Wednesday, October 8, 2014

Violence, nature or nurture?

I believe that culture, as well as poverty, education, IQ and the like are all connected to violence, but correlation does not equal causation. We have to look deeper into the cause of the violence, not just what they often have in common.

How can we tell what there is in common if we do not have a good picture of the criminals though? Some crimes and criminals get a lot of publicity, because the story is sensational. The dog bites man story is common, but when a man bites a dog, that is news worthy! So we can't trust the media to report fairly on the common crime, or what links them together. They have been known to show a bias and hide key evidence. . .We can trust the science and the stats on crime though.  

For instance hormones. . .can we trace violence to certain hormones? Yes we can! It is called testosterone.

Testosterone is a hormone associated with a quick temper, rage, lack of impulse control, etc.

When studying high testosterone in men they say ''The overall picture among the high-testosterone men is one of delinquency, substance abuse and a tendency toward excess. . .They have more trouble with people like teachers while they are growing up, have more sexual partners, are more likely to have gone AWOL in the service and to have used hard drugs. But that was so mainly for men who had low income and little education. . . among rapists, high levels are found in those who committed the most vicious attacks, and that among young men, schoolyard bullies have high levels of the hormone. . .testosterone levels correlated with certain vocations. Ministers were low in the hormone, while actors and football players had the highest levels. . .those who described themselves as entertainers also had high testosterone. . .The behavior of high testosterone individuals reflects intractability, unmanageability, and lack of docility as well as aggression and violence."
Source  Source

 OK, so high testosterone is very BAD!
Furthermore, we are apparently not idiots, we can tell a face with high testosterone with "above-chance accuracy."

According to an article in Psychology today on facial profiling, we instinctively judge a face and it is generally right! They says that "High testosterone shows itself in strong jawbones, darker coloring, and hollower cheekbones. . . At the University of St. Andrews, volunteers of both genders could tell, with above-chance accuracy, whether people were promiscuous (open to one-night stands and sex without love) just by looking at photos of their faces. . . Among men, the Lothario face (a composite of the most promiscuous males) had high-testosterone features: slightly smaller eyes, larger noses, and broader cheekbones."

Other studies connected behavior of different men with different monkeys.
"Whereas "status-striving" men tend to produce the macho hormone testosterone when challenged, like chimpanzees, laid-back men produce cortisol, nicknamed the cuddle compound, like bonobos."
So the two monkeys produce the fight or flight hormones. The "fight" men are like chimps in their hormonal response, while the "flight" men are like the bonobos in their hormonal response the article showed. 

Interestingly, there are other studies that show a genetic link of certain races to those same monkeys. Which may make these same races actually have the same reactions as those monkeys.

"Bonobos and chimpanzees differ strikingly in key social and sexual behaviors. We find that more than three per cent of the human genome is more closely related to either the bonobo (European Americans) or the chimpanzee (black Africans) genome than these are to each other."  "While Bonobos most resemble modern humans, it is chimpanzees which resemble modern blacks with their highly aggressive society. Bonobos live in peaceful constructive society."

Considering the numerous features and bad behaviors of high testosterone males, not shockingly then, a much higher level of testosterone has been registered in young blacks, as well as many Hispanics. (Though likely not all, as many are a large part white now.)

 "Sub-Saharan Blacks are highly polygynous, and this resulted in intense competition for fewer women and selection for very robust male body types. SS Blacks are more robust than Whites on all variables. Young Black males have higher levels of active testosterone than European and Asian males. Asian levels are intermediate to Blacks and Whites, but Asians have lower levels of a chemical needed to convert testosterone to its active agent, so effectively they have lower levels."

 Some tests for the mixed races showed significant differences with whites, while others didn't. . .likely dependent on the sample group being screened for IQ or not. IQ tends to be low in those with high testosterone, causing some scientists to say that high testosterone lowers the IQ.

