April 24, 2006

My New VDARE.com column:

Richard Lynn's Race Differences in Intelligence: Above is a graph showing the average IQ from 23 studies of Japanese people in Japan (red), 17 studies of Hispanics in the U.S. (green), and 17 studies of Aborigines in Australia (blue). The horizontal axis is the estimated average year born of the sample studied. The virtually horizontal colored lines are the best fit lines. While there is a lot of noise in the data, the stability over the generations is striking.

Ever since the publication of Richard Lynn and Tatu Vanhanen's IQ and the Wealth of Nations more than four years ago, I've been beating the drums about how hugely important is their finding of a high correlation (r = 0.73) between average national per capita GDP and average national IQ.

Yet this fascinating research has been almost completely spiked in the press. For example, you might think that The Economist would owe its $129-per-year subscribers some coverage of this research that has so many implications for international business and investing.

Yet the only time The Economist has mentioned the book was in citing it as the source when the magazine fell for that bogus blue-states-have-higher-IQ-hoax!

Now, Lynn has a new book out, Race Differences in Intelligence, which tabulates 620 separate studies of average IQ from 100 different countries with a total sample size of 813,778. That's nearly four times the number of studies summarized in his book with Vanhanen. (Here is J.P. Rushton's review on VDARE.com, and here is Jason Malloy's review on GNXP.com.)

This profusion of data allows us to do analyses of important issues that haven't been feasible before.

How do high IQ people rationalize to themselves suppressing mention of national differences in average IQ—especially when they spend so much time thinking about how they, personally, are smarter than other people?

A common stratagem, I've found, is to assume that IQ differences matter only if they are genetic in origin. Since no decent, civilized, right-thinking person could possibly believe that racial differences in IQ have any genetic basis, then racial and national differences in average IQ can't possibly exist.

Except—they do exist.



And, as I will show that—no matter what their origin, whether in nature or nurture or both—these IQ gaps will continue to exist for many decades.

So we need to think about differences in thinking.

Here's an above-average quality example of the usual kind of wishful thinking from James C. Bennett, author of The Anglosphere Challenge: Why the English-Speaking Nations Will Lead the Way in the Twenty-First Century, on his interesting Albion's Seedlings blog...

Bennett's replies, in part:

“The whole question of trying to make conclusions about ‘national IQs’ from these tests is problematic. Differential national IQ rates could mean that there are inherent differences in IQ, but they could just as easily mean that the socio-cultural-economic differences between nations produce differential IQ scores for environmental reasons… In a few years further genomic studies and fMRI imaging of the brain will tell us far more about heredity and intelligence (and the nature of intelligence) than we can infer today from the wide and rather problematic assortment of statistical studies available today. I think speculation about it is a waste of time right now.”

But (as I responded) it makes no sense to assume that existing IQ gaps have no real-world impact just because they might prove not to be genetic. The overwhelming fact is that—whatever the causes of the disparities may turn out to be—the gaps exist.

And the crucial point is that China appears to have a lead on India of at least one standard deviation (by Lynn's estimate, 1.5 standard deviations or 23 points). From all we know about national IQ trends over time, the possibility of that gap disappearing before, say, 2050, is very small.

Relative differences in average national IQs change even more slowly than, say, relative differences in average national height, which take a couple of generations to fully work through the system.

Since IQs are quite stable from childhood through adulthood, a trailing population's main hope for closing the gap with a higher IQ group rests on its future children.

Let's look at a stylized example. Assume that the IQ gap between two populations, such as China and India, is currently 15 points. And, assume that the babies being born tomorrow in India are suddenly as smart as the babies being born in China.

The red line reflects the growth in the trailing country's workforce's average IQ if the gap disappeared among all babies born in 2006.

The subsequent narrowing of the workforce disparity wouldn't even begin until the 2006 babies started their careers at age 18 in 2024.

If the retirement age is 65 and the population remains stable, then the gap would only be half-closed by 2047, and wouldn't disappear until 2071 (red line in graph below). If it took 2 generations for the average IQs of newborns to catch up, convergence in the workforce wouldn't happen until the 22nd Century (blue line):

So, these gaps will remain crucially important for generations to come. [More]


My published articles are archived at iSteve.com -- Steve Sailer

Tanning and mood

The BBC reports:

Sunbathing may be a physical addiction, research in the United States suggests.

Scientists believe exposure to ultraviolet rays may stimulate the release of chemicals in the blood which produce a natural high. The team from Wake Forest University in North Carolina say this may explain why some people are prepared to ignore the cancer risk of too much sun. The research is published in the Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology.

Professor Steven Feldman The Wake Forest team analysed 14 people, aged between 16 and 34, who typically used tanning beds two times a week. Each volunteer spent 15 minutes lying on a sunbed which exposed them to UV rays and then on another - again for 15 minutes - which released no rays. The volunteers were not told which beds released UV.

The subjects were asked if they would like to return days later and use a sunbed of their own choosing. Twelve returned and 95% [?] opted for the bed which radiated UV light. They said it made them feel good and helped them relax. The researchers believe that tanning may release endorphins into the bloodstream.

A reader writes:

I've always just assumed (probably based on something I heard a million years ago) that sunbathing makes whites feel good because their bodies crave sunlight to generate vitamin D (there's a Russian family near me, when the sun comes out after a patch of dreary weather, the mother is religious about getting out and getting some sun...).

This might be sex-linked. I've never really understood white girls attraction to sunbathing (I've know a number who were near religious about it). It cant just be the opportunity to lie around with most of their clothes off; they'll do it with or without public exposure.

My guess is that blondish people find that tanning does the most for their mood. Red-headed people don't tan much and others are already tan. But has any research been done on this?

A reader writes:

The research that I've seen on this topic implicates not tanning as the mood enhancer, but sunlight to the retina. This causes a stimulation of melatonin production, presumably among other things. It's been found that even the blind respond to light exposure this way. Artificial solar light panels are now widely available as treatment for so-called SAD, or Seasonal Affective Disorder, the form of depression caused by lack of light during the winter months. I've no idea whether the amount of exposure to solar radiation is cumulative; if it were, all the tanners would be manic, I suppose. But it seems possible that sunbathing provides such an intense amount of solar exposure to the retina that moods are improved.

Does that mean that you get less of a boost from the sunshine if you wear sunglasses?


My published articles are archived at iSteve.com -- Steve Sailer

The neocons' endorsement of the Führerprinzip

The growing criticism by retired generals of the Bush Administration's war in Iraq is driving many neocons into furies of rationalization as to why lèse-majesté is a threat to the Republic. A reader writes:

Do you think that the neocons realize that some of their criticism of the retired generals comes dangerously close to the Nazi's Fuhrer principle? One of the most important steps in the road to disaster for Germany was the requirement that the officer corps swear an oath of allegiance to Hitler instead of to the republic or the nation.

