This is uncontroversially true. The controversial opinion that Raymond holds is that this implies an inherent genetic deficit in intelligence rather than simply being reflective of socioeconomics.
IQ is highly impacted by schooling and wealth. The 1965 immigration reform act filters immigrants based on skills and wealth, increasing the average IQ of immigrants. 60% of Asian-Americans are first-generation immigrants, and the total population has increased from ~1.5M in 1965 to 17M in 2010.
Thanks for this, I hadn't realised. I don't condone or support those views in any way, and would therefore recommend that anyone reading the essay do so with a critical eye in case these views leaked into its content. It's been a long time since I read it and I'm much more sensitive to this now than I was then so I may have missed subtext that was inappropriate in that way.
No problem. See I'm being downvoted for what I guess is perceived as "tone policing". FWIW, I've read the cathedral and the bazaar many times over the years myself, and I don't think there's anything controversial in the paper itself. That said, some people have sensitivity as to where information comes from, so it's good to have that context when recommending any particular work.
On the contrary, it is inappropriate to pander to silly people who have “sensitivity to where information comes from”. You just have to read that phrase to see how wrong it is. The very nature of information (as opposed to opinion) is that its provenance is irrelevant.
He believes that the biggest impediment to black people in the modern day is other black people.
> Marion Barry abuses the D.C. mayor's office and snorts crack on video and `movement' blacks march in the streets to get him acquitted.
> Who will wake up the poor blacks in our cities to the fact that they've become their own worst enemies, slaughtering each other in numbers the Klan could only dream of, yearly racking up casualty figures reminiscent of a medium-sized war?
Is he asking any black people what should be done? Not in this essay. He's laying all blame at the feet of black people. He doesn't mention any issues caused by non-black people.
Also, he's asserting that some anti-racism initiatives are threats.
> `Afro-centrists' agitate for their own (segregated) schools and curricula that would consciously try to write the white man out of the black child's version of history.
(Increasing black representation is writing the "white man" out of history?)
> Who will speak the hard truth: that, against this hideous backdrop, continued attempts at the moral blackmail of innocent whites with reminders of past racism will only drive them into the arms of hatemongers like David "Sieg-Heil" Duke and his scummy gang of knock-off Nazis?
(The worst racism is calling something racist?)
If this essay was supposed to convince me he doesn't hold some racist views, it backfired miserably. His vision of "non-racism" appears to be conscious ignorance, where the biggest racist threat is people saying something is racist.
Absolutely. Even if this essay happens to be ok I recognise that I'm fairly unlikely to spot problematic issues in things so I do like to know the context and give it when recommending so that I can give a heads up to those who might be more likely to spot issues.