 "Intelligent people have lower libidos and less masculine physiques. What hormone is responsible for both sex drive and masculine builds? That's right: testosterone. And two new papers suggest that testosterone may depress IQ."

Of course testosterone may appear to "depress IQ", as testosterone is high in Africans, and IQ is abnormally low in all of Africa. . .

Again, they are avoiding the obvious, it is the blacks who are the ones with the high testosterone and the low IQ.

Testosterone doesn't change your IQ. Studies show it changes very little by diet or environment. . .it is mostly if not all genetic.

If IQ isn't obvious enough with this link, the brain size is another. 

"Promiscuity [linked with high testosterone males] in a population correlates with larger testicles. . . There is a tradeoff between testicle size and brain size because both are costly organs – if more resources are invested in larger testicles, then there are fewer resources available for a larger brain. Also, brains and testicles support different strategies for the male to pass on his alleles. . . If females need male resources, big brains beat big balls. Of the three major races, blacks have the largest testicles and the smallest brains."

Then there is head size, which is very different with whites and blacks. Head size is correlated strongly with brain size, which is also correlated with IQ. Have you ever wondered why they measured a newborns head?

There are many other both historical and scientifically proven links to lowered intelligence in the blacks, as well as violence via their hormones. There are many good books by scientists, just stating the facts. Here are two you can read online. Here and here.

So while many try to skirt around the racial implications of violence and aggression, fighting for the top position, ruthlessly is something that low IQ, testosterone pumped up minorities (but especially the blacks who are pure) are wired for, just as the chimp is. 

In primates, the higher the testosterone, the higher their rank. ''Finding your place in the hierarchy is a basic part of primate life, and testosterone is tightly linked to the outcome of battles for dominance in other species.'' In black culture the most dominant male is the most domineering and rough. This would be why from the age of even 2, black boys will attack and even growl at others they perceive to be challenging them. (I have seen this myself, and the little white boy was just smiling at him!)

Even to look a black guy in the eyes is a show of superiority to him! Only the alpha male looks a male in the eye, all others who are from less dominating positions must look down. In all dark countries they look down to superiors, just as monkeys do. In all white countries they are equals and maintain eye contact out of respect and confidence.

 Everything is a competition to black men! Which is why they dominate in violent sports. Are dominating/controlling mates (with consequently abysmal divorce rates if they even get married, and the rest of the time are single), and are bullies in school. This has led to white flight from public schools, as I showed in my post here.

"Male dominance status is not a simple function of aggressiveness, but acquisition and maintenance of high dominance rank often involves frequent aggression, and testosterone has been considered the quintessential physiological moderator of such behavior. Testosterone can alter both neurological and musculoskeletal functions."

High testosterone is said to supposedly stunt bone growth, grow big muscles, strengthen bones and lower IQ. . .that is presuming we would without these "imbalences" all be the same. Only problem is, in Africa they are all short, stocky, have strong bones and a low IQ when pure. They also have dark skin. . .that is a little more then a correlation. Perhaps the causation of the high testosterone and the genes for those things are just naturally found in all pure blacks. . .as they are all things we see in the chimp-like, riotous ghetto blacks. (Starting very young, and with both sexes.)

It should come as no shock then that the blacks, in the time frame of their highest spike of testosterone, are committing 52% of the murders, though not even 13% of the population. 
 90% of blacks are murdered by other blacks. Forty-five percent of their victims are white, 43 percent are black, and 10 percent are Hispanic. When whites commit violent crime, only three percent of their victims are black. Blacks are an estimated 39 times more likely to commit violent crimes against whites than vice versa”.

Then there are rape stats. . .as seen here. Gang rape stats are an even higher gap, as it is not even on the charts to see a gang rape by whites, against any race! While it is common for the blacks to gang rape white girls.