Increasingly, i see the same mistake being made by vocal hawks. Although, in truth, i see the explicit argument made more on warblogs than in newspaper columns. Essentially, they say, retired officers may not voice an opinion that disagrees with the civilian leadership. It is fine, however, for retired officers to support the SecDef, or President. They may even campaign for him.

i do not see why any jerk with a modem is allowed to have an opinion on Iraq or Iran and can even advocate war and more war. But the men who have most knowledge about war, strategy and logistics must be silent. Frankly, I want to hear more from them and less from JPod or Ledeen.

Another noted:

Max Boot spoke at the Philadelphia Society a few weeks ago, and his presence has provoked something of a revolt among some of that conservative talk shop's longtime members. His speech--in which he implied that anyone using the word "neocon" was an anti-Semite--was a jeremiad against anyone criticizing the Iraq war. In so doing, he explained his own philosophy of "conservative interventionism" and "armed Wilsonianism," both of which seemed divorced from both historical and present reality. (Besides, his speech was filled with howlers, like "The American people repudiated Nixon's realism." When did that happen, in 1972?) No surprise that Boot is attacking guys like General Zinni, who was CinC Centcom and actually might know a little something about the Middle East.

Another notes:

I remember in 1996 Clinton was petrified of Colin Powell running. It was detailed in Dick Morris' book. They cooked up a plan to deal with him, and it was exactly what you described; That any general who opposes the president represents some sort of military coup. funny.

Another thing I thought was funny.... According to Morris, Clinton seethed at the prospect of the press annointing Powell and treating him with kid gloves because he was black. That would have been delicious. To see THE elite get the same treatment thousands of middle-management white males get every day.


My published articles are archived at iSteve.com -- Steve Sailer

April 23, 2006

Since when were RETIRED generals banned from criticizing the Administration?

The neocons are divided over the recent criticisms by a half-dozen retired generals of elderly Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld. Some, like Bill Kristol, want Rumsfeld to be the Designated Fall Guy for the failure of their Iraq War. But others see criticism of Rumsfeld as criticism of their war, and they don't like that. Max Boot, for instance, declaims in "A General Disgrace:"


The retired generals, who claim to speak for their active-duty brethren, premise their uprising on two complaints. First, many (though not all) say we should not have gone into Iraq in the first place. Former Lt. Gen. Greg Newbold calls it "the unnecessary war," and former Gen. Anthony Zinni claims that "containment worked remarkably well." That is a highly questionable judgment, and one that is not for generals to make.


The most hilarious argument is that retired generals shouldn't be allowed to criticize the government [presumably because the next step is a military coup]. So, retired General Dwight Eisenhower was wrong to attack the Truman Administration when he ran for President in 1952? Retired General Ulysses S. Grant wasn't allowed to say what he thought of the Andrew Johnson Administration when running for President in 1868?

The History News Network writes:


Twelve presidents were generals: George Washington, Andrew Jackson, William Henry Harrison, Zachary Taylor, Franklin Pierce, Andrew Johnson [he was a military governor of Tennessee during the Civil War -- I don't know if that came with the rank of "General"], Ulysses S. Grant, Rutherford B. Hayes, James Garfield, Chester Arthur, Benjamin Harrison, and Dwight Eisenhower.

The list of generals who have run for president, won their party's nomination and then lost include: Lewis Cass, Winfield Scott, George McClellan, Winfield S. Hancock [and John C. Fremont].

Admiral Dewey, Douglas MacArthur and Al Haig [and in 2004, Wesley Clark] wanted to be president but failed to win their party's nomination.


My published articles are archived at iSteve.com -- Steve Sailer

The NYT Public Editor give a big wet kiss to the NYT's hysterical coverage of the Duke lacrosse goat rodeo

New York Times ombudsman Brian Calame, perhaps taking time out from watching the old "Law & Order" reruns where he apparently gets his worldview, reviews his newspaper's overheated interest in this ridiculous farce and finds it A-OK. Let's just note that the word "hoax" never appears in his essay. He concludes:


"A final thought, based on my review of The Times's performance: Covering the legal proceedings that seem likely to focus on the extremely serious charges of sexual assault and kidnapping is vital. But the paper needs to keep an eye on the allegations and reports about the racial insults voiced by various players, and on the lacrosse team's seemingly flawed culture. If the rape and kidnapping charges do not hold up, the story doesn't end. The Times should be prepared to continue covering what is done about the racial-insult allegations, given the prominence of the team and the university."


"If the rape and kidnapping charges do not hold up, the story doesn't end." Uh, wouldn't the story then be how the Newspaper of Record got hoaxed into publicizing at vast length an absurd tale made up by a drunken stripper?

What I'm struck by is the complete lack of self-awareness in the media. Even with a fair number of discussions of how all this is pre-figured in Tom Wolfe novels, the key concept from the "Bonfire of the Vanities" of the hunt for the Great White Defendant just hasn't register with the press. A Google search for "Duke lacrosse" and "Great White Defendant" brings up only 13 different sites, most of them inspired by me.


My published articles are archived at iSteve.com -- Steve Sailer

More on blacks and swimming

As I've mentioned before (here and here), a new study shows that young black males are 5 to 12 times more likely to drown than their white peers. My best friend lost his stepson to the Kern River last year, so I'm particularly aware now of how dangerous water can be. The drowning death toll of black youths is terribly high, especially considering how little time they spend around water. Nobody knows why. Unfortunately, the vast majority of media would rather continue to let black kids drown than to have a frank discussion of why they drown.

My pet theory is that biological and cultural differences interact. Although blacks who know how to swim can swim fine, they often find learning to swim more frightening than whites do because, when in good shape, blacks are denser on average than whites.



If that's true, then blacks need to get the message: Your children are more vulnerable to drowning, so you must teach them to swim.


Readers write:


I may have mentioned to you in an e-mail quite some time ago about my experience in the US Marine Corps boot camp. I'm a North American indigene, coastal Salish, morphologically similar to the Inuit. During the swimming qualification (a holdover from when the majority of USMC duties were aboard US Naval vessels, the way the Canadian Mounties still had dressage training until not that long ago) I floated like a cork while all the "dark green" Marine recruits ended up being fished from the bottom of the pool by the lifeguards. We were all teenage guys who'd been running twice a day under the loving attention of our drill instructors for the last two months, all volunteers for service in the Marines. The black guys just had less body fat. The DI's all mentioned this beforehand, and told them not to worry too much about it.

*


I asked one of my good black friends about this in college a hundred years ago. He laughed and said something to the effect that white people like to swim because they think a tan makes them attractive. Blacks don’t have that problem. He also said that pool water makes a black person’s skin all rusty and nasty.


I had no idea what he meant by rusty, so he lightly scratched his arm. The residue of dead skin showed up as a grayish mark. That’s rust.


