By Davis Carlton

Recently Charles Murray has published a new book called Facing Reality: Two Truths about Race in America, and it is causing a bit of a stir while still largely being ignored. In this book Murray lays out a case for racial differences in intelligence and crime rates. Murray’s work builds upon the information provided by many other race realists, and provides opportunities for new discussions about what this data implies for race relations in America. Unsurprisingly black commentators haven’t spoken favorably about Murray’s research, even going so far as to question why someone would be so interested in doing this research in the first place.

One example of this kind of resistance to the popularization of race realism is Professor John McWhorter of Columbia University. McWhorter writes, “Facing Reality is seriously disturbing. Murray gives a great deal of evidence for two points. One is that black people aren’t, on the average, as intelligent as other people. The other is that black people in America are more violent than others.” Jared Taylor of American Renaissance notes that McWhorter is willing to accept that blacks are indeed more violent than other groups while attributing this to “welfare, drugs, fatherlessness, etc.” McWhorter rhetorically asks Murray why he is “airing this information” and acknowledges that if the information presented by Murray is accurate then “we need to accept an America in which black people are rarely encountered in jobs requiring serious smarts” before adding “I would have to work very hard to come up with a way of accepting that world.”

Another striking example of this is a black “conservative” by the name of Coleman Hughes who interviewed Murray about his research. During the interview Hughes expressed concern for the notion that Murray’s research would become mainstream for fear that it might lead whites to disapprove of blacks and whites intermarrying. Hughes cited data that suggested that the same percentage of whites who believe that blacks are generally less intelligent also would object to a relative marrying a black person. Noting that these two concepts are rightly linked, Hughes is concerned that knowledge of race realism will lead to fewer black men being accepted as suitors for white women. The horror!

Murray’s response at least started out strong in which he redirects back to the purpose of his research which is to show that we ought to expect the racial differences in various outcomes based upon very real racial differences in intelligence and criminal behavior. Murray correctly insists that his research as well as the research of others thoroughly debunks the notion that American and more broadly Western “systemic racism” is holding minorities back from success. Evangelical leaders would do well to listen and see firsthand how Murray arrived at his conclusions. Murray then derails by advocating for strict individualism as an antidote to “racism.” I’m not concerned here to critique Murray’s position. I think that Jared Taylor has already done a good job doing so. Nor am I particularly concerned with critiquing Hughes or McWhorter.

My endeavor is to ask how blacks should respond to Murray’s research. In asking this question I’m honestly attempting to be as sympathetic as possible to the perspective of black men who genuinely love their people and want what is best for them. The temptation to try to dismiss Murray’s data and conclusions would naturally be tremendous. No one wants to admit that their race lags behind others in important ways like intelligence and criminality, and the knowledge that blacks excel at certain athletic achievements would hardly be a strong consolation. So what should black men, and particularly black Christian men do with the information that Murray presents?

I believe that the answer is to embrace the reality. There is enough research to know that what Murray presents cannot be written off as a mere outlier. Neither is there any reason to believe that this can be written off as a “legacy of slavery” because these differences have persisted long after slavery has ended and in spite of massive government spending. The solution is for black leaders to embrace God’s Law as the standard of justice. If black leaders could see the wisdom of God’s commandments, statutes, and judgments then they would stop mourning the deaths of thugs, degenerates, drug dealers, and gangbangers as though it represents some sort of grave injustice.

If black leaders placed an emphasis on Biblical justice and eschewed egalitarian “social justice” over several generations the black race could enjoy the benefits of eugenics practiced in a Christian manner. A century ago W.E.B. Du Bois understood the need for blacks to recognize the naturally gifted among themselves as their leaders, calling this cohort “The Talented Tenth” and explaining, “The Negro race, like all races, is going to be saved by its exceptional men. The problem of education, then, among Negroes must first of all deal with the Talented Tenth; it is the problem of developing the Best of this race that they may guide the Mass away from the contamination and death of the Worst.”

Du Bois was raised in the white community of Great Barrington, Massachusetts and was brought up in the Congregational church. Du Bois would later turn his back on God and become a communist, making a career of complaining about prejudice and discrimination and ultimately typifying everything wrong with black advocacy in the 20^th century. Earlier in his career Du Bois saw the Talented Tenth as a means to gain respect within the mainstream of the Western world and even expressed concerns that this class of Negroes would commit miscegenation and thus fail to produce future generations of distinctly black leaders. Du Bois’ predictions have sadly become true.

Blacks who truly care for the well being of their people and who might be inclined to be disturbed by the data presented by Charles Murray need to understand and oppose the damage that miscegenation causes blacks (not to mention everyone else). It isn’t uncommon for blacks who are financially or socially successful to date and marry outside of their race. The result is that most of these blacks become detached from black communities and do not feel a sense of loyalty to the black race as a whole outside of obligatory support for “civil rights” initiatives and black lives matter protests.

To conclude, black leaders should see books like Murray’s Two Truths as an opportunity to wake up the broader black community to harsh realities. Blacks must learn to embrace Biblical justice as a means of purging the baser elements from their midst and place stronger and promote more effective social stigmas against fornication and miscegenation. Talented blacks must actively avoid miscegenation if they are to avoid what Devon Stack rightly calls “brain drain” when successful blacks move away from fellow blacks or marry outside their race.

Successful black men should seek out women from stable black families. Black churches must actively seek out black orphans who have been abandoned by their fathers (of which there are many) instead of abandoning them to adoption by guilt-laden whites. Black men must be socially pressured by the black community at large into being good fathers to their children, and when problems arise because of the breakdown of the family, blaming “systemic racism” and “oppression” should not be an option. The work of Murray and others are undoubtedly hard sayings for many blacks to hear, but they must hear and heed them if there is to be any progress within the black community as a whole, and this is my sincere hope as a white Kinist.