Other abuse from blacks it towards their own kids!
This is a stereotype, but the many videos on Youtube that compare the parenting styles of blacks vs. whites  (from the perspective of blacks!) make it pretty obvious, that there is no denying it, black "culture" (or more like their genes) makes for aggressive and abusive parenting styles. In fact, in defending marks left on a child of an NBA players kid from whipping, a fellow black stated that "Every Black parent in the South whips their kids." (The smart mixed ones leave the South.) This may not be true in middle class families, but when around the typical poor black mothers, I frequently hear threatening of whooping or beatings. Apparently though, they think beating their kids is natural, as it is also what the African and primate "cultures" do. And let me tell you, if I had to deal with their brats, I would be beating them too!! Black kids from the hood have no respect and are as dumb as a brick.

This aggression (as seen by the high levels of testosterone), is in both the male and to a lesser extent the female blacks (as well as others with color as the Hispanics). Don't think blacks don't see the differences in the races, they do, but they always seem to notice it in the opposite sex. Few own up to what their sex does, as that would implicate them, and that would take humility. . .something testosterone suppresses you might say.

For instance, the black males in mass claim the black females are the problem with America, and will often not date black woman for reasons due to testosterone. Saying the cause of their repulsiveness to the black men is:
  • because of their attitudes
  • because they shift their own blame to the black men
  • because they don't listen
  • because they have too many babies out of wedlock (73% of black babies are born out of wedlock) too much passion
  • because they're too manly, side effect of testosterone
  • are too materialistic, attempting to gain status of a white woman they overspend and shop too much.
  • and self hate. Black men notice that they will dress above their status, use creams, straighteners, and even get nose jobs to look white.
It's all over Youtube, as well as the internet and TV! 

While the black woman, who are even educated, are scrambling for a black mate (70% of marrying age being single) because of the truth of these statements. Instead of owning to their issues though the black woman will complain that the black guys are mostly in jail, while others say they "don't need no man." 

Arrogance, aggression, dominance. . .that is typical of high testosterone, low intelligence and the black genes, which are genetically closest to the chimps. It is thus inevitable that when challenged, a black man or woman who feels insecure in their status (likely most of them) would seek to dominate a perceived to be easier, less aggressive, target then their own high testosterone race. . .Whites.

This need to dominate by the blacks has always brought on one of two things in history or now, fight or flight. The classic is white flight, less classic is an honor cultureYou either adapt your behavior to the violence around you and survive, or you run away like a coward and show them who is the boss. (Them.)

As a side note, interestingly, the term "gentleman" (from Latin gentilis, means belonging to a race or gens, and man, so putting it together = "belonging to a race of man".  The word equates with the French gentilhomme ("nobleman"). It was a term used to describe a well educated man, from a good family line, who didn't need to work hard, if at all. Generally a white man.

Testosterone is more likely, at least in times of conflict, to be temporarily higher in those who are from the South. The rednecks of the South being much more likely to "chimp out" on you, then the Northeners. Which may be why they are said to be an "honor culture", and not as likely to be a "gentle" man even though they were white.

To this day in the South men are more untrusting and ready to fight for their race, families or honor.
Not surprisingly in darker and poorer places white woman prefer more high testosterone or aggressive features in their white men, while in whiter and more civilized places the woman select for less aggression and testosterone. 

This is because they theorize that survival depends on being aggressive when living in dark and poor cultures. 
Whites who don't stand up for themselves are literally headed for extinction according to the stats.

Woman all prefer (according to the studies of high testosterone features in whites above) some testosterone, as they see a man willing to fight (instead of just run) as one who will be able to keep her safe from attacks and rapes. (Most of which come from being around the blacks.)

So whites will either have to adapt and defend themselves as the minority population becomes a majority in the next generation (Examples of this fighting back today are found mostly in the South, check out modern examples for your entertainment here.), succumb to their woman being raped as shown above, their things being stolen, being forced to run away (white flight) or get depressed (and sometimes commit suicide) when they find out they can't make peace with and live by the golden rule with some people. 

