Nigger -- Wikipedia online Encyclopedia article
Robert Weinert
NOTE FROM BOB:
As you read the controversial information below in this
email sent to me by a friend I wish you to think carefully and deeply before
responding. I ask you to avoid responding emotionally. I ask you to try to
respond using pure logic… please write directly to the author Steve Quest at squ...@questlabs.org Please remember,
I am a Christian first and foremost, are you? I want to love and serve
God and Truth with all my heart mind and strength.
First of all, I will not be cowed by the demands of political correctness. I will send out information that others do not dare to send out.
Secondly, I want you to know this about me: I do not want to be a minority in America, do you?
Thirdly, I assert that every city blacks take over
goes to hell and every
nation blacks take over goes to hell. Does anyone really need proof of
this assertion? Isn't it obviously true to all but the most biased
observer? Just look at Detroit, etc...
I do not want to live in a brown or black hell like Mexico or Africa, do you?
What about your grandchildren, do you want them to be a minority?
This is a controversial statement: I do not think blacks and hispanics
have the high IQ that is required to build and maintain a highly
organized, peaceful and prosperous civilization as whites have done
in numerous western nations.
Blacks around the world are on average 15 to 30 IQ points below whites.
They are more emotional, explosive, violent and
dangerous and we all know this is true and that is why white flight
occurs in every city that blacks begin populating.
Thus, I prefer to live with whites in a free white (Christian) nation.
You had better think about these things seriously or
your grandchildren may curse you and our generation
for losing America, letting it turn into a brown and black
cesspool like Mexico and Africa.
Bob
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Steve J. Quest <squ...@questlabs.org>
Date: Oct 22, 2006 6:20 AM
Subject: Nigger -- An interesting analysis of Wikipedia bias.
To: James Von Brunn <vonb...@goeaston.net>
Cc: Edvaard <k4...@tampabay.rr.com>, Captain May <capta...@prodigy.net>, Robert Weinert <rober...@gmail.com>, Bob from Michigan <rober...@earthlink.net>, Kevin Alfred Strom <kevin.alf...@revilo-oliver.com>, Majordomo List Manager <majo...@questlabs.org>
Yes, the following link _really_does_ exist on Wikipedia!
Linkname: Nigger - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
URL: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nigger
And therein you will find the following passage.
The perception of the term nigger as derogatory is no doubt related
to the fact that the Negro race itself was regarded by many whites
of the time as inferior, lazy, simian in appearance, stupid, and
criminally inclined. There is an observable pattern of terms
denoting black people which have come to be regarded as derogatory,
just as exist for all ethnic groups.
WAS regarded? None of the citations listed have changed much in the past
two hundred years, but just for fun, let's examine each; one by one. :o)
Inferior. In the past six thousand years, the Negro race has contributed
absolutely nothing to society. Egalitarians have recently tried to attach
a number of `inventions' to Negroes, all of which are lies! Yes, even
peanut butter was invented by Dr. John Harvey Kellogg in 1895, a year
before some Negro claimed to have invented it -- probably after reading
about various peanut usage patents, including one submitted by Kellogg.
Linkname: Black Invention Myths
Comment: This rare site details many suppressed truths.
URL: http://www33.brinkster.com/iiiii/inventions/
Linkname: Black Inventors
Comment: These are a few of the many university funded fraud sites.
URL: http://www.uky.edu/StudentOrgs/AWARE/archives/invent.html
URL: http://www.swagga.com/inventors.htm
URL: http://www.littleafrica.com/resources/inventors.htm
URL: http://www.niica.on.ca/CSONAN/BlackInventors.aspx
Lazy. Negroes comprise just 12.9% of our population, but represent more
than HALF of those receiving unemployment benefits, as any one of the over
_twelve_million_ articles found via google on this subject will attest.
Linkname: black unemployment - Google Search
URL: http://www.google.com/search?q=black+unemployment
Linkname: Black unemployment has risen from 30 percent to 40 percent in just one year
Comment: Note the White unemployment rate now hovers around 3.5 percent.
URL: http://www.cbtu.org/2003website/takingastand/blackunemployment.html
Simian in appearance. I perform a _lot_ of work for the blind, designing
and building new and unique adaptive technologies, indeed questlabs itself
is the non-profit associated with this altruism. One of the kids I was
working with one time, was listening to my usual racial rhetoric, this of
course coming after he reported to me that a sighted Black kid who offered
to do him a favor, had actually ripped him off for 20 dollars (took the
money but didn't return). Having never visually seen a Negro, he listened
carefully to my description of them. He said he could only identify them
by their voice, and believe it or not, by smell. ;o) Of course when his
father came to pick him up, the very first thing he asked his dad was, "Do
Black people look like gorillas?" to which his father immediately busted
out laughing. After a minute or so of intense laughter his father assured
him that "Black people look just like us, as they are people too". Of
course the statement was completely negated by his long bout of laughter.
Stupid. For the past 90 years, Negroes as well as Whites have been tested
using various standardized testing methods. The Negro has always scored
at least one standard deviation _or_more_ BELOW Whites. What this means
is that one out of every TWO Whites will score at the median, while only
one in SIX Blacks will score at the median! In other words, a graduating
Black high school senior has the intelligence of a White eighth grader.
Linkname: Black-White IQ Differences
URL: http://library.flawlesslogic.com/iq.htm
URL: http://www.vdare.com/Sailer/no_excuses.htm
URL: http://www.vdare.com/Sailer/unthinkable.htm
URL: http://www.africancrisis.org/ZZZ/ZZZ_News_8429.asp
URL: http://brookings.nap.edu/books/0815746091/html/1.html
URL: http://www.discriminations.us/2004/06/are_blacks_too_dumb_to_take_iq.html
Criminally inclined. On this issue, even our own government doesn't pull
any punches, at least not anymore. Today, TV commercials seem to
glamorize Black culture; and the Black thug or Black gangster as some kind
of hero, and yet the truth remains that only 1 in 8 Americans are Negro,
just 12.9% of the population, yet they commit 85.71% of _all_ homicides!
Linkname: Bureau of Justice Statistics Homicide trends by race
URL: http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/homicide/race.htm
Of course the wikipedia entry states, "derogatory, just as exist for all
ethnic groups". Oh really? If derogatory terms exist for _all_ ethnic
groups, why doesn't the wikipedia entry on White people list some of the
more common terms, such as `honky' or `cracka'? My best guess is because
wikipedia is assembled predominantly by White people, as Blacks represent
only a tiny sub-fraction of a percent of the total users of the Internet.
Linkname: White people - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
URL: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_people
Of course, like all the poisons our race eats on a daily basis, this page
further tries to convince us "race can be better described as a social
construct" and "there is greater variation within 'racial' groups than
between them" which is physically, statistically, and logically false.
Let me ask you this, if the above statements were true for Whites, then
they would indeed be true of _all_ races -- including Negroes, so why omit
those statements from the bloated and lionized entry on these so-called
"African Americans"? Also worth mentioning, the total word count for the
"African American" entry (link below) is as of this writing 12,906 words,
spanning 1,618 lines. For comparison, the entry for White people is only
1,795 words, spanning just 305 lines. Given that White people obviously
are the most impressive race of man -- id est, White men walked on the
moon; what exactly does this blaring _seven_to_one_ disparity suggest?
Linkname: African American - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
URL: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/African_American
Truthfully,
sq <squ...@questlabs.org>
+++++++
QUOTE: "In general, when blacks and whites are matched for social and economic status, the IQ gap decreases, but only by about a third. The black-white gap for children of the wealthiest parents is considerably greater than the gap for the children of poorer parents.
Regression towards the mean—a strictly genetic phenomenon—best explains what is happening. Nature has a tendency to temper extremes. Very tall people tend to have tall children but not as tall as themselves. Very short people are likely to have children not quite so short as themselves, and this tendency to retreat from extremes is called regression towards the mean. It applies to intelligence too, and means that the children of very smart or very stupid parents tend to drift back towards the average for the population. Study after study has shown that black and white children seem to be regressing towards different means: averages of 100 for whites and 85 for blacks."
+++++++
Rushton Revisited
by Andrew Duffy
The Ottawa Citizenhttp://www.canada.com/ottawa/ottawacitizen/news/story.html?id=6c9fe76b-f1bd-4cfb-baa8-5d006efdf650&page=1
October 1, 2005
Controversial Canadian professor Philippe Rushton, best known for shocking the world in 1989 with a paper arguing some races were smarter than others, is back with another study saying blacks are not as genetically gifted as whites or East Asians. Sixteen years ago, his theory was incendiary. This time around, it was greeted with a shrug. What's changed?
Has he softened his views? Have we grown tired of him? Or have advances in science made him more palatable?
Andrew Duffy investigates.
- - -
In January 1989, when University of Western Ontario psychologist Philippe Rushton presented a research paper at the American Association for the Advancement of Science in San Francisco, it triggered an academic maelstrom.
His paper, which argued that genetic evolution has created identifiable IQ gaps among groups of East Asians, whites and blacks, was denounced by scientists on the conference floor. Why would he launch such an inquiry? How, they demanded, could he draw findings from intelligence tests that were culturally biased?
Then-premier David Peterson called him a racist and demanded that he be fired by the university. The police launched a hate crimes investigation. Security concerns forced him to deliver lectures by videotape.
Mr. Rushton became part of the Canadian lexicon, an epithet. He also became the most famous university professor in the country, a guest on The Geraldo Rivera Show.
All of which makes the muted reaction to Mr. Rushton's latest academic paper so curious.
