The term “South Asians & North Africans” seems to have been created by scientist Richard Lynn circa 2006, and refers to a race Lynn defined as the the people from Bangladesh, India, Pakistan, Iraq, Iran, the Gulf States, the Near East, Turkey, and North Africa (that’s a lot of people!). The idea that all such people can be lumped together into a single race seems to have originated with the geneticist L.L. Cavalli-Sforza who sometimes distinguished between Europeans and non-white European causcasoids. I have no idea whether Sforza had a genetic reason for making this distinction, or if he was just being descriptive but Lynn took a genetic interpretation.

Assuming this is a legitimate race or genetic cluster, Lynn could have just referred to them as “non-white caucasoids” as I do, but perhaps he wanted to emphasize how different they are from whites by dropping the term “caucasoid” and instead using the more long-winded term “South Asians & North Africans”. Still, I like the term “South Asians & North Africans” because it implies a people caught between two worlds: too Southern to be considered Eurasian, too Northern to be considered African.

Still, the term has limited practical use. Imagine a typical Arab being asked what race he is by a stranger:

Stranger: “What race are you?”

Arab: “I’m South Asian & North African”

Stranger: “You mean your dad’s from South Asia & you mom’s from North Africa?”

Arab: “No, they’re both from the Middle East.”

Stranger: “Then why didn’t you just say you’re Middle Eastern?”

Arab: “Because Middle Eastern is not a race; the race is South Asian & North African. Since the Middle East is between both, they get included too.”

It seems the HBD interest in “South Asians & North Africans” emerged after the Septempter 11, 2001, terrorist attacks in the United States which put the worldwide focus on Muslims. Prior to that, I doubt HBD scholars like Richard Lynn & J.P. Rushton showed much interest in this group, with Rushton just lumping them in with other “caucasoids”. But in the years following September 11th, Rushton and his team collected data all the way from Serbia to show that a South Asian ancestry population living there (Roma) had an average IQ of 70. Rushton could have tested the South Asian population in his own country (Canada), and, if they’re anything like Indian Americans would have likely scored well above 100 because of highly selective immigration and high standards of Canadian nutrition, but instead it was off to Serbia to test perhaps the lowest scoring South Asian population ever documented. Rushton would also write an article with a shockingly politically incorrect title: “Indians Aren’t That Intelligent (On Average)”.

I can’t help but wonder if Rushton decided to study South Asians partly because there are a lot of Indian ancestry people in Canadian universities. If these are politically correct, they might have been disproportionately hostile to Rushton’s other racial ideas, which were relentlessly attacked for years.

According to Lynn, “South Asians & North Africans” have IQs half way between whites and sub-Saharan Africans. However Lynn’s data shows African Americans score about the same as non-white caucasoids living in their home countries, probably because the former benefits from better nutrition & white genes. However Lynn claims that when blacks and South Asians are reared in the same environment, the latter have higher IQs. One exception to this rule might be the Caribbean, where there doesn’t seem to be an IQ difference Indians and blacks (though data is limited). Lynn believes this is because the Caribbean attracted a lot of indentured workers who were below the average Indian intelligence. Of course one could argue that the black slaves who were imported to the Caribbean were also below the average black intelligence, but Lynn apparently doesn’t believe this.

Advertisements