From: An Anonymous Female Reader [Email her]

Author  Jerry Pournelle, who runs the Chaos Manor website, has printed a remarkably self-congratulatory letter from one of his readers (presumably on the right hand side of the Bell Curve) which I believe explains why there is such resistance to the idea that IQ could be, even in part, an accident of birth. It really has to be read in full to be believed, but it ends with:

...If you want your kids to be like the rich/smart kids, then emulate what the rich/smart families do. Talk to the kids, and treat every interaction like an educational opportunity. Read WITH them, not TO them. And for crying out loud, turn off the TV. We almost never watch TV. When it is on, it is usually sesame street or world world or other kids educational show so at least it isn’t quite as mind numbing as most other popular tv shows.

Mailbag mostly on education, with good stories and other comments,Chaos Manor, June 27, 2013

(Shouldn't Sesame Street or World World be capitalized? Shouldn't "kids" have an apostrophe? Isn't it "shows", not "show"? I'm not a Grammar Nazi normally, but if anyone deserves it, it's this individual.)

You see, if it's not genetic, they can pretend that their advantages are all due to their own awesomely awesome awesomeness. All those poor children simply have parents who don't talk to them, or read to them, as opposed to all those wonderful rich parents. If it's largely an accident of birth, how on earth will they lord it over the poor?

Leaving aside the sheer rudeness of saying the poor don't love or care for their children (manners matter, okay?), it cedes an awful lot of territory to the Left.

Yes, the poor would be far better off without social pathologies like out of wedlock births. But they also overwhelmingly face obstacles that they lack the wherewithal to defend themselves against—not least massive amounts of unskilled immigration.

Conservatism Inc. (and Libertarianism Inc.) damage their case by refusing to acknowledge the unfairnesses in the current system, and to propose workable solutions, as opposed to preening about how wonderful they are.

James Fulford writes: I'll quote Steve Sailer here:

The typical white intellectual considers himself superior to ordinary white people for two contradictory reasons: First, he constantly proclaims his belief in human equality, but they don't. Second, he has a high IQ, but they don't."