In June, Mr. Rushton and University of California psychology professor Arthur Jensen published a 60-page study in Psychology, Public Policy and Law, a journal of the American Psychological Association. In it, the scholars presented 10 categories of evidence, including military and academic tests, brain size and adoption studies, to support their contention that East Asians as a group enjoy an evolutionary advantage over whites, and whites over blacks, that has contributed to measurable intelligence gaps between them.
"Neither the existence nor the size of race differences in IQ are a matter of dispute, only their cause," the authors wrote.
The cause of that difference is contentious. Some blame the tests, arguing that they measure a narrow, western notion of intelligence. Others say intelligence is primarily determined not by genetics but by environmental factors: poverty, nutrition, parental education, discrimination, the quality of local schools.
But Mr. Rushton and Mr. Jensen posit that 50 to 80 per cent of the IQ gaps between racial groups can be explained by genetics, by the gift of inherited intelligence.
That theory, they contend, holds important policy implications since it suggests that society must accept that group differences will repeatedly reveal themselves in scholastic achievement and other important measurements of "success."
"Ultimately," they wrote, "the public must accept the pragmatic reality that some groups will be over-represented and other groups under-represented in various socially valued outcomes."
In other words, those who design social policy should not seek to create equality between racial groups -- an impossible outcome in Mr. Rushton's mind -- but learn to live with the statistical differences.
"You absolutely have to accept that Chinese people are going to be under-represented on the basketball team, and that black people are going to be under-represented in high school graduates," Mr. Rushton said in a recent interview.
"That is just a fact of life. And it really doesn't matter how much lower you will place the bar, you will never equalize those outcomes, it is impossible."
The findings, Mr. Rushton notes, do not apply to individuals, but to groups. It's an idea that he believes must be taught in schools. "Even kindergarten children are capable of learning that although boys are typically taller than girls, many girls are taller than the average boy," he says.
Although seemingly as incendiary as ever, Mr. Rushton's latest ideas have generated little response from scientists or politicians, police or protesters. It has led even Mr. Rushton to ask: What has changed?
Why were his ideas so controversial 15 years ago but not now? Has Canada grown tired of him? Or have advances in genetic science pulled his theories into the mainstream?
Mr. Rushton says he would like to believe that his erstwhile critics have been silenced by the scientific force of his latest publication. But he's not that naive.
"In fact, I think the opposite is the case," he says. "It is just bad news to many people. So the best thing to do is just to avert the eyes and carry on, keep their heads in the sand."
There's no doubt that Mr. Rushton suddenly finds himself in an increasingly crowded field of inquiry.
In the 1980s, Mr. Rushton was viewed as a rogue academic. But today, a small army of scientists is exploring the genetic foundation of intelligence, and the genetic differences between people of African, Asian, Indian, Middle Eastern and European descent. Their work flows from the landmark Human Genome Project, which found slight differences in the pattern of DNA among ethnic groups.
In June, for instance, the Journal of Biosocial Science published a paper by a team of University of Utah scientists who suggested that Ashkenazi Jews -- Jews of European descent -- have evolved an enhanced intellectual ability through natural selection.
The researchers, led by anthropologist Henry Harpending, found that Ashkenazim score higher on IQ tests than any other ethnic group to which they can be reliably compared. Six times as many Ashkenazim as Europeans score in the "genius range" above 140 on IQ tests.
Albert Einstein, Sigmund Freud and Gustav Mahler are part of the Ashkenazim bloodline, as are half of the world's chess champions. In the U.S., Ashkenazim have won 27 per cent of the Nobel Prizes awarded to Americans, while making up just three per cent of the population.
Mr. Harpending and his colleagues concluded that natural selection has played a role in boosting the group's brain power. According to their theory, a millennium of discrimination in Europe forced Jews into intellectually challenging occupations as bankers and merchants -- jobs then considered distasteful for Christians. Since European Jews married consistently within their own community, and since successful merchants tended to have larger families than less successful ones, a process of natural selection took place whereby genes that enhanced intelligence became more common.
(The researchers went on to hypothesize that the same genes that enhance intelligence may trigger neurological diseases, such as Tay-Sachs, Gaucher's and Niemann-Pick, that have an unusually high incidence among Ashkenazim.)
"Absolutely anything in human biology that is interesting is going to be controversial," Mr. Harpending has said in defending his study.
Earlier this month, another study made news in Mr. Rushton's once-isolated universe.
Published in the magazine Science, the University of Chicago study suggested that the brain continues to evolve rapidly because of the influence of two genes that help determine its size. What's more, the study said, the genes are more readily found in some populations, such as in Europe and East Asia, than others, such as those in sub-Saharan Africa.
Again, the report's conclusions held nettlesome social implications.
Mr. Rushton, however, said he was "delighted" with the University of Chicago study, which identified, for the first time, a gene related to brain size.
"This is exactly what all theory has to predict," he says.
Mr. Rushton says that study, much like the work on the Ashkenazim, has lent respectability to his own work. "Here is another ethnic group (the Ashkenazim) that has been identified, genetically, as possessing a higher IQ," he says.
"So if nature has not made every population group in the world exactly equal in mean IQ, if there is one somewhat above, then it's quite possible to find one or two somewhat below?"
Mr. Rushton believes that he has always been a mainstream psychologist. The only difference now, he argues, is that the mainstream has been enlarged by the work of other scientists exploring the genetic basis of race, intelligence and disease.
Still, many of his colleagues continue to regard Mr. Rushton as academic nitro: a volatile and destructive force best left on the shelf.
The journal, Psychology, Public Policy and Law, took the unusual step of including three rebuttal essays when it published his most recent study. "What good is research of the kind done by Rushton and Jensen supposed to achieve?" asks one of the critics, Yale University psychologist Robert Sternberg.
Mr. Sternberg suggests the question to which Mr. Rushton has devoted himself has no value except to those cynics who would use it to justify discrimination. "Does science," he asks, "really want to provide that ammunition?"
Mr. Rushton and Mr. Jensen offer an explosive response to that question.
They argue that their research is important because "we will never make progress in race relations if we operate on the belief that one segment of society is responsible for the plight of another segment and that belief is false."
They suggest that policy-makers and judges have mistakenly ascribed "the underachievement of black people to prejudice and discrimination by white people," rather than to genetic disadvantages.
Mr. Rushton and Mr. Jensen then cite the landmark U.S. Supreme Court Decision, Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka, which outlawed racial segregation in schools, as an example of a decision based on just such a wrong-headed assumption.
Mr. Rushton claims to be interested only in truth and in the dissemination of science, even when it's politically unpopular.
Yet there's no denying that Mr. Rushton also has a nose for controversy that even Geraldo Rivera would envy.
He has written that Asians, as a group, have larger brains and exhibit more intelligence, family stability and sexual restraint than whites, and whites more than blacks. He has conducted a mass mailout of a book that propounds that theory to social scientists across North America.
Then, three years ago, he became president of the Pioneer Fund, a foundation incorporated in 1937 with the goal of "race betterment, with special reference to the United States." Among other things, it funds scientific studies that examine the differences between human beings based on gender, race and class.
The Pioneer Fund has a checkered history. One of its first funding grants in 1937 paid for the U.S. distribution of a Nazi Party film on eugenics. The fund's primary benefactor, Wickliffe Draper, was interested in the idea of repatriating U.S. blacks to Africa and later offered significant financial support for legal battles to oppose the racial desegregation of schools in the U.S.
That activity has led critics to charge that the Pioneer Fund hides an ugly political agenda behind its veil of science. The Southern Poverty Law Center, a non-profit advocacy organization, bluntly calls it a hate group.
Soon after accepting the job of Pioneer Fund president, Mr. Rushton authored a detailed defence of the foundation. He characterized it as a ground-breaking scientific enterprise inspired by the spirit of Charles Darwin.
"The directors of Pioneer Fund have always believed it is important to investigate the biological basis of traits like intelligence, the causes of racial and other group differences and the factors affecting demographic change," he wrote. "Because some Pioneer grants have reached what some believe are politically unpalatable conclusions on these topics, they, and Pioneer, have become unpopular in some circles. We in no way apologize for supporting supporting this research...
"We also believe it is unscientific and counterproductive to tag any and all such research as 'Nazi' or 'racist.' "
Geneticists once seemed poised to eliminate race entirely from the field of science, to make Mr. Rushton obsolete.
In the early 1970s, Harvard geneticist Richard Lewontin argued that the genetic differences between races were so infinitesimal that researchers would have no reason to sort people into classifications such as black, white and Asian.
His belief that race is "biologically meaningless" became an article of faith for many academics.
Then, in 2000, a seismic scientific event, the Human Genome Project, reordered the world of biology and made scientists take a fresh, new look at our genetic heritage.
At first, the DNA research seemed to affirm Mr. Lewontin's message of equality and brotherhood. The 13-year project found that humans share with each other 99.9 per cent of their genetic heritage. All people possess the same basic set of genes, the researchers announced. The differences between individuals and races, they said, owe themselves to variations in a tiny fraction of the three billion letter sequence in the human genome.
Rather than explore what unites us, however, scientists have seized upon discovering exactly what separates us.
That's because scientists believe the variation between people holds the answer to the genetic riddle of diabetes, heart disease, strokes and cancer.
It's widely acknowledged that diseases are not evenly distributed among ethnic groups and races. Sickle cell anemia, a blood disorder, is considerably more common among those with African ancestry. Hemochromatosis, an inherited disorder that causes the body to absorb too much iron, is not found among Indians or Chinese, yet more than seven per cent of Swedes suffer it.
