Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
With democracy Africa will have fewer coups. Authoritarian rule in post colonial Africa has contributed to one coup after another on the continent.
Interesting article. This author says China has much it can learn from South Korea on the role of democracy in improving it's economy. South Korea had its period of authoritarian rulers. The country didn't really improve until it become more innovative. That innovation came better under democracy.
Not true,democracies have had many coup d'etat and as often as dictatures,there 's no scientific evidence of that.
Who really cares, the way they do it,if China gets its economy rolling everything is else is propaganda and jalousy.
The Mongols were a foreign dynasty who treated the Chinese brutally, as were the Manchus and the British.
You prove the man's point.
Also, what is the "historical advantage" that you are talking about, other than the dynamism of the people?
I am actually cheering for Africa and point to some countries that are doing quite well, but you make some strange arguments.
Many would point historical advantage to evolution and IQ. There have been many studies over the past forty years indicating Asians having the highest IQ and blacks having the lowest IQ. Some historians point to all the inventions that came out of Europe and Asia. There was a book written by two Harvard professors called The Bell Curve. A Brown University economist, Oded Galor wrote a paper called the "Out of Africa" hypothesis claiming that genetic diversity of the gene pool is linked to economic development. Africa had high genetic diversity, while native Americans had very low genetic diversity. Asians and Europeans had moderate amounts of genetic diversity which has resulted in them constituting the "developed" world while Africa is the "developing world."
Historical advantage is a touchy subject that should be examined but not by non-experts like us.
Just wanted to add that. Besides, even if it's proven that some group has a lower IQ, they can still contribute to society. We can still educate them to be ok. Maybe they won't cure cancer or AIDS, but at least they can live as human beings in a humane way.
Many would point historical advantage to evolution and IQ. There have been many studies over the past forty years indicating Asians having the highest IQ and blacks having the lowest IQ. Some historians point to all the inventions that came out of Europe and Asia. There was a book written by two Harvard professors called The Bell Curve. A Brown University economist, Oded Galor wrote a paper called the "Out of Africa" hypothesis claiming that genetic diversity of the gene pool is linked to economic development. Africa had high genetic diversity, while native Americans had very low genetic diversity. Asians and Europeans had moderate amounts of genetic diversity which has resulted in them constituting the "developed" world while Africa is the "developing world."
Historical advantage is a touchy subject that should be examined but not by non-experts like us.
Just wanted to add that. Besides, even if it's proven that some group has a lower IQ, they can still contribute to society. We can still educate them to be ok. Maybe they won't cure cancer or AIDS, but at least they can live as human beings in a humane way.
That's a nonsense,many studies will claim the contrary,you don't have to be from harvard to be always right.
Every year,new studies appears on scientific publications that infirm categorically precedent studies on the same subject.
That's a nonsense,many studies will claim the contrary,you don't have to be from harvard to be always right.
Every year,new studies appears on scientific publications that infirm categorically precedent studies on the same subject.
Which studies? Not just Harvard. All the best universities come across the same results be them in Brazil, US, Canada, UK, Germany, Spain, South Africa or Australia.
Not saying it's 100% true. I'm not a sociologist or a neuroscientist. 4 studies may not mean much. 10 studies may not even mean much. 40,000 years of humanity history paints a pretty complete picture, and that should be used going forward.
03-02-2014, 09:09 PM
Guest
n/a posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChefRamsey
Just wanted to add that. Besides, even if it's proven that some group has a lower IQ, they can still contribute to society. We can still educate them to be ok. Maybe they won't cure cancer or AIDS, but at least they can live as human beings in a humane way.
Stop talking about Africans like that and instead be thankful we don't organize ourselves enough to put your white self on the chopping block in the name of retribution.
You're lucky I'm nice enough not to want you all as my slaves. No one should do that to another.
Instead of being grateful for the whole culture, seemingly, turning its cheek, you instead elect to bring up what you know won't be appreciated.
Which studies? Not just Harvard. All the best universities come across the same results be them in Brazil, US, Canada, UK, Germany, Spain, South Africa or Australia.
Not saying it's 100% true. I'm not a sociologist or a neuroscientist. 4 studies may not mean much. 10 studies may not even mean much. 40,000 years of humanity history paints a pretty complete picture, and that should be used going forward.
If i understand u correctly,yu're vietnamese ? Right ?
Just like you said,Asians have the highest IQ,right.
Can you explain how come that most asian countries were colonized by europeans ?
And Vietnam in particular?
Was the IQ of any help?
Many would point historical advantage to evolution and IQ. There have been many studies over the past forty years indicating Asians having the highest IQ and blacks having the lowest IQ. Some historians point to all the inventions that came out of Europe and Asia. There was a book written by two Harvard professors called The Bell Curve. A Brown University economist, Oded Galor wrote a paper called the "Out of Africa" hypothesis claiming that genetic diversity of the gene pool is linked to economic development. Africa had high genetic diversity, while native Americans had very low genetic diversity. Asians and Europeans had moderate amounts of genetic diversity which has resulted in them constituting the "developed" world while Africa is the "developing world."
Historical advantage is a touchy subject that should be examined but not by non-experts like us.
Just wanted to add that. Besides, even if it's proven that some group has a lower IQ, they can still contribute to society. We can still educate them to be ok. Maybe they won't cure cancer or AIDS, but at least they can live as human beings in a humane way.
Before accepting THE BELL CURVE, try GUNS GERMS AND STEEL and CONQUESTS AND CULTURES.
Some would say that Africa is underdeveloped because of Malaria and the expansion of the Sahara, ather than intelligence differences.
Or to say it another way, it is a chicken and egg thing. African IQs are lower because of lack of access to education and health care, primarily caused by a very harsh environment. They don't lack the access because their IQs are lower.
Some would say that Africa is underdeveloped because of Malaria and the expansion of the Sahara, rather than intelligence differences.
I think it has more to do with the over-regulated state controlled economies that many of Africa's new leaders adopted. After gaining independence many of Africa's new leaders wanted to emulate the socialist one-party state of the Soviet Union. Bad choice for development. African economies are still under too much government controls. I say they should have chosed democratic governments with mixed economies that leaned towards capitalism.
I think it has more to do with the over-regulated state controlled economies that many of Africa's new leaders adopted. After gaining independence many of Africa's new leaders wanted to emulate the socialist one-party state of the Soviet Union. Bad choice for development. African economies are still under too much government controls. I say they should have chosed democratic governments with mixed economies that leaned towards capitalism.
Easy said than done,i don't agree with u,it's the world economic order that
that needs some major adjustments.
Some european capitalist countries are in worst shape than Nigeria,Algeria,Morocco,South Africa,Angola and Mozambique.
Capitalism by itself can't do everything.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
