The Black Panther Coloring Book

May I present to you...COINTELPRO's greatest achievement: The Black Panther Coloring Book

I present to you...Brian Springer's SPIN:



Let's tie this into our national debate here:

Working classes are less intelligent, says evolution expert

Published Date: 22 May 2008
By EMILY PYKETT

WORKING-CLASS students have lower IQs than those from wealthier backgrounds and should not be expected to win places at top universities, an academic has claimed.
Bruce Charlton, an evolutionary psychiatrist at Newcastle University, has written a paper asserting the reason why fewer students from poor families are admitted to Oxford or Cambridge is not because of social prejudice, but lack of ability.

He ADVERTISEMENTsuggests that low numbers of working-class students at elite universities is the "natural outcome" of "substantial" IQ differences between classes.

He told The Scotsman yesterday, in an interview conducted by e-mail at his insistence: "Poor people have lower average IQ than wealthier people... and this means that a much smaller percentage of working-class people than professional-class people will be able to reach the normal entrance requirements of the most selective universities."

Dr Charlton said the average child from the highest social class is up to 30 times more likely to qualify for admission to a highly selective university than the average child from the lowest social class.

His claims could trigger an outcry similar to that faced by the Nobel prize-winning geneticist James Watson, who was forced to apologise after claiming that African and Caribbean workers were "demonstrably less able" than white ones.

However, Dr Charlton argues it is precisely the fear of creating controversy that prevents other academics taking the same line.

He said: "That is why such obvious scientific truths have not so far been stated clearly, or have actually been denied.

"(This theory is] accepted among those who know and understand the research."

He goes on to question the government's drive to get more students from poor backgrounds into top universities.

"The UK government has spent a great deal of time and effort in asserting that universities, especially Oxford and Cambridge, are unfairly excluding people from low social-class backgrounds and privileging those from higher social classes. Yet in all this debate, a simple and vital fact has been missed: higher social classes have a significantly higher average IQ than lower social classes."

Ministers insist the debate should be focused on helping young people realise their potential. Bill Rammell, Westminster's higher education minister, said: "These arguments have a definite tone of 'people should know their place'.

"There are young people with talent, ability and the potential to benefit from higher education who do not currently do so. That should concern us all."

Sally Hunt, general-secretary of the University and College Union, warned: "It should come as little surprise that people who enjoy a more privileged upbringing have a better start in life."

ANALYSIS

IQ, OR intelligence quotient, measures the ability to perform abstract reasoning and speed of learning.

But a debate rages over whether IQ tests are completely accurate and if their results are a reliable indicator of somebody's true level of intelligence.

Although tests may assess analytical and verbal aptitude well, they are not an accurate test of creativity, practical knowledge and other skills involved in problem-solving.

Many see IQ tests as an assessment of an individual's problem-solving ability, rather than general intelligence.

Others argue that they just show how good the individual is at IQ tests, especially during childhood.
___________________________________________________________

Now...not to blow my own horn, but I've been registered at a respectable 138 - I attended a public school from kindergarten through sixth grade; I then attended a specialized junior high school for seventh and eighth grade (I met in eighth grade on of the best teachers I've had the pleasure of learning from - thanks, Jerry!); I then took (on a whim) the Specialized High School exam (I'm not crowing, but I was in the middle of a class, and an advisor interrupted the class so that I could take the exam - I didn't study for it...and I made it into one of the schools).

So, the point for all of that back-slapping is this: the schools in and of themselves have NOTHING to do with learning - schools are merely a venue for the learning experience. I am a voracious reader; when I was younger, I had read every encyclopedia in my domicile (World Book and another - I'll get back to you on that...); in between stickball and football and baseball games with my friends, I would read.

I loved reading - reading was my escape from the confines of the physical world. A few things have supplanted reading in certain aspects, but by and large, to this day, nothing's better than a good old book to me.

In my opinion, this smacks of the Bell Curve propaganda - and now, I'm going to make an observation...

The drug laws were not intended to save the "children" from the vagaries of drug abuse; rather, I believe the laws were enacted to save "rich, idle layabouts" from drug overdoses. Now, I know...that was a heck of a tangent to take, but here's the thread - working class kids have to WORK to earn funds to keep themselves in food and entertainment; not so for our more affluent kids; and many of these affluent kids have the "entitlement mentality"; in other words, they haven't any patience - everything must be theirs for the taking, and everything must happen immediately, and YOU and I (the non-affluent) MUST MAKE IT SO.

Now, let's be clear - if you've earned the money you and your family enjoy...well, that's all that need be said! It's your money! I'm not a communist, because we, as a society, do not perform equal shares of work, and that mandates that everyone can get the same compensation for their contributions. That being said, while listening to CNN, twenty years ago, our CEOs were being paid twenty times the amounts being paid to the blue-collar workers, relatively.

They are now being compensated at a rate FOUR HUNDRED TIMES what those same workers are getting; now, in other countries, the CEOs were making around ten times the amount of their employees...and according to the report, that hasn't changed much.

So...the offspring of these individuals wouldn't seem to have too mush in terms of having idle monies to use on whatever comes to mind. Well, remember the crop of movies back in the eighties and nineties?

LESS THAN ZERO
AMERICAN PSYCHO
PRIVATE SCHOOL
BACK TO SCHOOL

I can go on and on, but the point is...idle hands are the Devil's playground. And rich hands with no effort expended to obtain said riches are idle, indeed. Ah...to be rich and to do something worthwhile...

I mention John Taylor Gatto here in this rant, because he will most likely second most of the ideas put forth in this posting - don't take my word for it...look him up, and understand his ideas in regards to education.

I'll leave you with one last observation: have you noticed which kids have won national spelling bees in the last few years?