The incidence of hypertension, prostate cancer and kidney failure is higher among blacks than whites (although some of that variability can be tied to diet and lifestyle).
Scientists believe that mapping the DNA variability between races and ethnic groups may lead them to the genetic triggers of disease, which in turn, could produce important drug breakthroughs and treatments.
Canadian scientists are now part of a $185-million international effort to produce a detailed map of human genetic variation. The International Haplotype Project will chart the common DNA sequence variations between major ethnic groups based on the DNA of Han Chinese in Beijing, Japanese in Tokyo, Yoruba in Ibadan, Nigeria, and Utah residents with ancestry from northern and western Europe.
As more researchers explore the relationship between genetics and race, more have come to the conclusion that Mr. Lewontin was wrong.
Neil Risch, widely regarded as one of the world's leading geneticists, has been a key figure in the still emotion-charged debate. Mr. Risch has argued that small genetic differences have evolved between races because of the geographic isolation of generations of sub-Saharan Africans, Caucasians, Asians, Pacific Islanders and Native Americans.
Mr. Risch has shown that researchers, by analyzing DNA, can correctly match an individual's self-described race in 99.9 per cent of cases. There was a greater chance, he said, that researchers would incorrectly guess an individual's self-described gender.
"There is great validity in racial/ethnic self-categorizations, both from research and public policy points of view," Mr. Risch, now director of the Center for Human Genetics at the University of California, concluded in a 2002 paper in Nature Genetics.
Even Francis Collins, the former director of the Genome Project, conceded as much last year when he told Nature Genetics that the project's researchers probably overstated their case about the insignificance of biology's connection to race.
"It is not strictly true that race or ethnicity has no biological connection," he said. "It must be emphasized, however, that the connection is generally quite blurry."
The focus of the debate has now shifted to how scientists should properly categorize their findings about genetic variation.
Those like Mr. Risch believe that race is a legitimate method, but others argue that using race is unnecessary and sensational. The second school of thought holds that differences between people would more properly be expressed in terms of group "genetic markers" that correspond with different parts of the globe.
Most scientists today accept that genetics plays some role in human variation and that some combination of hereditary and environmental factors determine intelligence.
That point is conceded by two of the three critics who respond to Mr. Rushton's latest publication in Psychology, Public Policy and Law.
The more challenging question is whether the IQ gap that has been identified between Asians, whites and blacks is fixed or changeable.
What can be done to raise group IQs and, more importantly, academic achievement levels among specific race and ethnic groups?
Charles Murray, co-author of the bestselling 1994 book The Bell Curve, recently published an essay in Commentary magazine in which he argued that, at the very least, educational outcomes can be improved. "Dropout rates, literacy and numeracy are all tractable. School discipline, teacher performance and the quality of the curriculum are tractable. Academic performance within a given IQ range is tractable," he wrote. "The existence of group differences need not and should not discourage attempts to improve schooling for millions of American children who are now getting bad educations."
New York University psychology professors Lisa Suzuki and Joshua Aronson argue the danger of Mr. Rushton's theory flows from the implication that IQ gaps are largely immutable. It's an idea, they say, that could diminish support for affirmative action hiring and pre-school educational programs aimed mostly at impoverished, black Americans.
For his part, Mr. Rusthon said that while black academic achievement can be improved, and while the IQ gap can be somewhat narrowed, there will never be equality.
Parents, he said, easily accept the idea that some of their children are more gifted intellectually or physically than other ones. As a society, he argued, we have to accept the same notion.
"It's very harmful, this philosophy we currently have, which is that anybody, all of us, we can just reinvent ourselves. We can grow and change and develop into something very different, that somehow we're not constrained genetically.
"The more you can realize who you are earlier, and that includes race and IQ, then personally the more you can accept it, the easier it will be."
Mr. Rushton contends his ideas are controversial today only because they do not dovetail with popular religious and political dogmas about everyone being born equal. "It's not happy news for a lot of people, so in that sense it is controversial," he said.
He takes particular offence to the suggestion that his work is unnecessary and offers no meaningful social insight. Indeed, his response to that criticism is made of more Rushton nitrogylcerin, the kind that no amount of science is ever likely to defuse.
"If it really was a colour blind society, and nobody even noticed race, maybe there would be some more justification for it (the criticism)," he told the Citizen.
"But people are pulling their hair out and are saying, 'What about Toronto the Good? Where did it go to?' What about Ottawa? I'm sure it is the same? What about Montreal? I'll bet you it's the same. I'll bet it's the same in every bloody city in Canada where you have black people. It's inevitable that it won't be. So there you go."
-- Robert HendersonBlair Scandal website: http://www.geocities.com/blairscandal/Personal website: http://www.anywhere.demon.co.uk
+++++++
&&&
The Intelligence Of Nations
By Philippe Rushton
IQ and the Wealth of Nations. is a brilliantly-conceived, superbly-written, path-breaking book that does for the global study of economic prosperity what The Bell Curve did for the USA. Richard Lynn and Tatu Vanhanen examine IQ scores and economic indicators in 185 countries. They document that national differences in wealth are explained most importantly by the intelligence levels of the populations. They calculate that mean national IQ correlates powerfully—more than 0.7—with per capita Gross Domestic Product (GDP). National IQs predict both long-term and short term economic growth rates. Second in importance is whether the countries have market or socialist economies. Only third is the widely-credited factor of natural resources, like oil.
One arresting fact emerges: the average national IQ of the world is only 90. Fewer than one in five countries have IQs equal or near the British average of 100. Almost half have IQs of 90 or less. This poses a serious problem if the book's conclusion that IQ = 90 forms the threshold for a technological economy is correct.
Lynn and Vanhanen review the theories advanced over the last 250 years to explain why some countries are rich while others are poor. These include: climate theories (temperate zones are said to be best); geographic theories (an East-West Axis is said to be best); modernization theories (urbanization and division of labor are said to be good); dependency theories (exploitation and peripheralization of poor nations are said to be bad); neoliberal theories (market economies are said to be good); psychological theories (cultural values like thriftiness, the Protestant Ethic, and motivation for achievement are said to be good). Some of these factors no doubt play a role. But it turns out that IQ that does the heavy lifting.
Next, Lynn and Vanhanen review the scientific literature and find that IQ is an important determinant of educational attainment, earnings, economic success, etc. In the United States and Britain, the correlation between IQ and earnings for individuals is approximately 0.35. (That is, cleverness is a fairly loose guarantee of economic success for an individual, but is significant across an entire population. If you bet on it at a gaming table you wouldn't win on every throw, but you would make a lot of money over an evening.) Of course, it makes sense that intelligence determines earnings. More intelligent people learn more quickly, solve problems more effectively, can be trained to acquire more complex skills, and work more productively and efficiently.
Nations whose people have high IQ levels also have high educational attainment and large numbers of individuals who make significant contributions to national life. On the flipside, nations with low levels of intelligence have low levels of educational attainment and few individuals who make significant contributions. Low intelligence leads to unfavorable social outcomes like crime, unemployment, welfare dependency, and single motherhood.
Lynn and Vanhanen prove that the widespread though rarely stated assumption of economists and political scientists—that all peoples and nations have the same average IQ—is wildly wrong. Their evidence documents substantial national differences in average intelligence. The highest average IQs are found among the Oriental countries of North East Asia (average IQ = 104), followed by the European nations (average IQ = 98), and the mainly White populations of North America and Australasia (average IQ = 98). Further behind are the countries of South and Southwest Asia, from the Middle East through Turkey to India and Malaysia (average IQ = 87), as are the countries of South East Asia and the Pacific Islands (average IQ = 86), and Latin America and the Caribbean (IQ = 85). Lowest are the countries of Africa (average IQ = 70).
Lynn and Vanhanen find that some countries do have higher or lower per capita incomes than their national IQ averages would predict. This is where having a market or socialist economy or sitting atop a sea of crude oil comes in.
Some of the countries with a higher per capita income than would be predicted from their average IQs are Australia, Austria, Barbados, Belgium, Canada, Denmark, France, Ireland, Qatar, Singapore, South Africa, Switzerland, and the U.S. Except for Qatar, South Africa, and Barbados, all of these are technologically highly developed market economies. Qatar's exceptionally high per capita income comes from oil exporting, which is actually managed and controlled by corporations and people from European and North American countries. South Africa's much higher than expected per capita income derives from the high performance of the industries established and managed by the country's European minority. Similarly, Barbados's above average wealth comes from its well-established tourist industry and financial services, which are owned, controlled and managed by American and European countries.
Some of the countries with lower per capita income than would be predicted from their average IQ: Bulgaria, China, Hungary, Iraq, South Korea, the Philippines, Poland, Romania, Russia, Thailand, and Uruguay. Most of these are present or former socialist countries. Iraq has suffered from losing the Gulf War and a decade of UN trade sanctions. The large amount of ethnic conflict in the Philippines decreased growth.
Lynn and Vanhanen provide a detailed examination how well IQ theory stacks up against its competitors. For example, two significant exceptions to the view that a tropical climate is detrimental to wealth are Singapore and Hong Kong, which lie in the tropical zone but are rich. Conversely, Lesotho and Swaziland are temperate, lying slightly south of the Tropic of Capricorn, but poor. These differences, however, can be explained in terms of intelligence theory. The people of Singapore and Hong Kong belong to the ethnic group with the highest average IQs; the people of Lesotho and Swaziland belong to the ethnic group with the lowest.
