In a Low IQ Idiocracy, Violence Is the Cause

ForeignPolicy
In the many decades since African countries were liberated from their colonial masters, benevolent overseas observers have been watching and waiting for Africa to flower and bloom under their new freedoms. Every African liberation movement was seen as a noble cause, as a sacred means to the end of breaking the back of the racist subjugation of African people.

Decades later, and what are the noble causes in Sub-Saharan Africa? What drives the violence and terror that regularly sweeps across the dark continent like a searing brushfire?

There is a very simple reason why some of Africa's bloodiest, most brutal wars never seem to end: They are not really wars. Not in the traditional sense, at least. The combatants don't have much of an ideology; they don't have clear goals. They couldn't care less about taking over capitals or major cities -- in fact, they prefer the deep bush, where it is far easier to commit crimes. Today's rebels seem especially uninterested in winning converts, content instead to steal other people's children, stick Kalashnikovs or axes in their hands, and make them do the killing. Look closely at some of the continent's most intractable conflicts, from the rebel-laden creeks of the Niger Delta to the inferno in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, and this is what you will find.

What we are seeing is the decline of the classic African liberation movement and the proliferation of something else -- something wilder, messier, more violent, and harder to wrap our heads around. If you'd like to call this war, fine. But what is spreading across Africa like a viral pandemic is actually just opportunistic, heavily armed banditry.

...I've witnessed up close -- often way too close -- how combat has morphed from soldier vs. soldier (now a rarity in Africa) to soldier vs. civilian. Most of today's African fighters are not rebels with a cause; they're predators. That's why we see stunning atrocities like eastern Congo's rape epidemic, where armed groups in recent years have sexually assaulted hundreds of thousands of women, often so sadistically that the victims are left incontinent for life. What is the military or political objective of ramming an assault rifle inside a woman and pulling the trigger? Terror has become an end, not just a means.

This is the story across much of Africa, where nearly half of the continent's 53 countries are home to an active conflict or a recently ended one. Quiet places such as Tanzania are the lonely exceptions; even user-friendly, tourist-filled Kenya blew up in 2008. Add together the casualties in just the dozen countries that I cover, and you have a death toll of tens of thousands of civilians each year. More than 5 million have died in Congo alone since 1998, the International Rescue Committee has estimated.

...Most frightening is how many sick states like Congo are now showing Somalia-like symptoms. Whenever a potential leader emerges to reimpose order in Mogadishu, criminal networks rise up to finance his opponent, no matter who that may be. The longer these areas are stateless, the harder it is to go back to the necessary evil of government.

All this might seem a gross simplification, and indeed, not all of Africa's conflicts fit this new paradigm. The old steady -- the military coup -- is still a common form of political upheaval, as Guinea found out in 2008 and Madagascar not too long thereafter.

......conflicts in Africa have become -- circles of violence in the bush, with no end in sight. _ForeignAffairsvia_Instapundit

How is the low average IQ of SubSaharan Africa relevant to this perennial bloody mayhem on the primitive dark continent? Without strong leaders and a large supply of high IQ outsiders from a market dominant minority, the future of Africa will always be bleak and bloody. Sub Saharan Africans themselves cannot organise, build, and maintain a large infrastructure to support a healthy, high tech, economically prosperous society. Just as small children delight more in the knocking down of the blocks than in the building of the towers, so do mind children delight more in the tearing down of society than in the planning, construction, and maintenance.

A low IQ society tends to be violent -- not because low intelligence necessarily lends to violence, but because there will always be persons of slightly higher intelligence than most who want to take away what others have earned, and are willing to incite violence to gain their selfish ends.

As the author wrote in the above article, if you kill the leaders of a violent African movement, the movement will die for lack of leadership. Eventually, the bell curve will supply new leaders who will bring new violence. But there may be a peaceful lull between bloodlettings.

What you see in Sub Saharan Africa is also the future, Coming Anarchy, for other parts of the third world, and for the parts of the developed world that choose to import large numbers of third world people.

Law and order, a peaceful society -- such is not the natural state of low IQ human existence. Much work, time, and expenditure is required to separate the violent and the instigators of violence from the general population (as European nations are learning the hard way, following decades of foolish immigration policies). A low IQ society -- unless it also contains a significant number of high IQ market dominant minorities -- will not possess enough people with the necessary requirements to hold off the forces of violence.

This violence is the past, present, and future of Africa. It does not have to be the future of your nation.