A lot of whites spend time in swimsuits in part because sunshine on their skin elevates their mood. Sunbathing isn't just cosmetic -- it makes a lot of people, especially blonds, happy. Unfortunately, I've never seen an explanation of the biochemistry of this. Do darker skinned people not get as much of an emotional lift from sunbathing?

*


Blacks are not natural swimmers and avoid learning how to swim, which I think accounts for the rate of drowning. But when trained they are really good swimmers. I was a division I swimmer and before that I swam on a public swim team in an integrated town for 10 years and saw and coached some decent black swimmers. They definitely resist swimming as a sport. I have had black parents call me and ask me to convince their son to swim in high school instead of joining the basketball team and sitting on the bench because they were better at swimming than basketball. Our high school sent a black diver to the Pennsylvania state championship this year and I also watched a black guy win the 50 yard freestyle at the state meet.

*


I was on the track team at XXX University in 1996-7 where the sprinters were almost all black. On a side note, all whites on the short distance team sprinted and ran hurdles. Long distance was mostly all white (our team wasn't good enough to attract any Kenyans.) We would keep track of our body fat and the blacks would have percentages in the 2-3 range whereas whites were generally around 8-10 although sometimes as low as 6.


I read somewhere that Danny Farmer, who back in the 1990s was UCLA's star wide receiver and All-American volleyball player, had a 3.7% body fat, which is about the lowest I've ever heard of for a white guy. A former UCLA coed writes: "Poor abused, yet criminally hot, Danny Farmer. He ran into me at Thrifty once -- literally, we turned corners in the toothpaste aisle and collided, and it actually kind of hurt me, as he had no body fat -- and he was SO NICE about it to me. He was all, "wow, are you okay?" and I was like, "dfjakgiariugbdddIloveyou." or something, and he was like, "I'm really sorry I ran into you," and I could not say anything coherent in response. Sigh. I had the biggest crush on him. Me, and 11,000 other girls."

*


How likely is a black kid to be forced by his parents or others to wear a lifejacket while boating? This is somewhat related to intelligence and education, but at least as much to culture--do all the people around you laugh at you for wearing a lifejacket, or does everyone around frown at parents whose kids aren't wearing them?


Do blacks ever go boating? It's not like I can afford it either these days, but when I used to do a little sailing and kayaking, I noticed that only thing that seemed to bring black people to the water was fishing.

*


Here's a little factoid that I learned when I worked at the post office: blacks typically don't learn how swim. It's just not part of their culture, even for the ones who can afford swimming lessons and pool passes (like postal workers). Since most of the deaths take place in hotel pools, I'm guessing that black kids, who would have never been to a pool if they had not happened to stay at a hotel with one, decide to give it a try, with tragic results. The fact that black males especially have a high drowning rate could be attributed to the fact that males, of any race, are more likely to do something idiotic, like jump into a swimming pool when they don't know how to swim.

The article's writer probably didn't know that. Whites are mostly ignorant of non-white culture.

*


One factor you haven't mentioned is poorly-trained, low-quality lifeguards at the public pools urban black kids swim at.

I worked for many summers as a camp counselor in Maryland. About 15% of our campers and staff were African-Americans from DC or Prince George's County. It was almost a cliché that the white suburban kids could all swim well when they got there, but that the black kids from the city couldn't -- were often terrified of the water, in fact, including the older kids (14-15 yrs) who were otherwise pretty tough. A high proportion of black counselors couldn't swim well, either, about half. I'm not sure I even met a white counselor who couldn't swim.

During Staff Training Week, some of these black counselors would take the training to become certified lifeguards (Red Cross or YMCA), and a certain percentage often failed, perhaps a quarter to a third, while another quarter-to-third would pass but just baaarely, and I sure wouldn't trust that percentage to watch my kids in the pool. One guy got certified and could barely doggie paddle his way across the pool! There were always a lot of highly-qualified white lifeguards (and, to be fair, a smattering of well-qualified black ones) around so no one ever drowned, but the overall quality of the black lifeguards from the inner city was way, way lower than the quality of the suburban white lifeguards, who I would certainly trust with my kids' lives.

But imagine an overcrowded inner-city public pool. The kids may be behaving a little more rambunctiously than the kids at a white suburban pool, but it's the quality of the lifeguards that's the biggest problem. No safety net of hyperqualified, experienced white lifeguards to mask the relative incompetence of the majority of the black ones, and that's when the drownings happen. We'd occasionally get reports from the camp director of a drowning at some other camp somewhere in the country, and our pool staff would read the incident report summaries and think, what the hell kind of pool is this? It was always something like: the only two lifeguards on duty were a 16-year-old and an 18-year-old, and one wouldn't even be certified, and the other would have been inexplicably away from the pool for 10 minutes when the drowning happened, stuff like that.

So I'm sure the reason a higher % of black kids than white kids drown is multicausal (like everything in studying human behavior), but the quality of the lifeguards at the pools black kids frequent is major, and might even be the biggest overall cause.


It sounds like a lot of black kids who drown have snuck into a public pool that's closed, or drown in a motel/hotel pool.

*


Occam's razor: The simplest explanation for more accidental drownings among the black population is that not many of them know how to swim. In turn, the simplest explanation for this is that black people usually don't *like* to swim, because it tends to ruin anything that they've done to their hair (any straightening, etc.).


Thanks. That should be true for girls, but an awful lot of the boys have very short hair.


True, but who usually makes sure that a kid learns to swim? The mother. Particularly in a single parent household (it goes without saying). And if the mother has never learned to value swimming, she probably won't push swimming on her sons. And so the cultural value of learning to swim never takes root.

*


I don't think you are correct here. I remember Bob Kiputh's admonition to me. Buoyancy is key. Many people will float unless they blow their breath out which results in their sinking. One thing swimmers have is huge lungs because they can't breath when they want to-- that may be a factor. I have heard talk of "swimmer's muscles" vis a vis other sports' muscles, but I realize that body fat is deduced from immersion results so denser bones would not be a factor. On the other hand I've looked at the bodies of thousands of swimmers over a lifetime and hardly any of them look at all like, say, Joe Frazer. And I think I am right that only one black man has ever won an Olympic swimming event and that was recently....I'm guessing it's reduced access to swimming pools and swimming teachers when young, coupled with a bit of parental neglect and ignorance.


Anthony Nesty of Surinam beat the great Matt Biondi in 1988 for a gold medal. An American kid who is a little bit black won a gold recently, but you couldn't really tell by looking at him. I don't think that at the Olympic level, differences in buoyancy matter, except maybe in the 1500 meters, but they matter in getting started swimming.

*


I wonder if this person grew up around many poor blacks. Blacks show FAR less inclination towards the water than whites do. The ones who do show an inclination for the water express it almost exclusively at public swimming pools, and they avoid the deep end like the bubonic plague. Seriously, growing up in Savannah I remember distinctly how ironclad this rule was, and how (literally) impossible it was to get any of my black friends to break it - not one ever did.