Modernization theories, according to which all economies would evolve from subsistence agriculture through to various stages of urbanization and industrialization, have worked for Western Europe and the Pacific Rim but have failed for the four remaining groups of nations (South Asia, the Pacific Islands, Latin America, and sub-Saharan Africa). IQ and the Wealth of Nations proposes that modernization theories describe Western Europe and the Pacific Rim because these countries have appreciably the same or somewhat higher IQs than in the United States. But they did not work for the other four groups of countries because average IQs are below the technological threshold.
But why did the peoples of East Asia, with their high IQs, lag behind the European peoples until the second half of the 20th Century? Well, China's science and technology were generally more advanced than Europe's for around two thousand years, from about 500 B.C. up to around 1500 A.D. But in the 15th century, Chinese inventiveness came to an end and from that time on virtually all the important advances were made by Europeans, first in Europe and later in the U.S. The explanation may be that Europeans developed the market economy, while China stagnated through authoritarian bureaucracy and central planning.
The failure of Japan to develop economically until the late 19th century is largely attributed to a regulated economy and isolation from the rest of the world. By 1867-68 a revolution occurred and the new rulers embarked on a program to modernize Japan by adopting Western education and technology, and by freeing up the economy by transforming state monopolies into private corporations. Much of the Japanese economic success in the 20th century was built by adopting inventions made in the West, improving them, and selling them more competitively in world markets. Japan thereby built up its motorcycle, automobile, shipbuilding, and electronics industries. Although it is sometimes asserted that the Japanese have not made any significant scientific and technological innovations of their own, this underestimates their technological achievements: the fiber-tipped pen (1960), "bullet" trains traveling at 210 km per hour, much faster than any Western trains (1964), laser radar (1966), quartz watches (1967), VHS video home systems (1976), flat screen televisions using liquid crystal display (1979), video discs (1980), CD-ROM (read only memory) disks (1985), digital audio tape (1987), and digital networks for sending signals along coaxial cables and optical fibers (1988).
African countries are at the opposite pole from China and Japan in national IQ. This may explain why they are such a major anomaly for modernization theory. The low rate of economic growth of African countries following their independence from colonial rule in the 1960s is one of the major problems in developmental economics. During the years 1976-98, the average rate of economic growth per capita GNP of the 41 countries of sub-Saharan Africa for which data are available is much lower than in the rest of the world. Many of the African countries actually suffered negative per capita growth rate. Economists have quantified all possible factors, such as climate, ethnic diversity, geography, mismanagement, unemployment and the like, and compared the situation to elsewhere in the world, especially Asia. They concluded that these factors do not provide a complete explanation and that there is some "missing element." Some have suggested the low level of "social capital," i.e., the widespread corruption and lack of trust in commercial relationships, poor roads and railways, unreliable telephones and electricity supplies, and the prevalence of tropical diseases such as malaria.
IQ and the Wealth of Nations identifies IQ as the missing link. Some of these "social capital" are actually manifestations of a low level of intelligence in the populations. Poor telephone services and electricity supplies, low agricultural yields, and the poor advice given by government advisory boards reflect low average IQ. With a mean IQ of 70, the populations of Africa cannot be expected to match the rates of economic growth achieved elsewhere in the world.
Finally, Lynn and Vanhanen peer into the future. They predict future growth is most likely in countries with high national IQ scores but currently bad economic systems. The countries of the former Communist Bloc—Russia, Poland, Bulgaria, and Romania, and the People's Republic of China, and Vietnam—are good bets.
What else can be done? Lynn and Vanhanen also list some of the factors, some environmental and some genetic, that might raise IQ scores and somewhat alleviate the disparities in national average IQ. These include: better nutrition, education and health; and ending the dysgenic fertility trends where the lowest IQ people produce the most children. (Obviously, immigration policy has a role to play too.)
The take-home message of IQ and the Wealth of Nations: national differences in IQ are here to stay and so is the gap between the rich and the poor countries. Political promises that the gap is temporary, and will be remedied by aid from rich countries to poor countries, or even by poor countries adopting appropriate institutions, will not be fulfilled. Such promises assume that all human populations have equal mental abilities to adopt modern technologies and to achieve equal levels of economic development. They do not. The authors sound a clarion call for the recognition of national and race differences in intelligence.
Adapted from:
The Bigger Bell Curve: Intelligence, National Achievement, and The Global Economy, 22 October 2001, (PDF version) in Elsevier Science journal Personality and Individual Differences)
IQ and the Wealth of Nations. Richard Lynn and Tatu Vanhanen, Westport, CT: Praeger (2002), 256 pp., U.S. $64.95 (Hdbk.) ISBN 0-275-97510-X
Philippe Rushton is a professor of psychology at the University of Western Ontario and the author of Race, Evolution, and Behavior: A Life History Perspective
+++++++
|
|
Page 1 |
New Century Foundation
2717 Clarkes Landing
Oakton, VA 22124
The The Color of Crime
Race, Crime, and Violence in America
|
Page 2 |
New Century Foundation
2717 Clarkes Landing
Oakton, VA 22124
Tel: (703) 716-0900
Fax: (703) 716-0932
Major Findings
l
There is more black-on-white than black-on-black violent crime.
l
Of the approximately 1,700,000 interracial crimes of violence involv-
ing blacks and whites, 90 percent are committed by blacks against whites.
Blacks are therefore up to 250 times more likely to do criminal violence to
whites than the reverse.
l
Blacks commit violent crimes at four to eight times the white rate.
Hispanics commit violent crimes at approximately three times the white rate,
and Asians at one half to three quarters the white rate.
l
Blacks are twice as likely as whites to commit hate crimes.
l
Hispanics are a hate crime victim category but not a perpetrator cat-
egory. Hispanic offenders are classified as whites, which inflates the white
offense rate and gives the impression that Hispanics commit no hate crimes.
l
Blacks are as much more dangerous than whites as men are more
dangerous than women.
|
Page 3 |
The Color of Crime - http://www.amren.com/color.pdf
-1-
New Century Foundation
The Color of Crime, a New Century Founda-
tion study based on federal crime reports,
has found significant differences in violent
crime rates for different racial and ethnic groups.
Blacks, for example, are many times more likely to
commit crimes of violence against whites than vice
versa. Of the approximately 1,700,000 interracial
violent crimes involving blacks and whites reported
every year, blacks commit 90 percent and whites
commit only ten percent. Blacks are therefore more
than 50 times more likely than whites to commit
interracial crimes of violence. The differences are
even greater for multiple-offender interracial crimes,
with blacks 100 to 250 times more likely to be in-
volved in gang attacks on whites than the reverse.
Some people may argue that blacks attack whites
because they expect them to be carrying cash or
valuables. However, fewer than 20 percent of black
attacks on whites are robberies; rape and assault do
not usually have economic motives.
There is more black-on-white violent crime than
black-on-black violent crime. When blacks com-
mit violence they attack whites 50 to 55 percent of
the time. When whites commit violence they attack
blacks only two to three percent of the time.
Hate crimes are thought to be the most serious
acts of interracial crime, but there were only 9,861
reported in 1997. Of these, 6,981 were race-related
and 4,105 were violent. This very small number of
crimes receives a disproportionate amount of atten-
tion, but it is likely that the millions of ordinary
interracial crimes–90 percent of which are commit-
ted by blacks against whites–are more damaging to
race relations. Although white-on-black hate crimes
receive a great deal of attention, blacks are approxi-
mately twice as likely to commit hate crimes as
whites.
Hispanics are considered a victim category for
hate crimes but not a perpetrator category. A Mexi-
can who is attacked because of ethnicity is recorded
as Hispanic, but if the same Mexican attacks a black
or white for racial reasons he is considered white.
This inflates the figures for "white" hate crime per-
petrators, and gives the impression that Hispanics
commit no hate crimes.
For virtually all crimes, there are consistent and
pronounced differences in arrest rates for violent
crime by race and ethnicity. Blacks are five to ten
times more likely to be arrested than whites, His-
panics are approximately three times more likely,
American Indians are about twice as likely, and
Asians are only one half to two-thirds as likely to
be arrested for violent crimes as whites. The very
high rates for blacks means that the single best in-
dependent predictor of crime rates for an area is the
percentage of the population that is black.
Blacks are as much more likely to be arrested
for violent crimes as men are more likely to be ar-
rested than women. To the extent that arrest rates
are a good indication of actual criminal behavior–
and there is very strong evidence that they are–
blacks are as much more dangerous than whites as
men are more dangerous than women. If people feel
more threatened by unknown men than by unknown
women and are justified in taking additional pre-
cautions against them, from a statistical point of
view they are equally justified in making the same
distinctions between blacks and whites. l
The Color of Crime
Summary
|
Page 4 |
The Color of Crime
-2-
New Century Foundation
The Color of Crime
cial violent crimes for 1994 (the NCVS is carried
out annually, but the Department of Justice does
not issue full reports every year; 1994 is the most
recent year for this data).
The group of numbers at the top of the page rep-
resents totals calculated for single-offender violent
crimes reported for that year. They are extrapolated
from the actual crimes reported by the survey
sample. We find that in 1994 6,830,360 whites were
victims of violent crimes, and that 16.7 percent
(1,140,670) reported that the perpetrator was black.
Blacks were victims of 1,100,490 violent crimes,
of which 12.3 percent (135,360) were committed
by whites. Adding these figures for interracial crime
together (1,140,670 and 135,360) we get a total of
1,276,030 interracial crimes, of which 1,140,670
or 89 percent were committed by blacks.