So, as would be expected of a victim, not perpetrator of the violence:

"individuals (particularly Whites) living in honor states (those with many dark people) are at an especially high risk for committing suicide."More on the differences between the cultures of the peaceloving Northerners, and the fighting Southerners here.

For more on the genetic component to violence, as well as a discussion on honor cultures, check out this video. 

This quick temper of the Southerners could be also in part due to their black genes, as the vast majority of those who are passing as white (yet have black genes), are found in the South. Rednecks I'm guessing.

Apparently the rednecks admit they don't put up with troublesome ghetto blacks, claiming to whoop them easily. Saying they are all bark and no bite, as they are too stupid. Or so the forums strongly hint at.

Being part black, rednecks are genetically predisposed to act more like them in their stupidity and violence, but it may also be the proximity to the blacks, as environment and "culture" does corrupt.

Although, according to the above research,
"Laboratory research has demonstrated that men in honor cultures perceive interpersonal threats more readily than do men in other cultures, including increases in. . . testosterone levels following insults."

Maybe experience in living near blacks in the South has allowed some men to stay alive by being more aggressive. . .If all men were wise, they would learn to be quicker to perceive an "interpersonal threats". It is a learned response out of self preservation to be part of an honor culture as a white man. The real violence is, and always has been from the chimp blooded, testosterone pumped, low IQ, black race. As they mix this may appear less true, but genetics all trace violence straight back to Africa. . .something abundantly clear when you leave them to themselves in the pure parts of Sub Sahara Africa. (Almost all of which are in constant civil war. The map below depicting constant war from the time of independence from the whites. The red being constant, yellow only sporadic.)
African nations which have had intra-national conflict since Indepence. Red represents ongoing hostilites. Yellow represents past hostilites.

The most violence is from Sub Sahara Africa, those who have no Neanderthal in them, while having the rare Duffy blood. They are genetically so far from the whites they should be called a different species. In fact, I have linked the genes of the blacks and whites back to homo erectus DNA and Neanderthal DNA, and connecting the evidence with the ancient texts, I have made a pretty solid theory as to the origin of everyone from a few different species. Only one created by "God" though I hate to say. Check out more on that in my posts: Here and here.

Whatever the case, it should be clear now that violence and aggression is based in the blacks nature, not nurture. . .and peaceful blacks, who have a high IQ, are simply mixed blacks. Color is a poor indicator sadly, but the high testosterone features are more accurate, like low IQ, equated with poverty, as they likely can't get or keep a job. Think short and strong. Watch for dark young gangs, as the stupid violent males often travel together. (The peaceful ones, with obviously low testosterone and high IQ prefer to hang out with educated whites, and are generally more "racist" then the whites are against stupid and violent blacks.) 

Stay safe. 

Sunday, September 28, 2014

Homeschooling and private schools a classic form of "white flight."

 Schools have self segregated naturally these days, with the free and public ones now mainly comprised of the poor or minorities (often one and the same), with white flight happening towards homeschooling and private schools. 

"Separate but equal education policies allowed whites and blacks to share the same school systems. School districts were integrated, individual schools were not. When the federal government forced integration to be extended to individual schools, white people moved out of integrated school districts, leaving them to blacks. . . The advent of forced school busing was an admission to the failure of forced integration."
After the government used school buses to force integration of different classes/races of kids, the kids went on strike. Why? Have you ever had to be on a bus with inner city blacks?


"Jim Crow forced whites to sit in the front of the bus, blacks in the back. Southerners viewed that arrangement as a fair and equitable means of protecting whites from black crime, violence and "rascality." When Jim Crow ended, white people were effectively forced off the bus. For the most part, buses became segregated, black-only means of transportation. Whites not only found buses too dangerous, they also fled formerly Jim Crow communities for all-white suburbs. . . Jim Crow laws allowed whites and blacks to occupy the same space at the same time. Communities were more racially integrated with Jim Crow than without."

