tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5002675950760488813.post8651579531154153064..comments2022-08-13T18:27:36.180-07:00Comments on The Unsilenced Science: Blacks with Bullets Embedded in Bonenooffensebuthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02461190919466049463noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5002675950760488813.post-54422173981466249092015-07-23T07:38:24.482-07:002015-07-23T07:38:24.482-07:00I&#39;ve seen various analyses of data. In rural L...I&#39;ve seen various analyses of data. In rural Louisiana after the Civil War and before Jim Crow, blacks had a lower homicide rate than whites, both interracial and intraracial. In many of the big cities during the late 1800s and early 1900s, many ethnic whites (Italians, Irish, etc) committed higher rates of homicide than blacks.<br /><br />Much of the homicide rates seem correlated with lead exposure. There have been a number of major violent crime spikes over the past century. <br /><br />The first correlated to increased lead use in rural areas starting in the 1800s, which showed up in the crime data around 1900. Following that, there was the increase of industrialization and urbanization that led to a massive spike of violence. The third spike is the most well known. It followed after lead being added to gasoline and ended following leaded gasoline having been regulated.<br /><br />There tends to be higher rates of violence with populations with higher lead toxicity rates. Many whites left urban areas for suburbia where lead toxicity was low, and their earlier high violent crime rates dropped. We don&#39;t have lead toxicity measurements for the earliest populations, but we do have more recent data. The lower classes have higher rates than the upper classes. Minorities have higher rates than whites. Poor minorities have higher rates than poor whites. Blacks have higher rates than Hispanics.<br /><br />A large part of this has to do with more bypasses and toxic dumps having been placed in poor black communities. It&#39;s unsurprising that populations surrounded by more lead have higher rates of lead exposure and hence toxicity. It&#39;s also unsurprising that these populations show all the predictable known results of lead toxicity: stunted brain development and lower average IQ, impulse control problems and ADHD, aggressive behavior, etc; there are also many health conditions as well. I don&#39;t know why anyone pretends to be shocked that people with poisoned brains have social and behavioral problems.<br /><br />Two of the comments mentioned that black crime began going up in the 1880s. Besides that being when widespread lead usage began, that is also when Jim Crow began. Also, it was around the time when blacks began to experience increasing levels of racial oppression: chain gang re-enslavement, sundown towns, redlining, lynchings, bombings, arson, etc.<br /><br />It doesn&#39;t take a genius to see the obvious connections.Marmaladehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02701062765483715442noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5002675950760488813.post-31276566888301209252011-12-28T07:18:11.929-08:002011-12-28T07:18:11.929-08:00Could we stop calling them &quot;African Americans...Could we stop calling them &quot;African Americans.&quot; I object to the &quot;American&quot; part.sykes.1https://www.blogger.com/profile/10954672321945289871noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5002675950760488813.post-7343506541072488462011-12-14T23:37:23.555-08:002011-12-14T23:37:23.555-08:00Excellent analysis. Eric Monkkonen attempted to ad...Excellent analysis. Eric Monkkonen attempted to address the issue you raise about African-American emigration. Here is the full quotation:<br /><br />&quot;The city’s African American population had a very different history from its immigrants—one of declension in size from 16,000 in 1840, to about 12,000 in 1860, to perhaps less than 10,000 in 1865. By midcentury, less than 2 percent of the city’s population was black. This demographic trajectory, so different for the rest of the city’s people, tells us much about the city’s inhospitality to African Americans. Freedom, yes; friendship, no.<br /><br />Traditionally, African American men had worked on the city’s docks, in its shipyards, and in various service occupations. The new immigrants competed vigorously, and sometimes violently, for these jobs. This story culminated tragically in 1863 in the New York City Draft Riots. No matter how one interprets these riots, they always contain a base element of racism. Angered by the efforts to draft poor and immigrant workers, the city’s white immigrant men quickly turned their initial political protest into a race war against African Americans. A large but never reliably established number of black residents died—many as victims of vicious public lynchings. Not too surprisingly, after the riots the city’s black population decreased even faster. Novelist Peter Quinn brilliantly depicts the African American exodus. Even though we can outline this demographic history of black New Yorkers, we cannot yet establish precise population measures, and we can expect that census enumerations were highly inaccurate. Thus, any construction of rates with at-risk denominators must be understood as estimates.