To get the rates at which blacks and whites com-
mit interracial crime we divide the number of crimes
by the population to get crimes per 100,000 popu-
lation. The Census Bureau reports that the 1994
white and black populations were 216,413,000 and
32,653,000 respectively. Whites therefore commit-
ted acts of interracial violence at a rate of 62.55 per
100,000 while the black rate was 3,493.63 per
100,000, a figure that is no less than 55.85 times
the white rate. Put in the most easily understood
terms, the average black was therefore 56 times
more likely to commit criminal violence against a
white than was a white to commit criminal violence
against a black. Similar calculations show that the
black rate for interracial robbery, or "mugging," was
103 times the white rate. These two rates are illus-
trated in the graph on the next page, and it is im-
portant to understand what these figures mean. The
multiple of 56 does not mean that blacks commit
56 times as much interracial violence as whites.
What it means is that if whites commit interracial
violence at a rate of 10 crimes per 100,000 whites,
the rate for blacks is 560 per 100,000, or 56 times
the white rate. This is the kind of calculation that is
represented in most of the graphs in this report.
The figures from Table 42 of the NCVS show
other facts about interracial violence. If we once
Interracial Crime
On June 7, 1998, white supremacists hitched
James Byrd of Jasper, Texas, to the back
of a truck, and dragged him to death. This
appalling crime reminded the country in the most
forceful way that racial hostility and interracial
crime continue to be serious problems in the United
States. The resulting national outcry demonstrated
how deeply Americans feel about racial violence.
Outrage over acts of this kind is entirely appropri-
ate. However, to concentrate on one crime, no mat-
ter how sickening, is to present a distorted picture
of interracial crime. If we are to respond appropri-
ately to the problem of racial violence it is impor-
tant to know its true nature and proportions.
Most Americans probably believe that whites
commit most interracial crimes, and that blacks are
the most frequent victims. The reverse is true: In
approximately 90 percent of the interracial crimes
of violence involving blacks and whites, blacks are
perpetrators and whites are victims. In terms of
crime rates (calculated as the number of crimes per
100,000 population), blacks are more than 50 times
more likely to attack whites than the reverse. To
use the common short-hand expression, interracial
crime is overwhelmingly "black-on-white." Be-
cause statistics of this kind are surprising to most
people, it is worth explaining them in some detail.
Every year since 1972, the U.S. Department of
Justice has carried out what is called the National
Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS) to determine
the frequency of certain kinds of crimes. The NCVS
survey sample is very large–approximately 100,000
people in some 50,000 households–and is carefully
selected on the basis of census data to make it as
representative as possible of the nation as a whole.
The NCVS is an invaluable record of criminal vic-
timization as reported directly by Americans, and
it is the only significant nationwide measure of in-
terracial crime.
Two pages from the NCVS are included as Ap-
pendix A of this report.
1
The first page, Table 42,
lists various categories of single-offender interra-
|
Page 5 |
The Color of Crime
-3-
New Century Foundation
again concentrate on the group of figures at the top
of the table we can calculate the total number of
crimes committed by perpetrators of each race, and
the percentage that is committed against the other
race. We find that the 1,140,670 acts of violence
committed by blacks against whites constitute 56.3
percent of all violent crimes committed by blacks.
That is to say that when blacks commit violent
crimes they target whites more than half the time
or, put differently, there is more black-on-white than
black-on-black crime. Similar calculations for
whites show that of the 5,114,692 acts of criminal
violence committed by whites, only 2.6 percent
were directed at blacks. (Although homicide is a
violent crime, the NCVS does not include it because
victims cannot be interviewed. The number of in-
terracial murders is small and does not affect the
percentages and ratios presented here.)
Some may argue that blacks commit violence
against whites because whites are more likely to
have money and are therefore more promising rob-
bery targets. However, of the 1,140,670 black-on-
white acts of violence reported in 1994, only
173,374 were robberies. The remaining 84.8 per-
cent were aggravated assaults, rapes, and simple as-
saults, which presumably were not motivated by
profit. Rape, in particular, has nothing to do with
the presumed wealth of the victim. More than
30,000 white women were raped by black men in
1994, and about 5,400 black women were raped by
white men. The black interracial rape rate was 38
times the white rate.
The second page of Appendix A of this report is
another page from the NCVS. Table 48 shows in-
terracial crime data for acts of violence committed
by multiple offenders. By doing the same calcula-
tions as before, we can determine how much group
or "gang" violence (not in the sense of organized
gangs) is interracial, and how much is committed
by blacks and by whites. Of the total of 490,266
acts of multiple-offender interracial violence, no
fewer than 93.9 percent were committed by blacks
against whites. Robbery, for which there is a mon-
etary motive, accounted for fewer than one third of
these crimes. The rest were gang assaults, includ-
ing rapes, presumably for motives other than profit.
Rates of group violence for each race can be
calculated as before, and the difference between the
races is stark. The black rate of overall interracial
gang violence is 101.75 times the white rate; for
robbery it is 277.31 times the white rate. Differ-
ences as great as this are seldom found in compara-
tive studies of group behavior, and they cry out for
study and explanation. It is probably safe to say
that if the races were reversed, and gangs of whites
were attacking blacks at merely four or five times
the rate at which blacks were attacking whites the
country would consider this a national crisis that
required urgent attention.
Hate Crimes in Perspective
Ever since passage of the Hate Crime Statistics
Act of 1990, the FBI has been charged with col-
lecting national statistics on criminal acts "moti-
vated, in whole or in part, by bias." The law does
not compel local law enforcement agencies to sup-
ply the FBI with this information but most do. In
1997, the most recent year for which data are avail-
able, the FBI received hate crime information from
11,211 local agencies serving more than 83 percent
of the United States population.
2
In that year, there was a total of 9,861 offenses,
of which 6,981 represented bias crimes based on
race or ethnic origin. The remainder were for rea-
sons of religion, sexual orientation, or disability.
The FBI reports 8,474 suspected offenders
whose race was known. Of that number, 5,344 were
white and 1,629 were black. Their offenses–which
0
20
40
60
80
100
0
20
40
60
80
100
Black-on-White
White-on-Black
All Violence
Robbery
Single Offender Black-on-White Crime
Rate as Multiple of White-on Black
|
Page 6 |
The Color of Crime
-4-
New Century Foundation
included all categories of hate crime, not just racial
bias–can, in turn, be divided into violent and non-
violent offenses, and by calculating the rate of of-
fense by race we find that blacks were 1.99 times
more likely than whites to commit hate crimes in
general and 2.24 times more likely to commit vio-
lent hate crimes.
As for cases of racial bias, there were 718 blacks
charged with anti-white (as opposed to anti-homo-
sexual, anti-Semitic, etc.) crimes and 2,336 whites
charged with anti-black hate crimes. Although the
number of white offenders was larger, the black rate
per 100,000 was twice as high. A larger number of
whites commit these crimes, but blacks are 2.0 times
more likelyto commit them. This overrepresentation
of blacks in hate crimes, not just in race bias cases
but in all categories, runs counter to the common
impression that whites are the virtually exclusive
perpetrators of hate crimes and are certainly more
likely to commit them than blacks.
But perhaps of even greater significance is the
relatively small number of bias crimes to begin with.
Of the 6,981 offenses based on race or ethnicity,
only 4,105 were violent, involving murder, rape,
robbery, or assault. The rest included such offenses
as vandalism and intimidation. These numbers are
almost insignificant compared to the 1,766,000 in-
terracial crimes of violence (combining both single-
and multiple-offender offences) reported in the
NCVS.
Needless to say, part of this huge disparity in
numbers is explained by the fact that the NCVS
covers all crimes–whether reported to police or not–
whereas for a crime to be included in the FBI's hate
crime statistics it must first be reported to police
and then officially classified as a hate crime. No
doubt there is some number of crimes never reported
to the police that authorities would consider hate
crimes if they knew about them.
However, how important is the distinction be-
tween interracial crimes that are officially desig-
nated as hate crimes and those that are not? For a
crime to be considered a hate crime, the perpetrator
must make his motive clear, usually by using racial
slurs. It is not hard to imagine that of the 1,766,000
interracial crimes committed in 1994, some–per-
haps even a great many–were "motivated, in whole
or in part, by bias" but the perpetrators did not ex-
press their motives.
Given the realities of race in the United States,
would it be unreasonable for a person attacked by
someone of a different race to wonder whether race
had something to do with the attack, even if his as-
sailant said nothing? Such suspicions are even more
likely in the case of the 490,266 acts of group vio-
lence that crossed racial lines in 1994. What is the
psychological effect on a victim set upon by a gang
of people of a different race? A white woman gang-
raped by blacks or a black man cornered and beaten
by whites can hardly help but think he was singled
out at least in part because of race, even if the at-
tackers used no racial slurs.
Many states have passed laws that increase pen-
alties for people convicted of hate crimes. These
laws recognize the harm done to society when
people are attacked because of race or other char-
acteristics. However, one might ask which does
more damage to society: the few thousand violent
acts officially labeled as hate crimes or the vastly
more numerous interracial crimes of violence that
go virtually unnoticed?
Hate Crimes Committed by Hispanics
The government's treatment of hate crimes is
misleading in another, even more obvious way, in
that the FBI reports hate crimes against Hispanics
but not byHispanics. Appendix B is the FBI's "Hate
Crime Incident Report," which is used to record
bias crimes. Although Hispanics are clearly indi-
cated as a victim category in the "Bias Motivation"
section, they are not a perpetrator category in "Sus-
pected Race of Offender." The FBI therefore forces
local law enforcement agencies to categorize most
Hispanic offenders as "white" (see "Measuring His-
panic Crime Rates," below) and the figures for 1997
reflect this. The total number of hate crimes for that
year–9,861–includes 636 crimes of anti-Hispanic
bias, but not one of the 8,474 known offenders is
"Hispanic" because the FBI's data collection
method does not permit such a designation.