Anyone who grew up with one or more blacks in school has had to admit that they were always the ones who beat up on the white kids. They were the bullies. Many online have said that this was on a daily basis! (Never the other way around.) 

In fact any school with more then a few minorities in general has had to ramp up their security. In my state it is quite telling! The government has recently given a huge grant to Virginia public schools for security purposes, as well as a free breakfast program. . .to add to the free lunch program. Only some schools are getting use of the grant, and it seems to be proportionate to the amount of blacks in the schools. The schools with the most blacks are getting the most money for security as well as charity to feed the blacks 2 meals a day, on the tax payers tab.

 In fact, one site with demographics showing white flight has happened, and because of that the school lunch program and soon to be breakfast program, has gotten disproportionate use by that school, when compared to the country. . . the number of kids on it matches almost perfectly the number of blacks. No doubt the crime in those schools must be bad, or they would not be getting so much money to protect themselves and the kids. . .while the majority of the rest of the suburban schools got nothing. The test scores of those schools getting the grants also correlate with the low IQ blacks in them. . .

In a school setting it is hard for blacks, because they are not in their element, and generally do poorly. The confusion between the ones with scholastic potential and the others without it led some to do testing to segregate into special classes, not unlike "achievement tests" today. Honor and special ed. classes being the result.

The old idea of "intelligence (IQ) testing" was strangely found to be more "politically incorrect" then the testing on what was actually taught in the class. 

This was because the IQ test almost always segregated the kids into races. (It was said to measure potential, as opposed to learned skills or knowledge.) 

The average tests being failed could be chalked up to learning disability, ADD, bad home life/lack of studying, lack of ambition, different learning style, etc. but there was little that could have more then a tiny effect on an IQ test, as it was said to be mainly heritable. 

While the IQ tests showed a big intelligence disparity, just as averages for continents did, (something still denied or hotly debated and excused by the black community and few others), the same thing has been seen by the standardized state tests they do today. . .blacks are far below whites and Asians. Of course some defending the low IQ minorities claim the tests unfairly advantage whites and Asians.

 The only thing a bit unfair is that for black kids (as opposed to whites) segregation lowered their performance in school and brought up the violence. 

Other tests have shown a correlation with minorities and low test scores as well as bad behavior in school. The studies also claimed that a disproportionate number of the children with attention problems (ADD?) were black students. All of this not surprisingly, correlates with what we know of jails being full of those with a low IQ (and blacks) as well. More on IQ and it's correlations here.

 IQ differences (which are generally equated with the wage you make) separate people of all shades into classes, naturally.

Race and IQ are both well studied, but cultural Marxists would like to believe it doesn't exist, or that it can be excused away, but the fact is it can't. Watch Race and IQ denial explained for more on that.

The schools in Detroit and Ferguson give a clear picture of the link between black violence and low IQ as well as other test scores. 

Frankly, the white flight to private schools or homeschool is inevitable and not racist but a matter of self defense! (As well as trying to get a good education and not be held back by the behavioral and intelligence issues of the minorities.) 

Whites try to forcibly stop this separation, in their push for equality and cultural Marxism, but it naturally happens. These days it is obvious in my area, as well as other areas with minorities, that the schools the white tax payers are supporting, are mainly filled with the future criminals and the illegal aliens. (You vote for that when you vote Democratic folks!)

Some still in the public system have gotten angry about the white flight towards homeschooling, saying it "destroys communities".

 While there is good reason for this observation, the real destruction is done by the minorities, and just becomes more apparent when the whites leave.   Amazingly this liberal and often Afrocentric site had a very good article debunking this argument.)

