was a functioning meritocracy of the Social Darwinian variety.

The greater genetic variance would lead to the genetically superior blacks disproportionately rising to the upper echelons of global wealth and power. The transnational plutocracy, therefore, should be dominated by blacks. We should see the largest gaps within the global black population and not between blacks and whites, since the genetic distance between black populations is greater than the genetic difference between particular black populations and non-black populations.

Based on the principles of human biodiversity, that means principled HBDers should support greater representation of blacks at all levels of global society. I can’t wait to hear this new insight spread throughout the HBD blogosphere. Then HBDers will become the strongest social justice warriors in the civil rights movement. Based on the evidence, how could HBDers do anything less?

Well, maybe there is one other possible conclusion. As good reactionaries, the paranoid worldview could be recruited. Accordingly, it could be assumed that the genetically superior sub-population of black ruling elite is so advanced that they’ve hidden their wealth and power, pulling the strings behind the scenes. Maybe there is Black cabal working in secret with the Jewish cabal in controlling the world. It’s this Black-Jewish covert power structure that has promoted the idea of an inferior black race to hide the true source of power. We could take this argument even further. The black sub-population might be the ultimate master race with Jews acting as their minions in running the Jew-owned banks and media as front groups.

It’s starting to make sense. I think there might be something to all of this genetic determinism and race realism. It really does explain everything. And it is so amazingly scientific.

6 thoughts on “Black Global Ruling Elite

  1. The Black Agenda report has a great series on what they call the “Black Misleadership Class” (Ex: neoliberals like Obama):

    The issue is not the diversity of leadership. The issue is that the common citizen that is Black is in a system of institutionalized racism and class warfare.

    • As you know, I agree. It most definitely is system of institutionalized racism and class warfare. This institutionalization is systemic and pervasive, shot through every segment of society, even found within the black population itself. Wealthier and more powerful blacks are on average far lighter-skinned (e.g., Obama), just as poorer and more disadvantaged blacks are darer-skinned.

      Darker-skinned blacks don’t just experience prejudiced from whites (in hiring, promotions, pay, housing, police harassment, harsh punishment, etc) but from blacks as well. This has particularly been shown in courts where black juries are more likely to perceive as guilty darker-skinned blacks, leading to higher rates and longer terms of incarceration. I bet, if someone were to study it, that the same pattern would be found among lighter-skinned and darker-skinned Latinxs, Indians, Mediterraneans, etc (maybe Irish as well, since there is a historical population of dark-skinned Irish that probably comes from their Basque origin).

      This racism exacerbated by classism is so powerfully institutionalized that, especially combined with the increasing influence of Latin American racism (based on gradation of skin tone), it will survive long after non-whites become a majority. All whites could die off and the legacies of racism could easily persist. A diverse ruling elite doesn’t really change anything, for what that would most likely mean is a diversity of lighter-skinned people. But even increasing some darker-skinned people into a corrupt and oppressive system won’t change the system itself. There are plenty of corrupt and oppressive societies in the world with non-white ruling elites and economic elites.

  2. Here’s an example:

    Black wealth declined under Obama. That is in part he didn’t do what he should have done. Held the bankers responsible, another New Deal, and fundamentally reshaped the US economy to serve the people not the irch. Obama sold out.

    More neoliberal Obamas will not do anything for the people save make things worse, even if it does form a “Black Ruling Elite”.

    • Then again, wealth of most white people also cratered under Obama. Wealth in general for the majority cratered starting in the Bush administration because of economic problems. Obama didn’t start it, but neither did he do anything to stop or lessen it — if anything, exacerbating it. That is on top of decades of growing inequality that continues and is worsening. The plutocrats, white and black, are doing great. Certainly, those like Obama did great under Obama’s administration.

        • That is generally true. But there was something odd going on with worsening mortality rates (correlated to worsening addiction rates and suicide rates) for poor rural whites, especially those entering middle age (i.e., GenX) and women.

          This worsening of health wasn’t seen with minorities for their mortality rates have continued to get better, as average lifespan improves. Many trends have still been improving for minorities, from health to average IQ. That is partly because minority populations have had more room for improvement in basic conditions.

          The negative impact of class warfare hits whites and non-whites differently. But no one in the lower classes escapes unscathed.

          It can be problematic lumping all whites together. I bet, if you looked at poor whites and rural whites as separate from all other whites, you likely would see similar worsening of economic inequality. It’s just the wealthier whites throw off the average white data, which makes it look better for most whites than it actually is.

Please read Comment Policy before commenting.

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s