If a Mexican is assaulted for reasons of ethnic-
ity he is officially recorded as Hispanic. However,
he becomes white if he commits a hate crime against
|
Page 7 |
The Color of Crime
-5-
New Century Foundation
a black. Even more absurdly, if a Mexican com-
mits a hate crime against a white, both the victim
and the perpetrator are reported as white. And, in
fact, the 1997 FBI figures duly record 214 "white"
offenders who committed anti-white hate crimes.
3
The offenders were probably Hispanic, but if that
is the case the report should say so. If some of the
"whites" who are reported to have committed crimes
against blacks are also Hispanic, the report should
indicate that, too.
An examination of specific crimes shows that
official reports can be misleading. Murder is the
most serious and shocking of all hate crimes, and
the FBI lists five cases of racially-motivated mur-
der for 1997–three "anti-black" and two "anti-
white." The FBI report does not provide details
about the perpetrators or the circumstances of the
killings, but the local police departments that re-
ported the crimes to the FBI have this information.
Two of the anti-black killings took place in the
same town, a largely Hispanic suburb of Los An-
geles called Hawaiian Gardens. Hawaiian Gardens
has a history of black-Hispanic tension that is so
bad many blacks have been forced to leave. In one
of the murders, a 24-year-old black man was beaten
to death by a mob of 10 to 14 Hispanics who took
turns smashing his head with a baseball bat. In the
other, a Hispanic gang member challenged a 29-
year-old black man's right to be in the neighbor-
hood. A few minutes later he returned and shot the
man in the chest.In both cases, the victims and kill-
ers did not know each other and the motivation ap-
pears to have been purely racial.
4
These crimes are
typical of what we think of as hate-crime murders,
and because no Hispanics are identified as perpe-
trators in the FBI report, it is safe to assume the
killers were classified as white.
The third anti-black killing took place in An-
chorage, Alaska. According to press reports, a white
man, 33-year-old Brett Maness, killed his neigh-
bor, a 32-year-old black man Delbert White, after a
brief struggle. Mr. Maness, who was growing mari-
juana in his apartment and kept an arsenal of weap-
ons, had been shooting a pellet gun at Mr. White's
house, and the black man had come over to com-
plain. Interestingly, a jury found that Mr. Maness
killed Mr. White in self defense, but convicted him
of weapons and drugs charges. The incident was
considered a hate crime because Mr. Maness had
brandished weapons and shouted racial slurs at Mr.
White in the past.
5
A police spokesman adds that
racist literature was found in Mr. Maness' apart-
ment after the shooting.
The remaining two killings were classified as
anti-white, but only one fits the usual conception
of such crimes. Four white men were walking on a
street in Palm Beach, Florida, when a car came to a
stop not far from them. Two black men got out with
their hands behind their backs and one said "What
are you crackers looking at?" One of the white men
replied, "Not you, nigger," whereupon one of the
blacks brought a gun from behind his back and fired
several times, killing one white and wounding an-
other. Attackers and victims did not know each
other, and the criminal motivation appears to have
been purely racial.
6
The other anti-white killing in-
volved a Texas businessman from India, Sri Punjabi,
who shot his Mexican daughter-in-law because his
son had divorced an Indian wife to marry her. Mr.
Punjabi was incensed that his son should marry
anyone who was not Indian.
7
(Presumably, this
crime should have been classified as anti-Hispanic
rather than anti-white.)
These five racially-motivated murders reported
for 1997 do not fit the popular image of hate crimes,
namely, of whites brutalizing non-whites. In fact,
only one perpetrator was "white" in the usually ac-
cepted sense. What was the nature of the thousands
of other officially-reported hate crimes? Without
examining all 9,861 of them it is impossible to say.
It is clear, however, that the FBI report gives a
false impression. It inflates the number of hate
crimes committed by "whites" by calling Hispan-
ics white. At the same time it gives the impression
that Hispanics never commit hate crimes. The rea-
son for gathering these data is to arrive at a better
understanding of the extent of racial friction and
violence in the United States. If statistics are to have
any meaning they must reflect American reality,
namely, that most Hispanics think of themselves as
a separate group, distinct from non-Hispanic whites,
and are perceived by others as a different group. It
is impossible to understand or alleviate group fric-
tion without recognizing this. If the FBI wants to
|
Page 8 |
The Color of Crime
-6-
New Century Foundation
collect meaningful data, it must recognize Hispan-
ics as a perpetrator category as well as a victim cat-
egory.
The Color of Crime
Different racial groups in the United States com-
mit crimes at different rates. Most Americans have
a sense that non-white neighborhoods are more
dangerous than white neighborhoods–and they are
correct. However, it is very unusual to find reliable
information on just how much more dangerous
some groups are than others.
The Uniform Crime Reports (UCR), published
annually by the FBI, is the standard reference work
for crime and crime rates in the United States. The
UCR is a nationwide compilation of criminal of-
fenses and arrest data, reported voluntarily by local
law enforcement agencies. In the most recent UCR,
which covers 1997, the FBI received reports from
17,000 law enforcement agencies, covering 95 per-
cent of the country's population. The UCR is un-
questionably the most comprehensive and authori-
tative report on crimes brought to the attention of
the police. News stories about rising or falling crime
rates are almost always based on the UCR.
In trying to determine crime rates for different
racial groups, it is important to understand the dif-
ferences between the UCR and the National Crime
Victimization Survey(NCVS) referred to above. The
NCVS contains only one kind of information:
crimes Americans say they have suffered. The UCR
includes two different kinds of numbers: crimes
reported to the police and arrests of perpetrators.
Even for the same year and for the same crime, these
three sets of numbers are different. The largest num-
bers are in the NCVS, because they include crimes
not reported to the police. Somewhat smaller are
the UCR figures on offenses reported to authori-
ties, and smaller still are arrest figures, which rep-
resent offenses for which a suspect is arrested.
For example, in the 1997 NCVS Americans say
they suffered a total of 1,883,000 cases of aggra-
vated assault,
8
but according to the UCR, only
1,022,000 were reported to the police. During that
same year, there were only 535,000 arrests for ag-
gravated assault.
9
Racial data enter the UCR fig-
ures only when an arrest is made, so it can be ar-
gued that racial comparisons should not be based
on UCR data. Different racial groups may report
crime to the police at different rates, some groups
may be more successful at escaping arrest, and the
police may discriminate between racial groups in
their arrest efforts. However, there is a great advan-
tage in using UCR data because its racial catego-
ries are more detailed. Unlike the NCVS, which
reports only on "black," "white," and "other," the
UCR compiles arrest data on "black," "white,"
"American Indian/Eskimo," and "Asian/Pacific Is-
lander." These are the only national crime data that
make these distinctions. Also, as we will see later,
UCR arrest data can be compared to other data in
ways that make it possible to treat Hispanics as a
separate ethnic category.
Another good reason to use UCR data is that
although the racial proportions vary somewhat be-
tween the NCVS survey data (race of perpetrator
as reported by victims) and the UCR arrest data (race
of persons arrested), they are not that different. For
example, according to the UCR, 57 percent of
people arrested for robbery in 1997 were black, as
were 37 percent of those arrested for aggravated
assault.
10
According to NCVS data on single-of-
fender crimes, 51 percent of robbers were reported
by their victims to be black as were 30 percent of
those who committed aggravated assault (once
again, using 1994 data).
11
Since there is a greater
overrepresentation by blacks in NCVS-reported
multiple-offender crimes, combining the two sets
of figures brings the racial proportions in the NCVS
figures extremely close to the racial proportions in
UCR arrest figures.
12
Put differently, police are ar-
resting criminals of different races in very close to
the same proportions as Americans say they are vic-
timized by people of those races.
By this measure, who is committing crime in
America? The graph on the next page shows arrest
rates (calculated, as before, as the number of ar-
rests per 100,000 population) as multiples of the
white arrest rate for various crimes. The white rate
is always set to one, so if the black rate is three, for
example, it means that blacks are arrested at three
times the white rate. Once again, it does not mean
that three times as many blacks as whites were ar-
|
Page 9 |
The Color of Crime
-7-
New Century Foundation
rested; it means that if 100 of every 100,000 whites
were arrested for a crime, 300 of every 100,000
blacks were arrested for the same crime.
The data show a very consistent pattern: Blacks
are arrested at dramatically higher rates than other
racial groups. American Indians and Eskimos (here-
inafter "Indians") are arrested at slightly higher rates
than whites, and Asians are arrested at consistently
lower rates. The popular conception of crime in
America is correct; rates are much higher among
blacks than among whites or other groups.
It is for this reason that the single best indepen-
dent indicator of a jurisdiction's crime rate is the
percentage of its population that is black. The scat-
ter chart to the right plots homicide rate and black
percentage of population for all the states and for
the District of Columbia (which is the outlying data
point at the upper right).
13
The tendency is clear:
The higher the percentage of blacks, the greater the
number of murders.
It is worth noting that murder rates are a differ-
ent kind of data from both NCVS reports and UCR
arrest data. They are not based on victim reports
nor can they be distorted by differences in arrest
rates by racial group that could reflect possible po-
lice bias. Pure homicide rates tell us nothing about
the race of either the killer or the victim. They are
simply an expression of the level of homicidal vio-
lence in a community, and that level increases as
the percentage of blacks increases.
