HBD: Human Biodiversity

Violence and Group Pathology

A video of a racist beating perpetrated by five black savages has surfaced online (H/T: Auster and Chuck Ross):

Obviously, only anonymous online voices will disseminate information about this sickening incident and the evident motivations. The mainstream media will either ignore the story altogether or cast it as a racially neutral event, the criminals and the victims but mere coincidences. And if a sort of mainstream pundit like Rush Limbaugh or Michael Savage dares speak the truth, they will be dismissed as incorrigible racists fabricating enmity not in the pursuit of truth, but rather as a means for fear-mongering.

But we already know this and it's one reason why this blog exists. Instead, I'd like to briefly consider a question raised over at GLPiggy: what percentage of blacks (and Hispanics) are capable of such savagery, or at the very least, incapable of existing in a civilized society?

As I've argued before, black (and Latino) criminality does not stem entirely from genetics; rather, the relative degree of criminality, not the absolute magnitude of pathology, derives from genetics. Thus, one can't even consider the above question without a grasp of the overarching social factors that motivate or excuse such behavior. In the linked post, I argued that:

[t]he Civil Rights movement didn't only legally condemn discrimination, but it also, through attendant social and cultural changes, unfettered black impetuousness and collectively exonerated them from any future wrong doings. Mainstream academia and media adopted a narrative that blamed black transgression on historical wrongs, and later, hoaxes like "institutional racism."

So assuming the extant social factors, how can one quantify the misbehaving subset of the respective racial groups? Of course, this is a somewhat amorphous characterization to begin with, further muddled by the difficulty of finding a viable metric. Perhaps, we should look for the metric first and extrapolate that particular behavior to connected pathology. Incarceration rates are a good place to start, though this isn't exactly what I want. I want not only violent individuals like that profiled, but I also want to include socially and culturally depressive individuals, the kind that make you roll your eyes at the post office or cause a scene at the supermarket.

To get that, I think the best metric is out of wedlock births and two-family homes. I found those numbers last summer: just over 80% of black births and about 35% of white births are out of wedlock. Of course, many black and Hispanic middle class people exhibit stereotypical behavior, like that Columbia professor, but let's ignore them. So I'd estimate about 80% of blacks, probably somewhere around 65% of Hispanics, and 35% of whites are contributing to our social and cultural depression. If anyone has a better metric, please provide it in the comments.

Finally, this question leads into the concept of genetic determinism. Maybe we needn't answer this particular question or obtain an accurate approximation in order to prognosticate on societal outcomes. Sure, this constitutes an interesting intellectual exercise, but in the end, we don't really need to pinpoint the number of morally diseased individuals shown in the video. And we really don't need an accurate assessment of the "Smart Fraction" either. For all the qualifications race realists repeat about the lack of black intellectual uniformity, the facts remain that societies function commensurate with their majority population. See this chart for all the evidence you'll need.