>Potato, potahto. Oh good. When do we get google nationalized? And a wealth tax? And when do we close the stock markets? Also when do the trials for crimes aga

>Potato, potahto. Oh good. When do we get google nationalized? And a wealth tax? And when do we close the stock markets? Also when do the trials for crimes against the people start, we'll only need to arrest 95% of all politicians. And of course we will be disbanding the mercenary army and replacing it with a conscription army where everyone has to spend 3-5 years. There's a few hundred more things that need to be done. But since all liberals are socialists we shouldn't have a problem with any of them. >No. The article suggests that it is evidence that there's probably no intelligence/ability discrepancy between different races. You have variables race and gender, the variables can take on two values each. The claim is that race is more important than gender. Call it the function f that maps race r ={w,b} and gender g = {m,f} to an arbitrary value: f : r,g -> R. Since we can just look at the values from the graph we can see that the outcome function f has the following property: f(b,m) < f(f,w) < f(f,b) < f(m,w) So the suggestion that race is the primary cause of worse outcomes is clearly wrong since black women are better off than white women and black men. Similarly the idea that sexism is the cause is also wrong since black men are worse off than every body and white men are better off than everybody. So you can either admit that race and sexism have no explanative power and accept the fact that class is the predominant factor with some interesting but ultimately trivial second order effects, or you can start doing gender studies and talk about the white male patriarchy and how it keeps everyone down. I'm guessing you'll pick the second since it helps the capitalists stay in power and you have been exposed to their propaganda you whole life.