Nevertheless, to return to the view that arrest data
reflect police bias rather than genuine group differ-
ences in crime rates, police actually have very little
discretion in whom they arrest for violent crimes.
Except for murder victims, most people can tell the
police the race of an assailant. If a victim says he
was mugged by a white man, the police cannot very
well arrest a black man even if they want to.
For this reason, many people accept that police
have little discretion in whom to arrest for violent
crime, but still believe drug laws are enforced un-
fairly against minorities. Drug offenses are beyond
the scope of this report but here, too, there is inde-
pendent evidence that arrest rates reflect differences
in criminal behavior, not selective law enforcement.
The U.S. Department of Health and Human Ser-
vices keeps records by race of drug-related emer-
gency room admissions. It reports that blacks are
admitted at 6.67 times the non-Hispanic white rate
for heroin and morphine, and no less than 10.49
times the non-Hispanic white rate for cocaine.
(Rates for Hispanics are 2.82 and 2.35 times the
white rates; information is not reported on Ameri-
can Indians or Asians).
14
There is only one plau-
sible explanation for these rates: Blacks are much
more likely to be using drugs in the first place.
Finally, if racist white police were unfairly ar-
resting non-whites we would expect arrest rates for
Asians to be higher than for those for whites. In-
stead, they are lower for almost every kind of crime.
Measuring Hispanic Crime Rates
Any study of group crime rates in America is
complicated by the inconsistent treatment of His-
0
2
4
6
8
10
Black
Indian
White
Asian
Car Theft
Assault
Robbery
Rape
Murder
Arrest Rates
Multiples of White Rate
|
Page 10 |
The Color of Crime
-8-
New Century Foundation
panics by different government agencies. For ex-
ample, the Census Bureau's official estimate for the
1997 population of the United States divides all 268
million Americans into four racial groups: white,
black, Indian and Eskimo, and Asian and Pacific
Islander. The bureau then explains that among these
268 million people there are 29 million Hispanics
who "can be of any race." However, it also counts
non-Hispanic whites, non-Hispanic blacks, Indians,
etc. Thus we find that although according to the
strictly racial classification, there are 221 million
whites in the United States, there are only 195 mil-
lion non-Hispanicwhites. When American Hispan-
ics, approximately half of whom are Mexican, are
apportioned to the four racial categories, the Cen-
sus Bureau considers 91 percent to be white, six
percent black, one percent American Indian, and
two percent Asian.
The treatment of Hispanics can make for odd
results. For example, according to the 1990 census,
the 3,485,000 people of Los Angeles were 52.9 per-
cent white, 13.9 percent black, 0.4 percent Ameri-
can Indian, and 22.9 percent Asian–which adds up
to 100 percent. This makes the city appear to be
majority white. However, Los Angeles was also
39.3 percent Hispanic, and if we subtract the 91
percent of them who were classed as whites, the
non-Hispanic white population suddenly drops to
only 16.6 percent.
What does this mean for crime statistics? Be-
cause the UCR figures do not treat Hispanics as a
separate category, almost all the Hispanics arrested
in the United States go into official records as
"white." This is contrary to the usual understand-
ing of the word, which is not normally thought to
include most Mexicans and Latinos.
If violent crime rates for Hispanics are substan-
tially different from those of non-Hispanic whites,
putting Hispanics in the "white" category distorts
the results. This is not as serious as in the case of
hate crimes, in which the crime itself has to do with
the very personal characteristics that are being omit-
ted from the records, but there is no reason not to
make ethnic or racial comparisons as accurate as
possible. The UCR tabulates separate data on
American Indians and Eskimos–who are less than
one percent of the population–but it ignores His-
panics, who are 12 percent of the population.
Some data-gathering agencies do treat Hispan-
ics and non-Hispanic whites separately. The Cali-
fornia Department of Justice, which records all ar-
rests within the state, consistently makes this dis-
tinction (though it lumps Asians and American In-
dians into the "other" category). Some of these Cali-
fornia figures are included as Appendix C of this
report. In conjunction with Census Bureau popula-
tion figures for Hispanics, non-Hispanic whites, and
non-Hispanic blacks living in California in 1997,
we can calculate the arrest rates for the different
groups for different crimes. In the graph below, these
rates are once again represented as multiples of the
white rate. As is the case with national UCR data,
blacks are arrested at much higher rates than whites,
but Hispanics are also arrested at considerably
higher rates.
The different rates at which Hispanics and non-
Hispanic whites are held in prisons and jails are
another indicator of the differences in crime rates
between the two groups. Although the UCR does
not treat Hispanics as a separate category for arrest
purposes, some government reports on the prison
population do consider them separately. For ex-
ample, the Department of Justice has calculated
1996 incarceration rates per 100,000 population for
non-Hispanic whites (193), Hispanics (688), and
non-Hispanic blacks (1,571).
15
Expressed as mul-
tiples of the white rate, the Hispanic rate is 3.56
and the black rate is 8.14. These multiples are close
0
3
6
9
12
15
Black
Hispanic
White
Robbery
Assault
Rape
Murder
California Arrests by Race
Multiples of White Rate
|
Page 11 |
The Color of Crime
-9-
New Century Foundation
to those from the California arrest data, and justify
the conclusion that Hispanics are roughly three
times more likely than non-Hispanic whites to be
arrested for various crimes.
If we make this assumption, we can use the fol-
lowing formula to incorporate this differential into
the UCR racial data on white arrests so as to calcu-
late more accurate arrest rates for non-Hispanic
whites:
R(Number of non-Hispanic whites) +
3R(Number of white Hispanics) = Actual Number
of Arrests
Here, R is the arrest rate for non-Hispanic whites
and 3R is the arrest rate for Hispanics who are cat-
egorized as white when they are arrested. Calcula-
tions of this kind show that if Hispanics are broken
out as a separate ethnic category with an arrest rate
assumed to be three times the non-Hispanic rate,
the rate for non-Hispanic whites decreases by 19.5
percent. The graph below shows arrest rates (as mul-
tiples of the white arrest rate) adjusted for this re-
duction. For lack of more precise information, the
multiple for Hispanics is set at three times the white
rate for all crimes even though there is certain to be
some variation in the multiples for different types
of crimes. The unadjusted arrest rate chart is also
reproduced next to it for purposes of comparison.
Because the evidence from national incarceration
rates and California arrest rates suggests that His-
panics commit violent crimes at some multiple of
the white rate, the adjusted graph is probably a more
accurate indicator of group differences. Both graphs
are on the same scale and show the extent to which
separating out Hispanics reduces arrest rates for
non-Hispanic whites.
It should be noted here that the NCVS survey
data on interracial crime referred to at the begin-
ning of this report also includes Hispanics in the
"white" category. It is therefore impossible to know
how many of the "whites" who committed violent
crimes against blacks were actually Hispanic or how
many of the "whites" against whom blacks com-
mitted violent crimes were Hispanic. If Hispanics
commit violent crimes against blacks at a higher
rate than whites–and judging from their higher ar-
rest and incarceration rates for other offenses this
seems likely–the NCVS report also inflates the
crime rates of non-Hispanic whites.
Men versus Women
Many people resist the idea that different racial
groups can have significantly different rates of vio-
lent crime. However, there are several group dif-
ferences in crime rates that virtually everyone un-
derstands and takes for granted. Men in their 20s,
for example, are much more prone to violence than
men in their 50s, and when they are arrested more
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
Black
Hispanic
Indian
White
Asian
Car Theft
Assault
Robbery
Rape
Murder
Adjusted Arrest Rates
Multiples of White Rate
Adjusted by separating out Hispanics
Hispanics included with whites
0
2
4
6
8
10
Black
Indian
White
Asian
Car Theft
Assault
Robbery
Rape
Murder
Unadjusted Arrest Rates
Multiples of White Rate
|
Page 12 |
The Color of Crime
-10-
New Century Foundation
0
2
4
6
8
10
Blacks v.Whites
Men v.Women
Arrests for Robbery
Expressed as Multiples
frequently for it, no one doubts that it is because
they commit more crime. Likewise, virtually no one
disputes the reason for higher arrest rates for men
than for women: Men commit more crime than
women. This is the case for racial groups as well:
Asians are arrested at lower rates than whites be-
cause they commit fewer crimes; blacks and His-
panics are arrested at higher rates because they com-
mit more crimes.
When it comes to violent crime, blacks are ap-
proximately as much more likely to be arrested than
whites, as men are more likely to be arrested than
women. The multiples of black v. white arrest rates
are very close to the multiples of male v. female
arrest rates, suggesting that blacks are as much more
dangerous than whites as men are more dangerous
than women.
The first graph on this page shows arrest rates
for men as multiples of arrest rates for women for
the same crimes.
16
The differentials are roughly
similar to those between blacks and whites. The next
two graphs compare arrest rates for murder and rob-
bery, and demonstrate that the black/white arrest
multiple is almost as great as the male/female mul-
tiple. The last graph makes the same comparison
for arrest rates for all violent crimes. (These fig-
ures have not been adjusted for the fact that His-
panics are included with whites. As we have seen,
this adjustment lowers the white arrest rate by nearly
20 percent, and would make the black/white mul-
tiples greater than the male/female multiples.)