Black behavior was similar at the beach. Sure, blacks like the beach, but they don't care much for the water. It's like there's a rule in the Universal Handbook of Blackness: thou shalt wade no deeper than thy knees. I'm not exaggerating. I think I remember seeing maybe one or two blacks swim past waist deep at the beach during my childhood.

*


From "In the Minority" in Aquatics International by Shabnam Mogharabi:


Ingrained cultural differences also make it difficult. For instance, coaches specializing in minority swim instruction say that more than 50 percent of black parents do not know how to swim, so the skill never becomes a priority in those households.

“Some of the parents are scared of water,” says Kim Burgess, director of Swim Central, a program of the Broward County Parks and Recreation Department in Florida that works with local schools to provide underprivileged children with exposure to water. “They were never taught to swim, so their kids don’t get taught. It’s not a priority.”

More than three-fourths of black women say they are nonswimmers. Many coaches and black athletes say that hair care and maintenance is one of the issues that keep them out of the water. Some white aquatics professionals don’t realize the time and money black women spend to maintain and style their hair. Chemically treated water tends to undo styles quickly, and causes frizziness and other problems.

*


It seems to me that motor-vehicle deaths are not higher among blacks because they are more likely to use public transportation. They also do not have high DUI rates. Black students have argued that this is due to less drunkenness among blacks, but the data more strongly support the idea that they do not use cars as much.

Accidental deaths which clearly reflect recklessness, such as gun accidents, are more common among blacks teens and young adults. (This is not due to greater access to guns--whites have higher levels of ownership).


Here's a study of motor vehicle deaths by miles driven. I was under the impression that young Mexican men were the most dangerous drivers, but this says blacks are.

I have a vague impression that there are a lot of activities where blacks aren't daredevils. For example, extreme sports are heavily white and Asian. I saw some ESPN show once where an NBA player tried rock climbing -- he was catatonic with fear. I recall a black comedian talking about how blacks don't like rollercoasters. (I'm terrified of rollercoasters myself, so I couldn't tell you first hand what the demographics are.) Perhaps blacks don't much like heights?

In contrast, Iroquois Indians traditionally get construction jobs on NYC skyscrapers. When asked what was the secret of why Indians weren't afraid of heights, one worker replied, Of course we're scared. We just refuse to show it.


My published articles are archived at iSteve.com -- Steve Sailer

War Nerd on the Moussaoui Trial

Gary Brecher writes in Fighting Terror with Kleenex:


Instead, Moussaoui blew into court looking like Bluto from Popeye: this big, burly, hairy, shouting blowhard full of Koranic piss'n'vinegar. It was shameful to watch the way he talked back to the useless prosecution team. It ruined the whole point of the trial. Look, this trial isn't exactly a whodunit. Moussaoui boasts non-stop that he was in on the plot, so that's settled. The point is to make him look weak and terrified and get him to renounce his Al Quaeda ties in public, preferably while crying like a little bitch.

Instead - and it shames me to say this - it was our guys who cried. I can't believe it! There was a serving US Army officer on the stand, CRYING while he talked about people being (sob!) killed, yes, KILLED when Moussaoui's pals from the "How to Fly a Commercial Airliner without Landing" aviation school slammed that commuter jet into the Pentagon. This dude was soaking his hanky while Moussaoui looked on and sneered.

Now don't start telling me about how manly it is to cry. In the first place, no it isn't. In the second place, even if you think so, they sure don't think that way in Waziristan and Yemen and Java. In those places, a US Army officer weeping while he talks about casualties means one thing: w-e-a-k. Trouble is, we're so used to all this boo-hoo crap about 9/11 for home consumption that we don't see that when it's time to put on a show for the Muslim hordes (and that's what this trial is). [More]


And here's a transcript of John Derbyshire on Radio Derb:


I hate to admit it, and you're going to hate me for admitting it, but as I've been following the Zacarias Moussaoui trial, I've found my self wondering if we really can win this war on terror. Item: A U.S. naval officer, Lt. Nancy McKeown, wept on the witness stand while testifying about the deaths of her colleagues. Here is what Moussaoui said about that, quote: "I think it was disgusting for a military person to cry. She is military, she should expect people at war with her to want to kill her."

I agree with Moussaoui. Isn't it an offense under our Uniform Code of Military Justice to weep in the face—literally, actually, in the face—of the enemy? If it isn't, it ought to be. I'd be happy to see Lt. McKeown court martialed, and if judgment were up to me, she'd be stripped of her commission and given five years in the brig.

Item: In Moussaoui's defense, though without his approval, a clinical social worker, Ms. Jan Vogelsang, testified that Moussaoui was a victim of child abuse and racism. His father had beaten the kids, and Moussaoui's girlfriend's family had rejected him because they looked down on North Africans. What did Moussaoui think of that testimony? "It's a lot of American B.S.," he shouted as he was led from the court.

Well, again, I totally agree. It is a lot of B.S., though unfortunately not particularly American. The whole Western world has been infected by this poisonous pap.

Item: The Los Angeles Times, arguing against a death sentence, editorialized that, quote: "Capital punishment gives jihadists like Moussaoui the martyrdom they crave." End quote. Possibly so; but it gives the rest of us the immense satisfaction of knowing that there is one less of the enemy in existence.

Watching this trial, I've been left with the impression that on one side of the war on terror there are unbreakable men of steely determination striving to kill as many of us as possible, without distinction, compunction, or remorse. On the other side are the emoting, weeping, sniveling, feminized legions of our rotten therapeutic society, the children of Oprah and Bill Clinton, wailing about "racism" and "abuse," gushing out their precious feelings for the world to see. So far as that first side is concerned, I believe Zacarias Moussaoui is a fair example of what we are up against. If the other side is illustrative of the Western world's cultural defenses, we are surely doomed.


A reader adds:


Did you see 'Some Kind of Monster,' the documentary about [heavy metal band] Metallica? Dave Mustaine, the lead singer of [another metal band] Megadeth, CRIES in it. Not for the arguably acceptable reasons for a man to cry (death of a dog or father), but because he was having a sit down with the Metallica drummer and they were talking about the fall-out from Mustaine being kicked out of Metallica 20+ years ago. Just to reiterate -- the singer of Megadeth cries on camera. What the hell is happening to this country???


My published articles are archived at iSteve.com -- Steve Sailer

Absurd lineup process used:

ABC News reports:

According to the police report, the alleged victim was shown a police lineup of 46 photos individually depicting all the Duke lacrosse team members except for freshman goalie Devon Sherwood, the only black member of the team. He was excluded because the alleged victim told police her attackers were white...

However, an eyewitness identification expert believes the police lineup procedure was flawed because no non-lacrosse players were included. Gary Wells, president of the American Psychology-Law Society, described it as "a multiple-choice test without any wrong answers."

