“One can not offend people by stating that a large portion of human abilities is inherited, that there is a difference in a mean IQ, etc.”

Perhaps not per se. However, many people who state such things do so in order to provide a scientific basis for their prejudices. If you start writing that blacks have a lower IQ than whites, or that working class people have a lower IQ than “middle class” people, and that this proves the inferiority of one group or another, it would be much more surprising if people weren’t offended.

Furthermore, you seem to imply that “human abilities” are more than just inherited, but that they have some basis in “race”. My understanding of it is that the overwhelming majority of the human genome is the same in everyone, whilst over 85% of the differences are found within a population. The remaining 15% would also account for differences between say, English and French people, or English and German, as well as between various races. Indeed skin colour is hardly an accurate “scientific” method for determining someone’s race, for example Australian Aborigines and Africans are much more distantly related than would be expected (indeed many scientists in previous centuries included them in the same group).

It still remains, so far as I am aware, to be proven that this small amount of differentiation between traditionally defined races can actually have an effect on something as complex as intelligence, especially sufficient effect for this difference to have some bearing on the superiority (or otherwise) of a particular group of people. Nor is it a given that this should bring about a restructuring of society so that those inferior groups are treated as inferior. Indeed one could just as easily draw the conclusion that those who were less intelligent should have more time and energy invested in them so that this difference could not manifest itself in any noticeable fashion and could not have a detrimental effect on society as a whole. It speaks volumes about the prejudices or motivation of the people who produce such data that it is invariably the first option which is suggested.

It should also be pointed out that IQ testing is far from an accurate measure of intelligence, not having originated from some theory of what intelligence actually is. At the end of the day, that intelligence tests frequently place white men at the top is hardly surprising given that the tests are often written by white men, and in this sense are no different to the measurements of brain size, carried out by white men which concluded that white men had larger brains and therefore were more intelligent. Of course such differences in size rapidly disappeared when more objective methods for measuring them were applied.

“The lessons of Vietnam, Irak, Iran, Afganistan tell us that there will never be a political structure that until 1945 Western countries enjoyed.”

It is hardly to your credit that you attribute the lack of democracy in these countries to some kind of national, racial or cultural flaw. At worst it demonstrates a thinly veiled racism or, at best, a complete ignorance of the recent history of these countries. Surely the current Islamic regime in Iran has more to do with the fact that Islam was the one of the only allowed (in a very limited sense) forms of resistance to the Shah, than some fundamental irrationality on the part of Iranians? Even more so when we consider that the Shah replaced a democratically elected government.

We are not living in a democratic world, it is only the press that is, while they talk within the norms of the current powers, that is free to rant about all the “incorrect” people, like David Irving.

I do not think that the level of freedom that we have now is higher than in such country as China. Very said situation indeed. And that is the directo result of the multicultural and multiracial society. One can not offend people by stating that a large portion of human abilities is inherited, that there is a difference in a mean IQ, etc.
The lessons of Vietnam, Irak, Iran, Afganistan tell us that there will never be a political structure that until 1945 Western countries enjoyed. And that is why David Irving views can be very close to reality: name one African country that is not corrupt to the core?
Democracy originated in Islan and other nordic countries, and that is where it existed for a while. Unfortunately with countries such as UK are on the way to become Muslim…with many implications to the freedom of expression, etc…

http://www.fpp.co.uk/books/biogr/06_Pure_Math.pdf