I'm not saying you are, I'm saying that if you say what you are saying without qualifying that its only because of social factors that people of particular races tend to have lower IQs, then you are a racist, which is the generally agreed upon definition. Instead of evading the label, why not embrace it? For instance, I am a misogynist through and through, and if someone calls me one I affirm it. Why not accept that you are a racist instead of trying to pretend what you're saying has anything to do with objectivity and empirical science?
> if you say what you are saying without qualifying that its only because of social factors that people of particular races tend to have lower IQs, then you are a racist, which is the generally agreed upon definition
Generally agreed upon by whom? Just you? The dictionary definition, which is most indicative of what is generally agreed upon, of "racist" denotes a requirement of prejudice, discrimination, or antagonism. An assertion of different races exhibiting different IQs due to heredity factors may be incorrect, but being incorrect does not imply prejudice, discrimination, or antagonism.
Its not that the assertion is incorrect, but that if it is made without knowledge that IQ is primarily influenced by social-economic factors, then it can be construed as racist because it is saying that a positive quality (high IQ) is given by nature to certain groups of people who already happen to hold certain economic and social privileges, instead of the other way around. Unless you're claiming that having a low IQ can be seen as something positive.
IQ is neither positive or negative. It is merely a factual representation[1] of what is. What has lead you to establish this emotional connection to it?
[1] To the extent of our best known ability to represent it. Any flaws in that representation accepted.
This is not an argument and is just an inflammatory remark.