By including "fillers," or non-suspects, in a police lineup, an accuser has to pick past the filler to choose people who actually might have committed the crime. "Without fillers as a control, the process has no internal credibility check," Wells said.

David Rudolf, a North Carolina defense lawyer who has been an adjunct professor at Duke and the University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill, believes the procedures may be problematic to the point of being inadmissible in court. "I have significant doubt that this will be admitted in court," he said, "and no doubt defense will challenge it vigorously."

The issue, Rudolf explains, is that due process prohibits evidence from lineups that are unnecessarily suggestive and conducive to mistaken identity. "When you take the only suspect group and put it in front of the victim," Rudolf says, "by definition you're suggesting it was one of the 46 people in that group."


My published articles are archived at iSteve.com -- Steve Sailer

April 22, 2006

More on black drownings

Why do young black males drown at rates 5 to 12 times greater than young white males: In response to my suggestion that, among other causes, greater body density of black males means they don't float as well, which makes them more vulnerable to drowning, a reader writes:


"Perhaps part of the explanation for the high rate of drowning about black children is less parental supervision. Compared to other groups, blacks do not watch their children as closely. Of course, much of that is due to father absence."


Another writes:


You may be right to suggest that blacks float less easily, therefore drown more readily.

But I can think of other plausible explanations. How about this: blacks drown more often because their lower IQ's (on the average, of course) make them less able to anticipate and judge the risks of swimming effectively. So the young ones venture into the deep- end too often, and the older ones too often leave the young ones alone in the pool.

As for a pattern of females drowning more frequently when they're young, well, that too may be due to factors other than leanness-helping-them-sink. Perhaps post-adolescent females stay out of the water because they don't wish to mess up their fancy hairdo's (on average blacks spend a greater proportion of their incomes on grooming than whites do). For that matter, even if older females are less lean, perhaps modesty keeps them out of the water (so they won't have to reveal pudgy figures) rather than blubber keeping them afloat.

Note that the IQ theory is *not* inconsistent with a low correlation between family income and child- drowning rate. Even though IQ is positively correlated with income, reversion to the mean suggests that high-income parents will have plenty of lower-IQ children at risk of drowning.


The lack of parental supervision suggestions seems upheld by some stats from an old Statistical Abstract I had at hand: the black accidental death rate is much higher, perhaps double, the white rate up through age 14, but after that (when parental supervision drops off and disappears), the black accidental rate is comparable to the white accidental death rate. So, the IQ theory might not be supported.

For all ages, the black male death rate for non-motor vehicle accidents was 29.3 versus 26.0 for white males, which is one of the smaller racial differences. For car crashes, the male death rates were almost identical between the races: 22.2 vs. 21.9. (However, blacks die more from other causes, especially homicide, so more don't live long enough to die accidentally, which means the black accidental death rate is somewhat understated.)

In summary, the black drowning rate seems high compared to other causes of accidental death, so the more-likely-to-sink theory remains plausible.


My published articles are archived at iSteve.com -- Steve Sailer

Around the web:

- American immigrant in Mexico Fred Reed praises Mexico's sensible approach to immigration in contrast to America's.


- Noah on Gideon's Blog responds (belatedly) to a posting by me on Jews and immigration.

- In Reason, Ronald Bailey defends the new Schering-Plough clinical trial of a Hepatitis C drug even though African-Americans are excluded from taking part.

- Dr. Stat considers high school dropout rates in the light of IQ. He suggests:

"I also advocate an intermediate diploma, say at the 10th grade level, which would give people who otherwise "drop out" a reasonable and achievable goal, and remove from them the stigma of being classified a "drop out" when there are jobs they are perfectly capable of doing. What is so magical about 12 years of school? For some people, 8 is enough, for others, 10 would be enough. Doing this would stem the tide of dumbing down the high school curriculum in order to get more and more people, who are not intellectually qualified, through 12 years of school."

- Case closed! Guilty as charged! The NYT's umpteenth story on the Duke lacrosse goat rodeo comes with this headline sure to induce confidence in the Durham DA's case:

Second Stripper From Duke Party Offers Account

Kim Roberts said she initially doubted the story of her colleague, but now she is not so sure.

Lead & Gold offers more:

The second "dancer" is on probation for embezzlement. She was arrested in March for parole violation. On the day that the indictments were handed up, the DA signed off on a reduction of her bond.

Now she is talking to PR firms:

"I'm worried about letting this opportunity pass me by without making the best of it and was wondering if you had any advice as to how to spin this to my advantage."

We need a new term for hate crime hoaxes. How about "Crying Wolfe"?

A reader responds:

I agree that we need a term for these media fueled fake hate crimes. But i'd hate to see a great writer-- and maybe the most acute observer of post-war America- tarred with the association. Might i suggest:

Level One: For the original accuser-- Doing the Tawana

Level Two: When the usual suspects start mau-mauing for the cameras-- Pulling a Sharpton

Level Three: When it erupts into a perfect media storm-- the Full Jackson


My published articles are archived at iSteve.com -- Steve Sailer

Churchill on his ancestor, John Churchill, the first Duke of Marlborough

A reader writes:


If any of your readers are tempted to read one book on that military history reading list, I would recommend Churchill's biography of Marlborough. It is the best book written by the only man who, so far in history, was both the Caesar and Cicero of his age. The Marlborough story is the only major work Churchill wrote when he was not doing several dozen other things, during his wilderness years in the 1930s.


But in writing about his famous ancestor, Churchill was doing a number of things all at once. He was showing the professional historians of his time, some of whom had criticized his earlier work, that he could compete with and better them at scholarly research and judicious interpretation of evidence. He was refuting an attack on John Churchill by the historian whom he otherwise adored and learned about writing from, Macaulay. He was giving not only a narrative of a long series of battles, but explaining why they turned out as they did. As a former soldier and future commander of armies, it was not enough for Churchill to simply describe Marlborough's tactics. He needed to understand why he won so decisively and consistently, which had to do with the early adoption by the British and Dutch armies of the new musket and bayonet, which gave these Protestant soldiers something like a six-to-one advantage over an equivalent number of French soldiers, as least for a while.


Marlborough was also the first Englishman to make his country great by leading a selfishly unstable coalition of countries in repelling a Continental tyrant, so Churchill was training himself for his role in World War II. And he was chronicling the sudden, almost accidental, development of the two-party system in the English Parliament. Since practical democracy in all countries works on a party system, Churchill was describing a decisive stage in the rise of democracy, first in England and America, then several centuries later across the world.

Running through the whole story is the theme of an astounding marriage, rare in any time and almost unheard of in Marlborough's day. The second volume ends with a line by the widowed Sarah Churchill about her dead husband that reminded me of Mary Tyrone's final line about her husband in "Long Day's Journey. . ."


You don't get much more than all that in two volumes.


My published articles are archived at iSteve.com -- Steve Sailer

Less body fat and denser bones

Reuters reports:


Drowning risk highest for black males


Swimming-pool drowning cases involve a disproportionate number of black boys and young adults, and public pools appear to be the primary danger zone, U.S. government researchers have found.

