In the late '70s, a couple of sociobioloists, Wilson and Freeman, found that Hopi Indian children developed faster cognitively and motorically, had better eyesight and in general outdid their white counterparts with respect to the advancement and culmination of their mental and physical abilities. It was hypothesized, in typical liberal environmentalist theorizing, that the custom of Hopi mothers of carrying their infant children strapped to their backs somehow caused those children to develop so much faster.

Immediately, it became fashionable and prevalent for upper class, wine and cheese, Whole Foods type, white liberal mothers to carry their babies on newly designed and mass produced infant back carriers that were suddenly manufactured and made available for the occasion of this new fad. But it was all just a fad and had no basis in fact. That the speculation that back carrying caused quicker, stronger children's developement was unfounded soon became clear as children of iKhung! "African Bushmen" children and children of many other technologically primitive cultures whose mothers did not have the infant back carrying custom showed developmental rates similar to those of the Hopi Indians.

It was, in fact, found that children from any non Western culture developed significantly faster and better than those of white Americans or white Europeans and within Western civilization, children of non dominant or less dominant, poorer groups - as those on the Native American reservations (and something vaguely similar was discovered among African American children) - had similar positive disparities with white, middle and upper class children.

The only logical conclusion that can be drawn from this is that the dominant groups of society and civilization, the rich and the white, grow up and live in relatively safer, more protected environments significantly more sheltered from the forces of Natural Selection, than do the less dominant groups, the poorer and darker skinned. IOW, the less dominant groups, much more than the dominant, live in environments where the stupid, feeble and inept will not survive. So then, in just a few generations, the less dominant groups outstrip the more dominant ones in evolutionary advancement.

Thus it is at least as logical to conclude or presume that the rich, higher status people are less intelligent and less mentally fit than the poor and lower status as it is to presume the converse, i.e., that the rich and dominant are naturally superior to the poor and less donminant.


Add comment

Login or register to post comments

Come Cruise with Thom Hartmann in July 2020

Join me for an exciting Bermuda getaway aboard Oceania Cruises, the world’s leading culinary and destination-focused cruise line. Set sail on the reimagined Insignia for 7 nights beginning July 25th 2020. Take advantage of Oceania Cruises’ OLife Choice promotion, where you can choose shore excursions, a beverage package, or onboard credit – Oceania Cruises also includes Wifi! You'll also receive complimentary gratuities, a $50 onboard credit and two exclusive cocktail parties. Did I mention we are planning special onboard events with yours truly? Prices start at $1199.

Reserve your stateroom today by contacting Keene Luxury Travel, and mention the Thom Hartmann Group 800.856.1155

or go to

"The Saddest Thing Is This Won't Be Breaking News"

Thom plus logo As the world burns, and more and more fossil fuels are being used every day planet-wide, atmospheric carbon dioxide levels passed 416 ppm this week at the Mauna Loa Observatory in Hawaii. In the 300,000 years since the emergence of modern humans, carbon dioxide levels have never been this high.