This problem is sadly not only in the South, or even in the USA. For instance in BC Canada, the public school teachers have had such problems with the growing minorities populations in them (though you would not catch that being said out-loud or in the media) that they were on strike for many months, demanding smaller classes and higher pay to deal with so many "special needs kids", read "minorities". The strike made the kids miss 5 weeks of school on both ends of the summer, and due to "little understanding" from naive white folks or angry minorities as well as little support from government officials, the negative feedback seriously hurt the teachers moral, causing many to rethink the profession even more!

Some ethnic groups in Canada have even demanded that the government help them start and finance their own schools. (Which public schools are turning toward these days anyhow.) Some liberals have protested saying that "Canada's multicultural policy, as envisaged in the early 1960's, did not promote separateness. Early philosophies and policies of multiculturalism in Canada were benign. They were based on toleration and accommodation and harmonious relations between different groups and races. But multiculturalism in the 1990's seems to be taking a different shape. It has become akin to ethnocentricism." [They are calling for a] "segregated system of schooling based on children's ethnic heritage. This is the kind of system South Africa has now."

 In fact this is what is happening by choice and because of white flight in any area of the world with minority domination. What they fail to see is that while the whites would flourish without the minorities in general, the minorities would grow more ethnocentric and angry and entitled without integration. 

Yes, no doubt the minorities will in general have a poor education, worse teachers, and less resources, just as predicted, and just as in every other area of the world that they are in. . .but that is their doing, not whites.

So while integration clearly doesn't work for us whites, as we are seeing clear stats on where the crime in schools is coming from. . .having them separate from us, like in Jim Crow, hurts them.  Is there a solution to safely teach those who mainly think that showing an interest in school is "acting white?" Is there any helping their culture of violence?

Will pouring more money into free majority black public schools help?  Will say, 530 million to spend on added security, feeding them two meals a day, lowering the standard to make sure no child gets left behind and the like (all on the mainly white man's tax dollar) be the solution to the problems with the black schools in Detroit, as Obama believes? (And is set to happen.) Audits have already shown that 54 million dollars already poured into Detroit schools have gone missing, or were misspent. . .while they have racked up a 200 million dollar deficit!

Like Bill O'Riley has suggested below in the link, could it be that it is just a waste of money to try to teach the chaotic, poor and low IQ minorities who don't already come from wealthy homes (that could afford public schools), as they obviously have "no learning curve"? (Saying "Obama will bankrupt the country if he tries to throw money at all our problems". . .which could be translated "throwing money at all the blacks of Detroit". I showed in past posts that minorities and blacks in particular are the parasite of not just this country- the USA- but the world!)

This belief that an expensive education makes a smart person, who is less violent, is just wishful thinking on the part of a minority of powerful whites, all over the world. Or they pretend to believe it in order to get their vote. . .In fact in Africa they have seen miserable results with the free public schools whites have set up. Yet the humanitarian white nations keep pouring money into those free schools!

 In Kenya alone "The World Bank expects to spend $100 million on education in Kenya over 5 years. The British are donating $75 million, the Swedes $7 million, the Canadians $6.7 million, the Americans $3 million and Unicef $2.5 million."

"Michael Kremer, a Harvard University economics professor who volunteered as a high school math teacher in Kenya after college and who has done years of research in Kenyan schools, said Kenya clearly needed both more foreign aid and domestic reform of its own education system.
Kenyan officials agree."

My own precious grandma was a teacher in a school she started in Liberia, west Africa. While humanitarians and missionaries want to make Africa a more civilized place by schooling those without potential, or teaching them religion, it's not just a waste of time, but it takes them away from work that helps them survive.

 Without a guaranteed living being made because of slavery (a luxury to the Blacks who went to America) attending a school only makes the families without working kids more poor, and it unrealistically raises their hopes for the future. Yet more money is being poured into Africa to make free schools throughout the most depressed areas. As they have noticed in Africa though, herding 100 kids into a room and not even passing half of them from the first grade (where they only learn their alphabet and to count) is hardly what people would call getting an education. Nor will more money and smaller classes in any part of Africa help that, they have found.