In one of the most extensive studies to look at the issue, investigators found that nearly half of the swimming-pool drownings they tracked occurred among African Americans - with males being at particular risk.

The findings, published in the American Journal of Public Health, not only confirm past research showing that a large number of young drowning victims are African American, but also identify where these deaths are happening.

Nationally, between 1995 and 1998, 51 percent of drownings among blacks ages 5 to 24 happened in a public pool. Most often, it was a hotel or motel pool. That stands in contrast to white children and young adults, 55 percent of whom drowned in a residential pool.

It's not clear why young African Americans, males in particular, are more likely than other racial groups to drown. But the new findings point to the places where prevention efforts are most needed, according to the investigators, led by Dr. Gitanjali Saluja of the U.S. National Institute of Child Health and Human Development.

Hotel and motel pools, they point out, often lack lifeguards. So it's vital for children to always have an adult with them.

The study findings are based on federal data for 678 swimming-pool drownings among 5- to 24-year-olds between 1995 and 1998.

Overall, three-quarters of the victims were male, and black males were at greatest risk. Their rate of drowning was anywhere from 5 to 12 times higher than that of white males, depending on the age group. Hispanic males were also at greater risk than whites, but the difference was much smaller.

Among females, African Americans had a higher drowning rate through the teen years. White and Hispanic females had similar rates at all ages.

Researchers have speculated that the higher drowning risk among African Americans has to do with income; lower-income families are less likely to be able to afford swimming lessons. However, Saluja's team found that the racial discrepancy persisted even when they factored in income. More research, they say, is needed to understand the underlying reasons.

The researchers lacked information on whether drowning victims had ever had swimming lessons, but they point out that pediatric experts recommend that all children age 6 and older learn to swim.


Clearly, wealth and thus exposure to swimming pools plays a role in this, but the much lower rates of drowning among Hispanic males than among black males argues for a more sophisticated view of the problem. Further, blacks don't spend that much time at motels and hotels, so the high rate of black male drownings there needs explanation.

I've long argued that nature and nurture work together here. Blacks tend to have denser bones and black males, when young and in good shape, lower body fat percentage. Fat is lighter than water and thus helps you float. Muscle is heavier than water and thus helps you sink. You don't need to be able to float easily to swim (lots of Olympic swimmers are denser than water), but it makes it harder and scarier to learn to swim. And that's one reason more black youths don't learn to swim.

The pattern of black females having higher drowning rates than white females through the teenage years, but not afterward would fit this body fat model too.

For example, Michael Jordan, who stayed at 3% body fat his whole NBA career, has spent plenty of time around fancy swimming pools, but he hasn't learned how to swim. Us old crocks will also remember how during the swimming race in the first Superstars trashsport competition on ABC in 1973, the great boxer Joe Frazier damn near drowned.

With the pool season rapidly approaching, make sure your kids know how to swim.


My published articles are archived at iSteve.com -- Steve Sailer

April 21, 2006

The most famous sports team in the world?

The most famous sports team in the world? A reader writes:


Check out Google hits for "Duke lacrosse". They are topping 22,000,000, more than for "Dallas Cowboys" or "Manchester United" or "New York Yankees". lol... Is the Duke lacrosse team now the most famous sports team in the world?


News reports should come with labels that say:


"Warning: This news item represents basically the exact opposite of how the world actually works. We are making a big deal about this incident because it is a Man Bites Dog story that is interesting only because it is so unusual. If you rely on stories like this for useful information about the real world to help you live prudently and profitably, you will be sorry."


Obviously, a big reason the media (e.g., the NYT, which seldom deigns to give much coverage to local crimes, has run almost 20 articles on this North Carolina brouhaha) are gleefully repeating the allegations by the drunken black stripper / car thief that she was gang-raped by white athletes is because white-on-black gang rape is vanishingly rare in the United States. (In the FBI's annual National Crime Victims Survey, none of the approximately 10,000 black women surveyed from 2001 to 2003 reported being victims of a white gang rape.) In contrast, black-on-white gang rape is, apparently according to the NCVS, a much more than daily occurrence in this country (although small sample sizes for gang-rapes make it hard to be definitive about the size of the ratios). White-on-black single rapist crime, while not unknown, averages only 900 cases per year according to the FBI survey of victims. In contrast, there are 15,400 black-on-white single rapist crimes per year, according to the NCVS.

There should also be a sticker that says:


"Warning: Accusations against white male college students of race-based hate crimes frequently turn out to be hoaxes perpetrated by either minorities or by leftist whites. But we in the press don't consider this to be news, so you probably haven't heard of it."


My published articles are archived at iSteve.com -- Steve Sailer

April 20, 2006

I could see this one coming:

Right after Hurricane Katrina, a reader pointed out to me that New Orleans would no doubt wind up a Latino-dominated city, full of the illegal aliens brought in to rebuild it on the cheap. I replied to him in an email on 9/6/2005:


And then I'm sure we'll read all about how right and fitting it is that New Orleans is a Hispanic city because, uh, Spain ruled it for 20 years in the 18th Century. And who cares about Louis Armstrong and Tennessee Williams and Jelly Roll Morton and John Kennedy Toole, viva la Raza!


Not surprisingly, George Mason U. economist-aesthete Tyler Cowen, now a New York Times columnist, has now argued just that in Slate. In the course of asserting the wisdom of his plan for turning much of New Orleans into a vast, Latin American-style shantytown favela, Cowen writes:


For starters, cheap housing might be one means of inducing migrants—many of them Latino immigrants—who have come to the city for temporary construction jobs to stay. And as low-cost laborers settle in the city, they'll boost economic activity and pay taxes, thereby attracting corporations, service suppliers, and entrepreneurial small businesses. It would be fitting if New Orleans were rebuilt, both physically and culturally, by Latin and Caribbean immigrants. After all, the city has long been influenced by Hispanic and Caribbean settlers.


The next day in "Bienvenido, Nuevo Orleans," he returns to his beloved topic of la reconquista:


"Still, as Latinos put down roots, these cultural outposts will continue to pop up. As they do, Latinos will be restoring a time-honored Hispanic influence to New Orleans. The Spanish ruled the city from 1762 to the Louisiana Purchase of 1803. During this time, Louisiana grew from fewer than 7,500 people to about 50,000. The so-called "French Quarter" of New Orleans draws more on Spanish than French architecture. Creole cuisine derived jambalaya from African sources but also from paella. The use of paprika, meat pies, and red beans—all local staples—comes from Spanish sources as well, often through the mediation of the colonial New World. The early 20th-century New Orleans port made much of its money dealing in Central American coffee and bananas. Might a new influx of Hispanic influence bring comparable benefits in the future?"


