A blog commentator named “Swanknasty” wrote: Blacks have probably contributed as much if not more to popular art through music than whites in white society. Indeed blacks are dramatically over-represented in certain forms of popular art, not music only. Who’s the most successful broadcaster in American history? Oprah. Who’s the most successful music star in American history? Michael Jackson. Who’s the most successful comic in American history? Bill Cosby. Who’s the only living American Nobel Prize winning novelist? Toni Morrison. Who’s arguably the greatest American orator of the 20th century? Martin Luther King. Blacks are only about 12% of America, yet they are #1 in one form of art after another. Coincidence? I don’t think so.

Now some people might say it’s affirmative action creating more opportunity for blacks to enter certain fields, but affirmative action was largely just a correction for past, and to a lesser degree, current, discrimination; there’s very little evidence it’s given blacks an unfair advantage at the highest levels of the “free market”. Blacks are less than 0.25% of American billionaires despite being over 10% of Harvard graduates, so while affirmation helps blacks get all the right credentials, it doesn’t appear to help them rise to the top in the real world. And yet when it comes to the arts which requires no credentials, they do rise to the top with great efficiency, despite averaging lower IQ scores than other Americans.

In order to explain this, one should note that all modern humans can trace their ancestry to a single black woman who lived in Africa 200,000 years ago. Because early forms of the black phenotype emerged so early in human history, I believe they have preserved certain ancient traits such as relatively high social IQ and relatively high rhythm IQ which was useful for attracting numerous mates, however when humans left Africa and migrated North, evolution placed more emphasis on pure survival and less emphasis on prolific mating, so not only did sex organs and testosterone decrease, but social IQ and rhythm IQ became relatively low, and technological IQ became relatively high, as g (general intelligence) increased. In addition, moving North increased mental stability, and too much mental stability impairs creativity.

This does not necessarily mean blacks are more creative than whites or even as creative as whites, but what it does mean is that when a black and white both have a true overall IQ (or g level) of around 130, the black will be far more likely to become a creative genius, especially in the arts, because he or she will be typically higher on the non-g components of creativity.

However just as blacks are relatively creative because they branched off the human evolutionary tree early, Northeast Asians might be relatively uncreative because the mongoloid phenotype emerged very late in evolution; at a time when social IQ and rhythm IQ was reduced (relative to g), and mental stability was maximized. This is not to deny the incredible creativity of Northeast Asians, it’s simply to say that there creativity should be higher than whites given their higher overall IQ, yet this doesn’t appear to be the case. So just as blacks are probably higher on the non-g components of creativity than whites, whites are probably higher on the non-g component of creativity than Northeast Asians.