&quot;nooffensebuthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02461190919466049463noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5002675950760488813.post-65204353707967695222011-12-14T07:44:01.087-08:002011-12-14T07:44:01.087-08:00A possible explanation for why Black crime may hav...A possible explanation for why Black crime <i>may</i> have been &#39;aritificially&#39; low in NYC in the mid-1800s (perhaps applicable to similar places as well) :<br /><br />First of all, we see children of Black soldiers <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/12/education/military-children-outdo-public-school-students-on-naep-tests.html" rel="nofollow">do much better</a> on standardized tests than non-military Blacks&#39; children do. Why? As Steve Sailer likes to point out, the military swears by IQ testing (or a close proxy for it). The bottom fifth (is it?) of the scorers are flatly not admitted into the U.S. military at all, and and the second-to-bottom quintile is seldom admitted. This leaves the pool of Blacks admitted to the military decently-smart compared to the USA&#39;s Black average. In other words, military Blacks were selected for intelligence.<br /><br />Something similar may have happened in NYC in the 1800s, with the proverbial gate shut to the lower elements of the Black population:<br /><br />I found an odd pattern in the census data, as I was revieweing it following your wonderful post here. [Data from <a href="http://www.census.gov/population/www/documentation/twps0076/NYtab.xls" rel="nofollow">Census</a>, opens a .xls].<br /><br />NYC Population By Race and Year<br /><br />NYC Whites<br />1820: 113,000<br />1870: 929,000<br />=3.03 doublings<br /><br />NYC Blacks<br />1820: 11,000<br />1870: 13,000<br />=0.18 doublings<br /><br />Phenomenal White growth (over three doublings in 50 years) and essentially <i>no</i> net-Black-growth. (1820-1870 White growth even beats the Ellis-Island boom, 1880-1930, when NYC&#39;s population saw only 2.44 doublings, by my calcuation. There would have been some natural constraints on growth by that point, i.e. lack of space in NYC, so maybe this is an unfair comparison). What explains such heavy Black emigration out of NYC in the decades straddling the U.S. Civil War? (TFRs being high in those days, Blacks would have had to emigrate in considerable numbers to maintain zero net growth in NYC). Possibly, social pressure from the Whites forced-away the lower elements of the Black population of NYC that had been there earlier. (2,400 Black slaves lived in NYC in 1790, along with 1,100 free Blacks). In those days, such a thing was possible. I don&#39;t know. I&#39;d like to hear a better explanation for this.<br /><br />Notice that according to Pinker&#39;s graph, Black crime really took off in the 1880s -- which would be more clear if he had used a more honest scale -- exactly when Black population growth began in NYC.<br /><br />For comparison, a similar but <i>weaker</i> trend in population growth by race is seen in Pinker&#39;s other example city (where evidence for the phenomenon Pinker points to -- a posited long-lost equality in Black and White crime rates -- is also, as it happens, <i>weaker</i>; that is to say, the racial disparity in crime in Philadelphia was greater throughout the post-Civil-War era than it was in NYC):<br /><br />Philadelphia Blacks<br />1820: 8,000<br />1870: 22,000<br />=1.4 doublings<br /><br />Philadelphia Whites<br />1820: 56,000<br />1870: 652,000<br />=3.5 doublingsAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5002675950760488813.post-7551376251848978682011-12-14T07:11:26.268-08:002011-12-14T07:11:26.268-08:00From the entry: &quot;The US Census Bureau did not...<b>From the entry:</b><br />&quot;<i>The US Census Bureau did not start tracking crime until 1880, and despite being a minority, African Americans were receiving 54 percent of unlawfully concealed weapons charges and 75 percent of exhibiting a deadly weapon charges and were committing 83 percent of shootings, 85 percent of stabbings, 48 percent of manslaughter homicides, and 43 percent of murders.</i>&quot;<br /><br />Blacks were 13.1% of the USA in 1880, according to Census.gov [<a href="http://www.census.gov/population/www/documentation/twps0056/tab01.xls" rel="nofollow">See here</a>, opens a .xls]. <br /><br />The above-cited crime patterns by race seem to have been remarkably constant from 1880 on through the present day.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com