Tyler is a very sharp guy, and most of the time he's admirably upfront about laying all his cards on the table. But his Hispanophilia is so pronounced that he ends up deluding even himself about immigration. Consider the mindless emotionality of his objection on his Marginal Revolution blog to building a fence along the Mexican border: "Get the picture? Hispanamerica is coming, like it or not. Let's deal with it constructively." If that's the best he can come up with, I'd hate to hear his solution to the problem of prison rape!


So, can you see the fast one he's pulling here in his New Orleans' essays? The traditional Hispanic influence on New Orleans was both Spanish from Spain and mulatto from the Islands, but not mestizo from the Mainland, like 95% of the illegal aliens moving into New Orleans. This Mexican and Central American influx will not transform the city into anything resembling the New Orleans that contributed so much to world culture. but instead eventually turn much of New Orleans into Van Nuys East.

I know you like Latin American art, Tyler, but you're kidding yourself that massive illegal immigration is making American life more culturally sophisticated. This is a fallacy held by many who live in the D.C. area like you do, with its unusually diverse sources of immigration. If you want to see the real future your cheerleading is helping bring on, come out and visit the vast, dreary monocultural proletarian barrios of northern Orange County and eastern San Fernando Valley.

In terms of creativity, the Mexican contribution to American culture might well be in decline. Mexicans traditionally have had some good visual talents. Remember the gorgeous "lowrider" customized cars that Mexican-Americans invented in the 1950s? Well, I haven't seen anything like a lowrider on the streets of Southern California in years. The car-customization culture of Southern California is today dominated by two non-Hispanic impulses:

- the vulgar pimp-my-ride black-invented style centered around buying expensive but cheezy accessories (much of the work on the pimpmobiles is performed my Latino mechanics, but the aesthetic is African-American and store-bought) or

- the Asian "rice rocket" style of subtly enhancing the performance of inexpensive little Japanese imports, which is at least more tasteful than the black style, but is kind of dull.

The old Mexican-American lowrider look, however, is unfortunately long gone from the streets of LA.

Cowen enumerates the cultural benefits of his plan for making New Orleans into a giant favela:


Shantytowns might well be more creative than a dead city core. Some of the best Brazilian music came from the favelas of Salvador and Rio. The slums of Kingston, Jamaica, bred reggae. New Orleans experienced its greatest cultural blossoming in the early 20th century, when it was full of shanties... Katrina rebuilding gives the city a chance to become an innovator once again.


Question: What is different about the population of, on the one hand, Salvador, Rio, Kingston, and the old New Orleans and, on the other hand, Van Nuys in the San Fernando Valley and the future New Orleans that Tyler looks forward to?

Right, the four places he lists that have contributed heavily to popular music are all quite African in population. In contrast, the New World Indian contribution to world music is minimal -- the lovely Peruvian flute music featured in Simon and Garfunkle's "El Condor Pasa" is one of the rare exceptions. Mexican pop music, for instance, is basically vulgarized Cuban music. The Mexican folk song "La Bamba" is named after a district in Angola! I write this in sorrow -- 20 years ago my favorite band was Los Lobos from East LA, but where are their successors?


Tyler's carrying out a sleight-of-hand common in Open Borders arguments. The unspoken but obvious underlying message is so often: "Mexicans are better than blacks." So, illegal aliens are praised for being harder working, less crime prone, and more family-oriented than ... well ... cough ... than you-know-who. In other words, Mexicans are more restrained than African-Americans, which tends to be true, relatively-speaking.

Okay, but then the Open Borders crowd turns around and assures us that Mexican illegal immigrants are making our culture more "vibrant" with their wonderful musical creativity yada yada. The assumption here is that all them colored folks -- black, brown, yellow, whatever -- got natural rhythm.

Well, it doesn't work that way. There are tradeoffs in this world. A group's accomplishments tend to be intimately related to its shortcomings. For instance, blacks win the Heavyweight Boxing Championship of the World a lot and lead the NFL in rushing all the time, and blacks make up a disproportionate fraction of muggers. They are both manifestations of blacks tending to be big, strong, fast, and aggressive, which are physical traits useful both in professional sports and in street crime. All this is probably related to higher average black levels of testosterone and/or testosterone receptors.

In contrast, East Asians have very low crime rates and high economic productivity, but don't produce many charismatic cultural figures. Mestizos tend to fall between blacks and East Asians on a lot of traits. But they tend to be not very productive creatively in the U.S. in proportion to their vast numbers, perhaps because they are drawn overwhelmingly from the less talented people of Mexico and Central America, the failures who couldn't make it at home.

A reader writes:


Los Lobos (or their successors) have been displaced because the new immigrants would rather listen to "Los Tigres del Norte"...


I recall going to see my first Los Lobos show in Chicago in the mid-1980s. The streets around the concert hall were jammed with Mexican immigrants in cowboy hats. But when we got to the show, it turned out all the Mexicans were going to the "Grupo Latino" night at the dance hall next door featuring mariachi bands from Mexico, and the Los Lobos fans were the same upper middle class white kids who would have turned out to see Talking Heads or Lou Reed.


Indeed, the monotonous, culturally deprived California of twenty-forty years ago produced the X, the Go-Gos, the Blasters and on and on. And Los Lobos should be included in these. While obviously influenced by their background, they were a genuinely American, working class band.


Right. X mentored the Blasters, and the Blasters mentored Los Lobos. But that kind of cross-ethnic cultural fertilization has declined in LA due to the overwhelming preponderance of Latinos.


My published articles are archived at iSteve.com -- Steve Sailer

How to Rig an Immigration Poll, Part 2

In an email, the insightful Audacious Epigone pointed out that in my recent VDARE.com assault on rigged questions about immigration, I had flat-out missed the worst survey research sin committed by the contrivers of the April 13th LA Times poll. I overlooked the LAT's biggest feat of sleight-of-hand because I concentrated too much on the biased wording of the individual proposals, rather than on the bigger picture.

The LAT offered respondents the following "three proposals" and asked whether they supported or opposed each one (in other words, the proposals were not mutually exclusive). See if you can spot how they contrived the grouping of the questions to artificially lower the amount of immigration restrictionist support.


1. "Create a guest-worker program that would give a temporary visa to noncitizens who want to legally work in the U.S."

2. "Allow undocumented immigrants who have been living and working in the U.S. for a number of years, with no criminal record, to start a path to citizenship."

3. "Fence off hundreds of miles of the border between the U.S. and Mexico and make it a felony to enter illegally."


Yet, are there really just three proposals here?

No, there are four:


1. Guest-worker program
2. Amnesty
3A. Fence
3B. Felony


The two pro-immigration proposals were made independent of each other, while the two anti-immigration proposals were linked together with the logical operator "and." The word "and" is the opposite of "or" -- you're only supposed to answer "Support" for #3 if you favor both the fence and the felony.