0
2
4
6
8
10
Men
Women
All Violence
Arson
Car Theft
Larceny
Burglary
Assault
Robbery
Murder
Male Arrest Rates
Multiples of Female Rates
0
2
4
6
8
10
Blacks v.Whites
Men v.Women
Arrests for Murder
Expressed as Multiples
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
Blacks v.Whites
Men v.Women
Arrests forAll Violent Crimes
Expressed as Multiples
|
Page 13 |
The Color of Crime
-11-
New Century Foundation
What does this mean? Although most people
have no idea what the arrest rate multiples may be,
they have an intuitive understanding that men are
more violent and dangerous than women. If some-
one in unfamiliar circumstances is approached by a
group of strange men he feels more uneasy than if
he is approached by an otherwise similar group of
strange women. No one would suggest that this
uneasiness is "prejudice." It is common sense, born
out by the objective reality that men are more dan-
gerous than women.
In fact, it is just as reasonable to feel more un-
easy when approached by blacks than by otherwise
similar whites; the difference in danger as reflected
by arrest rates is virtually the same. It is rational to
fear blacks more than whites, just as it is rational to
fear men more than women. Whatever additional
precautions a person would feel are justified be-
cause a potential assailant was male rather than fe-
male are, from a statistical point of view, equally
justified if a potential assailant is black rather than
white.
Likewise, there is now much controversy about
so-called "racial profiling," by the police, that is,
the practice of questioning blacks in disproportion-
ate numbers in the expectation that they are more
likely than people of other races to be criminals.
This is just as rational and productive as "age" or
"sex profiling." Police would be wasting their time
if they stopped and questioned as many old ladies
as they do young men. It is the job of the police to
catch criminals, and they know from experience
who is likely to be an offender. Americans who do
not question the wisdom of police officers who
notice a possible suspect's age or sex should not be
surprised to learn that officers also notice race.
Conclusions
Two things can be said about most of the infor-
mation in this report: It is easily discovered but little
known. Every year, the FBI issues its report on hate
crimes, and distributes thousands of copies to schol-
ars and the media. Why does no one find it odd that
hundreds of whites are reportedly committing hate
crimes against whites? And why does no one ques-
tion the wisdom of calling someone white when he
is a perpetrator but Hispanic when he is a victim?
(An FBI spokesman refused to discuss the reasons
for this by telephone and insisted on an exchange
of letters. His reply is provided below.
17
)
For some years there has been an extended na-
tional discussion about the prevalence of black-on-
black crime–and for good reason. Blacks suffer from
violent crime at rates considerably greater than do
Americans of other races. And yet, amid this na-
tional outcry over the extent of black-on-black
crime, there appears to be little concern about the
fact that there is actually more black-on-whitecrime.
Nor does there seem to be much interest in the fact
that blacks are 50 to 200 times more likely than
whites to commit interracial crimes of violence.
Everyone knows that young people are more
dangerous than old people and that men are more
dangerous than women. We adjust our behavior ac-
cordingly and do not apologize for doing so. Why
must we then pretend that blacks are no more dan-
gerous than whites or Asians? And, of course, it is
no more than pretense. Everyone knows that blacks
are dangerous, and everyone–black or white–takes
greater precautions in black neighborhoods or even
avoids such neighborhoods entirely.
The answer to these questions lies in the current
intellectual climate. Americans are extremely hesi-
tant to "perpetuate stereotypes," and generally take
care not to draw or publicize conclusions that may
reflect badly on racial minorities. This is understand-
able, but has reached the point that certain subjects
can no longer be investigated without bringing
down charges of "racism." Needless to say, research
that reflects badly on the majority population is not
constrained by the same fears. However, our will-
ingness to ignore sensibilities should not be selec-
tive. Violent crime and interracial violence are im-
portant, agonizing concerns in this country, and we
cannot begin to formulate solutions unless we un-
derstand the problems. l
References
1
U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice
Statistics, Criminal Victimization in the United
States, 1994 (Washington, DC: USGPO, 1997), pp.
41, 45.
|
Page 14 |
The Color of Crime
-12-
New Century Foundation
2
U.S. Department of Justice, Federal Bureau of
Investigation, Hate Crime Statistics 1997 (Wash-
ington, DC: USGPO, 1999).
3
Hate Crime Statistics 1997, p. 12.
4
Ron Russel and Victor Mejia, "City of Fear,"
New Times (Los Angeles), Feb. 12-18, 1998, p. 13.
5
Patty Sullivan, "Anchorage Man Gunned Down
in Spenard," Anchorage Daily News, Nov. 22, 1997,
p. D1. Peter Porco, "Murder Suspect Acquitted,"
Anchorage Daily News, Dec. 12, 1998, p. E1.
6
Offense Report, Case No. 97123655, Palm
Beach Country (Fla.) Sheriff's Office.
7
Gloria Padilla, Murder Trial Defendant Misses
Court Appearance, San Antonio Express-News,
March 11, 1997.
8
U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice
Statistics, Criminal Victimization 1997 (Washing-
ton, DC: USGPO, 1998), p. 3.
9
U.S. Department of Justice, Federal Bureau of
Investigation, Crime in the United States 1997
[known as Uniform Crime Reports or UCR] (Wash-
ington, DC: USGPO, 1998), pp. 33, 36.
10
Arrest information by race is from Crime in
the United States 1997, p. 240.
11
Criminal Victimization in the United States,
1994, p. 40.
12
According to the UCR, blacks are arrested for
violent crimes at 4.72 times the rate at which whites
are arrested. This multiple is shown on the graph
on page 10. How does this figure compare with the
number of blacks who are reported to be commit-
ting crimes in the NCVS? In order to make a com-
parison we must make certain assumptions about
the NCVS figures. Since police concentrate their
efforts on making arrests in cases of completed
rather than threatened or attempted violence, it
makes sense to use the NCVS numbers for com-
pleted violence. At the same time, NCVS figures
pose a problem in that they do not report the num-
ber of offenders in multiple-offender crimes (see
Appendix A, page 2.) In comparing UCR arrest fig-
ures to NCVS reported offenses, we are comparing
the racial proportions of persons arrested with the
racial proportions of people reported by the public
to be committing crimes. It is therefore necessary
to make an assumption about the average number
of assailants in multiple-offender crimes. Since the
black disproportions in NCVS-reported violent
crimes are even greater in multiple-offender crimes,
a high estimate for the number of offenders in such
crimes increases the number of black offenders as
compared to white. All multiple-offender crimes
have at least two perpetrators, and an estimate of
three participants in each such crime is probably
conservative, and keeps the black disproportion
lower than a higher estimate would.
Using this figure of three, and using NCVS-re-
ported data for completed crimes of violence, we
find that blacks are reported by the public to be
committing such crimes at 4.77 times the white rate
(the reader can make this calculation himself, us-
ing the data in Appendix A.). This figure is ex-
tremely close to the 4.72 multiple of the white rate
at which blacks are arrested. It would be hard to
find stronger support for the view that police are
not racially biased in their arrests but are simply
arresting people of different races in essentially the
same proportions as people of those races are re-
ported by the public to be committing crimes of
violence.
13
Glayde Whitney, "Ideology and Censorship in
Behavior Genetics," Mankind Quarterly, Summer,
1995, p. 338.
14
U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice
Statistics, Sourcebook of Criminal Justice Statis-
tics 1997(Washington, DC: USGPO, 1998), p. 253.
15
Sourcebook of Criminal Justice Statistics 1997,
p. 494.
16
Crime in the United States 1997, p. 239.
17
"First, you ask why 'Hispanics are a distinct
victim category but are not a distinct perpetrator
category?' The answer to your question is that un-
der the current Hate Crime Data Collection Pro-
gram we do not collect information concerning eth-
nicity for either the victim or the offender. The pri-
mary focus of the hate crime program is on the type
of offense and the bias motivation. Ethnicity is of
interest only as it relates to the bias motivation for
a particular criminal offense. The fact that an anti-
Hispanic hate crime was reported does not neces-
sarily imply that the victim was of Hispanic origin.
Only the offender's perception or bias motivation
is being reported." [David R. Loesch, Deputy As-
sistant Director (FBI), letter dated March 30, 1999.]+++++++
http://www.morganquitno.com/cit05pop.htm
The top ten most dangerous are as follows.
1. Camden, New Jersey 84% non-White
2. Detroit, Michigan 88% Non-White
3. St. Louis, Missouri 57% non-White
4. Flint, Michigan 59% non- White
5. Richmond, Virginia 62% non-White
6. Baltimore, Maryland 69% non-White
7. Atlanta, Georgia 67% non-White
8. New Orleans, Louisiana 72% non-White
9. Gary, Indiana 89% non-White
10. Birmingham, Alabama 75% non-White
For the top 10 most safest cities are as follows.
1. Newton, Massachusetts 88% White
2. Clarkstown, New York 76% White
3. Amherst, New York 88% White
4. Mission Viejo, California 76% White
5. Brick Township, New Jersey 73% White
6. Troy, Michigan 82% White
7. Thousand Oaks, California 78% White
8. Round Rock, Texas 66% White
9. Lake Forest, California 68% White
10. Cary, North Carolina 79% White
Camden's murder rate was more than 10 times the national average and its robbery rate was seven times the national average, the study said. Camden is known for a history of corrupt politicians, drug-dealing and murders, and has been among the Top 10 in the most dangerous city rankings in each of the eight years Morgan Quitno released them. By most measures, it is also among the nation's poorest.
The safest city, also for the second year in a row, was the Boston suburb of Newton, Massachusetts, which had no murders and the lowest overall crime and motor-vehicle theft rates in the nation. It is also 88 percent White.
Media Links
http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2005-11/22/content_3816845.htm
Census data: US Census 2000