Considering now what we see in Africa, Canada, as well as all other places they have studied that has a black population, there seems to be little hope of giving them an education, or ending up an equal multicultural society.

Noting the inherent inequality between the low and high IQ people, the school system is seeing problems they can't just ignore. "Data from the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) reports that 63 percent of fourth graders perform at only basic, or below basic, levels in reading. Sixty-nine percent perform at these levels in mathematics. African-American, Hispanic, and Native American fourth graders perform consistently lower than their white counterparts."

This minority element is what accounts for "the dumbing down of America", and it is why compared to other white countries (first world nations) we are scoring lower and lower. While blacks. thanks to their high rate of mixed marriages are getting smarter. "Indicators of achievement on mathematics and science, such as the Third International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS) comparison of students in the fourth and eighth grades from forty nations (and twelfth-grade students from twenty nations), have revealed that the overall achievement of students in the United States is low compared to students in other industrialized nations."

Yet they keep hoping that more money and programs pushed on these problem schools will change this "unfair" inequality!

"Since the 1950s, federal compensatory education efforts have tried to achieve equity in education with programs such as Head Start, giving preschoolers from low-income families a chance to start kindergarten at the same level as their middle- and upper-class peers. Other major federal policy efforts created categorical programs–such as Title I, bilingual education, and special education initiatives–to promote equity for children with economic disadvantages, language barriers, and physical or mental disabilities."

"A groundbreaking federal commitment, the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965, and subsequent amendments, supports education achievement and equity by providing federal funds to states and school districts." Particularly those with minorities. . .

Inequality being there doesn't mean it was not earned. This is something even the middle class and smart blacks are saying. "Courts, bureaucrats and the intellectual elite have consistently concluded that "gross" disparities are probative of a pattern and practice of discrimination. Given all of the differences among people, such a position is pure nonsense."

The public school system while giving little meaningful education, with low quality teachers, graduating the minorities at dismal rates, and making them college ready at even worse ones (culminating in getting bad jobs or being unemployed), as well as exposing the whites to a lot of violence, have been proven a failure of multiculturalism. In fact multiculturalism around the world has been deemed a failure by nearly all but our politicians. According to a poll done by BBC in Europe, 95% believe multiculturalism has been a dismal failure.

multiCBecause of the root cause of the failure of multicultural society, but multicultural schools in particular (being the poor minorities inability to achieve equality), it is obvious that the proposed reform ideas like tax credits and vouchers (for everyone rich or poor to use at whatever school they want) would actually make the problems worse!

I propose that either: 
#1. we make school optional to the non native dark Americans. That alone would turn around the schools as ghetto blacks, as well as some Hispanics would likely drop out.
#2. and/or teachers could simply IQ test the kids, to make sure they don't waste time or state money on the ones with an IQ of below 90. 
Or, we could just do what they used to do all over Africa. . .
#3. make all the public schools private and financially out of reach for all but the wealthy. (Homeschooling being an option for all, but only helping those with smart genes from smart parents. . .as IQ is highly heritable.)

A socialist country just doesn't work with poor and low IQ minorities. We just can't afford the free schools to be taken over by the minorities, who are not giving back in taxes.

 Nor is it fair that whites have had to leave the historically safe, white dominated schools that they started and now continue to pay for, simply because the minorities account for 93% of the growth in this country! 

The ones who started this civilization, and are still paying most of the taxes are having to personally finance the schooling of their own children, while the government throws away money on the education of other nations immigrants, who will (after wasting their childhood stressing out over school), likely end up as pickers, and burger flippers!! (Or unemployed.)

 If minorities (who are now a majority in the public schools), want a free education, besides the self directed education the internet, and libraries can easily give a smart kid, and they believe they can compete for the good jobs in the future, based on a history of intelligence in their family, then they need to be wiling to foot some of the bill for it, as whites have done. 

Down with free public schools! Who's with me?!