Thus, if you supported the guest-worker program but not the amnesty, or vice-versa, you'd still be counted by the LAT as supporting one of the first two proposals for increased immigration. But if you supported the fence but not the felony, or vice-versa, you'd be logically forced to answer "oppose" to the combined proposal.

*

Also, In Slate.com, Mickey Kaus comments on my original VDARE.com article on the poll here (page up once you get there).


My published articles are archived at iSteve.com -- Steve Sailer

A much-needed blog

Economist Dean Baker has started Beat the Press to critique economics reporting, which has been particularly awful during the immigration debate. He writes:

One of the great absurdities in the debate over immigration policy is the frequently repeated claim that the U.S. economy is generating more “low wage” jobs than can be filled by the domestic workforce. This line has been endlessly repeated in news stories on the issue.

Quick trip back to econ 101: recall the concepts “supply” and “demand.” What makes a job a “low wage” job? In econ 101 world, a job will be a “low wage” job if the supply is high relative to the demand. When there is insufficient supply, then the wage rises. My students didn’t pass the course if they couldn’t get this one right. Econ 101 tells us that there is not a shortage of workers for low wage jobs; it tells us that there are employers who want to keep the wages for these jobs from rising.

Immigration has been one of the tools that have been used to depress wages for less-skilled workers over the last quarter century. Many of the “low-wage” jobs that cannot be filled today, such as jobs in construction and meat-packing, were not “low-wage” jobs thirty years ago. Thirty years ago, these were often high-paying union jobs that plenty of native born workers would have been happy to fill. These jobs have become hard to fill because the wages in these jobs have drifted down towards a minimum wage that is 30 percent lower than its 1970s level.

In response to this logic, the “low wage” job crew claims that if the wages in these jobs rose, then businesses couldn’t afford to hire the workers. It’s time for more econ 101. Businesses that can’t make money paying the prevailing prices go out of business – that is how a market economy works. Labor goes from less productive to more productive uses. This is why we don’t still have 20 percent of our workforce in agriculture.

So the economic side of the debate over immigration is a question about employers wanting access to cheap labor.


My published articles are archived at iSteve.com -- Steve Sailer

Request for advice:

A reader writes:


"One thing many conservative websites discuss is the lack of military history taught to young people nowadays, and I agree. What's a good place to start for those of us who are victims of the modern educational system? Can you or one of your many readers recommend a good introductory text?"


A reader responds:


I currently teach AP European history, and have taught AP US in the past. The military-free content described is pretty accurate, although battles are fair game so long as they have a significant political or diplomatic impact, or if they served as the turning point (Waterloo, Stalingrad, Midway, etc.) of a particular war. However, you will never find questions on the exam about a particular general's tactics or the fine details of a noteworthy battle. Consequently, textbooks which are popular for use with AP courses (although all are "college-level", some seem to be more used at the high school AP level than in college survey courses.) often reflect that tendency. John Merriman's History of Modern Europe is one exception; its excellent WWI and WWII chapters are amongst the lengthiest in the entire (1,400+ page) book, and the book is replete with interesting military anecdotes. I don't necessarily think the lack of military history is a conscious decision on the part of the College Board, as they develop the course to reflect the predilections and attitudes of the equivalent courses taught in colleges, which are themselves the ones that are often consciously anti-military. I would also hasten to add that state standards on the teaching of history reflect the same tendencies.

As for your reader's question as to book suggestions: I would recommend Archer Jones' The Art of War in the Western World, Millet and Maslowski's For the Common Defense: A Military History of the United States of America, The Longest Night: A Military History of the Civil War, and essentially any book John Keegan has ever written.


AP teachers are judged more rigorously than most teachers because the percentage of their students who pass the AP test is fairly public knowledge, and the parents of their students tend to be the wealthiest, smartest, and most demanding parents at the school. So, they teach to the test. AP classes can be rather joyless experiences since teachers often worry they don't have time for classroom discussions. AP teachers would prefer not to go into detail about any one battle because if they choose the wrong battle and it never shows up on the test? Yet, battles are the hinges of history and nobody should be able to claim to be educated in history without having studied at least one battle in detail.

So, it's really up to the College Board to pick a single battle and make that The Battle for the purposes of the AP test and thus of AP classes. Fortunately, for the study of U.S. History, there's really only one reasonable contender for the role: Gettysburg.

For European History, there are several possibilities, but Waterloo would seem like the best choice. The main worry I have about studying Waterloo is that it's too benign, too much like an Ali-Frazier heavyweight championship bout rather than part of a war: Europe's two greatest generals finally meet, for one day on one square mile of battlefield, commanding armies armed with exactly the same technology, with virtually no civilian casualties, and then everybody goes home for 99 years of peace.

Others suggest:


- I'd suggest The Reader's Companion to Military History. It's a reference work, but it's very readable, has top-notch contributors, and you can learn quite a lot just by randomly opening it and reading entries.

- Good beginner text: The Wars of America by Robert Leckie.


When I say beginner, I mean beginner. The text is directed toward the "young adult" market--my uncle gave it to me as a Christmas present when I was in 9th grade. Written from a traditional and patriotic perspective (i.e. the central hero of the Revolutionary War is George Washington---not some unknown black man or harpy).

Just about anything by John Keegan, though my favorite is The Face of Battle.

Victor Davis Hanson's Carnage and Culture is very, very, good.

- It's odd that the two best contemporary military writers (for newcomers at least) are each others archnemesis-- Victor Davis Hanson and your old friend The War Nerd.

Vic Hanson is sort of like a nonfiction version of Mark Helprin--- writes wonderful books and idiotic columns. He has a couple of books that in several chapters per campaign, break down famous battles. Good stuff.

- Your reader might try Churchill's best book, his biography of his ancestor the Duke of Marlborough, which is terrific military and political history. I'm not a military man, but for me this book crystallized a far-reaching point: In whatever arena, intelligence consists of seeing clearly what confronts one, rather than being guided by common opinion, prejudice, mere caution, etc. (But beware that the book starts slowly. I suggest skipping the first volume if one grows impatient.)

- For a good introduction to military history go to Osprey Publishing website. Choose a book that interests you and start reading. I have a bias for British Military History but Osprey Publishing has books on every country and era of military history.

- The movie Zulu is a good introductory "text".

-The US Marine Corps has long had an official reading list and requires all members to read a set of books at their "intellectual" (rank) level. Kind of a great books program for the military. It's considered the core cannon. Google for "Commandant USMC reading list":

Official USMC list


Heinlein's Starship Troopers used to be the first book for privates but not anymore.


- By J.F.C. Fuller is one of the best general histories of warfare. He always includes the political, social, and economic reasons behind the wars. Sophisticated but highly readable. His highly un-PC political views may be the reason this three-volume series doesn't get more mention. But it's still in print.


Jerry Pournelle highly recommends Edward S. Creasy's Victorian classic Fifteen Decisive Battles of the World.


My published articles are archived at iSteve.com -- Steve Sailer